| The Comments |
Despite her being an inner (not vocal) I was drifting with the idea that Mrs May might just be the best of the conservative candidates for leader and PM. But I decided to score them on: Charisma, Ability, Brexit committment, Political experience, Acceptability to country, and experience out of politics.
I was very surprised to find Liam Fox clear leader.
Fox 16, Leadson 11 the other three 8 or 9. (May was still 5 short of Fox with the Brexit qualification left out)
The bonus being that as a scotsman Fox might make some north of the border feel a little more Britsh again.
How would you score it?
This message was last edited by tteedd on 04/07/2016.
0
Like
|
marcbernard said. It is somewhat insulting, not to say inaccurate, to suggest that civil servants are clamouring for a gravy train
Welcome to this year's civil service entrance exam. I see that all of you have been able to find yourself a seat and a desk so obviously you've got what it takes to be civil servants.
Should you pass this exam and become a member of the civil service, you will enjoy not only the esteem and envy of all your friends but also a unique package of fringe benefits, including: an early retirement scheme which allows you to retire while still turning up for work; flexitime which enables you to decide when you don't want to work at work plus free use of government stationery this has been facilitated by the introduction of eight-items-or-less lanes as you leave the building.
_______________________
"That woman's tongue. If it was a bit longer she could shave with it."
2
Like
|
Shame they appeared to have cutback in the wrong areas then, as according to the press they are recruiting negotiators as they haven't got any worthy of the task...
0
Like
|
Who are the shadowy Fat Cats trying to trying to block Brexit? Top City law firm launches legal bid to stop new PM from triggering Brexit without a vote in Parliament - but why won't they reveal who they're working for?
- Anonymous group of academics and business figures trying to stop PM invoking Article 50
- Law firm says House of Commons must vote before Brexit formally triggered
- Around three quarters of MPs supported Remain in the EU referendum
- Some have suggested Commons should water down or even block Brexit
0
Like
|
Baz
Don';t think this is a problem, the 'OUT'S' won by about 1.3 million votes, I don't think there are 1.3 million members of the house of common's, UNLESS they are seriously thinking of ignoring the vote of the people and over-ruling with their own vote?????
Can you imagine the problems that would create, there would protests from now until forever.
If they over-rule this, what happens when there is a general election and they don't like the result?
I think those that lost the vote should now 'move on', it was democratic and for the sake of our country should stay that way.
This message was last edited by BigAl2015 on 04/07/2016.
2
Like
|
Where did this information come from Baz1946?
Just looked it up online and picked up this
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1344613/nicola-sturgeon-claims-holyrood-could-veto-uks-exit-from-eu/
"
Scottish Parliament will veto Britain’s Brexit vote says First Minster Nicola Sturgeon
SNP leader threatens to urge MSPs to block the UK leaving the European Union
By CRAIG WOODHOUSE Chief Political Correspondent
26th June 2016, 12:25 pm
SCOTTISH leader Nicola Sturgeon sparked fury yesterday by threatening to veto Brexit.
She said she would ask Members of the Scottish Parliament to block the UK leaving the EU as it is not in her country’s interests.
But the SNP chief admitted the move could spark outrage in England and Wales.
She said: “It is perhaps similar to the fury of many people in Scotland right now as we face the prospect of being taken out of the European Union against our will.”
Politicians in Scotland and in Northern Ireland, which also backed Remain, have suggested they could block Brexit under “legislative consent” powers.
That requires politicians in devolved assemblies to vote on some major changes.
Ms Sturgeon told the BBC’s Sunday Politics Scotland: “Looking at it from a logical perspective I find it hard to believe that there wouldn’t be that requirement.
“I suspect the UK Government will take a different view on that and we’ll have to see where that discussion ends up.”
When asked if she would consider asking the Scottish Parliament not to back such a motion, Ms Sturgeon said: “Of course.”
‘Nicola can make life hard for Westminster’
Might the above have any relevance?
This message was last edited by ads on 04/07/2016.
0
Like
|
According to this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislative_Consent_Motion
A Legislative Consent Motion (also known as a Sewel motion) is a motion passed by either the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly, or Northern Ireland Assembly, in which it agrees that the Parliament of the United Kingdom may pass legislation on a devolved issue over which the devolved body has regular legislative authority.
The Scotland Act 1998 devolved many issues relating to legislation for Scotland to the Scottish Parliament. The UK Parliament maintains Parliamentary sovereignty and may legislate on any issue relating to the United Kingdom, with or without the permission of the devolved assemblies and parliaments.
The motions were named after Lord Sewel, then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland who announced the policy in the House of Lords during the passage of the Scotland Act 1998. Noting that the Act recognised the Parliamentary sovereignty of the British Parliament, he said that HM Government "would expect a convention to be established that Westminster would not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters in Scotland without the consent of the Scottish Parliament".
The devolved governments have no formal say in how the British Parliament legislates on reserved matters.
There are two uses for a Legislative Consent motion:
- When the UK Parliament is considering legislation extending only (or having provisions extending only) to England and Wales, and the Scottish Parliament, being in agreement with those provisions, wishes for the UK Parliament to extend them to Scotland. This saves the need for separate, similar legislation to be passed by the Scottish Parliament.
