Brexit and power to the people

daph that's one reason that May will be reluctant (apart from quite a few others) to call an early election. It would expose the huge rifts that there are in the Tory party.

Maizie d. 17.25

I will respond to your further post to myself by using your own kind words to me yesterday.

MaizieD Sat 05-Nov-16 12:31:14
I'm not taking it any further, POGS. You've already had my answer. You not liking it and repeating the question doesn't make me change my mind. It didn't work when my children tried the same tactics, either.

The Conservative Party itself is split on Brexit. Even some of those who are supportive don't like the way things are heading and they don't like being left out in the cold by May and her little band.

It would be interesting to know what people in the North East (and anywhere else for that matter) though Brexit would actually mean. If it's true that it was partially a protest vote against a public school-educated, London-centric elite, who are as distant as any Brussels bureaucrat, I can't honestly see the Conservatives picking up many votes in the area.

So save some of that wine for me!

If the voters in the North East who voted to Leave, feel that only the Conservatives Will deliver on Brexit, then if there was a snap GE, they may well vote that way.Voting UKIP will not help at that stage.Labour certainly got them wrong about Leaving the EU after all.At the moment, it's anyones guess as to what would happen.

@dj

Well, I suppose the North Sea might turn to wine! (Just as likely that the North East will vote Conservative - UKIP is more likely.)

@Jalima

Something was wrong with the sound on the video, but I watched it and somehow I don't think Labour will be winning it any time soon, although I looked up the 2010 results and the combined Labour/LD vote was higher than the Conservatives.

I was thinking of the constitutional issue. There was a majority for Remain and Rees-Mogg talks about stuffing the Lords with 1000 new members. What about the 'will of the people'?

I'm afraid I find Jess Phillips incredibly irritating and I can't really take what she says seriously either. A dinner party with her and Rees-Mogg would be my idea of hell!

I've been out all afternoon. I'm glad to see that we seem to have established that the judiciary is, quite rightly, an unelected, non political, arm of the constitution.

I said your post was nonsensical, POGS, because you seemed to be confusing the judiciary with the House of Lords.

There are other parties.
However, Labour aren't out of touch with Labour voters in my area. You shouldn't believe everything you read in the Sun or the Times, or even the DM.

Labour being out of touch with the Labour voters.

You reckon the North East will vote Conservative, do you, roses?

What do you base that on?

Because then she will have to tell them what her ideas are....and she hasn't got any.

Hurrah! I can post again.

Part of the confusion over my post arose because I found I was unable to respond to POGS response to my post. For some reason whether I can review or post seems a bit erratic at the moment. I have referred the matter to GN. I was talking about the Judges but I agree with POGS that the House of Lords, or at least some Members of it, will not be impartial. I do not approve of an unelected second Chamber but that is what we have at the moment and there is a great deal of expertise there across all parties and issues. Taking issues to the Lords is a way of safeguarding our interests in what the Government/Commons are proposing and can give an opportunity to reflect and alter. They cannot hold it up indefinitely but they can raise concerns about the Government's plans which could be very significant for our long term post-Brexit future. I think that is a worthwhile use of their time and ours. Too late when it is all done and dusted. The PM has been repeatedly told the Commons will vote to Brexit. She seems to fear the Lords' reaction rather more hence the appeal. Several very prominent voices on all sides are urging her to bring Article 50 to the House and kick start it all. Why doesn't she? Drop the appeal and get it done.

If you mean about losing their seats....that was thinking that if some MP's try and block article 50, the voting public in case of a GE, wouldn't vote for them in future ( and in the North East for example, Labour would then lose to Conservatives possibly.)

I think we have confusion ww on my post?

That has been ruled unconstitutional rose

It was never going to be May alone, but the Cabinet.Parliament was then going to get a vote.
Once it was given to the judiciary to decide, they had no choice but to consider it as a point of law , so no blame attaches to them.
If MP's won't vote on article 50 ( although I think they will) they would have to be prepared to lose their seats in some areas.
In the end, although it may hold things up, we will leave the EU.

Shows how important South Shields is!
I wonder how much Rees-Mogg's train fare cost; probably more than most of those people earn in a week.

Loved that dj.This photo of an election when the Liberals held the seat and the suffragettes campaigned against them might interest some people

Who do you think should decide what's best for the UK, roses?
Theresa May or parliament?
That's what it's about. Theresa May does not have a mandate to do what she wants to do without input from parliament.
We have a democracy, not a dictatorship.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIt3PM5DF_c

This is better.

Which is more or less what Lisa Nandy said on Newsnight the other night (she must have checked with JC et al before she said it).

Seems Corbyn's changed his mind again, or had it changed for him.

Labour MPs were concerned by the prospect of voting against Article 50, with one saying it was "unthinkable" for most of the party's MPs as it would defy the result of the referendum.

Labour's deputy leader Tom Watson confirmed that Labour were not seeking to do this. He said: "We're certainly not going to hold up Article 50 if we don't get the deal (we want)".

Or maybe not a petition.