Not to want to lose my human rights on the whim of a government minister?

[SecondRateFrog]

Dominic Raab says he wants to bring in a system which allows the Government to legislate against UK court judgements in human rights cases if it doesn't like them. Without going through a debate or a vote in Parliament.
Is this the end of the role of the courts in our democracy?
"Raab threat to ‘correct’ court judgments is ‘deeply troubling’, warn legal experts"
It's in The Telegraph too.
uk.yahoo.com/news/raab-threat-correct-court-judgments-144345935.html

Don't know why you are quoting Cameron, Clavinova

12 June 2016;
David Cameron confirmed Sunday that he will pull Britain out of the single market if there is a vote to leave the European Union at the upcoming referendum.

He said the Brexit campaign had made it clear to voters that voting to leave also meant pulling out of the single market.

There have been reports that the House of Commons, whose MPs are overwhelmingly pro-Remain, could vote against pulling out of the single market in the event of a Brexit. MPs could claim they were accepting voters’ wishes to withdraw from the EU while protecting them from the economic consequences of leaving the trading area.

However, the Leave campaign has made it clear that in order to restrict immigration and strike trade deals with countries outside the EU, Britain would have to leave the single market.

The prime minister said: “What the British public will be voting for is to leave the EU and leave the single market.

www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

Usual Brexit morons on here showing complete lack of understanding of how the how the constitution and democracy work.

Same old same old.

Usual Brexit morons on here showing complete lack of understanding of how the how the constitution and democracy work

Thankfully most (90% of voters atm) of those reading this thread understand what a load of bs it is. Of course those close to the heart of this appalling government will feel the need to try and influence people’s opinions, as MN is a popular site. But encouraging to see almost everyone sees it for what it is. Their tactics are failing, as is their Brexit.

Thankfully most (90% of voters atm) of those reading this thread understand what a load of bs it is.
Bet it gets though though.
And the cheering from the daily mail loving public will be deafening.

So if one cut n' paste adds nothing to the debate, add another cut n' paste from a failed politician, and that will make it correct.

Given that support for the Single Market was in the Tory Manifesto of 2015 it seems appalling arrogance for a PM who had won a majority to declare that he would arbitrarily ignore a manifesto commitment.

I have my own copy and paste! This from Lord Puttnam’s resignation speech:

^“And with every passing month there are more – each of them setting out to chip away at and undermine much of what defines an active liberal democracy: those institutions that might act as checks and balances on a populist government that’s trampling on long held rights and conventions, with the sole purpose of tightening its own grip on power.”^

I could cut & paste Gove’s soft Brexit views or Boris cakeandeatitism even after the referendum but I cba. Clav doesn’t even read her own links let alone anyone else’s.

mathanxiety Possibly, but more people voted to leave than to remain.

This is another quote from Lord Puttnams’ speech, where he’s warning us about what else is coming…

An ‘Elections Bill’ that, contrary to the advice of the Committee for Standards in Public Life, is set on undermining our long established independent ‘Electoral Commission’; a Bill to reform Judicial Review whose principal aim is to reduce the role of the Judiciary; a Police Bill that weakens the right to legal protest; along with a plan to ‘widen the scope of the Official Secrets Act’ with no commitment to add a public interest defence for journalists – even an Education Bill that seeks to reduce traditional academic freedoms in the area of Teacher Training! … and ‘reforming’ the UK’s implementation of the European Human Rights Act, potentially forcing us out of the Council of Europe

But we’re shouting into the wind really. Brexiteers just don’t care. Which is ironic really. I thought protecting those English ‘traditions’ and democratic institutions - respect for the law, an independent and free press, free speech and reasoned debate, the rights of individuals - were underpinning the vote to Leave.

But it’s clear now that claiming one voted to Leave as the alleged motivation to protect English traditions and institutions was a lie. Now we’re witnessing a gleeful and complete willingness to be rid of them. Where does this take us to? Back to xenophobia?

Shame on those MPs trying to protect their constituents from the economic consequences of leaving the SM/CU [we’re getting a flavour of that now] whilst navigating voters’ wishes to withdraw from the EU… just shame on them! Because it’s so clear that most voters completely understood/understand how global supply chains, trade, and free trade agreements work.

