Paphos Life

Just seen a certain Mickey Mouse has signed it.

WHL - does it matter? As I said, it is only a petition to gauge strength of feeling and what is apparent, is that within 36 hours or so, nearly 3m people feel strongly enough and while a percentage of those might be foolish names and not accurate, the overwhelming will be true and accurate.

Jimgward wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2019 1:06 pm WHL - does it matter? As I said, it is only a petition to gauge strength of feeling and what is apparent, is that within 36 hours or so, nearly 3m people feel strongly enough and while a percentage of those might be foolish names and not accurate, the overwhelming will be true and accurate.

And in 12 hours 17.4 million voted to leave.... I don't want to leave the EU, but I'm a democrat, that means, accepting the vote of the people, not crying until you get the decision you want.

I voted to remain but accept leave under OUR control. i.e. with terms that suit the majority of the country. The 30m who never voted to leave, also need recognition, as do the percentage who . want to brexit, but not to have everything more expensive, loss of jobs, or affects on 'normal' life.

I would take May's imperfect deal, as it will allow me and my businesses to continue as are, to a large extent. That would apply to most of the country.

I don't believe for one minute, that if a vote was held, where it was May's deal or a hard brexit, that anywhere near a majority would vote for a hard brexit.

So, this revoke petition in a recognition that we need to stop at the edge of this cliff, before jumping off. I am happy to leave with decent terms. What that implies is ALL parties to sit round a table and lower their red-lines. May more than anyone, as she sees this as purely a Tory decision and that's why it hasn't worked.

In order for this petition to be even accepted by the Govt. It surely has to be certified that all signatures are UK residents?. Also it would it not have to have 17.5 million true signatures in order to be effective.

Lincoln wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:01 pm In order for this petition to be even accepted by the Govt. It has to be certified that all signatures are UK residents. Also it would have to have 17.5 million true signatures in order to be effective.

Absolutely wrong. It is not a referendum, it is a simple non-binding petition. The only legal factor is that the result must be debated in the Commons if there are more than 100,000 signatures, which are not verified. In this case, that guideline is passed. Theoretically, you could have 60 million signatures and it would still not be binding in law. You could say it was advisory. FYI, no such petition has ever been acted on by parliament after debate, even with a million or more signatures.

Lincoln wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:01 pm In order for this petition to be even accepted by the Govt. It has to be certified that all signatures are UK residents. Also it would have to have 17.5 million true signatures in order to be effective.

Er, not true. To sign the petition one has to be a British Citizen or a UK resident. This is why we in Cyprus can sign it.

I sugned the petition this evening. The confirmation email said they now have nearly 3.5 M signed up.

Dee

Why should this petition carry any weight. After all it is asking for a democratic decision to be ignored, so surely it's perfectly ok for this to be ignored also? Otherwise it's hypocritical is it not?

By that logic we would only ever have one general election.

Devil wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:36 pm

Lincoln wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:01 pm In order for this petition to be even accepted by the Govt. It has to be certified that all signatures are UK residents. Also it would have to have 17.5 million true signatures in order to be effective.

Absolutely wrong. It is not a referendum, it is a simple non-binding petition. The only legal factor is that the result must be debated in the Commons if there are more than 100,000 signatures, which are not verified. In this case, that guideline is passed. Theoretically, you could have 60 million signatures and it would still not be binding in law. You could say it was advisory. FYI, no such petition has ever been acted on by parliament after debate, even with a million or more signatures.

True, however, if it gets anywhere like 17,000,000 signatures I am sure the government would at least think twice before regurgitating the old line about it being the "will of the people".

The will of the people at the last general election was that the Tories would not have a majority, yet they carry on regardless. No one voted for a coalition with the DUP

Dominic wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:35 pm By that logic we would only ever have one general election.

No, by that logic the will of the majority who voted would be carried out and it could then be put to another vote later, in a certain amount of years. Remain voters want the result overturned before it has been implemented, that is not democracy to my mind.

zorbathejock wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:50 pm The will of the people at the last general election was that the Tories would not have a majority, yet they carry on regardless. No one voted for a coalition with the DUP

By that logic half the countries in the EU wouldn't have a government!


Shane

ApusApus wrote: ↑Sat Mar 23, 2019 8:31 am
By that logic half the countries in the EU wouldn't have a government!

Most EU countries have some form of proportional representation, not the stupid "first past the post" system in the UK. PR is more democratic because it allows for wider views to be heard.

To take a hypothetical example:
Joe Bloggs 20,000
John Smith 17,000
Jim Brown 15,000
Joe Bloggs would be elected, with only 38 percent of the votes. Do you really think that he is representative of the constituency?

We have PR in Scotland and it works well

Alan

You could say that about items in manifestos that are never implemented; as an example in their manifesto the Tories had no time limit on votes for people overseas which was never introduced.
The whole system is rotten, democracy in name only. Whips used by all parties to threaten and cajole members to vote for the good of the party and not the country. What's democratic of 36% of the population dictating to the other 64% or a government with 42% of the vote running the country? Democracy is not very democratic, especially in the UK.

Jim

Over18 million were denied a vote. U.K. citizens living in an EU country for more than 15 years even though the result would affect them. EU citizens in the U.K. and 16 year olds who are now to be denied the freedom of movement their parents had

Devil wrote: ↑Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:17 am Most EU countries have some form of proportional representation, not the stupid "first past the post" system in the UK. PR is more democratic because it allows for wider views to be heard.

To take a hypothetical example:
Joe Bloggs 20,000
John Smith 17,000
Jim Brown 15,000
Joe Bloggs would be elected, with only 38 percent of the votes. Do you really think that he is representative of the constituency?

Whether I think it is representative is irrelevant, it's the system we use at present? Is it the right one or not is a different discussion?


Shane

zorbathejock wrote: ↑Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:34 am Over18 million were denied a vote. U.K. citizens living in an EU country for more than 15 years even though the result would affect them. EU citizens in the U.K. and 16 year olds who are now to be denied the freedom of movement their parents had

Of those 18 million, how many didn't realise that they would lose their voting rights after 15 years of residing in the EU country they chose to move to? Not many I suspect!


Shane