Brexit: Parliament Suspended

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Tiassa, Aug 29, 2019.

  1. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    it is not that simple
    but the means to preserving the fisheries is not simply BREXIT
    The quota systems etc... Vs marine preservation for sustainable harvesting is more the issue.
    with boom n bust economics touted as the moral & only logical systematic process to engage the issue, it tilts the narrative and curbs the real actions that should be taken to ensure long term sustainability.

    'my way of the high way' is not a level playing field ... be that BREXIT or Globalisation

    without stringent regulation and enforcement free trade agreements become globalisation of national assets and food security.

    remember the government controls the quotas
    and the regulations of who can sell what to whom
    just like mining rights

    nitrogen run off
    coral bleaching
    micro plastics
    pollution of mangrove swamps and wetlands
    building permits for marine environments

    deep sea research(thank god for the new ship because it seemed like an act of god budgeting to have it built & run)

    equally the democratic voters sold their rights by voting for BREXIT
    why is Boris the bad guy for trying to push it through ?
    is he not attempting to ensure the rights of the voters ?

    logic ? moral ? rights ?
    the somewhat apparent complicity of the ignorant fool voter wanting both outcomes by voting for a bi-polar issue...
    (they want democracy & freedom but do not want to be accountable for knowing what is going on and then voting accordingly?... how many times did they vote for the tory austerity government?)
    how do they increase the value of that fish as it is their resource controlled by their government...
    can they just declare it is now a higher value and put the price up ?
    like oil ...

    is everyone saying NO !
    "thats not fair" for the international markets to be increasing the price of oil ?

    middle east has oil
    Brittan has fish

    what is the difference ?
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2019
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    reads like an emotive fluff piece

    labeling ?
    like labeling American bleached chicken ?

    ummm ... so there is no border checks for anything marked "fish" ?

    was the subject inbound or outbound checking ?
    mixing up both is a little dubious

    how is that any different from normal market conditions ?
    the risk of doing business
    do they not have compulsory insurance like motor vehicles ?
    ... hypocrisy ?(probably a different thread subject)

    battle cry
    just say no it wont work and keep the snout in the trough until the ship sinks then swim off and find another trough

    the public said "we want BREXIT" then all the politicians spent 2 years giving reasons why it wont work.
    i thought their job was to make it work.
    not make it NOT work.

    thus media rattling on and on about every possible way it is not going to work is just temper tantrum advertising to try and be king of the 'no' hill and win on a fail or win on a job completed, or not completed...
    they are employed to do the job
    any private company would not tolerate such games and non productivity
    not only would it bankrupt the company it would be directly ignoring the reason the people were employed for.

    however.. this is part of the lie that the voters tell themselves

    note i am not claiming boris is jesus
    but the sudden plethora of boris hate seems to be an emotional transference issue that should have been directed at local MPs not towing the line to get the job done.
    along side the repeating of the same vote in the last general election to vote tory.

    the tory vote was effectively a knowledgeable(freedom and democracy) agreement by the voters

    to tell the Parliament to continue doing nothing.
    HRH told them to bloody well get on with the job... but she doesn't control their pay cheque
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2019
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. LaurieAG Registered Senior Member

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    poor ol hard done by voters who wanted to stick it to the disabled children and pensioners with all the austerity policys...

    now they are complaining that they have been miss lead to believe they are not the ones who will be having their belt tightened after they have consistently voted to have everyone's belt tightened for the last decade

    did they think they were voting for magic beans ?
    do they want their cow back after they eat the magic beans instead of planting them ?

    now they want to look for a bare bottom to spank to make them feel warm, fuzzy & familiar and self vindicated.

    the process was simple
    vote for brexit vote tory
    vote for no brexit vote labour

    bend over boris is all your fault(they cry)
  8. LaurieAG Registered Senior Member

    In which parallel universe was this?

    Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, who was elected by 60% of the parties members, was PRO BREXIT.
  9. Bells Staff Member

    No he wasn't.

    He was critical of the EU, but he supported and campaigned for 'Remain', as well as voted for staying in the EU.

    Perhaps you should check which parallel universe you exist in where he was pro Brexit. Because it certainly isn't the one the rest of us exist in.
    RainbowSingularity likes this.
  10. LaurieAG Registered Senior Member

    There is nothing wrong with my memory, 70% of the Labour MP's wanted to ditch him after the referendum result.

    Maybe you should tell wikipedia that they have it wrong.
    exchemist likes this.
  11. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member


    Mon 4 Jul 2016
    14.00 BST Last modified on Wed 14 Feb 2018 16.02 GMT
    11 Jun 2016

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    16 September 2015

    clearly pro European human rights protections and common law

    he doesnt seem to be ramping up the bunting yelling no prisoners while Shepparding voters to the election booths

    should he be using smaller words ?
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2019
  12. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    what did they say was the reason they said "on camera" ?
    post a link please ?
    video of some labour MP's being asked that question

    rather than any tory lawn party gossip magazine tabloid style media junket press release

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    i dont NEED to be right, i just don't see any facts to support your assertion.
    can you post any ?
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2019
  13. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    what BREXIT Looks like ?

