I've been told about this fussiness, by my many friends engaged in the same undertaking. For example, get professionally done photographs, from someone familiar with Republic of Ireland passport portraits (and such expertise is now not hard to find) because there's no way they'll accept the products of coin in the slot machines in railway stations.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
- Status
If there was a Labour three-pointed whip to vote against the bill, and he would vote against it anyway, only five more Tory rebels - just over 2% of all their MPs - would have to rebel with him for the bill to be in serious doubt. I daresay this isn't "beyond speculation", but a realistic scenario. I can't say the bill would win the necessary support for sure, but chances would be fairly good it would happen.
McHrozni
What would have been the result if each MP voted based on their constituency result?
I put this text in Google. This was the result:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/72...ir-constituents-Article-50-WOULD-be-triggered
401 out of 632 would be in favor, apparently.
McHrozni
Last edited:
Rolfe
Adult human female
Even though it's a fixed-term parliament there are ways to do it. So I suppose it's an option that's always under consideration. It's a bit of a nuclear option though and I think we're a very long way from it actually happening.
I'm sure the First Minister can find ways to do it. She has the absolute majority and shortening your term isn't usually considered to be anti-democratic.
The election that brought about SNP can be interpreted as embracing independence. This is as valid reading as a reading Tories are doing on Brexit referendum.
McHrozni
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
No it absolutely did. The Tories and Labour shouted from the roof-tops 'Let the people decide!' and then the people did decide. If they weren't prepared to live with the consequences of that then perhaps they should have exercised better judgement initially?
Of course it's entirely possible that Corbyn has the result he wanted anyway.
There is no series of failures. Everything is playing out exactly as the referendum bill suggested it would and should. The people vote, government implements that decision.
There was no suggestion that Parliament could block Brexit prior to the vote. There was no suggestion that anyone from Remain would try to scupper the process if it went the wrong way.
As such Corbyn's position has as much, if not more, validity as anyone else's at this point. Labour have reaped what they sowed now.
What they should have done was oppose the referendum. Others did. But they wanted to pander to the racists. Well done Labour.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
Not sure if it's a nuclear option in so much as there could be no complaints about the mandate for IndyRef 2 if its a manifesto pledge. Otherwise no doubt there will be much bumping of gums.
I think there might still be complaints about the validity of a Declaration of Independence based on an election manifesto, because it would be argued that some people vote SNP regardless of that party's manifesto, who would have voted No in an Indyref. I don't see that as a valid objection, but I know that argument is advanced in opposition to the Election idea.
However, if a referendum was refused, the election manifesto might be the only recourse - always assuming a clear majority in favour of such a strategy. Did that happen in Ireland in 1918?
The subsequent events there are not propitious. Irish MPs constituted themselves as an Irish assembly in Dublin instead of going to Westminster; the assembly was declared illegal by the U.K. Government, and years of conflict ensued, ending in partition of the country and the establishment in most of it of a "Free State". But the Empire is now deceased, and I don't think the UK has the stomach for that sort of thing any more.
You need to know who Ken Clarke is to realise that him voting against is representative of nothing. That's all I'm saying. You cannot extrapolate anything from his vote. He would have voted against even if the Nays exit involved walking past man-eating tigers.
ddt
Mafia Penguin
This cunning plan misses an essential element. Turnips.
I think Baldrick has more political acumen.
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
Part of the problem with this Brexit is that historically London has never been an industrial city, like Birmingham. There used to be things like leather making and clock making, and perhaps a big Bryant and May match factory in London. In late Victorian times many people were employed in transport, and women in domestic service in London.
The disastrous result is that the public and House of Commons think England consists of London and the Home Counties. They are only interested in banking and insurance and football and fashion and tourism and rock music, and the charity business. The politicians are only interested in trying to outsource the vital matter of housing, and education, and libraries, and healthcare and prisons in order to cut public spending, and so-called balance the budget, and trying to attack Iran.
London may not have been quite as industrial as Birmingham, but there were a huge number of manufacturing jobs up until the 60s. It was a major manufacturing hub of the country, partly down to the port links.
So no, that's not why.
So no, that's not why.
Although it would ignore the democratically expressed opinion of the Scottish people to remain in the UK. (I do not know if you actually voted but it definitely did not say remain in the EU it said remain in the UK!)
Why are pro-independence posters so opposed to democracy?
No SNP is a minority government - at least in my Scotland! (63/129)
But rather like what happened in Ireland, the Northern Isles which are likely to vote against SNP and independence might remain in the UK. This has a disproportionate effect on the oil / gas and fishing income for Scotland. Locally there is even support for putting the Trident submarines in Scappa.
I did indeed vote, and last time I looked, we were still in the U.K., and the independence supporters were not indulging in armed rebellion, but campaigning to remain in the EU by peaceful methods. The withdrawal from the EU indicates that Scottish voters were offered a false prospectus during the independence referendum. Nobody has suggested that this justifies undemocratic acts. Nothing could be a clearer expression of democracy than the last Westminster election results in Scotland.
You are suggesting that Scotland should be partitioned in the event of its having the temerity to secede from the Empire? This indeed happened in similar circumstances Ireland, in India, in Palestine. The history of that strategy doesn't really inspire confidence in it, however. On top of that, I really don't think, in post imperial days, there's much enthusiasm for a return to these practices.
When you remind people that such partition is "like what happened in Ireland" I think little more needs to be said. We recall "what happened in Ireland". We're only now getting over "what happened in Ireland".
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
"like what happened in Ireland" or India, or Pakistan, or Israel, or Cyprus, or Sri Lanka or...
I am not recommending it. I am warning that the suggestion of UDI as is suggested by some pro-independence campaigners my have unintended consequences. Some parts of the present UK may not wish to be part of an independent Scotland, the proposal seems to have been accepted that a sub part of referendum can be separately argued. If there is a case for Scotland not having voted to leave the EU; the case could be argued that other parts did not vote for leaving the UK.
The Scottish independence referendum was on remaining in the UK it was not on whether the UK was or was not in the EU.
If a Scottish referendum on independence was successful on the basis that Scotland would be part of the EU then could not join would that invalidate the independence referendum?
- Status