Brexit, for once some facts.

[flecc]

Yes, but when we vote we know its for 5 years. When we voted on this we knew it was definitive. Well thought so. Perhaps we should vote on it every 5 years then flecc.

I see no reason why not. It could be a second ballot slip at the time of general elections, asking, should we continue with EU membership. Three consecutive No's over three five year terms for example triggering Leave.

Sounds good to me, plenty of thinking time and no chance of 15 year long distorting campaigns on either side. Decisions made on what actually happens long term.

I'd be very happy to accept the outcome.
.

 

[Zlatan]

No it was not even the will of the voting public, 38%, remember?
.

I get your point but all you are moaning about is the use of phrase"will of the people", which to be absolutely true would need a 100% majority. Not one that simply wins the election /referendum.

 

[Zlatan]

I see no reason why not. It could be a second ballot slip at the time of general elections, asking, should we continue with EU membership. Three consecutive No's over three five year terms for example triggering Leave.

Sounds good to me, plenty of thinking time and no chance of 15 year long distorting campaigns on either side.
.

Yep, OK we, ve solved it...unless of course remainers decide it should be 4 straight wins..After deciding it was 3...Which is what you are doing now... Well not just you, and not you personally.. But you see the point.

 

[tillson]

The establishment doesn't like having lots of police or tax inspectors and neither does the common criminal class in respect of the first of those -

Absolutely right.

 

[Fingers]

Are you forgetting what Farage said? This result the other way round would be unfinished business
Only a 60/40 victory would end the matter

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk

If you read before you started mashing away with your head wand you may have noticed the line about fundamentalists.

Which Nige surely is.

 

[flecc]

I get your point but all you are moaning about is the use of phrase"will of the people", which to be absolutely true would need a 100% majority. Not one that simply wins the election /referendum.

No, 51% or more would be their will, a true majority. That's why in many referenda worldwide that is set as the pass mark.
.

 

[Fingers]

So you don't believe in five yearly general elections. Once the people have spoken it's final?
.

This wasn't a general election.

It's completely different and you know it.

 

[tillson]

Don't worry, the officer will not punished, the threat of that is just for public consumption to satisy the naysayers. There's been a long history of threats to punish officers of the Met fo killing, including some court cases in the worst cases, but they have never succeeded.

That include the worst case of all when an officer shot dead at point blank range someone he wanted to question who refused to get out of his parked car and was manouvering it out from between two cars to get away.

Although known, the man who he merely wanted to question was unarmed with no record of ever using any form of weapon or violence. The officer was alongside the car driver's window but about three feet out. He claimed he was in fear of being run over, apparently claiming to believe cars could drive sideways!

The way he fired his pistol at arms length directly into the side of the mans brain for failure to stop and no other reason was undoubtedly cold blooded murder, but he was found not guilty by a majority of what had to be a fixed jury.

So you need have no fear that the officer who tipped a guilty person off a scooter without any permanent harm being done will be punished.
.

I don't share your confidence, but I hope you are right and that this doesn't make other officers pause a moment too long before acting.

 

[flecc]

Yep, OK we, ve solved it...unless of course remainers decide it should be 4 straight wins..After deciding it was 3...Which is what you are doing now... Well not just you, and not you personally.. But you see the point.

Not if 3 times is actually passed as law, like the 5 year general election rule is now.

Easily done and a much better system, since there wouldn't be one side against the other. Just a majority over time wanting to Leave without remainers voting to stop that. Therefore no friction with the accumulation over 15 years giving plenty of time for all to get used to the trend.
.

 

[Zlatan]

No, 51% or more would be their will, a true majority. That's why in many referenda worldwide that is set as the pass mark.
.

That's your View, mathematically it would need to be 100%.Just one desenter in whole country and strictly the statement is wrong.. in my view.
But again its pedantics to suit the argument you chose. And pointless. Leave won by above the chosen margin at the time. End of. We should be leaving. We won't. Those that govern us are deciding..(the EU included in that statement)

The statement "will of the people" strictly always needs clarity. Its the will of 51% of the people? All the people ?
Well 37%.Pointless.And pointless getting in a tiz over it.