Things are so polarised. Opinions are so fixed in stone. And leavers are not prepared to back down and admit things really aren't working out. Or they are so insulated from the vagaries of everyday life they are oblivious to everything. Sadly because folk were so energised by the brexit debate, emotions were so high, it's become matter of self esteem. People simply can't admit they've been sold a lemon because they will loose face. They'll go along with anything because they are now on the winning side. They've thrown their lot in with the tories and feel a certain loyalty to them. We are stuffed as a nation and are now in a situation where any challenge to the government is just seen as lefty moaning, it really is that bad.

Or they are so insulated from the vagaries of everyday life they are oblivious to everything.

Wealthy pensioners, yes. But the pig farmer who has been in the news recently crying because she'll have to slaughter her pigs was on Woman's Hour yesterday. She was asked why she voted Leave "I voted for people to be more patriotic"

@MadameMaxGoesler, your claim that the referendum should have been wholeheartedly backed by all MPs based on the number who voted to leave is rather undermined by the fact that a whopping number voted to stay.

Those MPs who spoke for the narrowly defeated minority (who were a wide majority in two of the UK's four provinces) were clearly well within their rights and fulfilled their duty.

@DeepaBeesKit "...a profession known to be populated by the wealthy privately educated" you say.

Yet you seem to have no issues with the Tory party.

@DeepaBeesKit - you rightly point out that western economies are underpinned by certainty.

But the Brexiteers have thumbed their noses at received wisdom where the economy is concerned.

And some have made a lot of money betting against the British economy.

mathanxiety The leaflet sent out to all households promised that the government would implement the result of the referendum whichever way it went.
Are you arguing for the reversal of the Welsh devolution, which was based on a much smaller majority?

mathanxiety "And some have made a lot of money betting against the British economy."
If by that you mean people like Crispin Odey, you should bear in mind that hedge funds are only required to report their short positions and not their long positions. So you have absolutely no way of telling whether those investors are net short of UK stocks.

This is to do with Poland, but at first reading I thought that it referred to somewhere closer to home...
"Europe will not digest the end of the rule of law. Europe will die from such a development... Europe has been built on democracy, liberty, respect - and the rule of law," Asselborn told reporters before a meeting of EU European affairs ministers in Luxembourg.
"We have to realize this, not only the members that respect the rule of law but also in places where the thinking is that the rule of law is not that important. If you challenge the rule of law, you do it for a reason. And this reason is the retention of power."

But the pig farmer who has been in the news recently crying because she'll have to slaughter her pigs was on Woman's Hour yesterday. She was asked why she voted Leave "I voted for people to be more patriotic" hmm

Absolutely zero sympathy for this farmer. In fact I have negative sympathy. My more patriotic she means more racist, well she got her wish.

She claimed to be “very educated” in her vote, “I can assure you I didn’t vote for this” she said. Of course she did, she just didn’t do her research on the likely impact of departure of EU foreign workers and border controls on pig farming.

‘Absolutely zero sympathy for this farmer. In fact I have negative sympathy. My more patriotic she means more racist, well she got her wish.’

I read some comments under an article about her and apparently she had been known to ‘like’ comments calling Polish people cockroaches who should go home on her Facebook page so I think your assessment that she’s racist is correct.

That doesn't matter, @MadameMaxGoesler - he still made obscene money betting against the £.

No wonder he donated so much (to the average Joe, but a drop in the ocean to him) to Leave and to the Tories. He was also a donor to Ukip.

He backed Boris Johnson in his bid to oust Theresa May because political volatility and economic chaos result in him laughing all the way to the bank.

Are you arguing for the reversal of the Welsh devolution, which was based on a much smaller majority?
A straw man there, @MadameMaxGoesler.

My comment on the size of the No vote was in response to your attempt to blow smoke up the ass of this thread about the scale of the Yes vote.

Your statement that the Brexit referendum was both definitive and binding is a gross mischaracterisation.

What do you understand by the phrases 'sovereignty of Parliament' and 'direct democracy'?

• My comment on the size of the No vote was in response to your attempt to blow smoke up the ass of this thread about the scale of the Yes vote and hence, according to you, the obligation of MPs to suspend reason and rationality and support Brexit, ignoring all misgivings based on knowledge of how the economy works and/or knowledge of the crass ambition and chicanery of the extreme Brexit wing in the Tory party as it rose to ascendance.

Do any of you actually have in writing the concrete proposals that Dominic Raab is intending to implement?