antony1969 Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 malc d - 2017-03-31 8:17 PM antony1969 - 2017-03-31 4:24 PM malc d - 2017-03-31 4:10 PM antony1969 - 2017-03-31 9:39 AM If anyone ever loved the sound of their own voice it was this woman ... Go away ... https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3216279/gina-miller-wants-to-halt-eu-law-from-being-scrapped-in-great-repeal-bill-as-she-threatens-to-take-government-to-court-again-over-henry-viii-powers/ At a time when there is no real effective opposition in the Houses of Parliament, it seems quite useful that a member of the public is prepared to keep a check on what the government gets up to. :-| So we have Labour Party Members who voted for Jezza to blame for Windy Miller ??? What is your problem with Gina Miller ? If she just keeps appearing on the telly too much for your liking, you can always switch off. ;-) I don't need to turn it off as I very rarely watch it thanks Malc but your right if I felt that way I could turn her off if I did ... The answer to your question is I simply don't like her as some on here don't like The Mail or Micheal Gove or Trump or whatever ... I don't care for her , she is in my view a figurehead for losers , bitter , sore losers and I was always brought up to back winners but if you did lose act graciously and accept defeat ... Seems Remainers her included don't think the same and I believe she's enjoying her own self importance a tad too much ... Just my own personal thoughts but you did ask Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogerC Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 Barryd999 - 2017-03-31 11:50 AMHa Ha! Crystal ball? Not really just the opinions of many experts that I would prefer to listen to rather than dumb blind optimism from people who dont have a clue what a hard Brexit will mean.Brexit has only just started a few days ago by the way so the next two years or so is the time to see just how true (or not) the predictions will be, not over the last nine months of limbo.The Brexit honeymoon is over. Talking it up, being super positive and crossing your fingers hoping for the best wont wash anymore. Its going to take more than that. They need us more than we need them you have been telling us. Should be a doddle then huh? With the likes of self serving Clegg and his like clamouring for to remain that alone is sufficient for me to be celebrating the leave vote and Article 50. As for your 'experts'...hahahaha that's a joke.... The BoE 'experts'....."The bank has come under intense criticism for predicting a dramatic slowdown in the UK’s fortunes in the event of a vote for Brexit only for the economy to bounce back strongly and remain one of the best performing in the developed world." According to reports and an answer on QT £16 billion has come to the UK in the wake of the 'leave' vote.Barry your so called experts, including the Governor of the BoE appear to date not to know their way around any form of slightly correct predictions. Then of course there is that buffoon....nay imbecile Juncker camped out on the EU battlements threatening to break up the USA....... All in all there really isn't very much to commend the 'remain' camp.....all your lot can do is prophesy doom and gloom and look to hitch your futures to a dictatorial organisation led by an idiot that thinks 'he' can threaten the USA...........good luck to you. Best laugh in ages....hahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4370008/Exports-boom-UK-growth-outpaces-rest-G7.html Note we're now beating Germany and the US B-) ....... Pounds on its way up to......currently 1.18 euros :D ......... Dam how annoyed must those RemOAner experts and their disciples be? >:-) ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 malc d - 2017-03-31 4:10 PM antony1969 - 2017-03-31 9:39 AM If anyone ever loved the sound of their own voice it was this woman ... Go away ... https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3216279/gina-miller-wants-to-halt-eu-law-from-being-scrapped-in-great-repeal-bill-as-she-threatens-to-take-government-to-court-again-over-henry-viii-powers/ At a time when there is no real effective opposition in the Houses of Parliament, it seems quite useful that a member of the public is prepared to keep a check on what the government gets up to. :-| Seems to me that the government is actually doing what the majority voted for.......for a change B-) ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 More bad news *-) ........... