That referendum ...

[Amethyst]

Re: That referendum ...

I'd have voted for Maggie if I'd been old enough. If that helps

Weirdly Twitter isn't full of Brexiter's celebrating.... yesterday (and for weeks) it was full of people shouting VoteLeave VoteLeave - where are they today ? Sh*tting themselves probably. Like that woman on the BBC this morning who is scared and worried, who voted leave but 'didn't think it would count'.

( apols to those who are happy Brexiters btw )

[Amethyst]

Re: That referendum ...

As Cameron said and the Bank of England's Governor echoed, everything stays the same: Freedom of Movement of Goods; Services; Finances et cetera, operates as normal. Only after the invoking of Art 50 and the negotiations to the leave the EU will the law be affected.

As it stands any EU decision is automatically legally binding on the County Court to the Supreme Court. If there are two possible interpretations ie UK versus EU, then currently EU interpretation wins: 75% of UK cases lose in the ECJ, according to the Express. Yes in democratic countries such as the UK, the Supreme Court could still hear EU cases as it's likely to be entrenched as binding precedent to an extent in England/ Wales common law. However, the appeal courts in the UK do not, legally speaking, have to follow the precedents unless they're considered entrenched, they're then only persuasive authorities. The Supreme Court is the constitutional court of this country so it is the final say on whether existing ECJ case law is entrenched. In comparison human rights law is not as powerful as EU law in terms of the UK's sovereignty, a Parliament sovereignty.

I was more thinking about once we've fully left and art 50's done and dusted.

For now it's business as normal.

What I'm after really, is if we start cases now/next 6/12 months can we rely on ECJ decisions in those cases if they aren't actually going to get heard until after we have left fully ? Will they still carry persuasive weight?

[enaid]

Re: That referendum ...

I aint lol and I couldn't ever say I didn't vote leave (too many witnesses)
I am gutted at the pessimism of the remains and the petition for another go would cause a bloody revolution omho.
I think the EU has quite a few unhappy members and as far as Cameron's comment 'Lets be leaders not leavers' we are leaving and I believe we are the leaders in proving to the rest of the unhappy EU campers life goes on regardless.

[Crazy council]

Re: That referendum ...

i wanted to remain, but there are benefits and problems with both options,, and they probably stack up equally when the fogs cleared. I think our economy will take it after a roll

Am more worried about nationalism rising across the EU, Like the french blocking ports ect, the politicians can blindly hope that it will go this way, that way, but its how the people of that nation act that will be telling.

Also, its an unknown at the MO, the £ over the EURO , if the EURO collapses ( good chance ) the the £ and stearling will be fine. My worries over this are that the rest of the EU will be trying to devalue strearling the the £ to avoid the collaps of the EURO.

My predication... ( am being bold ) --- full re-negotiation

This will not lead to a split of the EU, it will lead to a full re-negotiation between all states, something much more fair that doesn't benefit the major nations

[Openlaw15]

Re: That referendum ...

I was more thinking about once we've fully left and art 50's done and dusted.

For now it's business as normal.

What I'm after really, is if we start cases now/next 6/12 months can we rely on ECJ decisions in those cases if they aren't actually going to get heard until after we have left fully ? Will they still carry persuasive weight?

The ECJ opinion is one of the most powerful institutions of the EU. I cannot see any changes from now, 2 years once art 150 has been invoked, another 2 years it's is 40 year history at least, another 1 or 2 for the UK system to adjust to the removal of EU authorities. I think the Member States will need a significant time of adjustment. In any event, to answer your question ECJ common law is not retro active ( i don't think it is or that would be discrimination, which is another pillar of the EU's treaties provisions), ie so you should be able to start a case now and ECJ having no deleterious (harmful) effect in existing ECJ law in the UK as i said not until around 5 years any way. Even the UK's common law is not retro-active, as i explained to Rob who subsequent found a relevant authority, except very rare constitution cases, ie public law, human rights, police situations etc (the cases Rob cited). So you should be quite fine to start a case now and it'll be heard in up to 2 years time. Consult an EU lawyer though as he will give you piece of mind.

[PAWS]

Re: That referendum ...

