|
|
Post by gashead79 on Nov 24, 2024 21:46:59 GMT
That online petition thingy is getting serious! That runs until May 😆 There's going to be 10 million signatures by Xmas at this rate! What was the retort before? You lost, suck it up, get over it? 😎 Maybe, perhaps Kier should say that in the house this week? There's going to be millions of signatures on that petition.. I wonder what they'll do? |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Nov 24, 2024 21:49:13 GMT
I think you could muster a million signatures or more against any government we've had since the dawn of social media, if organised properly.
The biggest ever e-petition was the one in 2019 to rejoin the EU, with over 6 million signatures.
|
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Nov 24, 2024 21:59:05 GMT
I think you could muster a million signatures or more against any government we've had since the dawn of social media, if organised properly. The biggest ever e-petition was the one in 2019 to rejoin the EU, with over 6 million signatures. Probably right. 6 million was just the remainers though i guess and the other 11 million just let it go.. If this petition hits 10m, then what? Labour got about 10m votes right?? |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Nov 24, 2024 22:46:18 GMT
What was the retort before? You lost, suck it up, get over it? 😎 Maybe, perhaps Kier should say that in the house this week? There's going to be millions of signatures on that petition.. I wonder what they'll do? As with all these things, it'll get a polite ignoring. |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Nov 25, 2024 7:22:19 GMT
Maybe, perhaps Kier should say that in the house this week? There's going to be millions of signatures on that petition.. I wonder what they'll do? As with all these things, it'll get a polite ignoring. The website says that 100k signatures gets considered for debate in the house. As mentioned, the article 50 one got a huge response and did get coverage. www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47772682.amp |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Nov 25, 2024 7:37:46 GMT
I mean by the government. It'll build up and they'll have to reference it at some point, ultimately though it will be. |
|
|
|
Post by francegas on Nov 25, 2024 10:55:43 GMT
Petition now exceeds 2 million. Whilst I agree that nothing will happen it does show the dislike of this government in such a short space of time.
|
|
|
|
Post by trevorgas on Nov 25, 2024 11:18:27 GMT
Petition now exceeds 2 million. Whilst I agree that nothing will happen it does show the dislike of this government in such a short space of time. All I would say is that as most governments are elected by a minority,they are disliked from day one. |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Nov 25, 2024 16:55:53 GMT
Oh the absolute irony of “respecting a democratic vote”.
So 2 million Tory voters want Labour out. In other news, water is still wet.
|
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Nov 25, 2024 17:17:30 GMT
Oh the absolute irony of “respecting a democratic vote”. So 2 million Tory voters want Labour out. In other news, water is still wet. The hypocrisy from those who told Remainers to like it or lump it would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that they are only partially interested in democracy - just the bits they agree with and only accepting election results if they win, as we see with the EU referendum (the people have spoken and all is well), Labour's victory (won by default and lied about everything) and Donald Trump's ideas about accepting defeat and loss in very different ways (celebrate if you win, lead a riot if you don't). The new breed of right winger is a real threat to a future free society in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Nov 25, 2024 21:29:21 GMT
Oh the absolute irony of “respecting a democratic vote”. So 2 million Tory voters want Labour out. In other news, water is still wet. The hypocrisy from those who told Remainers to like it or lump it would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that they are only partially interested in democracy - just the bits they agree with and only accepting election results if they win, as we see with the EU referendum (the people have spoken and all is well), Labour's victory (won by default and lied about everything) and Donald Trump's ideas about accepting defeat and loss in very different ways (celebrate if you win, lead a riot if you don't). The new breed of right winger is a real threat to a future free society in my opinion. It's a couple million signatures online, many of which are probably non genuine. There's no need to get all excited about it. On hypocrisy, didn't Starmer bang on about revisiting the brexit vote after the referendum? He's supposed to reinforce democracy, not undermine it! |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Nov 25, 2024 21:35:40 GMT
The hypocrisy from those who told Remainers to like it or lump it would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that they are only partially interested in democracy - just the bits they agree with and only accepting election results if they win, as we see with the EU referendum (the people have spoken and all is well), Labour's victory (won by default and lied about everything) and Donald Trump's ideas about accepting defeat and loss in very different ways (celebrate if you win, lead a riot if you don't). The new breed of right winger is a real threat to a future free society in my opinion. It's a couple million signatures online, many of which are probably non genuine. There's no need to get all excited about it. On hypocrisy, didn't Starmer bang on about revisiting the brexit vote after the referendum? He's supposed to reinforce democracy, not undermine it! Not sure it's Aghast getting excited about it. 😉 Starmer wanted to put the agreed deal back to the British people, in much the same way as Jacob Rees Mogg suggested at the start of the whole episode. I guess the difference was that Remain would have stayed as an option up to the point we left. We've now left so the proposal is now null and void, he's now looking at tinkering around the edges. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Nov 26, 2024 19:00:45 GMT
The hypocrisy from those who told Remainers to like it or lump it would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that they are only partially interested in democracy - just the bits they agree with and only accepting election results if they win, as we see with the EU referendum (the people have spoken and all is well), Labour's victory (won by default and lied about everything) and Donald Trump's ideas about accepting defeat and loss in very different ways (celebrate if you win, lead a riot if you don't). The new breed of right winger is a real threat to a future free society in my opinion. It's a couple million signatures online, many of which are probably non genuine. There's no need to get all excited about it. On hypocrisy, didn't Starmer bang on about revisiting the brexit vote after the referendum? He's supposed to reinforce democracy, not undermine it! So once an act is voted on and set in law, that's it? Democracy has done its job? Surely reinforcing democracy also includes revisiting past issues and correcting/revising if necessary. There must be hundreds of things that have been law that no longer are and vice versa. People once voted in laws that made homosexuallity a crime or that people could own other people. Is it undermining democracy to have done away with those laws? |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Nov 27, 2024 10:27:05 GMT