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4370032/It-makes-sense-stay-Britain-says-BMW.html :D ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 pelmetman - 2017-04-01 8:08 AM malc d - 2017-03-31 4:10 PM antony1969 - 2017-03-31 9:39 AM If anyone ever loved the sound of their own voice it was this woman ... Go away ... https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3216279/gina-miller-wants-to-halt-eu-law-from-being-scrapped-in-great-repeal-bill-as-she-threatens-to-take-government-to-court-again-over-henry-viii-powers/ At a time when there is no real effective opposition in the Houses of Parliament, it seems quite useful that a member of the public is prepared to keep a check on what the government gets up to. :-| Seems to me that the government is actually doing what the majority voted for....... No they are not. They haven't consulted anyone about what they want to do. They propose to transfer all the EU laws into our law en bloc, and then sort out afterwards which ones we keep and which ones we drop or change. Good idea - makes sense. But it seems that their proposal is that they ( the Tories ) should be able to make changes to those laws without any scrutiny by anyone else in parliament. OUR laws should be made in Parliament, surely that is one of the main aims of Brexit, so many people, including Gina Miller, think that what they are proposing is unacceptable. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 malc d - 2017-04-01 9:38 AM pelmetman - 2017-04-01 8:08 AM malc d - 2017-03-31 4:10 PM antony1969 - 2017-03-31 9:39 AM If anyone ever loved the sound of their own voice it was this woman ... Go away ... https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3216279/gina-miller-wants-to-halt-eu-law-from-being-scrapped-in-great-repeal-bill-as-she-threatens-to-take-government-to-court-again-over-henry-viii-powers/ At a time when there is no real effective opposition in the Houses of Parliament, it seems quite useful that a member of the public is prepared to keep a check on what the government gets up to. :-| Seems to me that the government is actually doing what the majority voted for....... No they are not. They haven't consulted anyone about what they want to do. They propose to transfer all the EU laws into our law en bloc, and then sort out afterwards which ones we keep and which ones we drop or change. Good idea - makes sense. But it seems that their proposal is that they ( the Tories ) should be able to make changes to those laws without any scrutiny by anyone else in parliament. OUR laws should be made in Parliament, surely that is one of the main aims of Brexit, so many people, including Gina Miller, think that what they are proposing is unacceptable. :-| I thought David Davis had made it quite clear that the normal procedures would take place when changing any of the unbelievable 50 thousand EU laws ... Gina Millers constant merry go round of media outlets making her threats serves no purpose what so ever other than keep her in the position she enjoys , in the news Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 antony1969 - 2017-04-01 10:03 AM I thought David Davis had made it quite clear that the normal procedures would take place when changing any of the unbelievable 50 thousand EU laws . , How can David Davis promise to use " normal procedures " for something that hasn't happened before ? You obviously have a lot more faith in politicians than I have. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 malc d - 2017-04-01 10:17 AM antony1969 - 2017-04-01 10:03 AM I thought David Davis had made it quite clear that the normal procedures would take place when changing any of the unbelievable 50 thousand EU laws . , How can David Davis promise to use " normal procedures " for something that hasn't happened before ? You obviously have a lot more faith in politicians than I have. ;-) We've never changed any laws ever before ???? ... I think we might have Malc a time or two Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 RogerC - 2017-03-31 8:56 PMBarryd999 - 2017-03-31 11:50 AMHa Ha! Crystal ball? Not really just the opinions of many experts that I would prefer to listen to rather than dumb blind optimism from people who dont have a clue what a hard Brexit will mean.Brexit has only just started a few days ago by the way so the next two years or so is the time to see just how true (or not) the predictions will be, not over the last nine months of limbo.The Brexit honeymoon is over. Talking it up, being super positive and crossing your fingers hoping for the best wont wash anymore. Its going to take more than that. They need us more than we need them you have been telling us. Should be a doddle then huh?With the likes of self serving Clegg and his like clamouring for to remain that alone is sufficient for me to be celebrating the leave vote and Article 50.As for your 'experts'...hahahaha that's a joke....The BoE 'experts'....."The bank has come under intense criticism for predicting a dramatic slowdown in the UK’s fortunes in the event of a vote for Brexit only for the economy to bounce back strongly and remain one of the best performing in the developed world."According to reports and an answer on QT £16 billion has come to the UK in the wake of the 'leave' vote.Barry your so called experts, including the Governor of the BoE appear to date not to know their way around any form of slightly correct predictions. Then of course there is that buffoon....nay imbecile Juncker camped out on the EU battlements threatening