Will Britain ever just piss off and get on with Brexit? -mod warning in OP (21/12)

pjohnson

Wanderer78 wrote: »

You d have to hand it to the kid, for that level of stamina, their efforts could go to better use though

He got thread banned from the kriegel thread so he can spend all his time here now :pac:

Kidchameleon

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Its getting a bit personal now lads and lasses, no need for that. I'll deserve apologies after the 31st of October but I wouldn't expect anyone here to eat humble pie.

You're telling us that government isn't bound by the previous parliament insisting that we only believe so because of mainstream media.

Why would anyone owe an apology to someone who says that?

Kidchameleon

Deleted User wrote: »

You're telling us that government isn't bound by the previous parliament insisting that we only believe so because of mainstream media.

Why would anyone owe an apology to someone who says that?

As I said, I wouldn't expect any, see links I provided re. parliamentary sovereignty

Sonny678

Sonny678 wrote: »

Simply put WW 2 is central to understanding everything Britian has done since 1945 when it comes to foriegn affairs.

It has, but more because the end of wwii led to the iron curtain, the Cold War and nato.

The Cold War shaped British foreign policy far more than wwii did,

Peregrinus

Kidchameleon wrote: »

As I said, I wouldn't expect any, see links I provided re. parliamentary sovereignty

This one? It doesn't bear out your claim.

dwayneshintzy

Kidchameleon wrote: »

As I said, I wouldn't expect any, see links I provided re. parliamentary sovereignty

Then why is Boris currently bound by the Fixed Term Parliament Act? That wasn't passed during the current parliament, surely by your logic he can just ignore it and get his general election immediately.

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

It has, but more because the end of wwii led to the iron curtain, the Cold War and nato.

The Cold War shaped British foreign policy far more than wwii did,

This is true.

But of course the cold war ended about 30 years ago, and since then British foreign policy has largely been about the UK's place in Europe- as befits a middle-ranking power, if we're honest. And with Brexiters rejecting the thrust of that policy and casting around for something else, they do seem to hark back a good deal to WWII and the lessons they fondly imagine it to have for the UK today.

Kidchameleon

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Then why is Boris currently bound by the Fixed Term Parliament Act? That wasn't passed during the current parliament, surely by your logic he can just ignore it and get his general election immediately.

Because in order to get around a law, parliament need to vote on it. He cannot do that at the moment because he does not have a majority. He will be able to after the next general election (one of the reasons the opposition do not want a GE). Did you read the link I provided? Its all there.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

This is true.
But of course the cold war ended about 30 years ago,

Have you told Vladimir this? he still seems to think it is going on, or at least his war of personal gain anyway.

Peregrinus wrote: »

and since then British foreign policy has largely been about the UK's place in Europe- as befits a middle-ranking power, if we're honest. And with Brexiters rejecting the thrust of that policy and casting around for something else, they do seem to hark back a good deal to WWII and the lessons they fondly imagine it to have for the UK today.

maybe some of the older ones hark back to simpler times, but i doubt anyone really wants to go back to rationing and conscription.

This month marks 80 years since the start of WWII and is being commemorated all over europe. Ireland didn't play any part in it, so it is natural that the Irish don't get it I guess.

Peregrinus

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Because in order to get around a law, parliament need to vote on it. He cannot do that at the moment because he does not have a majority. He will be able to after the next general election (one of the reasons the opposition do not want a GE). Did you read the link I provided? Its all there.

Johnson cannot do that at the moment? He cannot do it ever; he is not parliament.

The next parliament will be able to change the law. For that matter, the present parliament is able to change it. But that is no help to Johnson. All it offers him is the possiblity that if he can get parliament to agree to an election (and, at the moment, he can't) the election might return a majority of MPs willing to change the law in question, and this might happen before the law requires him to seek an extension, which is something he has said he will never do.

That's quite a lot of dominoes that have to line up and fall in the right direction at the right moment to spring Johnson out of the hole he has fallen into. Given that it required a high degree of ineptitude to fall into the hole in the first place, I wouldn't share your confidence that getting out again will be a shoe-in.

