The Prorogation of Parliament

Prorogation of Parliament

  • Right

  • Wrong


Results are only viewable after voting.
Unfortunately 'Leave' was voted for by a majority in 2016. No choices on the type of leave, just leave or stay and leave was what the majority of the voters wanted.

I am glad you agree the referendum was pountless.

It allowed people to vote for something not possible.

Its clear from what you say that since nobody chose what they voted for, we should now have a 2nd referendum.

That way you can choose exactly what you want.
 
Sponsored Links
Leave was indeed voted for. But the vote was advisory, not mandatory.

There has been a hell of a lot of lying and scare-mongering around the EU and referendum.

And indeed before then about the EU.

This has succeeded in turning people against these nasty, faceless EU bureaucrats who have introduced stupid laws like you can't grow curvy cucumbers or bananas, the banning of teasmades because they could injure people. They have also changed the definition of an island and are set to introduce black boxes into cars.
(All false, by the way).

And there are certain people in this country who want to turn people against the EU by any means possible, including lying and disinformation (remember Boris' kipper?) because there is one particular directive that they don't want this country to be forced to abide by.

There are many injustices in our society. One of the biggest concerns taxes. The whole point of taxes is that everybody (above a certain level of earning) should pay a tax on those earnings. The hoi polloi in this country generally pay their dues. The wealthy minority and massive corporations generally go to great, convoluted lengths to pay as little as possible.

And they want it to stay that way. They do not want to be subject to the Anti Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD), which was adopted by EU Council three days before the EU Membership Referendum.

And BJ is hell-bent on getting Brexit by any means possible (lying to the Queen, threatening MP's etc...) so that this can happen.

The Brexit deal May hammered out had ATAD in it, which is why it was rejected.
 
The Brexit deal May hammered out had ATAD in it, which is why it was rejected.
I hadnt thought about it like that.

the digitalisation of the world has made it tricky to stop tax avoidence.
the EU is powerful enough to leglislate against it.
Hence why the EU is after google, but the UK would have no chance of implementing a digital tax.
 
Sponsored Links
No doubt you will be able to find out.
But what has that to do with the '16 referendum?

Edit: apologies, I was still writing when Notch posted.
 
Leave was indeed voted for. But the vote was advisory, not mandatory.

There has been a hell of a lot of lying and scare-mongering around the EU and referendum.

And indeed before then about the EU.

This has succeeded in turning people against these nasty, faceless EU bureaucrats who have introduced stupid laws like you can't grow curvy cucumbers or bananas, the banning of teasmades because they could injure people. They have also changed the definition of an island and are set to introduce black boxes into cars.
(All false, by the way).

And there are certain people in this country who want to turn people against the EU by any means possible, including lying and disinformation (remember Boris' kipper?) because there is one particular directive that they don't want this country to be forced to abide by.

There are many injustices in our society. One of the biggest concerns taxes. The whole point of taxes is that everybody (above a certain level of earning) should pay a tax on those earnings. The hoi polloi in this country generally pay their dues. The wealthy minority and massive corporations generally go to great, convoluted lengths to pay as little as possible.

And they want it to stay that way. They do not want to be subject to the Anti Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD), which was adopted by EU Council three days before the EU Membership Referendum.

And BJ is hell-bent on getting Brexit by any means possible (lying to the Queen, threatening MP's etc...) so that this can happen.

The Brexit deal May hammered out had ATAD in it, which is why it was rejected.
If remainers succeed in getting a second referendum on any deal agreed or remaining in the EU, will that just be advisory as well.
Just asking.
 
So would the Government be obliged to ignore the result if they felt inclined to do so.
Why would they ignore it? They certainly haven't ignored the last ref, as debate has been raging in Parliament for years.

If the British public voted in favour of a nuclear war, I'd hope that the politicians did the sensible thing.
 
So would the Government be obliged to ignore the result if they felt inclined to do so.
Government havent ignored the 2016 referendum.

Its been debated constantly.

Its just that parliamentary democracy hasnt resulted in what you want.

The reason is because Brexit isnt deliverable in the cake and eat it way you want.

Brexiteers have to choose integration or isolation......make your mind up.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top