Books Click images for more details
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
Salopian Couldn't find your linked article.
Salopian, is it possible that people are trying to subvert UK Democracy to reverse the results of a UK Democratic election contesting the UnDemocratic Diktats of our unelected EU rulers?
Was it Fascists or Communists the EU was supposed to protect us from?
TinyCO2 I didn't say it wasn't possible just that for the vast majority of people it would be a lot of hassle. Someone with a bit of technical knowledge could do it. My point was that looking at the data there's a good spread of locations in the UK and worldwide so there are a lot of genuine votes in there too, or it's quite a sophisticated hijack and should make the government web designers more careful in developing their applications in future..
You also did make the remark that Remainer organizations were less honourable.
That wasn't my intention, I don't think either side was more or less honourable than the other.
Alan Kendall 12:39 other countries were given a Referendum over Maastricht, Lisbon Rome etc. The UK was not given a vote over the Euro either, and I am glad that Gordon Brown blocked that.
When we are given a chance to vote, the country is split almost 50:50. UK political parties win General Elections with under 40% electoral approval, and under the UK system, it is a Landslide victory.
The EU has steamrollered British democracy with the connivance of Prime Ministers since Thatcher. Other countries are now realising that they have been stitched up aswell. The dream of a Federal Europe depended on it not meeting Democracy. It just met Democracy and lost.
Alan kendall on Jun 26, 2016 at 12:39 PMI have never been able to vote for a single Prime Minister ...Not that old chestnut, even though you absolve yourself later. Convention is that parliamentary candidates are elected, accompanied by a manifesto, which should be implemented, not withstanding events (dear boy, events), and they have a leader who, if they get a majority, is the Prime Minister.
The House of Lords is not what it used to be! It used to be, until quite recently, a pool of expertise on nearly every conceivable subject under the sun (it's because we had the Empire :) ) and it used to iron out inconsistencies and was an, on occasion, extra voice for those who could not be heard. Their powers were restricted and they had to tread carefully. They understood about the demos.
That is the important thing; that the demos exists. That is what is wrong with the EU.
Referenda are a cop out.Yes, for questions like, 'do we licence dogs', its OK, but for complicated issues, they should be part of a manifesto, so the policy has some implementors. But whose idea was it? A Remainer!
13:30 pm "The House of Commons petitions committee has said it is investigating allegations of fraud in connection with a petition calling for a second EU referendum. Any signatures found to be fraudulent would be removed, it said."
golfCharlie (6.58am) "How many people decided to sign the Maastricht Treaty"? As originally posed I think that the answer is 12 (unless a representative for the EU also signed). What I take you to mean is that the general public were not allowed to vote. But there are many things in our democracy that we never get a chance to vote upon. I have never been able to vote for a single Prime Minister, nor any Cabinet Minister, nor as far as I know for any Shadow Cabinet equivalent. I have never voted for anyone in the House of Lords nor did anyone ask me about our Head of State or the lavish lifestyle to which she and her extensive family are privileged. I am not being given a chance to decide upon future changes to parliamentary boundaries, nor was I allowed to exercise my opinion upon proportional representation. But I live in the real word. I have to accept what exists, even at the same time recognizing all its faults. I vote to elect someone who will exercise their judgement on my behalf. They may elect others to take up more important roles who will make more important decisions including those like ratifying the Maastricht Treaty. If you don't like our system, then move to change it. To blame the EU for operating a similar system is poor logic. EU officials are appointed ultimately by the elected.
Referenda are a cop out. They can produce unwanted results with consequences that do not necessarily impact equally on those who vote. I have previously mentioned the effects of referenda on the state of bridges in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Another was the effect of referenda in California when I lived there over taxation. The results of these referenda was to impose higher taxation rates on newer house owners than those who already owned their houses and thus benefited from a fixed tax rate.
A recent BBC Radio 4 A Point of View by Roger Scruton last week (?), more eloquently made the case against referenda.
I have an email address than I can change the front end to an infinite collection of new addresses. They all return to the same mailbox. Anyone with an email like firstname.lastname@example.org can work out that there's probably a george1 and a george2, etc.
Jun 26, 2016 at 9:59 AMI also suggested a reason for the wording of the petition, can't see anything wrong with that reason.It should have been sorted out before the vote, by our Government, whose policy was to put it to the people, so each side should have had time to prepare, using some government resource and expertise, including constructive discussions with the Continentals, knowing the rules: not changing the rules, a la EU!
"Life is certainly going to be more complicated and stressful.It is the uncertainty that is stressful, due to the Government's unpreparedness: a Government that was headed up by a Remainer.
At the moment I'm mulling over what happens if the disparate group that make up the leave camp spend two arguing over what is best for the UK amongst themselves rather than negotiating the best deal with the EU.The Leave Camp are not disparate. They wanted to start formulating policy, goals and strategy, but Cameron stopped his ministers from engaging. UKIP, realising that time was of the essence, since Cameron was using his position and state resources to covertly campaign for Remain, started their own campaign. Similar untidiness occurred elsewhere, but it was amazing just how together the groups ended up, starting from many different positions on the political spectrum and without any 'establishment experts' available.
Much of the stress is due to a lack of understanding. For example, there are headlines that Hannan confirms that the changes will not bring down levels of immigration. The sky will fall in, or maybe not. It is a true statement, the changes will allow the government of the day to control immigration levels. The government could increase or decrease the levels, or let them remain the same. It will be up to the government of the day, elected by the voters of the day.
That's one headline, sorted and I am sure there will be many more to come, but it would save time if they had some substance.
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.