Hitchens can have his opinion, he's not an authority on the issue, is he. You're throwing one person's opinion at me. It means nothing.
Read my pots to Chippy and Melton; my arguement is that, whatever you may think of refs, not having them isn't democratic; it's our right.
Not really bothered, just saying there is no right to a referendum, it doesn't exist now, whether we have them is a choice entirely down to the government of the day. Personally if I was in government I wouldn't.I'd love to see the Government that decides to remove the option.
Maybe the SNP should stop bleating about one for Scotland then, eh?
65/35. 52/48. And one for doing nothing and one for not knowing what you were doing.That's not exactly democratic, is it, removing the electorate from decisions. Because we're not smart enough collectively to get involved?
But we're smart enough to choose those MP's who make those decisions though, right? They govern with our consent, remember. We were taken into the EEC without our consent, and had to hold a referendum to decide if it's what the public wanted. It returned a 65% yes and we stayed in.
The result of THAT referendum was "honoured", for 40+ years. Why not this one?
Oh for goodness sake, I didn't imply YOU personally, I was on about the tone of the thread. Do I need disclaimers on every line now lest it get misinterpreted?It’s not just his opinion, he said it would cause a constitutional crisis and parliament would struggle to find a way forward, that was his reasoning and he said this in 2015 and was proven right.
I never said it wasn’t democratic, if you can point out where I’ve said it isn’t please?
I said it was direct democracy and that’s at odds with our system of representative democracy, which has caused the issues.
"...a party should have put out a clear manifesto on how they would leave and been elected on that basis..."
But you'd have the MB EFTA party, Farage's Norway but I really want to crash out party, mcfc1632 and his Only I Understand party, Johnson's cake and eat it party, Dominic Cummings and his It's going to be very messy so let's swerve the "how" bit party, versus the "This Could Be Very Divisive so let's just not do it but they can blame us" party.
Now metaphor’s are a matter for the police.It's becoming pathetic...
Are people out there seriously believing Farage wants to advocate knifing people?
Or that it's just a 'bravado', throwaway line from a ridiculous man.
Oh for goodness sake, I didn't imply YOU personally, I was on about the tone of the thread. Do I need disclaimers on every line now lest it get misinterpreted?
Never implied there was an Act or a Law that guarentees, but our Parl allows us to hold referendums. I'd like to see the Government 'brave' enough to say to the electorate "yeah, we're never allowing you the chance to have a referendum on anything ever again."Not really bothered, just saying there is no right to a referendum, it doesn't exist now, whether we have them is a choice entirely down to the government of the day. Personally if I was in government I wouldn't.
Yeah, I disagree.Well you were replying to me and said it so what am I supposed to think?
Any thoughts on the rest of my post?
Yeah, I disagree.
Jo Swinson stated that the PM should request an extension to "remove the threat of no deal".Now metaphor’s are a matter for the police.
Honk Honk
They don't need to, any government can decide for itself not to hold referendums on anything, the next one can referendum away as much as it likes. I would think most of the electorate would be quite happy to see the back of referendums for quite a while, most people I know would.Never implied there was an Act or a Law that guarentees, but our Parl allows us to hold referendums. I'd like to see the Government 'brave' enough to say to the electorate "yeah, we're never allowing you the chance to have a referendum on anything ever again."
Yes. Parliamentarians handling on the method to leave has caused the constitutional crisis.You disagree that the referendum has caused a constitutional crisis and direct democracy doesn’t work well when you’re a representative democracy?
Yeah, that statement means absolutely nothing.They don't need to, any government can decide for itself not to hold referendums on anything, the next one can referendum away as much as it likes. I would think most of the electorate would be quite happy to see the back of referendums for quite a while, most people I know would.
I was rather hoping my choice of phrase would be less explicitly appreciated.I think the real ‘bone’ was the one he was giving the woman in question while handing over bundles of taxpayer cash.
Bet what, I stated a fact.Yeah, that statement means absolutely nothing.
"Most people I know..." Oh i'll bet.
No government can bind the hands of another.Never implied there was an Act or a Law that guarentees, but our Parl allows us to hold referendums. I'd like to see the Government 'brave' enough to say to the electorate "yeah, we're never allowing you the chance to have a referendum on anything ever again."
So we need to come to a compromise, don't we. As we've* agreed this is the best way forward.And that’s the issue with the referendum.
Leave means so many different things to different people.
I'm sure you did.Bet what, I stated a fact.
Yes. Parliamentarians handling on the method to leave has caused the constitutional crisis.
Don't ask the public what they think if you don't like the answer they give, eh? Oh wait, thats precisely what some people want; remove the opinions of the electorate from the running of the country entirely.
Just put us in power, there's a good serf.