J Mysterio

Aegir wrote: »

Have you told Vladimir this? he still seems to think it is going on, or at least his war of personal gain anyway.



maybe some of the older ones hark back to simpler times, but i doubt anyone really wants to go back to rationing and conscription.

This month marks 80 years since the start of WWII and is being commemorated all over europe. Ireland didn't play any part in it, so it is natural that the Irish don't get it I guess.

70,000 odd from Ireland and 50,000 odd from NI fought in WW2. You must hate living here.

Kidchameleon

Peregrinus wrote: »

Johnson cannot do that at the moment? He cannot do it ever; he is not parliament.

The next parliament will be able to change the law. For that matter, the present parliament is able to change it. But that is no help to Johnson. All it offers him is the possiblity that if he can get parliament to agree to an election (and, at the moment, he can't) the election might return a majority of MPs willing to change the law in question, and this might happen before the law requires him to seek an extension, which is something he has said he will never do.

That's quite a lot of dominoes that have to line up and fall in the right direction at the right moment to spring Johnson out of the hole he has fallen into. Given that it required a high degree of ineptitude to fall into the hole in the first place, I wouldn't share your confidence that getting out again will be a shoe-in.

Finally you admit that I am right.

J Mysterio

J Mysterio wrote: »

70,000 odd from Ireland and 50,000 odd from NI fought in WW2. You must hate living here.

ooh, some form of recognition for the Irish in WWII? that's a rarity.

Why must I hate living here? that's just a stupid statement.

Kidchameleon

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Because in order to get around a law, parliament need to vote on it. He cannot do that at the moment because he does not have a majority. He will be able to after the next general election (one of the reasons the opposition do not want a GE). Did you read the link I provided? Its all there.

"Government isn't bound by previous parliaments.... Because in this particular case, the current PM may get a majority after an election that may take place, and he may be able to undo what a previous parliament did."

Which law book was that in?

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

Have you told Vladimir this? he still seems to think it is going on, or at least his war of personal gain anyway.

That's quite a different war - as witness the fact that the political right in the UK and the US are mostly togging out with Putin this time round.

Aegir wrote: »

maybe some of the older ones hark back to simpler times, but i doubt anyone really wants to go back to rationing and conscription.

No? It seems to be exactly the policy favoured by those who would vote for a no-deal brexit, invoking the spirity of the Blitz to justify this.

Aegir wrote: »

This month marks 80 years since the start of WWII and is being commemorated all over europe. Ireland didn't play any part in it, so it is natural that the Irish don't get it I guess.

We followed the same policy as the US, supporting the Allies while trying to avoid direct involvement in the conflict. I dare say if the Japanese had invaded us and the Germans had declared war on us we would also have followed the policy which the US followed in that situation.

Peregrinus

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Finally you admit that I am right.

No, you're wrong. You said that the next government could change the law. The government can never change an Act of Parliament in the UK; only Parliament can do this. This is kind of basic stuff. You shouldn't have to have it explained to you, and you certainly shouldn't have to have it repeatedly explained to you.

Kidchameleon

Peregrinus wrote: »

No, you're wrong. You said that the next government could change the law. The government can never change an Act of Parliament in the UK; only Parliament can do this. This is kind of basic stuff. You shouldn't have to have it explained to you, and you certainly shouldn't have to have it repeatedly explained to you.

Semantics

Peregrinus

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Semantics

You think the distinction between government and parliament is a semantic one? The bind that Johnson is in right now should disabuse you of that notion.

FrancieBrady

Peregrinus wrote: »

You think the distinction between government and parliament is a semantic one? The bind that Johnson is in right now should disabuse you of that notion.

We will just ignore the 21 who acted as 'parliamentarians' and not Tory government members too, it seems.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

That's quite a different war - as witness the fact that the political right in the UK and the US are mostly togging out with Putin this time round.

different war, same belligerents. It doesn't matter who is in charge, there has still been a return to the willy waving of the past.

Peregrinus wrote: »

No? It seems to be exactly the policy favoured by those who would vote for a no-deal brexit, invoking the spirity of the Blitz to justify this.

