How shockingly ignorant Remain supporters are.

[ScreamingLadySutch]

Sorry, guys, but you are.

In the past week I have been told we must Remain because BJ is a dictator by one, and by another because it is easier to travel .

There seems to be no knowledge of our history and institutions, legal, political, sovereign and economic considerations, the history etc of Europe and what is really going on.

Labour and the trade unions were wholly against entry, and the Conservatives pushed it through by stealth and deceit. That crusty old socialist Tony Benn was prophetic on his remarks about what it meant. Now, today, that is reversed. Fascinating, really.

For a good grounding on the roots of the issue (Maastricht was going to result in Brexit it was completely inevitable), this documentary is quite useful:

I’m sorry you feel that way @qualcheckbot and I hope I haven’t been abusive. Incidentally I have a pretty good grip on constitutional law issues, wee bit rusty as it’s not the daily bread and butter, but certainly not coming from a background of knowing nowt.

QualCheckBot - if you are incapable of responding to the point that the absence of a given reason is not the same thing as an objection to a reason, then I can see why you are keen to bow out.

Lords Reed and Carnwath dissented in Miller 1 but were part of the unanimous judgement in Miller 2

@qualcheckbot I am sorry but your responses show that you don't understand as much about constitutional law as you claim. I suspect you are bowing out because you can't actually respond to the points being made.

Constituency after constituency voted leave -and have remain MPs. Who are obstructing the government who are trying to implement the referendum

The shocking ignorance on this thread is the belief that MPs are delegates. They are not - they are representatives of all of the voters in a constituency and as such have a duty to act in what they believe are the best interests of all of their constituents. They are specifically duty bound to ignore 'the will of the people' if they believe that the lives of 'the people' will be damaged. This is the fundamental difference between direct democracy and representative democracy - it provides a buffer and reality check to prevent democracy being undermined by groups or interests that have better access to the media, that have deeper pockets or that shout or threaten the loudest.

walkaround and jennymara you are both breathtakingly smug and rude. What an appalling way to respond.

I enjoy debating constitutional law and theory with posters such as Quaffy and some others because its very hard in real life to have a reasonable debate, outwith professional circles (and even then there are many lawyers who don't know the basics of constitutional law and theory). I usually just dip into such threads online and then dip out again just as quickly before it degenerates. Not because I "don't understand as much as I claim" or I "can't respond".

There are an awful lot more things to do with on a Sunday, preferably outdoors and involving some exercise!

When people get angry, they engage. Then you engage, with facts. The best academic I ever had taught me this

The best academic I was taught by (nite the correct grammar) gave me this piece of advice, which I always think of when I read nonsense spouted by leavers: "you can't argue with stupid"

Note I meant. Typo

@QualCheckBot I apologise for being smug.

I can see why you wouldn't want to admit you voted Leave, but it's pretty obvious that you did

@LavenderAndBeeswax that is an outrageous thing to say.

No wonder Remainers have earned a reputation for divisiveness, intolerance and rudeness, with comments like this.

@QualCheckBot I was interested in your points about whether it changed the constitution. I do not agree with you, but this is debatable. But I did think this comment was conspiracy theory stuff that ignored how the court case actually played out.

"It actually indicates that it was a purposive decision - one which was arrived at in advance and then the reasoning worked out afterwards. i.e. they went into it with an outcome already in place."

The Government response in court was woeful.Even if you think the Government action was lawful, which I do not, you do actually have to present your case well in court with supporting evidence. The Government did not do this.

@QualCheckBot I am sorry you have been hounded off the thread - posters who aren't ardent Remainers aren't welcome on MN. I think your posts have been really erudite and interesting.

Having listened to Lord Jonathan Sumption's Reith Lectures earlier in the year, I like him am concerned about the separation of powers, the future of democracy and the power of an unelected judiciary.

Remainers won't hear these arguments becuase the SC ruling went their way. Again, more shortsightedness.

There are an awful lot more things to do with on a Sunday, preferably outdoors and involving some exercise!

If only it weren’t compulsory to post on MN and you were able to do those things instead of the “I could debate but I won’t because none of you are as educated as I am.

I’m so sorry - sucks to be so constrained.

posters who aren't ardent Remainers aren't welcome on MN

Of course they are. Since 2016 I’ve been waiting for an erudite and eloquent Leaver to debate.

Maybe not today, eh?

@pierrebuzcow An unelected judiciary is an important safeguarding. It says that everyone has to abide by the law including elected officials.

The big problem is MPs - they rejected the withdrawal deal the EU accepted and BJ voted for. They will not revoke art 50. They will not agree to crash out. What do they want? There seems to be no single course they will agree. Exactly

Having listened to Lord Jonathan Sumption's Reith Lectures earlier in the year, I like him am concerned about the separation of powers, the future of democracy and the power of an unelected judiciary

I do actually share concerns on this front. Equally I’m not sure elected judges and ending up with a politically biased judiciary is great as an alternative either.

