Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

It's just the same with the subjects of 'preventing litter' and 'mending pot holes'. These are not 'fit for purpose' either, IMHO.

Around where I live, the litter bins themselves are not fit for purpose, they're badly positioned, inadequate in number and not emptied frequently enough.

Consequently, no one has any respect for either the bins or the council, or anything else for that matter, which is connected to the general concept of litter prevention.

We have lots of drivers who buy a 'take out meal', drive to somewhere where there is free parking, eat the meal and then dump the whole lot of packaging which came with said meal, out of the car onto the floor of the car park. Then they drive off leaving it.

Now let me have a bit of a brief say about 'pot hole repairs':

My council doesn't seem to have any kind of a pothole repairing policy at all. All repairs to the roads are 'subbed out' to contractors without any apparent specification as to what kind of repair is required or to what standard (eg. using mastic to seal joints so as to further protect against future frost damge). Neither does there appear to be any later inspection or supervision.

On the one hand, the council chuck away £millions on weird one off projects. On the other hand they say they don't have enough money to do all the pot hole repairs.

We also have roundabouts which are overgrown with vegetation and verges which are not cut/mowed. There are many road signs which are obliterated by tree leaves and suchlike.

The grass in our parks and open areas is actually cut quite frequently. However, that would appear to be ALL the work that is done to these areas. The mower machine men aren't taught to do anything else other than cut the grass. Several of the mower machine men even cut the grass when the ground is sopping wet and too soft for the mower wheels, so we get loads of 'trenching' ruts too.

Aaargh! Spit!

Anyhow, rant over now. Going to have a coffee and a sandwich.

:-)

A UK Supreme Court case will provide a clear legal path to block Article 50 and stop Brexit
Business Insider UK
Jim Edwards 2016-08-14T09:32:53Z
A lawsuit brought by a hairdresser, an investment-firm manager, and a handful of other plaintiffs that demands Parliament hold a vote on whether to trigger Article 50 will be heard by the UK Supreme Court, according to Bloomberg.

GET - On Google Play.
Business Insider uses cookies to make this website better. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Cookie Policy ×

POLITICS

A UK Supreme Court case will provide a clear legal path to block Article 50 and stop Brexit
Jim Edwards Aug. 14, 2016, 10:32 AM 63,155 139
Gina Miller
Gina Miller.Gina Miller / Linkedin
A lawsuit brought by a hairdresser, an investment-firm manager, and a handful of other plaintiffs that demands Parliament hold a vote on whether to trigger Article 50 will be heard by the UK Supreme Court, according to Bloomberg.

The case is crucial because it sets out a legal path that could allow the House of Commons to ignore the result of the EU referendum.

The plaintiffs argue that an Article 50 request to leave the EU can only be triggered by a vote in Parliament, not the mere request of the prime minister.

If the Supreme Court agrees, then the Article 50 request would be put to the House of Commons. It is not certain that Article 50 would get enough votes.

The lawsuits have been bundled together into a single case. Among the plaintiffs are Gina Miller, founder of SCM Private, an investment firm, and Deir Dos Santos, a hairdresser. Bloomberg says:

"'This will be one of the most important constitutional law cases ever decided,' said Jeff King, a professor at University College London. Britain, unlike the U.S., doesn't have a written constitution, but rather an accumulation of laws, customs and judicial decisions that date back centuries."

"'The court takes this litigation very seriously and will move expeditiously,' Judge Brian Leveson said at a preliminary hearing on July 19. The matter is 'of such constitutional importance it is difficult to see why' it won't move quickly to the Supreme Court, he said."

Prime Minister Theresa May's cabinet will be under pressure to proceed with an Article 50 request without putting it to a vote of the House of Commons. But in theory, a high court judge can imprison a minister for not obeying the law.

If MPs vote against Article 50, the case could be appealed all the way up to the European Court of Justice - putting the pro-Leave camp in the odd position of begging the EU's top judicial forum to overrule the UK government.

The supreme Court should and in all probability will throw the objection
to artice50 and Brexit out of court..

It was a democratic decision with Brexit being the democratic decision..

And of course it would fall into the hands of UKIP if the westminster
establishment attempted such a stitch up..

UKIP could do nothing if the courts and Parliament ruled that way. It would be a done deal. It wouldn't matter how many UKIP MPs there were

A three line whip would end the matter if it ever went to a vote.

And any mp voting to ignore the wishes of the electorate...well, they can always look for another job.

A three lube whip on such a matter would be unlikely as the majority of all MPs support remain

They might support remain, but they also support the monthly pay packet and position.

Would the everage mp really sacrifice their future for the €uro union?

Labour MPs have done even more recently. When MPs rebel in large numbers the party has to swallow it. Nay can't sack a large number.

Labour mp's are powerless, and Corby has them by the balls.

They'll have real fun getting re-elected.

They can make his life a misery until GE. More likely they may split.

Possibly, either way they are buggered.

The tory party could go the same way if it tries to pull a fast one on €uropa.

Haystack you don't seem to get it...The courts and parliament could rule against
the referendum decision, I doubt very much that the courts will due to it been
a democratic process with all conditions known beforehand, As to UKIP not being
able to do anything about it...Of course there is something that UKIP can and WILL
do if there is a stitch up, and that would be to stand against the establishment parties
on the betrayal and so called democracy being denied to the majority of voters wishes.

As to, If Corbyn wins the Labour leadership contest, then it stands to reason that
there is no way that the Labour party will stay as it is, it would have to split.

You have to remember that 50% more or less voted remain, so they won't vote UKIP. There are now regretted who wishes they had voted remain. Then there is the people who didn't vote. Some areas are staunch Labour and Tory and would never vote UKIP. UKIP could certainly gain a few MPs but not enough to change things.

You seem to have missed the point Haystack, like the rest of your fellow travellers in the remain camp.

People didn't vote for ukip, they voted to leave the €U....and won!

But at a GE enough will revert to type to make UKIP irrelevant.

It would make every general election null and void then , we can just get the court to overturn it.
Haystack your post 4885 is a repeat ,you keep saying 50% voted IN and lots of folk who voted OUT now regretted it ,you don't know that .
We (the public) voted OUT get used to it ,no one will overturn it and if there is any stitch up by the current gov you will see mass protest and a HUGE rise in UKIP votes , yes a HUGE rise in UKIP votes .
You seem to think the public are stupid and beneath you ,grow up.

The court would not be overruling the referendum. They would be saying that parliament still needs to pass the result as a Bill (law). This gives parliament the option of voting it down. I hope they don't. There would not be a big enough rise in UKIP to make a difference.

There would in Labour areas in Wales and the north of England.

People already turning from Corbyn's Labour in droves and it may only need a dozen or so UKIP MP's to hold the balance of power.

Conservative areas with high immigration would probably fall to UKIP if Parliament voted down Brexit.

Could they fall that low?