3 Russian Scenarios of Collapse of European Union, Best for Moscow
http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com...ind-of-eu.html …
3 Russian Scenarios of Collapse of European Union, Best for Moscow
http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com...ind-of-eu.html …
UK major political parties still do not get the EU and Article 50.....UK must trigger Article 50 before any negotiations can even take place and the UK plan they will resent will only be able to contain how they envision detangling 40 years of laws, court and trade regulations and on how they plan to exit "their passport for financial services.".....AND the date they will formally exit....
Once they formally exit then and only then will the UK be able to focus on trade deals and other items such as free movement of EU citizens inside UK and those Brits living in EU.....
What is it about UK political parties that have been in the EU for 40 years and yet still do not apparently understand how it functions...
"Progressive parties must aim to make any Article 50 deal part of a 2nd referendum or general election.."
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...P=share_btn_tw …
'Reverse Greenland', anyone? Scots eye post-Brexit EU options
http://reut.rs/29eGvSS
John Micklethwait writes that Britain's liberal, trading revival that began in 1979 may have now crumbled in 2016.
http://bloom.bg/29epQ1v
UK was known by EU member states to be a constant blocking force when EU wanted to make changes...this might in fact have been largely true....
Gove promising to curb exec pay - plans vague, but strangely similar to what EU tried 2012-2014 (against uk opposition)
Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 07-03-2016 at 10:17 AM.
Well worth reading......UK would do well to listen to Merkel as she is about their only friend right now in the EU............she is one of a few top EU leaders that believes the UK will not trigger Article 50 when it becomes extremely clear what the true costs are NOT the so called lies spread by all Leave groups....
Sunday Times Foreign @STForeign
Merkel to London... Is anybody there?
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/04...0-bcc24f53f55e …
WHAT is interesting is that the vote to leave was basically an "advisory vote" to Parliament as a Constitutional change vote would have required 2/3rds to vote for it and this is in fact a Constitutional change when 40 years worth of merged EU/UK laws and regulations must be changed back to UK standards.....Henry Kissinger is said once to have asked despairingly whom he should call if he wanted to speak to Europe. Now it is the Continent’s own politicians who are complaining that the line to Britain has gone dead in the meltdown since the referendum.
“The Brits must now come forward and say what they want,” Jens Spahn, deputy to Wolfgang Schäuble, Germany’s finance minister, told The Sunday Times last week. “We cannot start contemplating any new relationships before the old has ended. The sequence of things is clear: the first step is negotiating the exit, and this will take years;…
So in fact Parliament can still say on it's own...not to leave.....as they can state yes we respect the vote but it was not a vote for Constitutional changes....
THAT is why UKIP and some of the Leave leaders/groups such as BoJo wanted an immediate Article 50 triggered...then there is no going back as they are afraid the public will eventually realize this was only an advisory vote....not a binding Constitutional change vote.....
Actually confirms this........
May on @peston: "no absolute deadline" on Article 50.
Gosh.
AND the pain is starting to sink in..finally....one might say and a tad to late....
Britain's upstart banks face a bumpy ride through Brexit fall-out
http://reut.rs/29qjxoI
Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 07-03-2016 at 10:29 AM.
Citing OUtlaw09's last post in part:The UK does not have a constitution, so there is no law stating such a change needs a 2/3rds vote.WHAT is interesting is that the vote to leave was basically an "advisory vote" to Parliament as a Constitutional change vote would have required 2/3rds to vote for it and this is in fact a Constitutional change when 40 years worth of merged EU/UK laws and regulations must be changed back to UK standards.
In the 1979 referendum in Scotland:Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ish_devolution..the referendum legislation also required 40% of the electorate to vote 'Yes' for the plans to be enacted and this was not achieved.
Yes there is a "mountain" of UK law and regulation that originated from the EU, but that is not a 'constitutional change' in waiting. None of that "mountain" refers to how the UK is governed.
davidbfpo
David...beg seriously to differ....one of the main goals in order to join is to mesh the incoming countries laws.....criminal, financial, trade, yes even down to divorce and marriage rights and etc...to match those values set by the in order for the incoming nations legal system to be able to accept and carry out those decisions made by the ECJ and the ECHR ....Originally Posted by davidbfpo
That is the reason for the 36 Block/Step process in joining...meaning as each part of the new member's laws and regulations are matched and changed...then onto the next Block...