If we want a leader who admitted he was in favour of Capital punishment then go for Gove. If we want a leader who doesn’t feel he needs to get his facts right on the side of his campaign bus then vote for Boris and if you just want someone to stop a draft then go for May.
Things have already started to slide when you look at the footsie and the value of sterling. We will also see an immediate hold on foreign investment.
Unfortunately too many people assume this will only affect the ‘fat cats’ in the city and will never associate it with their jobs or pensions. Yep,our exports will be more competitive for a while but only because sterling is down and that is not a good thing! Anything we import will cost us more because of the exchange rate and that includes quite a lot of raw materials and food.

[wales01man]

Re: That referendum ...

We could have another referendum with the Question Do you want to stay in a common trading market with Europe without political and economic control or just leave.
Thinks it would be first option that would be my vote I thought that's what we voted for over 40 years ago

[Amethyst]

Re: That referendum ...

Cornwall regretting their decision already

Now that we know the UK will be leaving the EU we will be taking urgent steps to ensure that the UK Government protects Cornwall’s position in any negotiations.

We will be insisting that Cornwall receives investment equal to that provided by the EU programme which has averaged £60M per year over the last ten years.

– John Pollard, the Leader of Cornwall Council

http://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/...g-brexit-vote/

[PAWS]

Re: That referendum ...

Cornwall regretting their decision already

http://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/...g-brexit-vote/

And who will they complain to when they are told to get stuffed?

[Openlaw15]

Re: That referendum ...

If we want a leader who admitted he was in favour of Capital punishment then go for Gove. If we want a leader who doesn’t feel he needs to get his facts right on the side of his campaign bus then vote for Boris and if you just want someone to stop a draft then go for May.
Things have already started to slide when you look at the footsie and the value of sterling. We will also see an immediate hold on foreign investment.
Unfortunately too many people assume this will only affect the ‘fat cats’ in the city and will never associate it with their jobs or pensions. Yep,our exports will be more competitive for a while but only because sterling is down and that is not a good thing! Anything we import will cost us more because of the exchange rate and that includes quite a lot of raw materials and food.

We went through a bloody terrible recession in 2008 for several years. It will not be anywhere like that. The economy will balance when the markets realise the economy's safe. The markets just want stability, the UK Prime Minster, the Bank of England's governor, have conformed it's business as usual. It's just a temporary blip, sometime the economists are like lawyers in that they only see law or economics and not other things. I think they're blinded by existing models but not realising this is just a temporary blip.

[Openlaw15]

Re: That referendum ...

We could have another referendum with the Question Do you want to stay in a common trading market with Europe without political and economic control or just leave.
Thinks it would be first option that would be my vote I thought that's what we voted for over 40 years ago

17 out of 22 parts of Wales (3 million pop.) voted OUT; slight more than 50% for England (50 million plus population) did; but Scotland (5 million population approx.) had strong support for In. It's England that had the potential therefore to make or break the Br-exit referendum.

[Amethyst]

Re: That referendum ...

Joseph Rowntree Foundation statement

“The result of the EU referendum shows we cannot afford to return to business as usual for the poorest people and places across the UK.

For too long, areas that have traditionally been overlooked, particularly in the North of England, have been left behind as Britain’s economic growth is unequally shared.

The number one priority now has to be stabilising the economy as we know people and places on low incomes are most vulnerable to economic shocks.

We must look again at how prosperity is shared across the country, and work across party lines to comprehensively address the high levels of poverty in the UK.

The Prime Minister has set in train a programme of social justice reforms this country badly needs. The job for his successor is to continue that and go much further to ensure prosperity is shared by all parts of the country. We need long-term vision and leadership to get to grips with the root causes of poverty and improve people’s living standards.”

[PAWS]

Re: That referendum ...

At one stage the pound did drop to the same level as 1985 and that was before the true, full impact is felt.
It is estimated that the Government's coffers could be reduced by £44 billion per year as a result of economic slowdown. That will have a dramatic effect on public services and social welfare.

[Openlaw15]

Re: That referendum ...

Joseph Rowntree Foundation statement

The business economists forewarn a rise in mortgage interest rate. But yes poor families will always be worse off under capitalism. Not everyone can attain riches as if that were the cases many many would be rich or if everyone if were rich it means that they're not rich in relative terms.

[enaid]

Re: That referendum ...

You forgetting what we save on MEPs lol