to break up the USA....... All in all there really isn't very much to commend the 'remain' camp.....all your lot can do is prophesy doom and gloom and look to hitch your futures to a dictatorial organisation led by an idiot that thinks 'he' can threaten the USA...........good luck to you. Best laugh in ages....hahahahaAs has been said a million times now most of the predictions assumed Article 50 to me invoked immediately, If you fruitloops get your way and it ends up being a hard Brexit I think we will see exactly how great our economy is then. When you think about it if we are doing so magnificently well it makes a jump off a cliff into the unknown with no plan whatsoever seem all the more ridiculous. As for dictatorships well thats exactly what your going to end up with here if TM and your Swivel Eyed loonies get their way. Good job we still kind of live in a Democracy then isnt it and people are (At the moment) allowed to stand up and fight against such actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 antony1969 - 2017-04-01 11:19 AM We've never changed any laws ever before ???? ... I think we might have Malc a time or two I have no doubt that we have changed laws before - and the changes were all approved democratically in Parliament and the House of Lords. I doubt if any political party has been allowed to change any laws on their own, without the democratic process, for a very long time. ( ...and they shouldn't be allowed to do it now ).. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 malc d - 2017-04-01 11:27 AM antony1969 - 2017-04-01 11:19 AM We've never changed any laws ever before ???? ... I think we might have Malc a time or two I have no doubt that we have changed laws before - and the changes were all approved democratically in Parliament and the House of Lords. I doubt if any political party has been allowed to change any laws on their own, without the democratic process, for a very long time. ( ...and they shouldn't be allowed to do it now ).. :-| Then go back to what David Davis has said regarding normal procedure ... Mountain and a molehill me thinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 antony1969 - 2017-03-31 3:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2017-03-31 2:08 PM antony1969 - 2017-03-31 9:39 AM If anyone ever loved the sound of their own voice it was this woman ... Go away ... https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3216279/gina-miller-wants-to-halt-eu-law-from-being-scrapped-in-great-repeal-bill-as-she-threatens-to-take-government-to-court-again-over-henry-viii-powers/ As ever, it is not quite so, though. The warning about the constitutional clash originated from Lord Justice Neuberger, the head of the Supreme Court. All Gina Miller has said is that she would be prepared to fund the case. The case is not about the Great Repeal Bill, which is intended to convert existing EU legislation into UK legislation. It is about additional powers the government is seeking within that bill to be able to subsequently repeal/alter that legislation without first obtaining parliamentary approval. The Bill proposes that once the EU legislation has been converted, a minister could alter or repeal it by statutory instrument, and would not need parliamentary approval to do so. We are, in effect, back to the argument over the government using the Royal Prerogative to invoke Article 50 without seeking parliamentary approval. There seems little point to me in arguing that regaining control over our laws is desirable, and then complaining about a proposal that our laws should be subject to parliamentary approval, rather than ministerial edict. If passed, those ministerial powers would outlive the present government, and would create precedent. OK if one believes that only the laws one doesn't like would be repealed, but what about when future ministers of future governments set about the laws one thinks good? Banana republic is a derogatory phrase, but such powers are the trademark of such republics. Are we really leaving the EU only to become a banana republic? Is that what Brexiteers really voted for? "Prepared to fund the case" and keep her face in the spotlight for just a little longer old cynic me thinks ... She's enjoying the moment and one presumes living and working in London with her fellow Remain voters they'll be constantly letting her know she's the nations darling ... Might not work so if she lived in Sunderland me thinks ... She has stated she doesn't want to become a politician , time will tell ... Work that audience Gina OK. So, as we've all come to know, you aren't a Gina Miller admirer. But what does that tell us about your opinion on the merits of the case, which is what I thought your link was intended to draw attention to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 antony1969 - 2017-04-01 11:19 AM malc d - 2017-04-01 10:17 AM antony1969 - 2017-04-01 10:03 AM I thought David Davis had made it quite clear that the normal procedures would take place when changing any of