Revoke Article 50 petition 2

[MrPan]

Finished the last thread, here's a replacement...

You would look fairly fucking stupid if it were your signature that tipped the balance and they ended up debating and revoking

Parliament knows that under 18s were signing and same person can sign more than once. Hence they ignored the petition.

Even if all signatures were genuine 6 million is less than 10% of the UK population and not even half way to reaching 17.4 million and only 1 out of 8 of the electorate.

ONLY? To me it seems incredible that 1 in 8 of the electorate have actually bothered to sign a petition. Normally petitions get a tiny number of signatures compared to the number of people who feel that way (in the same way that 1 complaint to a business means about 200 people think that!), so I'm really impressed that so many have got round to signing it. It's not that it's a massive effort to sign, not like writing an email or filling in a complaint form, but it still takes someone to actually care, and to me, that shows the utter strength of feeling on this side. That should send a message to the government that they really really don't seem to know what a vast number of people want.

That should send a message to the government that they really really don't seem to know what a vast number of people want

Government is aware that same person can sign more than once. Easy to have multiple email addresses. I have 6.

I don't think the govt takes any notice of petitions, but this one was very effective at improving the visibility of revoke.

The petitions website people say they remove suspect votes; no reason to think the A50 petition was proportionately more subject to gaming than, say, the no deal one.

Mayhem you seem to be struggling with both the concepts of ISP’s and the petition comittee so you’re spouting pure unadultared bollocks

The petitions website people say they remove suspect votes

How can they tell the difference? People who move around a lot or travel overseas for work could set up many email accounts from different places. How could the petition website know they were not from the same person?

Many will have a work email and at least one private email, more likely to have more than one private email.

arliament knows that under 18s were signing and same person can sign more than once. Hence they ignored the petition

Yeah and all those leave voters signing as a joke...

arliament knows that under 18s were signing and same person can sign more than once. Hence they ignored the petition

They did debate it

The desperate conspiracy theories are a sure sign that the petition did a good job.

@MayhemNowCertain

Parliament knows that under 18s were signing and same person can sign more than once. Hence they ignored the petition

Do I need to explain the difference between the electorate and constituents again?

I don't know if I can make it any simpler.

Constituents can sign. People who have a vested interest but may not be on the electoral roll.

Also - they 'debated ' it? There weren't any conservatives even in the room, according to the article I read.

pickle

It varies from paper to paper...cant remember who said it but they had a link

Pfft. Debating legit or not signatures on the recent Petition is missing the point. UK is still a very divided nation on Brexit. Rerun of Referendum I tend to predict something like 52% Remain (which would still mean very divided nation).

There is no majority (in Parliament or in general population) for hard Brexit or for delayed WA (delayed WA = "No deal"). These facts are what's important to acknowledge about Where We Are.

Assuming the UK leaves the WA will be signed before ANY trade deals are made with the EU. The UK can decide to like the WA or not, but the EU will insist that it is signed before opening any discussions, whether the UK signs up 'voluntarily' or crashes out and comes to the conclusion that the people of the UK want to eat, the WA is sitting on the table waiting.

There weren't any conservatives even in the room, according to the article I read

Maybe they had worked out that the petition is open to abuse. Can’t remember the exact thread, but some remainer was on to encourage people to create as many email accounts as possible to get kids to sign too.

Rerun of Referendum I tend to predict something like 52%

And the remainers will argue that is a majority that should be accepted, but for some reason the current majority of 52% should not be allowed. Double standards comes to mind.

whether the UK signs up 'voluntarily' or crashes out and comes to the conclusion that the people of the UK want to eat

If leaving the EU makes starving a certainty how did UK survive for centuries before EU even existed?

Assuming the UK leaves the WA will be signed before ANY trade deals are made with the EU

Yes - the no dealers don't seem to realise that the choice (for brexiters) is between a deal now, and a deal on worse terms after a crash out.

Playing chicken with the cliff edge makes more sense for hard remainers, while revoke is possible.

and a deal on worse terms after a crash out

Thought no deal meant just that - no deal?

while revoke is possible

Thought revoke received the least votes during Parliament indicative votes?

{whether the UK signs up 'voluntarily' or crashes out and comes to the conclusion that the people of the UK want to eat

If leaving the EU makes starving a certainty how did UK survive for centuries before EU even existed?}

For a start there were a lot fewer people and many were pretty close to the breadline. Combined with current farming and trade practices the UK needs to import around 40% of it's food as an annual average.
From Saturday morning the UK can't suddenly cancel all food trade with the EU and buy it from elsewhere, for a start it would take a year or two for other countries to ramp up production to meet the demand, plus the cost of getting it shipped to the UK. The sort of details that Leavers conveniently forget.

There weren't any conservatives even in the room, according to the article I read

They were whipped not to appear. Many of them found having a party in a local pub more congenial than debating a matter of public interest i.e. doing the job they are paid to do.

And the remainers will argue that is a majority that should be accepted, but for some reason the current majority of 52% should not be allowed. Double standards comes to mind.

Double standards indeed: the Leave poster boy Farage said exactly that, that it would be unfinished business if the vote had gone the other way. So what's source for the Leave goose is surely source for the Remain gander.

Thought no deal meant just that - no deal?
No deal means crashing out without a deal. May's deal, which is the only one on the table, means kicking the can down the road, yet again.

Thought no deal meant just that - no deal?

No - a deal will still be required, with the EU and other countries. After a no-deal, the U.K. will have given up all its leverage and will be negotiating from a position of extreme weakness.

Thought revoke received the least votes during Parliament indicative votes?

Sure. But it remains legally possible. We don't know what May would do if it came to a straight no deal or revoke choice, but both options would be legally and practically available to her. Most legal commenters believe that revoke does not need the consent of parliament, it can be done by the prime minister acting alone on behalf of the executive.

Most legal commentators believe that revoke does not need the consent of parliament, it can be done by the prime minister acting alone on behalf of the executive

If one person by themselves can ignore a vote cast by 17.4 million I hope that T May has a good place to hide.

And the remainers will argue that is a majority that should be accepted, but for some reason the current majority of 52% should not be allowed. Double standards comes to mind

Bollocks

Quite obviously anyone with any brains in the government will make it at least 60/40 which massive amounts of remain voters on these threads have said is logical

Although...i did say brains and government in the same sentence so that might be an issue