Sovereignty and 'take back control'

" This thread leaves me with the impression I started with - very few knew or cared; it was a useful word to hang their prejudices on. "

But that was the impression I have got POGs. I thought you thought honest people were wonderful people.

GGMK2

I do think 'honesty' in a person is admirable but I have never said they are 'Wonderful People'.

I also think tolerance , accepting others may hold a different opinion are admirable traits but I would not say those who accept that point of view are "Wonderful People".

I would say those who twist or spin the words of others are NOT Wonderful People however.

One country that's not happy with one eu law.
Denmark and the abolition of roaming charges.
This from a Danish MEP.
Customers in Denmark are complaining that they are financially worse off than they were before the policy was in place. The price rises may well leave all but the most frequent travellers throughout Europe getting less value for money than previously
This is because mobile phone companies are charging more for contracts, not just in Denmark but other eu countries.

"No doubt you will challenge my opinion and I will have to accept that ..."

But you don't do you. You expect 'tolerance' to stretch to agreeing with whatever you say. I never hear you say 'it doesn't matter what I think, it is laid down in the law and the constitution" it is always more along the lines of - this is my opinion and I will attack you personally if you don't agree.

lemongrove:"Watching a Labour spokeswoman yesterday on The Daily Politics, she was given every chance by the presenter to say how Labour would have done it.She didn't have an answer."

The answer is, they wouldn't have started from here! We are stuck with the whole mess because Cameron didn't know how to deal with his backbench minority who were UKIP supporters.

Petra

You got it in one. This thread leaves me with the impression etc.

I'm sorry that this has led to a bit of sniping. I did, in all honestly, start it to try to discover what people understood by 'sovereignty'. I specifically asked Leavers because they were the ones who voted to 'take back control' because they believed that Britain had lost sovereignty.

I cited the current government actions because they are an attack on our constitution. I didn't mean there to be a debate on the actual Repeal Bill, that's a separate matter really. It's the Henry VIII clause that is relevant here.

GG2 has given a perfect, textbook explanation of the part of our governing institutions that holds sovereignty. This is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of legal fact.

So far, I don't think many people understand this.

More than one person has likened May's Repeal Bill to the 1933 German Enabling Act, which allowed Hitler to gain power because he was able to make any law he liked without having to go through the German parliament. This is how dictators work; they bypass the representatives of 'the people' in order to legally impose their own laws to achieve their own ends.

If we don't know or understand that it is our representative parliament, not the government, that has sovereignty (the highest power in the land) then we are in danger of allowing dictatorship in.

As I said on another thread, we fought a civil war and beheaded a king in order to establish that Parliament is sovereign.

The EU Withdrawl Bill is due to be debated on Monday.

If you are unhappy about the Government's proposals to limit the time allotted for its debate to eight days, the proposal to grant dictatorial "Henry VIII" powers to the Government and/or the proposal to force all Parliamentary Select Committees to have a chairman and a majority of members belonging to the governing party, please email your MP asap.

www.open-britain.co.uk/email_your_mp?utm_campaign=obemail55&utm_medium=email&utm_source=in

Thank you varian - I have sent it to my MP although I won't hold my breath I'm afraid.

lemongrove:"Watching a Labour spokeswoman yesterday on The Daily Politics, she was given every chance by the presenter to say how Labour would have done it.She didn't have an answer."

As they are not the government it is just one more lazy question from the BBC journalists.

Sovereignty.
It is the power to make rules and run a state. A sovereign has the power to make laws and the right to expect people to obey them. Today we vote people into parliament and we give them the sovereign authority to make decisions on behalf of the people. There are three different parts to a constitution, whether written or unwritten, and all of them are important, to divide responsibility between different parts of the government so no one person or group of people has all the power, and allow citizens to be involved in the decision making.
From Andrew Marr's Children's book of Politics.
The government seems to want to forget that important part of its duties.

Watching Andrew Marr with both Michael Fallon and Tony Blair I can see both points of view. Engineering committees to support the government is nothing new for minority governments. Labour did in the 1970's when the Lib/Lab pact was in vogue. What came across to me about MF's interview was the dogged blinkered view on Brexit refusing to come clean on the actualities. Sooner or later they will have admit just what damage Brexit will do to the country and to the EU. We cannot be part of a trading club without accepting a degree of control. We are still sovereign country as are many other EU members. What makes the current situation so dangerous is the lack of pragmatism due to right wing dogmatism. Empire will never return, the rest of the world has no obligation or proven desire to trade with us more outside the EU than within in.

Tony Blair may be a political has been who has made mistakes but he does speak a lot of common sense. We do need to Exit from Brexit and the only way to do that democratically is to have a second referendum when the full facts are known.

But do you think that hard line Brexiteers will believe the facts whoever gives them? I think that they will be dismissed as scaremongering again and also saying we cannot know what will happen until we actually exit the EU.
If we are to stop the Brexit process I think the Govt will need to take the bull by the horns and give the reason for pulling out. People will create about pulling out and go on about it for another 40 years but another referendum may well not solve the problem but make it worse.

Agreed WW but the Hard Brexiteers are really a small minority who must not be allowed the whip hand. Parliament has the power to do something about it. They need sustained pressure from the public to make them do what is right in the interests of the country.

Cindersdad

" We do need to Exit from Brexit and the only way to do that democratically is to have a second referendum when the full facts are known."

If only the facts were known when we joined the Single Market, signed The Treaty of Rome and the Lisbon Treaty.

The Lisbon Treaty , signed by Gordon Brown caused quite heated derbates not only in Parliament and in the UK in general but also in other member states .

Ironically it led to calls for an EU Referendum at the time but the people of the UK were refused a Referendum.

It is also ironic that a lit of the voices that aired their discontent over the signing of the Lisbon Treaty are now pro Remain campaigners.

A U.Turn. A Volte - Face and sadly I believe some are doing so for a personal political reasons .

a fact perhaps unknown by people south of the border ,the PEOPLE of Scotland are sovereign ,not the parliament or the queen,in fact the now queen Elizabeth the first of Scotland could be removed BY the will of the people if they decided the Windsors were in breach of contract to the country...if for instance she had publicly stated she didn't want independence and the majoity of scots did ,its a very important part of Scots law and I believe that in Wales they had the same rights ,though not sure if they retained it .

I'm actually not altogether sure that we, the people of England (by way of parliament) couldn't remove the current monarch too! Surely, ever since the Restoration of Chas II, at the invitation of parliament, our monarchs have ruled by the consent of Parliament.

paddyann, can you explain the law behind what you say? I'm curious.

Ken Clarke branded the the possibility of staying in the eu completly hopeless and urged the thousands who attended yesterday's anti-brexit march to give up
On Sky news this morning.

He probably wants us all to start smoking again, too.

durhamjen
It was only in August this year that he vowed to continue fighting brexit.
He's obviously a man who knows when he's beaten.

A shame Maybot doesn't.

There are serious problems with the UK government transferring to themselves areas which are currently devolved. Scotland and Wales not happy about this.

Not surprised. It can't be legal, can it? Yet......

twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/906070827325644800

Jack of Kent blog.

These are the papers from the negotiations so far, put in table form so hopefully easy to read and understand.

jackofkent.com/brexit-negotiations-resource-page/

If only the facts were known when we *joined the Single Market, signed The Treaty of Rome and the Lisbon Treaty.

Which specific 'facts' are you referring to POGS?

*(We didn't just 'join' it, we created it. The Single Market was Thatcher's brainchild)