So, even though Brexit Referendum was advisory the advisory result of it must be implemented against all reason, but because it was advisory any associated wrongdoing cannot be challenged in the courts.
= #VoteLeave really are having their cake and eating it.
-
-
-
Conservative MP - Suella Braverman said , categorically , on BBCDP that the referendum result was a " Binding Mandate " ! So who do we believe ? :-/
-
1.Parliament voted to allow Government to hold the EU ref, having been advised it was to be "advisory" 2. Cameron's leaflet sent out during the run-up to the ref said: "whatever you decide, we'll implement." 1/2pic.twitter.com/3VU6xFjBsW
-
To me, it sounds like the executive overriding the legislature - in a through-the-door leaflet. I'm eternally surprised it hasn't been challenged. 2/2
-
....In any case, if what Suella says is true and the referendum was binding, then - according to what David Lammy is saying - the means by which the Leave vote was coerced-not-won can be challenged in the courts. Zugzwang for the Leave result: either advisory only, or illegal.
-
I believe the opposite is what David Lammy said. If "Advisory & Not Binding" it could not be legally challenged . I'll be happy to be corrected.
-
Advisory. Not binding, so some defence against challenge.
-
Malgosia & I & many others said this right from the start. The referendum is binding when it suits them & then it's advisory when it suits them. It's been goal post shifting all the way. Never been a shred of democratic due process in this Brexit regime & that was ALWAYS clear.
- 1টি আরও উত্তর
নতুন কথা-বার্তা -
-
-
Announcing that the referendum was advisory but that they would stick with the result was a scam in the first place as it meant they didn't have to abide by all the legal safeguards of an obligatory referendum. This has been a stitch up from the beginning.
-
That prat as mayor would be as bad as Khant

কথা-বার্তা শেষ
নতুন কথা-বার্তা -
-
-
@DavidLammy is completely correct here, the@ElectoralCommUK has already confirmed this FACT when they appeared before the@CommonsCMS earlier this year. Watch them explain that Parliament, once given the information, has the prerogative to decide if a vote is UNSAFE....pic.twitter.com/limbK4HHxt -
It is not as if this vote was really important - or anything. However - it was thought important enough for some wealthy people to break the law and buy the result.
- কথা-বার্তা শেষ
নতুন কথা-বার্তা -
-
-
How "convenient" that the Ref was advisory, so the courts can't overturn it. It's almost like it was all carefully planned in advance – with the initial preparation by Cameron.
-
We've all been played, leavers and remainers alike. It was never about any of us.
-
Never was. Never is under the Tories. Under Blair I had hope - the only time in my adult life I felt politics could change things for the better. And then Iraq. Remain was the only sensible vote for the future. Leave was a disastrous choice.
-
For me it didn't even take as long as Iraq. Labour made a promise in their '97 manifesto to hold a Royal Commission on vivisection (experimentation on animals). It was quietly dropped, without explanation. I honestly can't see any good reason to do that at all.
-
Having said that, they did do some good - Sure Start, the minimum wage, civil partnerships, the Good Friday agreement etc. Increased capital spending on health and education too, although I think PFI was a very expensive way of funding this.
-
Introduced tuition fees, continued cutting student grants and kept zero hour contracts - some really good policies there - not!
কথা-বার্তা শেষ
নতুন কথা-বার্তা -
লোড হতে বেশ কিছুক্ষণ সময় নিচ্ছে।
টুইটার তার ক্ষমতার বাইরে চলে গেছে বা কোনো সাময়িক সমস্যার সম্মুখীন হয়েছে আবার চেষ্টা করুন বা আরও তথ্যের জন্য টুইটারের স্থিতি দেখুন।
nope