Quizzes & Puzzles39 mins ago
Indyref2 The Right Answer.........
83 Answers
Supreme court judges rule unanimously that the holding of a referendum is a reserved matter and thus permission is needed from the UK government.
https:/
https:/
Answers
You're at it again, Corby, and your constant stirring isn't helpful. Unlike the contributor who just joined us again and, once again, is no more, TTT is not a troll.
11:07 Wed 23rd Nov 2022
I agree with Naomi that TTT is not a troll, perhaps a gullible sucker but not a troll. deffo. perhaps a crazy rhymester. ex rhymester, perhaps a penny wordsmith but not a drop of troll blood in him. love him!
the supreme court rule is here
https:/
35 pages - happy reading - to those Abers who.....
can... summon up interest
the supreme court rule is here
https:/
35 pages - happy reading - to those Abers who.....
can... summon up interest
//they keep going on about democracy yet they want to ignore the 2014 referendum!//
In fairness the goalposts have moved since the 2014 referendum. Brexit, which the majority of Scots didn't vote for, has happened so I can see their point. That said, I think in leaving the UK the Scots would be doing their country a great deal of harm. They seem to think they're bigger than they actually are. Why they think that is not clear to me.
In fairness the goalposts have moved since the 2014 referendum. Brexit, which the majority of Scots didn't vote for, has happened so I can see their point. That said, I think in leaving the UK the Scots would be doing their country a great deal of harm. They seem to think they're bigger than they actually are. Why they think that is not clear to me.
TORATORATORA, "they keep going on about democracy yet they want to ignore the 2014 referendum!"
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, madam?” or its variants have been attributed to various folk, including Churchill.
The vote took place prior to the Brexit vote, a vote in which a majority of those voting in Scotland voted to remain in the EU.
As the facts changed since the 2014 vote, why should folk who might have changed their minds since then, not be allowed to demonstrate that?
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, madam?” or its variants have been attributed to various folk, including Churchill.
The vote took place prior to the Brexit vote, a vote in which a majority of those voting in Scotland voted to remain in the EU.
As the facts changed since the 2014 vote, why should folk who might have changed their minds since then, not be allowed to demonstrate that?
//Politically and legally correct result.//
Agreed. The puzzling thing is why the Scottish government was given permission to take the question to court in the first place.
//what exactly are the westminster government going to do if the scottish administration simply prints their own ballots and go ahead anyway? because that's what they'll do.//
They don’t need to do anything at all – except deduct the money it cost from their weekly stipend.
Unfortunately the ridiculous devolution arrangements introduced by the Blair administration have given the minor nations of the UK delusions of grandeur. Not satisfied with the devolved matters of which they have been given control, they now take to court an argument over a matter that was clearly reserved for Westminster. I happen to believe that (a) the Scots should be granted a referendum – just to shut them up and (b) that it will result in a vote to remain in the UK (which I think is a pity) - because most Scots know on which side their bread is buttered. I don’t know why the rest of the UK – especially the English – are all that fussed about maintaining the Union. There is certainly nothing in it for England except a bill.
Agreed. The puzzling thing is why the Scottish government was given permission to take the question to court in the first place.
//what exactly are the westminster government going to do if the scottish administration simply prints their own ballots and go ahead anyway? because that's what they'll do.//
They don’t need to do anything at all – except deduct the money it cost from their weekly stipend.
Unfortunately the ridiculous devolution arrangements introduced by the Blair administration have given the minor nations of the UK delusions of grandeur. Not satisfied with the devolved matters of which they have been given control, they now take to court an argument over a matter that was clearly reserved for Westminster. I happen to believe that (a) the Scots should be granted a referendum – just to shut them up and (b) that it will result in a vote to remain in the UK (which I think is a pity) - because most Scots know on which side their bread is buttered. I don’t know why the rest of the UK – especially the English – are all that fussed about maintaining the Union. There is certainly nothing in it for England except a bill.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles54 mins ago
Strands #269 “Come Fly With...
Quizzes & Puzzles56 mins ago
ChatterBank62 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles68 mins ago
Law76 mins ago
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.