The "will of the people"

mich777

There some very articulate and informative posts above yours, explaining why the 2016 results do not apply today so not sure why you're still pondering those results I'm at a loss to understand.

It seems to me that the views of the minority in all areas of life are more important now than the majority. Yes, I will be very angry if we don't leave and would be willing to take some sort of action, although not sure what sort at the moment as I am generally law abiding. I am not afraid of a No Deal Brexit because that is the only true Brexit. Deals can be sorted out during the year after we have left on our terms as an independent country.

Don't you remember Farage telling us all in 2016 that a 52:48 result would be "unfinished business"?

The referendum was not advisory. DC said it was a once in a life time opportunity and that regardless of the result he would ensure that it was implemented; then of course when he didn't get the result he wanted he resigned.

There's a lot of talk about the fraudulent nature of the referendum in terms of the leave campaign. You can't get more fraudulent than the PM who held it, saying regardless of the result that it would be implemented, that he would lead the country in which ever direction it took, and then reigned.

resigned

The fraudulent referendum was advisory.

Cameron had no right to say the result would be implemented and when he realised that it would be impossible to deliver the undeliverable promises of the Leave liars, he resigned so Theresa May ended up with the poisoned chalice.

Cameron deserves to go down in history as our worst ever PM.

Quizqueen : Deals can be sorted out during the year after we have left on our terms as an independent country.

1. ”during the year”. Do you really believe it'll take one year to start and finalise all the deals?

2. ”on our terms”. So China, India, USA and all the others will meekly comply with our wishes?

3. ”independent country”. No country is truly independent any more.

It would be interesting to hear what you base your optimism on. I think many of us agree that the last three years have been a mess and our leaders have shown nothing but incompetence. Boris Johnson is now promising that we will be ”the best place on earth” but who can believe him?

I agree that the will of the people is usually nonsense in every context.

It is the will of those who have the franchise (e.g. Tory members in the case of the leadership vote); and the will of those who bothered to turn out and vote.

The referendum was advisory, but we are where we are and I have yet to find anyone who voted leave to admit they were wrong.
Asked why they voted leave the answer is either, we can manage without the E.U. or to control immigration. No mention of how we are going to be better off, the Brexiteers “ Canada +++” trade deal is off the table, remember that, they wanted cake and eat it.
If we do leave with no deal we will just have to make the best of it, probably no cake.

The referendum was not advisory. DC said it was a once in a life time opportunity and that regardless of the result he would ensure that it was implemented; then of course when he didn't get the result he wanted he resigned. (Fri 16-Aug-19 11:30:46)

The longer people continue not to understand the difference between the law and politics the longer they will feel upset.

Legally and democratically the referendum was advisory. When Parliament passes a bill such as the European Union Referendum Act 2015 it would have to declare, in that bill, if it was giving its executive powers (powers to make a decision) over to anyone else. In this case the voters.

On 3 November 2016, the High Court in London ruled that it is the responsibility of Parliament (and not of the Government unilaterally) to decide whether, when, and how the UK should set aside legislation (in this case, the European Communities Act 1972 that makes the UK a member of the EU). The court held that the referendum was "advisory for the lawmakers in Parliament", enabling the electorate to influence Parliament in its policy decisions. In interpreting the intent of the Act, the court considered the precedents of previous UK referendums. As a consequence, the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill 2017 was introduced into Parliament to gain Parliament's consent for the invocation of Article 50. (wikipedia.org).

Whatever anyone, including the Prime Minister, were to say about "lifetime opportunities", etc., is politics. Parliament cannot be held to that in law.

Politicians lie, exaggerate and obfuscate. None of that puts a legal obligation on parliament. Recognising that is part of growing up.

Talking about "the will of the people " is nonsense, but really has little to do with the whole thing.

If anyone in the UK seriously wants to remain in the EU, then they will have to find some way of making themselves clear to the politicians in Whitehall.

There doesn't seem to be any legal way of stopping Brexit, at least not if the rulings of the High Courts of Northern Ireland and of Scotland were right.

