You may remember that before the referendum, William Oliver Healey set up an ePetition saying that the result shouldn’t stand if the winning vote was less than 60 per cent and turnout was less than 75 per cent. Well, the rules at the time of the referendum were the rules and this petition seeks to change the rules after the event.
This is contrary to every principal of English law that prevents retrospective enactment of legislation. Even Healey himself stated afterwards that he set up the petition to prevent the remain side ‘shackling us to the EU’ when everyone was expecting remain to win. Since then Healey complains that it has been ‘hijacked’ by the remain side. Well, sorry matey but you should have worded it better.
Still, if we’re going to play the petitions game, then let’s play nicely. Here’s a couple more petitions that you might find interesting :
Parliament is going to debate the first petition on 5th September as it reached the threshold where a debate is ‘considered’ of 100,000 signatures – even if 39,000 did come from the Vatican City which has a population of 800! To be fair, there would have to have been 4 million fake signatures to pull it under the 100,000 mark.
Thankfully, the Article 50 petition has also reached the 100,000 threshold so perhaps they could debate that at the same time?
And then there’s this one, which is fairly new but gathering pace…
Frankly, all that will happen is that a couple of MPs will stand up in a fairly empty House and bandy a few well used phrases around. Then they’ll say “Well, we debated it as required. Move on. Nothing to see here!”
Yes, ePetitions are a bit of a joke but they do at least provide some sort of method for making our views known – futile thought that might appear to be. So I’d urge you to sign the later two anyway. As they say at Tesco “Every little helps!”
Farage, Cameron and a much younger picture of Julie Etchingham
Well, that was an eye opener last night. Farage and Cameron not actually debating because Chicken Dave knows he’d get demolished by Farage. His excuse last time was that he wouldn’t exacerbate splits in the Tory party by debating against members of his own cabinet. What was the excuse last night, Dave?
I was appalled by the obvious bias of ITV and the complete ineptitude of Julie Etchingham. What the fuck was she there for other than to let the audience continually interrupt Farage whilst letting Cameron drone on about the economy. Why did she continually cut Farage short and not Cameron? Bias of the first order.
And the audience was clearly hand picked to do the same. Balanced, my arse! They were clearly pro-Remain.
And Farage was attacked relentlessly as a racist, little Englander. His comments on Cologne were taken out of context. His arguments on the economy were poo-pooed. Nobody was really listening. They just wanted him – in his own words – demonised. It was a clear case of “If you can’t kick the ball then kick the man who’s got it!”
What was clear was that Cameron is not very good at answering questions. It really made no difference what you asked him, he always pulled it back to the economy. The real answer on the economy is, of course, that we don’t know what will happen if we stay in the EU any more than if we leave. It’s a non argument but it’s nice and technical and scary so Cameron keeps rolling it out.
What was also clear was that Farage was not going to be allowed to answer the question, and yet despite this the reactions after the event seem to largely favour Farage as the winner. He clearly wasn’t on his best form last night although, to be honest, he really wasn’t given much of a chance.
It was appalling – but then that’s nothing less than you’d expect from Project Fear and it’s lackies at ITV…
I make no secret of the fact that I am a fervent supporter of the UK leaving the Fourth Reich, so I guess you would expect me to say that Michael Gove came out of last night’s Sky News debate better than David Cameron did on Thursday night. Having said that, I genuinely think that he did a better job than Cameron.
Faisal Islam managed to rattle Cameron who visibly lost some of his usual composure. He failed to do the same to Gove despite the continual interruptions that seem to be the signature tactic of the modern political interviewer. I particularly liked the way in which Gove nailed one question by quoting what Faisal had said the previous night.
The audience seemed less hostile to Gove. They were certainly less abusive. He was asked some awkward questions by the audience but it seemed to me that the end of the session was telling. Kay Burley seemed dissatisfied that he was getting too easy a ride and was clearly trying to stir things up in the closing minutes.
On the whole what came over was that there is no accurate economic forecast of what will happen if we leave. What also came across was that there’s no accurate forecast of what will happen if we stay in either. Will the rebate be taken away so we pay more? What will the unelected bureaucrats drop on us for having the audacity to vote in the first place? There are no guarantees and we all know it. As regards the so called economic experts, I think he was right to question the reliability of their forecasts and their impartiality.