The spirit of the Blitz is little more than a phrase to sum up a nation coming together and putting on a brave face at a time of adversity, that is all. The same phrase was used when the PIRA were bombing London.

Peregrinus wrote: »

We followed the same policy as the US, supporting the Allies while trying to avoid direct involvement in the conflict. I dare say if the Japanese had invaded us and the Germans had declared war on us we would also have followed the policy which the US followed in that situation.

yet neither of those actually happened, which meant Ireland (the State, before Mysterio gets upset) played no part in WWII.

Kidchameleon

Peregrinus wrote: »

You think the distinction between government and parliament is a semantic one? The bind that Johnson is in right now should disabuse you of that notion.

No not at all. Look, basically my argument is that any bill passed now can be removed at a later date. Nobody said it would be easy to do. Am I correct or incorrect?

First Up

Kidchameleon wrote:

Its getting a bit personal now lads and lasses, no need for that. I'll deserve apologies after the 31st of October but I wouldn't expect anyone here to eat humble pie.

I admire the mental acrobatics, selective use of facts, ignorance of the institutions of government and governance and defiance in the face of reality that leads you to claim the UK's abject failure and humiliation in taking three years to leave the EU with empty hands as a victory.

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

different war, same belligerents. It doesn't matter who is in charge, there has still been a return to the willy waving of the past.

Well, all wars are basically willy waving.

Aegir wrote: »

The spirit of the Blitz is little more than a phrase to sum up a nation coming together and putting on a brave face at a time of adversity, that is all. The same phrase was used when the PIRA were bombing London.

Yeah. But nobody voted in favour of the Blitz, or Dunkirk, or the IRA bombing campaign. The difference is that this time people are urging a policy which will result in hardships that they themselves concede will call for a "spirit of the Blitz" response. That would be a first.

Aegir wrote: »

yet neither of those actually happened, which meant Ireland (the State, before Mysterio gets upset) played no part in WWII.

Played no part in WWII as a belligerent, true. But that hardly justifies the claim that Ireland "doesn't get it".

dwayneshintzy

Kidchameleon wrote: »

No not at all. Look, basically my argument is that any bill passed now can be removed at a later date. Nobody said it would be easy to do. Am I correct or incorrect?

That wasn't what you said. You said that the next government won't be bound by the current parliament.


They very much WILL be bound by the current parliament unless they have the votes to overturn the law. You didn't mention that very important caveat and went with a blanket statement.

McMurphy

Kidchameleon wrote: »

No not at all. Look, basically my argument is that any bill passed now can be removed at a later date. Nobody said it would be easy to do. Am I correct or incorrect?

Not specifically, no - but you certainly implied it would be easy.

Kidchameleon wrote: »

You are wrong. In the UK there is what is called "parliamentary sovereignty". Meaning that any government formed after a general election can disregard laws made by the previous parliament. A new government would not be "bound" by the previous parliament. Look it up, I am right and you are wrong.

They can't just "disregard" laws, as has been explained to you umpteen times on this thread.

Peregrinus

Kidchameleon wrote: »

No not at all. Look, basically my argument is that any bill passed now can be removed at a later date. Nobody said it would be easy to do. Am I correct or incorrect?

Any bill passed now can be repealed immediately, never mind at a later date.

But that's completely different from what you said earlier. And no, the different is not "semantic"; it's very, very meaningful.

Kidchameleon

Peregrinus wrote: »

Any bill passed now can be repealed immediately, never mind at a later date.

But that's completely different from what you said earlier. And no, the different is not "semantic"; it's very, very meaningful.

OK well lets say I worded it wrong, my point still stands, the bill (which is currently not law) could well be null and void in a few weeks.

Kidchameleon

Peregrinus wrote: »

Any bill passed now can be repealed immediately, never mind at a later date.

I'm glad we agree

Peregrinus

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I'm glad we agree

You've changed your mind, so?

dwayneshintzy

Kidchameleon wrote: »

OK well lets say I worded it wrong, my point still stands, the bill (which is currently not law) could well be null and void in a few weeks.

And the Lib Dems could win enough seats to head a coalition that revokes article 50 and keeps the UK in the EU!