• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

So May has bought off the ERG by accepting all their amendments, so it looks like the two bills will clear parliament this week, and the big confrontation will be put back to October.
 
A constitution would have triggered a referendum and quickly became a treaty so as to avoid all that pesky democracy.

I have no doubt whatsoever that a treaty would become something else in name only so as to do the same.
 
Only if the government of the time (and specifically the PM) chooses to use that veto.

The reason we enshrine these changes in legislation is so that no PM can choose to make constitutional changes on a whim. Cameron ensured that a treaty would require a referendum.

Should that prove problematic for the EU then they'll simply be able to push that legislation through with no more than the whim of the PM at the time to consider (as with the Lisbon "Treaty")

That's not really the point. Having signed over significant control to an institution happy to ride roughshod over democracy is.
 
None of those checks and balances stopped the Lisbon Treaty. I don't believe that, had the "Treaty" been named as the Constitution that it really was, the public would have even nearly voted it through in the UK.

Those were constitutional level changes into which we were tied by a transitory government. There are all kinds of good reasons why such changes should be put to the people, and the EU (with help from the one-eyed tax monster and Ed "his brother should have been an only child" Miliband) contrived to avoid the requisite level of democracy.
 
Last edited:
I actually totally agree with this part.

I also blame Cameron for the pathetically stupid way he put forward the referendum. It was like schoolboy stuff he thought he would offer one, win and that would shut people up. But by not setting out a proper stance he has left us in this mess.

Should have been a 3 way referendum I would always vote for out of the custom union, but then my politics on the EU is very long standing(remember having an argument with Leedspurs saying I would not support Europe in the Ryder cup in the late noughties because of my hatred of Brussels).

Cameron has actually inched ahead of Bliar as the worst Prime minister in recent history. Even if Bliar should be in a prison cell for Iraq and also caused a lot of social problems for people in this country with his mass immigration. I think Cameron with his poor handling of the Referendum has now inched above him.
 
scaramanga said:
None of those checks and balances stopped the Lisbon Treaty. I don't believe that, had the "Treaty" been named as the Constitution that it really was, the public would have even nearly voted it through in the UK.

Those were constitutional level changes into which we were tied by a transitory government. There are all kinds of good reasons why such changes should be put to the people, and the EU (with help from the one-eyed tax monster and David "his brother should have been an only child" Miliband) contrived to avoid the requisite level of democracy.
Click to expand...

The moment that kicked it all off and when the Cnut Cameron lied for the first time on a major issue to us. That was what put people onto UKIP in a big way. The powers that be I.E. the uncivil service fudge around to much you are going to see one of the most amazing political comebacks from a party in UK history.
 
My point is that there are limits to the decisions that can be made by a government - especially when that relates to a change in our ability to control the actions of our own leaders. With good reason, any attempt to make such alterations are usually put to a referendum. Clearly the European Constitution would and should have been put to a referendum, the EU and Brown/Miliband contrived to avoid the referendum by calling it a treaty and refusing to use our veto.
 
What a president to set. It says to the nation, minions beever away and pay taxes to pay for us lot to work when we want; and that we are a weak government who can not face its adversaries.

The absurd thing is the nation needs this weak government. Being rudderless and drifting into Brexit is even worse than May's all things to all men approach. It's been great being out the UK and at arms length from this nonsense, Brexit is such a waste of time!

There is no 'righter' way to do the wrong thing. Just cancel it, that is the right thing. Have a stupid referendum no one really wants to bother with, get it out the way, move on.
 
Last edited:
milo said:
This is worth a read


https://www.economist.com/britain/2...-trashed-the-basic-principles-of-conservatism
Click to expand...

Scathing.

“The first principle of conservatism is to be sceptical of pie-in-the-sky schemes.”

Conservatives have always been identified as the party of business, but that has been dented by those that want to regress completely free trade with our neighbours and damage UK industry.

In the future will there be new political party divides based on immigration, global integration and nationalism?


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
Last edited:
milo said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1018955386563563522
Click to expand...

In a nutshell why I cannot stand politicians and want genuine change at that level.

They serve themselves, work only to cling onto power, and are fudging cowards.

I can think of not one politician actually serving the best interest of the public/their constituents. Which is the whole bloody point of being a politician.

Its should be a vocation, not a career.

Sack them all off and start again.
 
Maastricht was a stitch up but I genuinely believe we didn't know what we were getting into at the time.

Lisbon shouldn't have been ratified in the same way though. It was a Constitution, not a treaty. It only got renamed a Treaty when the EU realised that it was going to fail to get its own way if the actual people affected by it got a vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back