 

[Zlatan]

Not if 3 times is actually passed as law, like the 5 year general election rule is now.

Easily done and a much better system, since there wouldn't be one side against the other. Just a majority over time wanting to Leave without remainers voting to stop that. Therefore no friction with the accumulation over 15 years giving plenty of time for all to get used to the trend.
.

The law's an ass. There would still be desent... either way. Some would justify it.. One way or another.

 

[flecc]

Getting rid of Farage is surely a benefit even for you remainers.

He's impossible to get rid of. Every time he resigns he pops back up again like a nightmare.

Maybe we could get the Met police to shoot him.
.

 

[Zlatan]

He's impossible to get rid of. Every time he resigns he pops back up again like a nightmare.

Maybe we could get the Met police to shoot him.
.

Run him over seems fashionable at moment.
Somebody could give him a scooter.

 

[Danidl]

This wasn't a general election.

It's completely different and you know it.

Perhaps you should reflect a bit longer on that statement... With a General election there is an imperative to have a winner. The function of a referendum is to find the wishes and aspirations of the people. The unassailable fact was that of the people who voted, a narrow majority expressed a preference for looser ties with the EU.
You could contrast that with recent referenda in my country where the clearly expressed view of the people was to, redefine marriage , to remove a constitutional ban on abortion and to remove the word blasfamy from the constitution. Simple outcomes to simple questions,for which the resultant consequences could be realistically considered.

 

[oyster]

I indicated clearly whom I thought would be the best candidate. Re-read the post perhaps?

Tom

Yes - you did. What I actually meant to post was asking for
any suggestions from OTHER people! Should wake up before posting any replies.

 

[flecc]

The law's an ass. There would still be desent... either way. Some would justify it.. One way or another.

Of course, but a tiny minority who could be ignored, not the huge numbers dissenting now and causing a major breakdown in social cohesion.
.

 

[Zlatan]

Perhaps you should reflect a bit longer on that statement... With a General election there is an imperative to have a winner. The function of a referendum is to find the wishes and aspirations of the people. The unassailable fact was that of the people who voted, a narrow majority expressed a preference for looser ties with the EU.
You could contrast that with recent referenda in my country where the clearly expressed view of the people was to, redefine marriage , to remove a constitutional ban on abortion and to remove the word blasfamy from the constitution. Simple outcomes to simple questions,for which the resultant consequences could be realistically considered.

But that's not what people were told. Had it been so do you really think 72% would have turned out for a survey.

 

[Zlatan]

Of course, but a tiny minority who could be ignored, not the huge numbers dissenting now and causing a major breakdown in social cohesion.
.

You have a point but all the dissenters voted on one side. Remain. They are from the real minority.
Perhaps we should organise rallies and who ever has loudest gets result.
Leavers don't need to show dissent. They won. Well I thought they had.

 

[flecc]

What I actually meant to post was asking for
any suggestions from OTHER people!

OK, my suggestion is that as Jean-Claude Juncker's term as EU Commission President is almost at an end, we could invite him.

Despite his apparently bumbling, sozzled way, he has an incredible record of success in everything he tackles. Just look at how wealthy he made tiny Luxembourg.
.

 

[oyster]

Yes, but when we vote we know its for 5 years. When we voted on this we knew it was definitive. Well thought so. Perhaps we should vote on it every 5 years then flecc.

We absolutely DO NOT know it will be for five years. The very first post-fixed-term-parliament-Act parliament didn't even make it to three years (only just over two years). A 100% failure for a fixed-term parliament to reach the fixed term does not appear to give a good historic basis on which to make predictions about future parliaments.

I am finding it very difficu;t to imagine this one lasting a full five years regardless how many PMs might be shuffled in and out.