Not happy with the decision?

[glosterred]

Over the last couple of days people have been blaming a certain portion of the country for voting out. Why not blame the 13 million or so eligible voters who could not be arse to get off their fat arses and vote. Those are the ones we should really be having a go at for not being arsed enough to vote in what will probably the most important political decision in their/our life time

That's the same with any vote, if all the people that worked for wages voted for the political parties that should serve them then the conservatives would never get in in the first place. Alf Garnet rings a bell. But what is wrong with this vote is that Britain has let it's young people down by looking inward instead of outwards.

Have you thought that the people who voted us out are those that voted us in in the first place and they voted us out because it is not what we voted for in the first place. They exercised their democratic right to vote which ever way they choose. If the younger generation are pissed with this decision then they should have gotten off their collective arses and voted on mass to stay.

[wilts rover]

Not happy with the decision, sign the petition to have it debated in parliament

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

has anyone realised yet that this is an own goal petition ?

the actual words are "We the undersigned call upon HM Government to implement a rule that if the remain or leave vote is less than 60% based a turnout less than 75% there should be another referendum"

if the above was enacted in law  then accordingly in order to rejoin the vote to rejoin must be more than 60%

very few laws are retrospective

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06454/SN06454.pdf


the pleader of the petition must feel just like the Northern Ireland center half when he also scored an own goal

quote from the link


1 What is retrospective legislation?

Retrospective legislation is generally defined as legislation which ‘takes away or impairs any vested right acquired under existing laws, or creates a new obligation, or imposes a new duty, or attaches a new disability in respect to transactions or considerations already past’.

1 According to the Oxford Dictionary of Law, retrospective (or retroactive) legislation is:

 Legislation that operates on matters taking place before its enactment, e.g. by penalizing conduct that was lawful when it occurred.  There is a presumption that statutes are not intended to have retroactive effect unless they merely change legal procedure.

2 Under its entry for ‘retrospective’ Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary of Words and Phrases outlines the principle:  … ‘nova constitutio futuris formam imponere debet, non prœteritis’, that is unless there be clear words to the contrary statutes ‘do not apply to a past, but to a future, state or circumstance’.

3 The previous Government’s position on introducing retrospective legislation was set out by Harriet Harman, the Solicitor General, in answer to a question from Jonathan Sayeed:   

Mr. Sayeed: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a statement on the Government's policy on the introduction of retrospective legislation.

  The Solicitor-General: I have been asked to reply. The Government's policy before introducing a legislative provision having retrospective effect is to balance the conflicting public interests and to consider whether the general public interest in the law not being changed retrospectively may be outweighed by any competing public interest. In making this assessment the Government will have regard to relevant international standards including those of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms which was incorporated into United Kingdom law by the Human Rights Act 1998.4



this petition  would make it harder to come back in 60% vote needed !!! so effectively it's a STAY OUT PETITION

You're making the massive, massive assumption we'd need to hold another referendum to go into Europe again. We didn't in 1973 and we still don't need to have one...

He's making an even bigger asumption its a law. It's not. The (first) referendum was only for guidance and the government is not bound to accept the result if it does not wish to. Unless it changes the law, then neither would the result of any future referendum be legally binding.

Thus Coleman's whole post is pointless. Unlike Chesterfield who are yet to be deducted the three points (s)he kept going on, and on, and on, and on...about.

[IDM]

I interpret the petition - if it was (unlikely) to be successful - is intended to get the government to ignore the vote and not to pull out of the EU.  No need to vote back in.

I doubt however that this will work..

[Colemans Left Hook]

bedtime reading

[Dagenham Rover]

  https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/138891/moderation-info


hmnn it appears to have been removed

however it basically said "If we lose against Iceland we demand a replay"

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

I like this one...

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/141855/moderation-info

[Dagenham Rover]

I like this one...

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/141855/moderation-info

same one ...... but lo and behold its vanished

[Glyn_Wigley]

bedtime reading

I'll wait for the film.

[SydneyRover]

The petition is calling for a debate in parliament, 1,000,000 signatures are required before a debate can be called for.

