Brexit

[MrWayne]

fatslob-:O said

 

MrWayne said:

Bold 1) That's exactly what i said, the decision to decommissioning nuclear energy was made by the previous government and her government stopped the decommissioning.

Bold 2) Why shouldn't it be acceptable? That's the power the constitution grants him. Also the german president can't be compared to the queen or other monarchs because he gets elected.

Bold 3) There is no final goal within democracy, it will always change. I don't know if the majority of the british people still want EU membership but a second referendum should clarify that

Things like a second Brexit referendum or a second election of the german Bundestag should always be the ultima ratio. If by a miracle the British parliament can agree on a solution(no deal, deal, stay in the EU), fine but if the parliament can't agree on anything there have to be a second referendum.

a) because nobody can justify a no deal scenario in this case, the government would be against it, the majority of the parliament would be against it and probably the majority of the british people would be against a no deal scenario.

b) a second referendum would be different than the first one because it would correct the big flaw the first one had. The big flaw the first referendum had was that you had to decide between the status quo, staying in the EU, something very concret, and Brexit, about whom nobody knew exactly what he would look like. Now people can decide between three very concrete options, no deal, May's deal or stay in the EU.

1) I think you need to be more informed from now on before engaging in political discussions. Angela Merkel did NOT repeal Gerhard Schroeder's call for decommissioning nuclear power and in fact speed it up! She faced rebuke from her own party's former leader who was also a former chancellor for that decision and it was Helmut Kohl which oversaw the openings of the German nuclear reactors ... 

2) That doesn't mean that there aren't 'flaws' in the constitution. By your justification does that mean Her Majesty should veto a bill that she does not like unless she wants her head lopped off ? The great powers of a republic or a monarchy should express restraint first before abusing it ... 

3) Why don't we hold out after Brexit then to see they still want in on the EU ?  

The parliament can't even agree to a second referendum either. They can't agree on any deal and I doubt revoking article 50 is a good idea among Conservative MPs ... 

a) That's not for you to solely decide, it's for the elected representatives to decide. For the most part, the conservatives are content leaving with no deal and I suspect if push comes to shove for either significantly delaying article 50 or revoking article 50 then the DUP will seriously consider pulling the plug before it comes to that because at the end of the day remainer rebels within the conservative party realize that they need the DUP just as much as themselves to keep them all in power as well or face the possibility of deselection. It's basically a game of who will blink first between the remainer rebels or the DUP ... (I suspect that Theresa May will just keep whipping the rebels until she meets the DUPs demands)

b) The result of the first referendum should also be respected (see the above reply I made to Hylian) and it is the format originally agreed upon by the MPs at the time and more importantly there is no majority of having another vote currently in the parliament ... 

1) It is a bit arrogant of you to say that I should inform myself more about German politics, especially when you apparently can't read your own sources properly.

"Just eight months ago, Mrs. Merkel stunned the opposition, environmental groups and anti-nuclear lobbies by pushing through measures to prolong the country’s use of nuclear power to 2033.

That decision — reversing a law passed by a previous government, which had planned to end nuclear power by 2021 — weakened support for her center-right coalition. But it increased the appeal of the opposition Greens. As a result, Mrs. Merkel’s conservative Christian Democrats were roundly defeated in a major regional election in March.

But then later in March, after the disaster at the Japanese nuclear power plant at Fukushima, Mrs. Merkel reversed herself and reset the phase out date for 2022."

2) It does not sound like you very informed about our president. The comparison is, again, nonsensical because he gets elected, monarchs don't. Also he can't just veto bills he doesn't like, it's no coincidence that it only happend eight times in the BRD history, only if he thinks the bill is unconsitutional he can veto it, also the parliament has options if he vetoes a bill, they can change the parts he said are unconstitutional, they can go to court to prove if the president is right or they can even go to court to impeach the president.

Speaking of constitutional errors: These non-binding referenda in the UK are one. Either doing it the right way like in Switzerland or not at all.

3) If the outcome is a no deal brexit, No.

I know that the second referendum has no majority in parliament but if things go on as they did in the the past 2-3 years the parliament will end up with only two options, no deal because they run out of time and second referendum because the EU will probably only grant more time if a second referendum happen.

a) Of course it's not solely on me to decide. Who do you think I am? I'm not planning to overthrow the british parliament to stop Brexit, neither have I the power to do that. I only stating my opinions and hope that there are enougth decent politicians in London who agree with me.

b) You don't engage with my arguments.

Last edited by MrWayne - on 26 January 2019