The only way to stop Brexit would be through massive civil unrest, or possibly a General Strike making it quite clear that until Brexit is cancelled life will not return to normal.

I don't see that happening, do you?

How sensible your last paragraph GracesGranMK3 - how come everyone can’t see it?

That ruling came more than 4 months after the referendum so at the time when we were told by DC that the result would be implemented, not knowing that would/could not be the case has nothing to do with growing up or the ability, or lack of it, to understand the difference between the law and politics.

I agree GG that politicians lie, exaggerate and obfuscate and did so on both sides with regard to Brexit. None more so than DC.

It is simply not true that we did not know at the time Smileless. You are trying to re-write history. I can remember long debates on here about the fact that our referendums are advisory. I can also remember that if experts were quoted they were poo-pooed. But it's by studying what the experts say that we learn and some chose to do so. Nothing changed in those 4 months it just needed to be proved in court for some to believe it.

If you committed a crime and it takes them 4 months or 4 years to bring you to court it does not change the fact the event happened previously.

On your other point, if you see that Cameron was playing a political game why keep offering it as evidence that the referendum was not advisory. You cannot change the facts but you can use the law to fight for a different outcome. To do that you do need to understand what our democracy is, not what you would like it to be which seems, according to many on here, a structure that will just do as they personally wish.

I can't remember any debates here on GN on the run up to the referendum that it was only advisory, but I'm not a regular poster on the political threads which may be why.

I have no recollection in the run up to any experts saying that it was purely advisory only experts on either side saying it would be an unmitigated disaster or wonderful triumph.

Parliament triggered Article 50 on the 29th March 2017, just over 4 months after the ruling by the High Court that you referred too. Therefore upholding the result of a referendum that some are now saying was only advisory. Parliament accepted the referendum result and acted accordingly.

With regard to a crime being committed, in the example you gave I agree however, that is in relation to an act being known as a crime and then deciding whether the accused is innocent or guilty of that crime.

It seems that there are plenty of politicians who regard democracy as "a structure that will just do as they personally wish".

As a remainer, I believe sstrongly that the result of the referendum, however thin the majority should be hnoured and we should leave the EU. However I expect the Leavers to accept how thin their majority was and pay some respect to the many who opposed leaving and take that into account in conducting their negotiations.

Boris, the bully he is, doesn't give a toss for anyone and is happy to trample nearly half the electorate into the ground just to have everything his way.

I think that is a very reasoned point of view M0nica.

As GG, above -me too, M0nica.

I too am resigned to leaving at some stage but I do enjoy blaming my “ leaving “ friends that the current mess is all their fault.
And I will continue to do that until we do benefit from leaving - I am confident that I’m going to have a good few years of doing that.

Why on earth should you or anyone else be resigned to leaving the EU when we all now know it would damage our country?

And when we do benefit from leaving David will you then thank your leaving friends for voting to leave?

Surely no-one who has been paying any attention to the overwhelming evidence over the last three years still seriously believes we could possobly benefit in any way from leaving the EU???

Only time will tell.

It’s very difficult to argue for the status quo and several have tried to get a remain campaign started but failed. My own view is that we should stay in the E.U. and fight for change within, there are plenty of others also want the E.U. to have a less federal agenda.

As I see it the only prospect of remain is by default, maybe no deal actually happens, more likely we will end up with a Norway type deal. The disadvantage with that is we still have to live with E.U. regulations without any say in formulating them, even with no deal E.U. regulations would restrict any changes.

Leavers just don’t appear to realize if we leave without agreement there has to be agreement or everything stops, to avoid that I’m sure there will be a transition of some kind for a short period, if we go to WTO rules on day one not much is going to move through the ports.

Smileless2012: Only time will tell.

We have alreay been told. We do not need to wait for Time. Some people are experiencing hardship and difficulties now because of the Brexit fiasco. Your lackadaisical attitude tells me you are not one of those. But let's see if Time can make it even more difficult for even more of us.