The petition calls on the British Government to implement a rule:

"that if the remain or leave vote is less than 60 per cent based a turnout less than 75 per cent there should be another referendum".

These are the rules about the vote, it's no good complaining that the rules are not fair after the vote has taken place and whether to were happy with the result or not, these are the rules, it's fairly straight forward.

The petition has now reached 2,600,000 +

[bpoolrover]

They should do the same for industrial action,there would never be a strike again

[Sammy Chung was King]

The decision has been made, nothing will change that now. It doesn't matter if it was older people, which i doubt, a wide range of people will have voted leave. Many have voted leave around my age, in they're thirties, i know very few people who wanted to remain.
This referendum, could be the start, of the end of the parties in they're current form, it is getting near to the time, when they will be disbanded, and new ways of politics will be created.
I didn't vote conservative in the last election, but you didn't see me wanting another go at it. It's not backward looking to vote to come out of something that was restricting the country from it's full potential. It was forward thinking, to dare to dream that things could be much better, by leaving!.

[The Red Baron]

The point is, everyone's vote counts, everyone's..

That's quite correct.  Those that voted Remain count on the Remain side, those who voted Leave count on the Leave side.  Those who chose not to vote clearly don't care whether we're in or we're out and are happy whichever way the result went so in effect they 'count' with the side that won. Though not shown in the official figures the effect is the same.
 
Whilst I'm not happy with the result I have to accept it, that's our current democratic process.
 
A better process would be to operate voting in a similar way Australia does - it's compulsory to vote, (though there arguments which can be put forward that this in itself is undemocratic).  Failure to vote attracts a fine, and while this is an almost negligible amount it does lead to a significantly higher turnout than almost anywhere in the world.  Even then, they don't get a 100% turnout.  Not perfect, but much better than our current system.
 

Of course you might have got a bigger vote to Leave if you'd got more voters out.

[wilts rover]

The decision has been made, nothing will change that now. It doesn't matter if it was older people, which i doubt, a wide range of people will have voted leave. Many have voted leave around my age, in they're thirties, i know very few people who wanted to remain.
This referendum, could be the start, of the end of the parties in they're current form, it is getting near to the time, when they will be disbanded, and new ways of politics will be created.
I didn't vote conservative in the last election, but you didn't see me wanting another go at it. It's not backward looking to vote to come out of something that was restricting the country from it's full potential. It was forward thinking, to dare to dream that things could be much better, by leaving!.

No it's not wrong to dare to dream like that Sammy. But when you vote for that dream without any sort of plan or policy to achieve it and in the face of opinion from 75% of our political class and the majority of professional economists, that's all it is. A fantasy.

[SydneyRover]

Petition Vote required to force parliamentary debate  : 100,000
Petition Vote at the last count.................................: 2,999,000

[glosterred]

Petition Vote required to force parliamentary debate  : 100,000
Petition Vote at the last count.................................: 2,999,000

Thought 100k was for it to be considered for debate, does not mean parliament has to debate it.

[Colemans Left Hook]

Petition Vote required to force parliamentary debate  : 100,000
Petition Vote at the last count.................................: 2,999,000

ON A LIGHTER NOTE

might a well go for the double with an EDM

this is one of the better ones  COYR

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2002-03/1175

[Dagenham Rover]

If all those that voted remain signed it it could be 15 million signatures so its irrelevant really

[Copps is Magic]

The guy who started it is actually a leave campaigner.

[Donnywolf]

The guy who started it is actually a leave campaigner.

Yes who 48 hours later has seen the "promises" the Leave side basically get rowed back on (or worse they denied saying some of them) leading him to believe like PPI he was mis sold !

[ferribyrover]

We've had the vote, remarkably 33m people voted, we have a decision. End of!
Not really. We have given the politicians a task and their response is to start all kinds of party politics tricks, resignations etc. Very disappointing.
The government gave us two options, remain or leave, they should have been ready for either outcome and the wishes of the (majority of) voters should be carried out. All this " I resign" business by the MPs, is wrong, they should just get on with making the people's wishes come to pass, as quickly as possible. Delaying matters is not good for anyone and will not change the result.

