Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 75   Go Down

Author Topic: Brexit Encore  (Read 150289 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 25124
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1140 on: September 11, 2019, 12:58:14 pm »

In a way you’re right Alan - without reciprocal health care rights, Rob could never have afforded to go live in Spain, so now Brexit would not be such a problem for hm.


Not quite: we paid for private health insurance for many years, even after Spain became a fully fledged member of the Community; as we were young and healthy, the premiums were affordable, and I had work to finance the whole adventure.

It was premiums going through the roof (mine) when we got ill that put the brakes on that, when my wife discovered just how good the national service was compared with the private we still "enjoyed".  Then, we abandoned the private sector. Nothing would have changed for me, except for that idiot Cameron's overestimation of the British nation's common sense quotient. I have been very pleased with the Spanish system and especially now that I can see into eternity again after the cataract ops! It was my countrymen opting to cut their own noses off by doing away with the vast benefits of membership that threatens to screw my peace of mind; well, not threaten: it has achieved it.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1141 on: September 11, 2019, 02:06:59 pm »

... threatens to screw my peace of mind; well, not threaten: it has achieved it.

Welcome to the club, Rob. Why shall I be the only one whose country of birth disintegrated? ;)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 25124
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1142 on: September 11, 2019, 03:02:16 pm »

Welcome to the club, Rob. Why shall I be the only one whose country of birth disintegrated? ;)

Indeed; but what's the next step that we can take that doesn't make us worse off?

Going back into roots, the area around Trieste and southwards along the Yugoslav/Italian border was always changing hands, and people finding themselves politically lost. I guess they just got used to it.

:-(

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1143 on: September 11, 2019, 05:40:20 pm »

Just when I thought we were in for a few weeks of quiet on Brexit, this:

Brexit: Scottish judges rule Parliament suspension is unlawful

Fascinating.  The Scottish Court apparently overruled the Queen who approve the shutdown of Parliament.    How could it do that since She is a monarch who reports to no one.  If the court can overrule Her decision, what purpose does She serve as a monarch? The court says the PM didn;t fill Her in properly.  How to they know that?  Are they saying the PM lied?  Does the Queen know what's going on, after all She's 95 or so.  Who's running the joint. :)

And people think our US government is screwed up with conflicting power.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-49661855 

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4756
    • My photography site
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1144 on: September 11, 2019, 06:20:47 pm »

No, they cannot overrule the queen. They have decided her government misled her.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1145 on: September 11, 2019, 06:36:33 pm »

No, they cannot overrule the queen. They have decided her government misled her.
They're really doing it based on the reason they think the PM is doing it. That he's up to no good.   But the Queen understands what he's up to and approved it anyway.  She knows.  The court knows too.  They overruled the monarch because they don;t like what's up.  She has no power. 

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9263
    • site
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1146 on: September 11, 2019, 07:04:06 pm »

They're really doing it based on the reason they think the PM is doing it. That he's up to no good.   But the Queen understands what he's up to and approved it anyway.  She knows.  The court knows too.  They overruled the monarch because they don;t like what's up.  She has no power.

Alan, there seems to be something about the English legal system which persistently confuses you, even when you are given entirely correct information. John's formulation was exact. The Queen acts - by convention, must act - on the advice of her ministers. The advice she was given was to prorogue parliament; and so that is what she did. It's a fiction, of course, that the prorogation was her decision, but it is, in our governmental setup, a useful fiction.

In England*, a very strong Divisional Court held that the issue was not justiciable and therefore no investigation was possible. In Scotland, the Inner House of the Court of Session held that it was justiciable and, after investigation, that the PM's motive in giving the advice he did was, in its words, to "stymie parliament".

It's not clear that the Scottish decision has any effect south of the border. Technically, it could be argued that the Inner House, being equivalent in Scotland to the Court of Appeal in England, is a higher court than the Divisional Court in England, from whose decisions in non-criminal matters appeals lie to the Court of Appeal. However, given the composition of the particular Divisional Court (it comprised the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls and the President of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court), that point is somewhat moot.

The matter will reappear before the Supreme Court (which is supreme in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland) next week; the Claimant in the English case has been given permission to "leap-frog" from the Divisional Court straight to the Supreme Court. Then, we'll see.

The whole thing strikes me as an entirely futile waste of time, but it's made a lot of people awfully excited.

Jeremy

*"England" in this context should be read as "England and Wales"
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1147 on: September 11, 2019, 07:16:22 pm »

... that the PM's motive in giving the advice...

I am not a lawyer, but that position strikes me as idiotic as the one over here, when similar idiots tried to argue they (judges) know what was in Trump's mind when the restrictions on travel from certain Muslim countries were instituted. Trying to read the mind, or motivation, rather than legislation itself, is a slippery slope. They lost, of course, when the matter came to the Supreme Court. The same will happen in the UK.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1148 on: September 11, 2019, 10:46:02 pm »

Alan, there seems to be something about the English legal system which persistently confuses you, even when you are given entirely correct information. John's formulation was exact. The Queen acts - by convention, must act - on the advice of her ministers. The advice she was given was to prorogue parliament; and so that is what she did. It's a fiction, of course, that the prorogation was her decision, but it is, in our governmental setup, a useful fiction.

In England*, a very strong Divisional Court held that the issue was not justiciable and therefore no investigation was possible. In Scotland, the Inner House of the Court of Session held that it was justiciable and, after investigation, that the PM's motive in giving the advice he did was, in its words, to "stymie parliament".

