Animals & Nature2 mins ago
No Contest For Smug &^%$ Of The Year Award!
72 Answers
Answers
The negative side is that it was unnecessary. I agree it was a perfectly acceptable option for any citizen to exercise (though I agree with earlier sentiments that it was unlikely to be entertained from anybody without the necessary connections)
18:25 Wed 25th Jan 2017
/// Miller is fooling no one when she claims to have been motivated by a passion to uphold the sovereignty of Parliament. ///
/// We all know her real desire to reverse the result of the referendum — a result, remember, that made her ‘physically sick’. ///
/// The bottom line is this: her side lost, she didn’t like it — and so she used her privilege to secure a top legal team to find a way of helping ‘Mummy do something’. ///
http://
/// We all know her real desire to reverse the result of the referendum — a result, remember, that made her ‘physically sick’. ///
/// The bottom line is this: her side lost, she didn’t like it — and so she used her privilege to secure a top legal team to find a way of helping ‘Mummy do something’. ///
http://
-- answer removed --
Or, to put it another, non sensational tabloidesque way, she exercised her democratic right to have the legal position investigated and it was found, by an independent panel of Judges, that the Government had promised something which couldn't be delivered, because it was unconstitutional, due to the fact that it would be contra to certain laws of the land.
the result is what it is - and was intended to be binding on the Government
sorry, no, sunny dave, it was only ever advisory, as referendums are. Enoch Powell pointed this out in reference to the first EEC referendum, saying Parliament was still sovereign, and so it is. MPs are free to give the result whatever weight they choose; and those in constitutencies that voted to remain may reasonably vote in support of their electors' views.
sorry, no, sunny dave, it was only ever advisory, as referendums are. Enoch Powell pointed this out in reference to the first EEC referendum, saying Parliament was still sovereign, and so it is. MPs are free to give the result whatever weight they choose; and those in constitutencies that voted to remain may reasonably vote in support of their electors' views.
Zacs - I'd merely edit - "used her democratic right ***and her huge wealth*** " ...
... if you or I had fancied having a go at this, we'd have been laughed all the way out of court.
The law exists as a tool for the rich and privileged - or, occasionally, the poor and legally aided.
Us poor *** in the middle can only stare from outside with our noses against the window.
... if you or I had fancied having a go at this, we'd have been laughed all the way out of court.
The law exists as a tool for the rich and privileged - or, occasionally, the poor and legally aided.
Us poor *** in the middle can only stare from outside with our noses against the window.
The negative side is that it was unnecessary. I agree it was a perfectly acceptable option for any citizen to exercise (though I agree with earlier sentiments that it was unlikely to be entertained from anybody without the necessary connections). But that is besides the point. The effect of triggering A50 will be the same whether it is done via executive privilege or by Act of Parliament. It will simply start the process of the UK's withdrawal. The only reason an individual would want to see that process subject to challenge is because there is a chance that the entire process will be derailed.
The notion that Ms Miller wants to ensure the primacy of the UK Parliament is absolutely absurd and insulting to the intelligence. Any supporter of the UK's membership of the EU has no interest in the primacy of the Westminster Parliament. The two things are incompatible. Ms Miller said that the result of referendum made her physically sick. Her challenge was unnecessary and was only made in an effort to overcome her sickness.
The notion that Ms Miller wants to ensure the primacy of the UK Parliament is absolutely absurd and insulting to the intelligence. Any supporter of the UK's membership of the EU has no interest in the primacy of the Westminster Parliament. The two things are incompatible. Ms Miller said that the result of referendum made her physically sick. Her challenge was unnecessary and was only made in an effort to overcome her sickness.
NJ, you can't say it was unnecessary and then go on to say 'there's a chance that the whole process will be derailed'. If it were unnecessary then the status quo would remain. But if it could derail the process, the status quo could be changed.
As for your claim that she only did it to get over her sickness. Well........
As for your claim that she only did it to get over her sickness. Well........
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.