[IDM]

An open question - how many of those 33 million voters now feel mislead (whether in or out) due to the political rhetoric (ie lies and spin) that we always get?

We have a general election every 5 years where we can vote to put right what we were lied about at the previosu election - how can we put right the lies from this referendum?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Ferriby.

Cameron resigned because made a misjudgement of historic proportions and had lost all credibility.

Labour Shadow Cabinet members are resigning because they can no longer work under what they see as an incompetent leader who's poor leadership was a major factor in the way the referendum went.

These aren't people playing "party political tricks". They are people acting from principle.

[The Red Baron]

Ferriby.

Cameron resigned because made a misjudgement of historic proportions and had lost all credibility.

Labour Shadow Cabinet members are resigning because they can no longer work under what they see as an incompetent leader who's poor leadership was a major factor in the way the referendum went.

These aren't people playing "party political tricks". They are people acting from principle.

I don't quite agree on Corbyn, BST. I don't think the opinion of those who resigned today has changed. What has changed is that a General Election could be called in the next 6 months. So they need a credible leader now, not in 3-4 years' time.

Although from some of the names I've heard floated as a possible successor to Corbyn, I'm not convinced they are a vast improvement.

[Filo]

Corbyn is the man to blame for the resignations, you can't call for unity on one hand and then sack a member of your shadow cabinet on the other

[BillyStubbsTears]

TRB

I agree that the Shadow Cabinet members who've resigned have never liked Corbyn. But they had to respect his election until things materially changed. They have materially changed now. Corbyn's now shown his modus operandi in a major campaign. He has demonstrated that he is an appalling leader. So the campaign has acted as the catalyst to make the Labour shadow cabinet act.

[Glyn_Wigley]

How many is it now that since he was elected leader have been sacked/have resigned or said right from the start that they won't serve in a Shadow cabinet under him? If Corbyn keeps hanging on the Shadow Cabinet will only have a full complement after the barrel has been scraped..!

[Copps is Magic]

It seems to me Corbyn still has popular support at a time when mis-trust for politicians and alienation from politics is at its highest.

Not one of these shadow cabinet ministers has taken any personal responsibility for the 'failure' of the remain vote. Not one seems to acknowledge any form of collective responsibility. Were they not campaigning too?

This is an extension of the politics people mistrust. It's cultish, reactive, undemocratic, personality politics decided behind closed doors. You have people like Ann Coffey saying 'his body language was all wrong', for example. I mean, are we really going to sacrifice substance and principle for this?

If they succeed, it will damage the labour party for a long time. They won't get my vote, not now, and not for the foreseeable future.

[Glyn_Wigley]

By the same token shouldn't a party leader take ultimate responsibility when he fails to lead adequately?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Copps.

Corbyn has popular support? What?

He's been in the job 9 months. His "doing a good job" rating is -22%. This is his honeymoon period. He's faced a utterly divided and internally arguing Tory party. And he's at depths that Ed Milliband took 4 years to plumb.

More than all of that, he is simply NOT a leader. As one Labour MP put it today, leaders have to find ways to bring diverse opinions together into a coherent conclusion. Corbyn has spent 30 years in rooms where everyone agrees with each other.

And then there is the Referendum campaign.

What woukd you have expected Corbyn to be doing 2 days before the vote? I'd have expected him to be demanding BBC and ITV news time to give a passionate and unequivocal message to Labour supporters. To have used Churchill's advice, " If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack."

Do you know what he actually did on Tuesday? He spent time talking to an obscure progressive American webcaster about how flawed the EU was and how, maybe, perhaps, on balance, it was the right thing, maybe to stay in.

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/16321

It's not good enough Copps. This isn't a f**king Student Union debate that Corbyn was taking part in. Fail to give a powerful and unambiguous steer to the Labour support and you leave the vacuum that Farage has rushed into. Corbyn has been a disaster AS A LEADER. Whatever you think of his policies (and I agree with many of them) he has failed in the most important moment that he will ever face. And he has to go.

[Glyn_Wigley]

He's been virtually invisible and when he has deigned to say anything he's been wishy-washy and ineffective. Being a leader is a job, not just a job title.