Remainers won't hear these arguments becuase the SC ruling went their way. Again, more shortsightedness

Given you accused Remainers of stoking divisiveness, this is not particularly conciliatory either.

The problem is leave MPs thought they could get a better deal with the EU by leaving than by being a member. That was never going to happen.

Parliament represents the people. The people are split, parliament is split.

Quaffy It is absolutely fundamental to the separation of powers that the judiciary can step in where the government exceeds its lawful powers.

Couldn't resist replying to this. Acceptable if its a proper Constitutional court, with constrained powers and absolute experts (not generalists) in Constitutional law and theory. e.g. the BCBG. Exercise of constitutional powers by the court really have to be constrained and very limited, and set out in advance.

I have to admit I'm not keen on the British approach to all of this at all. This mess would never have happened if there was a proper single document modern constitution laying down the majority required in a referendum proposing constitutional change. Worryingly, there are no proposals for a proper constitution by any political parties and the general population seem woefully unaware of the issue.

I said before on this thread that when I was in The Netherlands I could debate at quite a high level with people who were not experts in any way. They all came equipped with a general knowledge of the constitution and separation of powers for instance. While many posters also do on here, your average person on the street just doesn't. Its really strange, and worrying. What on earth is the education system here teaching? How to be rude when someone doesn't agree with your own political views?

I really am off out now. I haven't been driven off, I just see the thread going nowhere it hasn't already gone. I might pop in again later.

A lot of insults but not a lot of facts.
Regarding the GFA and the supposition that we have to have a border between the North and South in Ireland, this is a scare story put out by the EU and Varadkar. Both Norway and Switzerland are not in the EU and do not have hard borders with the EU countries surrounding them.
The £350 million, incorrectly used by Bojo before the referendum is the gross figure we give to the EU each week, so he should have quoted the net figure which is still huge - between £120m and £140m each week.
Are we going to be able to trade with and travel to Europe? I would say yes to that, because the reciprocal effect if there was a ban would be so great, that businesses in mainland Europe would suffer as well.
Switzerland, Norway and Canada enjoy tariff free trade with the EU.
Why do Labour like the EU so much, when in 2015, every Labour MEP voted against Jean Claude Juncker being appointed the head of the EU Commission?
How is it, that one of the smallest members of the EU - Luxembourg, provided three leaders of the EU. more than any other country?
Luxembourg, one of the richest countries in the World, is a well known tax haven and has a reputation for money laundering, one of the reasons for Labour opposing Juncker in 2015, yet this tiny, rich country pays virtually nothing into the EU.
Austerity measures, which hurt the poorest in society are the dictat of the EU - look at Greece, Italy, Ireland, France, Spain, Netherlands and the UK.

www.redpepper.org.uk/the-trouble-with-being-both-anti-austerity-and-pro-eu/

One of the biggest factors in Brexit, which nobody can deny, was immigration, which I think is a huge problem. Anyone who thinks that unlimited immigration is a great thing, clearly has no knowledge of economics. What has happened in the UK, is that UK employers now have access to bargain basement level resources, otherwise known as - workers. This isn't just agriculture, construction, but other sectors as well, where the extra competition for work has driven down wages. The average wage in Eastern Europe is around E4000, less than one third of our minimum wage.
Unlimited immigration also places a lot of extra stress on the infrastructure - education, health, public services, so that when public spending decreases due to austerity measures, the results are easy to see and experience.
I love Europe, but having travelled there regularly for the past twenty years, I have noticed recent criticism of the EU, in France, Germany and Austria particularly.
A lot of people (including myself), see the EU as an upper tier of burEUcracy, ruled by unelected, very highly paid, neo-liberal politicians, many of whom belong to groups such as Bilderburg which push "Free market Western Capitalism".
To sum up, I think that the concept of the EU may have been good, but has now been fully taken over by the ruling elite who care nothing about 95% of ordinary people. We are just resources to be used up as fuel in their project.

I have to admit I'm not keen on the British approach to all of this at all. This mess would never have happened if there was a proper single document modern constitution laying down the majority required in a referendum proposing constitutional change. Worryingly, there are no proposals for a proper constitution by any political parties and the general population seem woefully unaware of the issue.

Agree.

Both Norway and Switzerland are not in the EU and do not have hard borders with the EU countries surrounding them

When I went to Norway, there were checks on the border between Norway and the EU

When I went to Switzerland, there were checks on the border between Switzerland and the EU.

@qualcheckbot Pupils here are taught about how our parliamentary democracy works. I agree that we need a proper constitution. This was actually a public debate a number of years ago and it was supposed to happen, but no real progress was made.
But in the absence of a proper constitution we need the supreme court to rule on issues such as prorogration. It is a key safeguarding of democracy in the absence of a proper constitution.

Switzerland, Norway and Canada enjoy tariff free trade with the EU

Do you know what deal those countries have with the EU? And what they pay in return?