the unbelievable 50 thousand EU laws . , How can David Davis promise to use " normal procedures " for something that hasn't happened before ? You obviously have a lot more faith in politicians than I have. ;-) We've never changed any laws ever before ???? ... I think we might have Malc a time or two The difference is between changing primary legislation, which requires parliamentary approval, and changing secondary legislation - that made under statutory instruments (i.e. regulations etc.) by ministers without parliamentary approval. The proposal presently appears to be that all legislation passed into UK law under the Great Repeal Act would fall into the latter category. You may think that a good idea, but I don't. It is the same issue as the government lost in the Supreme Court over use of the Royal Prerogative to invoke Article 50. Maybe that will encourage a bit more thought and a change of emphasis. It is a disgrace that only wealthy private citizens are presently having to do the job of parliament in protecting the public from a government that is seriously over-reaching its legal authority. It is an even greater disgrace that those wishing for a short term victory can't see the danger of such powers being passed into the hands of any future government, of any political colour. Are we all now blind to future hazards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 malc d - 2017-04-01 9:38 AM pelmetman - 2017-04-01 8:08 AM malc d - 2017-03-31 4:10 PM antony1969 - 2017-03-31 9:39 AM If anyone ever loved the sound of their own voice it was this woman ... Go away ... https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3216279/gina-miller-wants-to-halt-eu-law-from-being-scrapped-in-great-repeal-bill-as-she-threatens-to-take-government-to-court-again-over-henry-viii-powers/ At a time when there is no real effective opposition in the Houses of Parliament, it seems quite useful that a member of the public is prepared to keep a check on what the government gets up to. :-| Seems to me that the government is actually doing what the majority voted for....... No they are not. They haven't consulted anyone about what they want to do. They propose to transfer all the EU laws into our law en bloc, and then sort out afterwards which ones we keep and which ones we drop or change. Good idea - makes sense. But it seems that their proposal is that they ( the Tories ) should be able to make changes to those laws without any scrutiny by anyone else in parliament. OUR laws should be made in Parliament, surely that is one of the main aims of Brexit, so many people, including Gina Miller, think that what they are proposing is unacceptable. :-| Well if you think Labour will be out of power long enough for the Tories to change 40 years worth of laws :D ........Suits me ......at the moment and I suspect the majority ;-) ........ Labour are completely away with the faeries *-) .......and will be until they remember who they're supposed to represent >:-) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 malc d - 2017-04-01 11:27 AM antony1969 - 2017-04-01 11:19 AM We've never changed any laws ever before ???? ... I think we might have Malc a time or two I have no doubt that we have changed laws before - and the changes were all approved democratically in Parliament and the House of Lords. I doubt if any political party has been allowed to change any laws on their own, without the democratic process, for a very long time. ( ...and they shouldn't be allowed to do it now ).. :-| From what they were saying the other day Old Shagger Henry's powers are used all the time to alter laws ;-) ........ It's just more RemOAner bitching >:-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 Brian Kirby - 2017-04-01 1:34 PM antony1969 - 2017-04-01 11:19 AM malc d - 2017-04-01 10:17 AM antony1969 - 2017-04-01 10:03 AM I thought David Davis had made it quite clear that the normal procedures would take place when changing any of the unbelievable 50 thousand EU laws . , How can David Davis promise to use " normal procedures " for something that hasn't happened before ? You obviously have a lot more faith in politicians than I have. ;-) We've never changed any laws ever before ???? ... I think we might have Malc a time or two The difference is between changing primary legislation, which requires parliamentary approval, and changing secondary legislation - that made under statutory instruments (i.e. regulations etc.) by ministers without parliamentary approval. The proposal presently appears to be that all legislation passed into UK law under the Great Repeal Act would fall into the latter category. You may think that a good idea, but I don't. It is the same issue as the government lost in the Supreme Court over use of the Royal Prerogative to invoke Article 50. Maybe that will encourage a bit more thought and a change of emphasis. It is a disgrace that only wealthy private citizens are presently having to do the job of parliament in protecting the public from a government that is seriously over-reaching its legal authority. It is an even greater disgrace that those wishing for a short term victory can't see the danger of such powers being passed into the hands of any future government, of any political colour. Are we all now blind to future hazards? The only disgrace I see is the RemOAners inability to accept a majority vote *-) ......... As for future hazards ;-) .......they'll be an election in 2020 (maybe sooner) so no doubt Joe public will let the Sainted Theresa know if she's over-reaching herself >:-) ........ As far as I'm concerned she's doing a great job, and will get my vote B-) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 pelmetman - 2017-04-01 2:30 PM Well if you think Labour will be out of power long enough for the Tories to change 40 years worth of laws :D . .......Suits me ... ...at the moment and I suspect the majority ;-) ........ Well, I'm not sure why you have changed the subject to the future of the Labour party, but the fact that you only believe in democracy when things are going your way, doesn't surprise me at all. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 malc d - 2017-04-01 3:13 PM pelmetman - 2017-04-01 2:30 PM Well if you think Labour will be out of power long enough for the Tories to change 40 years worth of laws :D . .......Suits me ... ...at the moment and I suspect the majority ;-) ........ Well, I'm not sure why you have changed the subject to the future of the Labour party, but the fact that you only believe in democracy when things are going your way, doesn't surprise me at all. ;-) You're making me sound like a RemOAner Malc :D ....... I guess there's not a lot of difference between us Brexiteers and the RemOAners........apart from the fact that we won (lol) .......... Perhaps democracy is a bit like theft.....possession is 9/10's of the law >:-) ............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 Brian Kirby - 2017-04-01 1:17 PM antony1969 - 2017-03-31 3:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2017-03-31 2:08 PM antony1969 - 2017-03-31 9:39 AM If anyone ever loved the sound of their own voice it was this woman ... Go away ... https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3216279/gina-miller-wants-to-halt-eu-law-from-being-scrapped-in-great-repeal-bill-as-she-threatens-to-take-government-to-court-again-over-henry-viii-powers/ As ever, it is not quite so, though. The warning about the constitutional clash originated from Lord Justice Neuberger, the head of the Supreme Court. All Gina Miller has said is that she would be prepared to fund the case. The case is not about the Great Repeal Bill, which is intended to convert existing EU legislation into UK legislation. It is about additional powers the government is seeking within that bill to be able to subsequently repeal/alter that legislation without first obtaining parliamentary approval. The Bill proposes that once the EU legislation has been converted, a minister could alter or repeal it by statutory instrument, and would not need parliamentary approval to do so. We are, in effect, back to the argument over the government using the Royal Prerogative to invoke Article 50 without seeking parliamentary approval. There seems little point to me in arguing that regaining control over our laws is desirable, and then complaining about a proposal that our laws should be subject to parliamentary approval, rather than ministerial edict. If passed, those ministerial powers would outlive the present government, and would create precedent. OK if one believes that only the laws one doesn't like would be repealed, but what about when future ministers of future governments set about the laws one thinks good? Banana republic is a derogatory phrase, but such powers are the trademark of such republics. Are we really leaving the EU only to become a banana republic? Is that what Brexiteers really voted for? "Prepared to fund the case" and keep her face in the spotlight for just a little longer old cynic me thinks ... She's enjoying the moment and one presumes living and working in London with her fellow Remain voters they'll be constantly letting her know she's the nations darling ... Might not work so if she lived in Sunderland me thinks ... She has stated she doesn't want to become a politician , time will tell ... Work that audience Gina OK. So, as we've all come to know, you aren't a Gina Miller admirer. But what does that tell us about your opinion on the merits of the case, which is what I thought your link was intended to draw attention to? You'd be right I don't care for her just as others on here don't hide their dislike of other individuals so alls fair I presume ... The link is full of Gina doing what Gina does best so go back to the beginning of this post regarding I don't care for her ... You like her , I don't but I presume her touring the studios and her agent will mean she'll be around to annoy me for a little longer and even more so when her book comes out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.