 |
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
It is the true purpose that is open to legal challenge.
No-one, except the most slavish follower of the Brexit cult, believes the reason being given.
If it is deemed the true purpose is to thwart the lawful exercise of Parliamentary sovereignty - you know, that thing Brexiteers made a song and dance about in 2016 - then it becomes an abuse of the power.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It is the true purpose that is open to legal challenge.
No-one, except the most slavish follower of the Brexit cult, believes the reason being given.
If it is deemed the true purpose is to thwart the lawful exercise of Parliamentary sovereignty - you know, that thing Brexiteers made a song and dance about in 2016 - then it becomes an abuse of the power.
"
It also sets bad legal precedents potentially allowing future governments to use this as a method for avoiding parliamentary scrutiny for more nefarious legislation |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It is the true purpose that is open to legal challenge.
No-one, except the most slavish follower of the Brexit cult, believes the reason being given.
If it is deemed the true purpose is to thwart the lawful exercise of Parliamentary sovereignty - you know, that thing Brexiteers made a song and dance about in 2016 - then it becomes an abuse of the power.
"
Leavers only want Parliamentary sovereignty when it suits them and when it doesn't their happy with partial dictatorship to push their narrative until Parliamentary sovereignty suits them again. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"It is the true purpose that is open to legal challenge.
No-one, except the most slavish follower of the Brexit cult, believes the reason being given.
If it is deemed the true purpose is to thwart the lawful exercise of Parliamentary sovereignty - you know, that thing Brexiteers made a song and dance about in 2016 - then it becomes an abuse of the power.
It also sets bad legal precedents potentially allowing future governments to use this as a method for avoiding parliamentary scrutiny for more nefarious legislation"
It does not set a precedent for that its already been done before. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It is the true purpose that is open to legal challenge.
No-one, except the most slavish follower of the Brexit cult, believes the reason being given.
If it is deemed the true purpose is to thwart the lawful exercise of Parliamentary sovereignty - you know, that thing Brexiteers made a song and dance about in 2016 - then it becomes an abuse of the power.
It also sets bad legal precedents potentially allowing future governments to use this as a method for avoiding parliamentary scrutiny for more nefarious legislationIt does not set a precedent for that its already been done before."
Wrong.
It has never been dine for more than 3 weeks (boris is suggesting 5 weeks)
It has also never been dine at a time of such national upheaval when parliament was as indecisive as it is currently.
Therefore the precedent gets set that future PM's can use this as a tool to go around parliament. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
Amber Rudd: “The most extraordinary idea I’ve ever heard.”
Sajid Javid: "You can't just shut down parliament."
Matt Hancock: "The end of the Conservative Party as a serious party of government."
Michael Gove: “It would not be true to the best traditions of British democracy.”
Nicky Morgan: “Clearly a mad idea.”
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"It is the true purpose that is open to legal challenge.
No-one, except the most slavish follower of the Brexit cult, believes the reason being given.
If it is deemed the true purpose is to thwart the lawful exercise of Parliamentary sovereignty - you know, that thing Brexiteers made a song and dance about in 2016 - then it becomes an abuse of the power.
It also sets bad legal precedents potentially allowing future governments to use this as a method for avoiding parliamentary scrutiny for more nefarious legislationIt does not set a precedent for that its already been done before.
Wrong.
It has never been dine for more than 3 weeks (boris is suggesting 5 weeks)
It has also never been dine at a time of such national upheaval when parliament was as indecisive as it is currently.
Therefore the precedent gets set that future PM's can use this as a tool to go around parliament. "
the reality is that because of party confeences he is only closing it for four days,is it worth it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It could be shut for 1appropriately timed day, if the real reason matched the claim. Even that should make anyone question the judgement of the PM, when the biggest change for generations is underway and when his party has spent 3 years without success to get a negotiated deal passed by parliament. This alone ought to make it very apparent that he is incompetent. Of course, the reality is that they are telling lies and deceiving the electorate as well as - presumably - the Queen.
It is gross misuse of power and a dereliction of duty by failing to secure the best interests of the country. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ony 2016Man
over a year ago
Huddersfield /derby cinemas |
"Amber Rudd: “The most extraordinary idea I’ve ever heard.”
Sajid Javid: "You can't just shut down parliament."
Matt Hancock: "The end of the Conservative Party as a serious party of government."
Michael Gove: “It would not be true to the best traditions of British democracy.”
Nicky Morgan: “Clearly a mad idea.”
"
. " I am not attracted to antiquated devices like proroguing parliament " ........ Boris Johnson |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ony 2016Man
over a year ago
Huddersfield /derby cinemas |
"Amber Rudd: “The most extraordinary idea I’ve ever heard.”
Sajid Javid: "You can't just shut down parliament."
Matt Hancock: "The end of the Conservative Party as a serious party of government."
Michael Gove: “It would not be true to the best traditions of British democracy.”
Nicky Morgan: “Clearly a mad idea.”
. " I am not attracted to antiquated devices like proroguing parliament " ........ Boris Johnson "
. "You can't deliver democracy by trashing democracy , we are not electing a dictator for our country " ...... Said Javid ....... Who said this during the Tory leadership campaign , Javid is now in The Cabinet as Chancellor .. Will he do the honourable thing and resign from government ???? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