I also liked the point he made about the big banks and businesses who have signed up to the Remain campaign – organisations that he’s right to point out spend large sums lobbying the EU and who get fat payments and tax breaks from them. The point that they’re hardly impartial in this debate was well made and one I’ve not heard trumpeted nearly often enough so far
And let’s not forget that on the legal side of things, Gove is perfectly positioned to comment from his position as Lord High Chancellor. From that point of view, I’d imagine he knows what he’s talking about when it comes to treaties, trade agreements and international law.
Gove’s message was that we should have faith in ourselves and our abilities. I agree with him. My view is that if we’re going to screw things up, then we should screw them up ourselves rather than have an unelected elite screw them up for us.
The message I got was simple : take back control of our own destiny. On the whole I think Gove did a good job last night getting it across
Well, what an unedifying spectacle that was last night on Sky News wasn’t it? I’ve followed politics with interest for a good few years and I’m struggling to remember an occasion when an audience treated a serving Prime Minister with such contempt.
To be fair to Sky, I thought they pulled no punches and I shall watch the debate with Gove tonight to see whether they treat him the same way. Cameron was asked if he would join the EU today if we weren’t already a member. Of course he would – on the terms he’s renegotiated says he. What a load of tosh!
I was particularly impressed with the way it took a student to put him in his place when he tried to interrupt her and how she accused him of waffling – which he clearly was.
Singularly unimpressive was the way he dismissed the issue of Turkey joining the EU. Failing the tests didn’t stop them shoehorning the Greeks in and look at the mess they’re in now. He says he has a veto over Turkey’s membership but would you trust him to use it given his support for them becoming members? I certainly wouldn’t.
He says he has a guarantee that we won’t join the Euro, ignoring the fact that nobody is asking us to.
He says we can control immigration whilst still being the EU which is, of course, complete nonsense. According to Cameron we need to address immigration on a Europe wide basis by stopping them entering the EU. I’m not sure how that gells with sending boats to the Med to haul them out and bring them ashore. It also ignores the fact that our immigration issues are mainly about those already in the EU – like Romania who are currently flooding our prisons with offenders. They’re already in Mr Cameron or have you conveniently failed to notice that?
All in all, we learnt nothing new last night although it is becoming clear that the electorate has had enough of scaremongering and lack of facts, so there’s hope we might escape yet…
Yes, It’s another fucking meaningless pledge card. We’ve seen them before. Tony Blair started them. Then we had the Miliband Stone. The Tories have done it before. Not one of them has been worth a light.
Now we have the Cameron pledge card shown above. Let’s examine each on shall we?
(1) “Full access to the single market” cannot be guaranteed because the Commission can change the rules whenever it likes. And in any case we have a trade deficit with the EU. They sell us lots more than we need them – so he’s basically ‘guaranteeing’ that something that is unlikely to happen anyway isn’t going to happen.
(2) “Workers rights protected” is meaningless. The law can be unilaterally changed by Brussels any time it likes. They just issue a new regulation or directive. Also try telling the Franch workers that at the moment and see what response you get!
(3) “Keeping the European Arrest Warrant” is also meaningless. Nobody is suggesting we wouldn’t keep it anyway but ignoring that it can be dumped at any time and we’d be outvoted if we tried to stop it happening.
(4) “A special status in Europe” Perhaps Mr Cameron would like to explain exactly what that special status might be? Or is it the special status whereby we get outvoted 27 to 1 every time we try to change something? Pretty special, that…
(5) “Stability for our country” What exactly does that mean? We have no stability in a system where we have no say in our own laws, no right to negotiate trade deals in our own right and no control over our own immigration policies. If that’s stable, then I’m glad I’m deranged. Like all the other Brexiters according to the PM.
A load of meaningless soundbites shoved out there by the PM in the hope that bullshit will baffle brains. That makes me downright bloody angry, frankly!
I’m with backbencher Marcus Fysh who spoke for many when he bluntly declared that these assertions were ‘bollocks‘.