It's not clear that the Scottish decision has any effect south of the border. Technically, it could be argued that the Inner House, being equivalent in Scotland to the Court of Appeal in England, is a higher court than the Divisional Court in England, from whose decisions in non-criminal matters appeals lie to the Court of Appeal. However, given the composition of the particular Divisional Court (it comprised the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls and the President of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court), that point is somewhat moot.

The matter will reappear before the Supreme Court (which is supreme in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland) next week; the Claimant in the English case has been given permission to "leap-frog" from the Divisional Court straight to the Supreme Court. Then, we'll see.

The whole thing strikes me as an entirely futile waste of time, but it's made a lot of people awfully excited.

Jeremy

*"England" in this context should be read as "England and Wales"





I said the Queen has no power. To say she was overruled because the PM misled her is silly.  She knows what's going on.  The fact is however they call it, the Queen's decision was declared null and void.  A commoner Scottish judge overruled the monarch.  She has no power. 

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1149 on: September 11, 2019, 10:53:00 pm »

The Europe is waking up... finally:

EU chief under fire over 'protecting way of life' portfolio https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49661650

Quote
Incoming European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has found herself under fire for nominating a commissioner responsible for "Protecting our European Way of Life"...

... "We must address and allay legitimate fears and concerns about the impact of irregular migration on our economy and society," she added.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1150 on: September 11, 2019, 11:01:56 pm »

Eurexit.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1151 on: September 11, 2019, 11:12:35 pm »

I said a while back here that the only way they'll save the EU pact is by eliminating the political nonsense and keeping basically a simple trade deal.  This woman leader understand this.  She's trying to save Europe for the Europeans.  MEGA! 

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5338
    • advantica blog
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1152 on: September 12, 2019, 02:36:13 am »

The UK Parliament pressed the government to make public an internal document "Operation YellowHammer" about the consequences of a failed No Deal Brexit.

Quote
It outlines a series of "reasonable worst case assumptions" for the impact of a no-deal Brexit on 31 October.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the paper confirmed the PM "is prepared to punish those who can least afford it".

Among its other key points are:
- Protests and counter-protests will take place across the UK
- Lorries could have to wait more than two days to cross the Channel
- Some businesses will cease trading
- There will be a growth in the black market
- Some providers of adult social care could fail

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49670123

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/831199/20190802_Latest_Yellowhammer_Planning_assumptions_CDL.pdf
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 25124
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1153 on: September 12, 2019, 03:49:50 am »

The UK Parliament pressed the government to make public an internal document "Operation YellowHammer" about the consequences of a failed No Deal Brexit.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49670123

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/831199/20190802_Latest_Yellowhammer_Planning_assumptions_CDL.pdf

And their trick, whenever these concerns are raised, is to call them "Project Fear" as if common sense is to be avoided at all costs because it might show some negative aspect of one's chosen direction of travel.

It's what the phrase "you couldn't make it up" was made up to illustrate.

;-(

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4756
    • My photography site
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1154 on: September 12, 2019, 05:53:02 am »

I am not a lawyer, but that position strikes me as idiotic as the one over here, when similar idiots tried to argue they (judges) know what was in Trump's mind when the restrictions on travel from certain Muslim countries were instituted. Trying to read the mind, or motivation, rather than legislation itself, is a slippery slope. They lost, of course, when the matter came to the Supreme Court. The same will happen in the UK.

The Scottish judges based their view on documentary evidence.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1155 on: September 12, 2019, 08:57:40 am »

The Scottish judges based their view on documentary evidence.
The point Slobodan was making if i can speak for him, was that the American courts decide, or should decide,  on the constitutionality of the rule rather than the motive.  There are many reasons why legislation is done, some are often not very savory.  As they say, making legislation is like making a sausage:- a lot of crap goes into it and people have different reasons for doing it.  Can you imagine if the courts could overturn a law because a few Ministers said something illegal for the reason to enact it?  You'd never be able to get anything passed into law.   So it has to come down to the constitutionality of it.

A case in point was a particular rule in Obamacare Health law.  Both Democrats and Republicans considered it a government "fine" to charge people who did not buy health insurance.  That was an important requirement of the new law.  Fines are ultimately unconstitutional as it would force people to buy a private product. That's not allowed. The Supreme Court heard that argument and despite the evidence that all the lawmakers called it a fine, the court considered it a tax.  Taxes are allowed constitutionally.  So the law survived because the Supreme Court said the law was valid constitutionally even though it was enacted for a different reason.  Laws stand on their own.  Getting into the reason becomes a slippery slope.

Now things may be different in GB.  We'll see when the Scottish decision is reviewed. 

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1156 on: September 12, 2019, 10:00:56 am »

The Scottish judges based their view on documentary evidence.

Like what? Scottish scientists are the first with a mind-reading machine? And even then, it would be irrelevant. Even lie detectors are inadmissible in court.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1157 on: September 12, 2019, 10:03:48 am »

And now something completely different:

https://apple.news/AqM_Oc3AZNVGB17IwgdM3zQ

Quote
“But the fact remains that after the withdrawal of Britain, we have an economic competitor at our door, even if we want to keep close economic, foreign and security cooperation and friendly relations.

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4756
    • My photography site
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1158 on: September 12, 2019, 10:55:32 am »

Like what? Scottish scientists are the first with a mind-reading machine? And even then, it would be irrelevant. Even lie detectors are inadmissible in court.

Try not to be obtuse. The judges read the documents which the government's lawyers had to disclose.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #1159 on: September 12, 2019, 11:00:08 am »

How could the queen not know what's going on when the rest of the world does?
Why doesn't the court just asked the queen what the Prime Minister told her?
Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 75   Go Up