    Thomas Cook races to secure more rescue funds
  14. Bells Staff Member

  15. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    well ...
    Thomas Cook...
    Should the government have stepped in earlier and put them under administrative management ?
    hind sight is 20/20
    the free market capitalism thing was running the table/game/national political scene

    as brits feel the bite this Christmas, will they be wondering what the point of BREXIT was ?
    i realise many think business must be allowed to fail
    however, in instances like this i dont see why a government take-over would not be helpful
    for example
    the government could buy out the debt and then trade the company out of debt by re-structuring to allow transition of employees and preservation of the air lines.
    though i have heard 1 aviation travel commentator say the market is over supplied with air travel
    and in such this begs the questions

    has the massive increase in cruise ships dented the profit margin of air travel ?
    almost definitely yes for outbound return tourism.

    i expect the pound will take a bit of a hit short term from this
    and... this may be the canary in the coal mine for the reality of worst case BREXIT

    those massively paid politicians are all on paid leave

    a new thread question
    should free market capitalism have regulations to force businesses from being able to negatively impact the national economy if they fail ?
    by rights they believe free market capitalism must run its own game.

    in the desire to avoid pointing fingers ...
    how much should the insurance premiums be to cover these losses ?
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2019
  16. LaurieAG Registered Senior Member

  17. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    You know, there is an old line, perhaps all the way back to Thomas Paine, that the idea of a hereditary ruler makes about as much sense as a hereditary mathematician.

    To the other, if the British must have royal overlords, perhaps a family of hereditary actuarials.

    Honestly, if the unelected head of state was an insurance executive, this Brexit bit would still be Magpie chatter: 「Fuck-all you're bollocking up that much surety for a pissjag! And imported, at that!」
  18. Bells Staff Member

  19. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    UK top court considers the prorogation of Parliament to be unlawful...

    What next?
    Will it make any difference in the slightest?
    Will The PM just get a slap on the wrists?
    Will he resign?
    Or will he just plough on regardless?
    Will parliament come back only to be prorogued more lawfully, pushing the date of the prorogation closer to the Brexit deadline?

    Only Time, in his inestimable manner, will tell.
  20. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    As I mentioned before, the Queen will most likely make use of her powers to dissolve Parliament and force the nation into an election...
    This seems to me to be the only option out of this mess.
    But I wonder if there is precedent in the UK for such an action?
    Certainly it has occurred here in Australia
  21. geordief Valued Senior Member

    Get a grip ,man. What you are talking about is fantasy politics. The Queen has no such discretion or power.

    She only goes along with the advice of her ministers. Her only independent power could be to refuse to go along with their advice .

    That would be barely contemplatable either.

    btw Aussieland could do well to replace the Queen with something more democratic. In my opinion.
    exchemist and Baldeee like this.
  22. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member


    I did a little bit of research and found only one instance of precedent in the UK as far as I can find. (re: dissolving parliament) ( To dismiss a prime minister and his or her government on the monarch's own authority. This was last done in Britain in 1834 by King William IV.)
    However the Reserve Powers, as they are referred to, that the Queen holds have never been tested as they are now.
    Brexit poses an extreme situation that may provoke something from the Monarch if she feels that the constitution of the UK etc is seriously threatened.
    But as you have stated it is almost unthinkable and I would add that it would probably mean the end of the Monarchy in the UK if she did interfere.

    If the PM chooses to ignore his own courts then she may have to step in...
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2019
  23. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    Absurdist nonsense.
    The monarchy is a figurehead, there to attract the tourists, and with pretty much nothing but ceremonial duties.
    They are constitutionally entitled not to pass acts into law, and last did so in 1708, but any such deviation from the norm these days would create a constitutional catastrophe in the UK which would probably see the end of the monarchy empntirely.
    The last monarch to dissolve parliament without parliament agreeing was probably Charles I, who opted to rule without one in 1629.
    Ultimately we had a civil war which pretty much set the tone for the monarchy losing its grip on power.
    From 1715 it became law that the parliament would sit for on more than 7 years (shortened to 5 years from 1911) but dissolution would be at the will of parliament, or at least the PM, who would Advise the monarch to dissolve it by Royal Proclamation.
    From 2011 we have operated under the Fixed Term Act, which allows parliament to automatically dissolve - i.e. without royal proclamation.
    You mean other than following legal democratic paths rather than unconstitutional ones?
    Laws have changed since the last time.
    You think the monarch has dissolved the Australian Parliament?
    When was that?
    I always thought that the Governor-General alone is responsible for things such as summoning, proroguing, or dissolving your parliament???

Share This Page