Is the sexual orientation of a judge relevent?

I agree with janeainsworth. I am neither ashamed nor proud of being British. At the present time, it does seem that the more unpleasant elements in our society are coming to the fore, but there are still many many decent people who are not eaten up with hatred and resentment and who go out of their way to help others.

I think the same applies to other countries too, although I do worry about the quite virulent anti-immigrant feelings that are gathering momentum in several other European countries - more widespread and vicious, I suspect, than what we are experiencing here.

I agree with you, jane.

What's the point in saying 'I'm ashamed to be British' when it's only a tiny minority of Britons who are behaving in such a disgusting way?

I find it interesting that our long established British Parliamentary democracy is now being a focus of some Brexiters fury! They misunderstood the Referendum & thought it was replacing the established system of decision making.
It turns out a referendum cannot be used that way. Another bit of political smoke & mirrors. A referendum should inform our democratically elected MPs about the mood of the electorate so decisions can be made using that information. With the outcome being so close it does not give a clear direction. What it should do is to make all politicians realise they have to listen more carefully to ALL of the electorate..and that includes the 48% who wish to remain whist also considering the preferences of the 52% who voted to leave.

Nobody else has to feel ashamed.
I do. That's all.

Durhamjen feels ashamed to be British because of the Brits who behave badly. I feel pretty proud to be British despite them.

I am sad that so many British values are being undermined and eroded by an increase in rather narrow thinking & lack of empathy to say nothing of attcks on the British democratic process by some Brexiters who seem to want some form of plebicite rule!

I am not a Brexiteer but I too am sad that British values are being undermined.

The principle that our Parliament voted by 6 - 1 for a referendum for the electorate to decide if we Stayed in or left the European Union. A democratic vote took place and the majority vote went in favour to Leave.

It then followed that the EU referendum, unlike the Scottish referendum, was only advisory. I can then accept that Parliament should give the backing for the government to trigger Article 50 if that is what is required.

What I cannot accept is for Parliament or the House of Lords to then reject, ' refuse to accept' the outcome of the democratic vote ,the referendum vote they had voted for to take place.

The ultimate undermining of British Values.

If the referendum was only advisory I don't know why Nicola Sturgeon has not claimed the Scottish Referendum was only advisory.

Parliament hasn't rejected the outcome of the referendum.

The court has upheld British values by affirming that sovereignty lies with parliament and not rule by decree.

The Telegraph, Sun, Mail and Express have deliberately misrepresented the facts.

Pogs you are missing or misunderstanding the point entirely.

The judges have ruled that sovereignty lies in Parliament through representative democracy.

There was an advisory referendum with the result showing the country completely divided with a tiny majority in favour of leaving.

If the supreme judges agree with the original ruling then parliament as our representatives will debate the kind of society/country we want after Brexit.

End of. Nothing about rejecting the referendum. But never confuse populism with democracy. Intelligent politicians will refer to a divided Britain and undoubtedly this will play a part in how they see a future UK.
It is entirely right that they do so.

Following on from the lack of support for the judicial institution from May and her government. The way that they tried to retain the power to decide Brexit to just the 3amigos plus one. The way the media has speed vitriol and hate, particularly towards the "foreigner"

I was reading this and wonder if it rings any bells.

The fascist playbook

1. Build a wave of nationalist/nativist populism based on real or perceived grievances; make it a movement.

2. Blame the "other" from within or without.

3. Denigrate and weaken legal institutions, and call into question their legality.

4. Assume additional powers within a small group or an individual.

5. Apply these powers against the enemy within with the support of the press.

Hmm Now why does that sound familiar?

But I think that is where the confusion is. A referendum is not Britain's democracy. We are not a plebicite democracy but a Parliamentary one. There a many times when Parliament have taken decisions that huge swathes of the electorate have disagreed with. MPs now know,as a result of the referendun on EU membership, that the country is split in two. They also know that many of the 52% were voting about things other than EU. There is no clear populist mandate to trigger Article 50. It is too close a call.

I don't believe that POGS is confusing anything...her post is quite clear.If the House Of Lords shilly shallies/blocks/ plays for time/ uses any trick in the book to delay, or any MP's on either side of the political divide does the same, then they will be attempting to thwart the decision on June 23rd.If they agree to try and pass legislation that triggers article 50, and then try and work with the government for the best outcome, then fair enough, if they don't then decidely not fair enough.

Whatever happens, we will be leaving the EU, but if the present argueing and wrangling goes on and on it will damage the economy in a way that it wouldn't if we were allowed to get on with it by triggering the process.

We shall see what and if it happens with regards to the Lords. Ironic that the Tories have traditionally been the party to support the Lords.

My point however is that sovereignty lies with parliament, and the use of the arcane "Royal Perogative" is undemocratic and anachronistic. The voter through our parliamentary democracy will decide what Brexit Britain looks like, not a small clique of reactionary right wingers who don't know their ass from their elbow.

Would it be better if the small clique were revolutionary socialists who don't know their ass from their elbow ? Just asking.

No, it wouldn't and that's why Parliament should be sovereign. Be careful what you wish for!

Whitewave

Please explain to me why the Scottish Referendum is not advisory? Given yours and other responses why has the Scottish Independence question not been taken away from the people and put in the hands of Parliament and the House of Lords to decide. That is exactly what is happening to the EU referendum . Explain to me where I am obviously going wrong in equating the two referendums and their outcomes.

It's a fair question I keep asking.

Scotland was given a referendum vote.

The Scottish electorate voted Remain in the UK

The decision is accepted.

-----

The UK was given a referendum vote

The UK population voted Leave

The decision is only advisory.

The only answer I see so far is we are not a plebicite democracy but a Parliamentary one. So why does Sturgeon the SNP not challenge the Scottish Independence referendum result , after all it must be only advisory.

I don't wish for either dd (although am sure a few do) I simply couldn't resist the fun of saying it.

Not sure POGS (amazing that nobody else on here has attempted to answer)
But my only thought is that it may have been in a bill passed by Parliament?

Write to Nicola Sturgeon and ask her, POGS.

I think the Scottish ref was different because the legislation was drafted and passed with different wording pogs
Quite, Penstemon, it was not a referendum to replace the sovereignty of parliament with the sovereignty of referendum results.
Highly irresponsible of papers and Farage to spread the idea that the judiciary is a bad thing - or that the judgement is somehow undemocratic.
Farage has been saying Powell-esque things on Marr show this morning apparently.
After this year I would thought many world leaders will think twice about calling a referendum . Not only our fiasco, but the one in Colombia where years of negotiation to bring about a peace ended in the people rejecting the terms of the peace.

whitewave

"with regards to the Lords. Ironic that the Tories have traditionally been the party to support the Lords."

It's also ironic those who have wanted the extinction of the House of Lords now are happy to use them to do their dirty work.

I have no problem with the judges decision , so be it , however what will follow could be a bigger constitutional crisis than Brexit if the House of Lords overrule the referendum result or attempts to delay the triggering of Article 50 ad infinitum which they are openly suggesting they want to do.

I did actually attempt to answer the Scottish Referendum question either yesterday or the day before, but no one picked up on it!

Think it must have been on another thread though as I can't find it in here.

The Scottish referendum was an "advisory referendum on extending the powers of the Scottish Parliament", whose result would "have no legal effect on the Union"

The gap between No and Yes was about 10%. Unless another referendum were to be held, Sturgeon would find it difficult to argue that leaving the Union is the will of the people.

(I didn't see your post, Ana, so don't know how that answer compares.)

Type it out on here Ana?