Maybe, perhaps Kier should say that in the house this week? There's going to be millions of signatures on that petition.. I wonder what they'll do? As with all these things, it'll get a polite ignoring. The government of the time didn't ignore the Referendum Petition - there was a three hour debate in Parliament on it with MPs from all sides/parties speaking. This one will eventually get something similar and I don't know if the government can schedule it early (ie before the petition ends in May) - if they can they should, that would nullify it, the Reform MPs and a few Conservatives would turn up to speak and (for fun) Farage might even threaten to call a vote of confidence in the government. The petition runs until three weeks after the local elections in May. If (as expected) they are a disaster for Labour, a debate then is more interesting. Would Labour MPs use it to defect to another party or stand as an independent? That still wouldn't affect their majority but that would significantly weaken them. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Nov 27, 2024 11:13:14 GMT
As with all these things, it'll get a polite ignoring. The government of the time didn't ignore the Referendum Petition - there was a three hour debate in Parliament on it with MPs from all sides/parties speaking. This one will eventually get something similar and I don't know if the government can schedule it early (ie before the petition ends in May) - if they can they should, that would nullify it, the Reform MPs and a few Conservatives would turn up to speak and (for fun) Farage might even threaten to call a vote of confidence in the government. The petition runs until three weeks after the local elections in May. If (as expected) they are a disaster for Labour, a debate then is more interesting. Would Labour MPs use it to defect to another party or stand as an independent? That still wouldn't affect their majority but that would significantly weaken them. It may get debated, but ultimately the Brexit one didn't change direction of the government. |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Nov 27, 2024 23:22:38 GMT
It's a couple million signatures online, many of which are probably non genuine. There's no need to get all excited about it. On hypocrisy, didn't Starmer bang on about revisiting the brexit vote after the referendum? He's supposed to reinforce democracy, not undermine it! So once an act is voted on and set in law, that's it? Democracy has done its job? Surely reinforcing democracy also includes revisiting past issues and correcting/revising if necessary. There must be hundreds of things that have been law that no longer are and vice versa. People once voted in laws that made homosexuallity a crime or that people could own other people. Is it undermining democracy to have done away with those laws? Revisiting past issues and decisions is fine. Undermining a democratic process such as a referendum, just because it didn't go the way you wanted is just mischievous. Something like what Trump did at the last US election. |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Nov 27, 2024 23:24:04 GMT
The government of the time didn't ignore the Referendum Petition - there was a three hour debate in Parliament on it with MPs from all sides/parties speaking. This one will eventually get something similar and I don't know if the government can schedule it early (ie before the petition ends in May) - if they can they should, that would nullify it, the Reform MPs and a few Conservatives would turn up to speak and (for fun) Farage might even threaten to call a vote of confidence in the government. The petition runs until three weeks after the local elections in May. If (as expected) they are a disaster for Labour, a debate then is more interesting. Would Labour MPs use it to defect to another party or stand as an independent? That still wouldn't affect their majority but that would significantly weaken them. It may get debated, but ultimately the Brexit one didn't change direction of the government. It might have added weight to certain debates and influenced MPs approach to things. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Nov 27, 2024 23:50:39 GMT
It may get debated, but ultimately the Brexit one didn't change direction of the government. It might have added weight to certain debates and influenced MPs approach to things. I suspect MPs' views were already entrenched by that stage. As we left on the basis of a very thin deal, one Sunak had to amend pretty quickly through the Windsor Framework, it had little to no influence IMHO. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Nov 28, 2024 6:08:34 GMT
So once an act is voted on and set in law, that's it? Democracy has done its job? Surely reinforcing democracy also includes revisiting past issues and correcting/revising if necessary. There must be hundreds of things that have been law that no longer are and vice versa. People once voted in laws that made homosexuallity a crime or that people could own other people. Is it undermining democracy to have done away with those laws? Revisiting past issues and decisions is fine. Undermining a democratic process such as a referendum, just because it didn't go the way you wanted is just mischievous. Something like what Trump did at the last US election. So if we hold a referendum, that's it. We can never revist that result ever again because "the people have decided"? Even if the result was so close and there is evidence that the decision was of no benefit to the country and a case could be made that the decision was actually detrimental? You seem to be saying revising past issues is fine but not if it overturns a decision that went the way you wanted. Seems a bit mischievous that. 😉 |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Nov 28, 2024 7:21:06 GMT
The government of the time didn't ignore the Referendum Petition - there was a three hour debate in Parliament on it with MPs from all sides/parties speaking. This one will eventually get something similar and I don't know if the government can schedule it early (ie before the petition ends in May) - if they can they should, that would nullify it, the Reform MPs and a few Conservatives would turn up to speak and (for fun) Farage might even threaten to call a vote of confidence in the government. The petition runs until three weeks after the local elections in May. If (as expected) they are a disaster for Labour, a debate then is more interesting. Would Labour MPs use it to defect to another party or stand as an independent? That still wouldn't affect their majority but that would significantly weaken them. It may get debated, but ultimately the Brexit one didn't change direction of the government. MPs got to air their issues in a way they wouldn't have had time to in the other debates about the decision/process so it was worthwhile. Any new and important issues raised were recorded and as far as I know there was no important new information raised that would have changed government policy... That's why this one is a bit different - no one is expecting Labour to call a early election or a vote of no confidence to be called. But I wouldn't be surprised to see a few Labour MPs use it to resign the whip or for Labour MPs to use it to criticise the decisions by their own leadership and that's why it's important - reminding Labour that their majority is large in terms of MPs but small in terms of popular vote... |
|