- When Westminster is considering legislation applying to Scotland but which relates to both devolved and reserved matters, where it would otherwise be necessary for the Scottish Parliament to legislate to complete the jigsaw.
As well as legislation about devolved matters, the convention extends to cases where UK bills give executive powers to Scottish Ministers, including in reserved areas, or which seek to change the boundary between reserved and devolved matters.
The intention was for the motions to be used for non-controversial matters, for the purposes of legislative economy and for clarity. It has been used for more controversial matters, where the Scottish Government does not wish to have the Scottish Parliament consider the issue in detail, to avoid the political consequences, and to keep the legislative bickering to Westminster only.
Guidance on the use of Legislative Consent Motions for Whitehall Departments is set out in Devolution Guidance Note 10.
Chapter 9B of the Scottish Parliament's Standing Orders specify the procedure for considering Sewel motions.
0
Like
|
Where did this information come from Baz1946
Ads, I just happened to look at the Daily Mail online.
0
Like
|
Mishcon de Reya, a top London law firm, said it’s representing a group of unidentified clients threatening legal action against the British government if it tries to initiate the process of leaving the European Union without consulting parliament.
This is supposedly who is starting the action, just checked the Daily Mail online and it seems to have gone.
0
Like
|
Does this make it even more significant to have the new leader of our Govt to be someone from the leave campaign? And hasn't Andrea Leadsom suggested speedy evoking of article 50, in which case will this revelation now scupper her ability to gain leadership given the predisposition of Conservatives to support big business?
Having said that Ex-defence secretary Liam Fox, who is bidding to become the next Tory leader, said any MP that voted against the referendum result "does not deserve to have a place in the House of Commons".
This message was last edited by ads on 04/07/2016.
This message was last edited by ads on 04/07/2016.
0
Like
|
|
What on earth next ,when a law firm that no one has ever heard of wants a leagal challenge on weather we the population of a Democratic country has made the right choice ,this sort of crap is what happens in a banana republic not the UK ,not a great country like the UK .l got a vote so did you, no matter what side you voted for is immaterial the votes are counted the side with the majority wins that is called DEMOCRACY people died for this in WW1 and WW2 if you don't want to see WW3 then don't try and turn the UK in to a banana republic.
4
Like
|
This is indicative of the power that big business wields and should be a wake up call for all citizens who value democracy and the ability to ensure their voices are represented in our sovereign parliament.
3
Like
|
What on earth next ,when a law firm that no one has ever heard of wants a leagal challenge on weather we the population of a Democratic country has made the right choice ,this sort of crap is what happens in a banana republic not the UK ,not a great country like the UK .l got a vote so did you, no matter what side you voted for is immaterial the votes are counted the side with the majority wins that is called DEMOCRACY people died for this in WW1 and WW2 if you don't want to see WW3 then don't try and turn the UK in to a banana republic.
This law firm has offices in London and New York, it managed Princess Diana's divorce, plus a good few well known other celebrities.
I wasn't aware the 2 wars were fought for democracy in the UK, and starting WW3 smacks of the Cameron speech.
Now as you are aware of the name of the law firm involved in this story it could be a good idea if you contacted them with your obvious grievances directly.
0
Like
|
And I think you're misreading the reason for the lawsuit. They are not saying the referendum should be overturned, merely that the Prime Minister can't declare Article 50 by him or herself. Just that parliament has to agree to it.
If parliament doesn't then they will be going against the will of the people and should be sacked (only my opinion). The reasons for a country with the highest deficit in the EU and a staggering national debt to leave is, again in my opinion, totally wrong and will cause more problems than it solves. However, the public have voted and it should be nothing more than a rubber stamp by parliament to start the process.
2
Like
|
Parliament agreed by a large majority to hold the referendum. I would have said that they had already agreed to the course of action neccessary to effect the result.
It appears that the action by Miscon de Reya is initiated by a group of people who do wish to overthrow BREXIT. My view is that the new PM, if he or she wishes, should just go ahead. There is no way they could stop the process.
The people are the higher court.
This message was last edited by tteedd on 05/07/2016.
1
Like
|
Statement from Nigel Farage
I have decided to stand aside as Leader of UKIP. The victory for the 'Leave' side in the referendum means that my political ambition has been achieved. I came into this struggle from business because I wanted us to be a self-governing nation, not to become a career politician.
UKIP is in a good position and will continue, with my full support to attract a significant vote. Whilst we will now leave the European Union the terms of our withdrawal are unclear. If there is too much backsliding by the Government and with the Labour Party detached from many of its voters then UKIP's best days may be yet to come.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you the membership for your extraordinary support and generosity over the many years, I could not have done it without you.
Nigel Ferage.
Now all we need is Tim Fallon to admit the Liberal Democrats are a non entity.
0
Like
|
|
|
Baz1946 you are making a ** EDITED ** statement by saying that WW1 and WW2 ,was not over freedom from fascist country's that tryed and failed to take over the Great Britain, and in force a dictatorship upon a Democratic society, next thing you will be saying that the Nazi Hitler was a great person .** EDITED **.it's called democracy for you're sake live with that fact or you will go nuts and get on with trying to keep the other foot out of the grave.
This message was last edited by windtalker on 05/07/2016.
This message was last edited by windtalker on 05/07/2016.
This message was last edited by eos_moderators on 7/5/2016 7:24:00 PM.
3
Like
|