WHY the idea was that say a mixed UK/Spanish marriage could be dissolved with the final decisions reflecting both Spanish and UK legal rights to protect the two individuals...down to portability of pensions and the acceptance of say pension earnings in one country being passed onto say the UK system and recognized in the UK and vice versa. e
THERE are estimates of upwards of 15-17 years in order to have the UK "reverse/rewrite/detangle" that "mountain".....remember it took almost that long for the UK to finally catch the curve and come up to EU legal standards...
AND yes the laws of the UK are in fact deeply meshed within EU laws and regulations....you will especially see that in the banking and finance sides of the UK...
YES you do not have a "Constitution as such" but major changes to anything in the UK legal and political system can in fact be changed by a 2/3rds vote... it just has to be so stated on the ballot thus binding for Parliament MPs.....
AND yes the leave vote was actually an advisory vote as it is not binding on Parliament as it is Parliament that has the final say not the PM nor the ruling party.
Secondly, if you pay close attention to the current mess....you have voted in the last election for a ruling party and their PM...now the ruling party has "lost" that PM who was elected.... .. thus so has your original vote disappeared...now you have that same ruling party deciding over the heads of those that originally voted and putting a new PM into place with the so called holding to 2020 as the next election.
So say a majority of the Tory/Labor if they crossed over voters do not like the choice...they are stuck and cannot say a thing until a sudden snap election...which ain't about to happen and the next scheduled vote is 2020.....
By some terms this is a coup as the ballot of each individual was not honored with the selection of the new PM and know one knows exactly just what his/her program is other than leave and trigger Article 50.
Then we see the constant sidestepping on the leave side saying well we will use the 52% as a leverage against the EU for a "better deal"...but the EU has openly stated....."you got the best deal before the vote" and that is now off the table.
Are we in fact now seeing with the utter confusion inside the Tories and Labor a complete breakdown of "parliamentary democracy"....
David.......notice the Lords's own use of the word "constitution" throughout the 210 pages".....and their views on just what are referendums and how they impact Parliament's decisions. Interesting that this study was done in 2009/2010.....long before Leave....
"The Select Committee on the Constitution" House of Lords.....
http://www.publications.parliament.u...onst/99/99.pdf
Titled "Referendums in the United Kingdom" 12th Session 2009/2010
Many on the Leave side should have intently read this....well worth the reading of 210 pages of "legalese"...........
One interesting comment the study noted was "while referendums maybe viewed as critical to change a particular situation...they may not in the end decisively resolve the situation for years to come'
Sound like the results of the "leave vote"???
Another interesting question they raised was....."where does the sovereignty actually lie.....within Parliament or with the People"???
Second interesting point was and if one reads between the lines....the hundreds of years of a functioning Parliament has in fact built a substantial body of an unwritten "Constitution" and how does a referendum affect that body of an unwritten "Constitution". They often referred to things that needed to be decided in the absence of a "written Constitution"...
This referendum was run under the concept and you heard it repeated literally for hours and days out of UK..."the People have spoken" but did they? As the current UK "sovereignty" still lies within Parliament.
I can see it slowly coming....what if the SNP MPs pull out the devolution agreements tied to the EU as being the basis of an independence vote....WHAT they if they are joined by a large majority of MPs from both parties as many of them have not been for Leave and they vote to Remain over the heads of those that voted to Leave....using the argument they are defending the UK from great damage...
Actually fully legal.....as the sovereignty of the UK lies within Parliament not the People....
That is why there should have been the 2/3rds clause added to the ballot thus the referendum can be seen as "simply advisor in nature to Parliament.
BTW...refer to Page 77..then continues on...quite interesting if one readings it correctly...."Referendums are one of the few ways in which under our "constitutional" settlement Acts of Parliament can be entrenched"..
WHY is it important "then referendums can be/must be able to be repealed by Parliament....."
Notice the Leave camp never talked about this study did they....with good reason... I would not as well if I were them......
Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 07-03-2016 at 01:47 PM.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks