This worries me:
So does this:
As I hope I made clear in a post yesterday, this decision was not about Brexit as such. It was about the right of parliament to decide upon issues affecting the well-being of people of this country. And what we now have is deliberate misrepresentation of that fact by major national newspapers. In the process they are implying that the judiciary are acting against the best interests of the people of this country when in fact all they are doing is making a decision on a case brought before them on the rather more straightforward issue of whether or not parliament must consent to changes in the law.
The implication of these headlines is that these papers are happy with rule by decree in this country. That is a route to the end of democracy. Is that where they really think we should be headed? If so we are in even deeper trouble than I previously thought and the need for those who believe in democracy to stand up and be counted is even more urgent than I suggested yesterday.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Every time the papers eschew the reporting of news in favour of the promotion of their own polemics, it seems to me that they forfeit their entitlement to be treated as news media, and instead become a particular (and rather perverse) type of entertainment. Should they therefore not lose their entitlement to be exempt from VAT? By what reasoning are they allowed to dodge this tax? HMRC says this (VAT notice 710/10) “…Publications which do not contain a substantial amount of news are not newspapers…”. Just a thought.
I like it….
Tristram
I agrre wholeheartedly, and I think your “just a thought” ought in fact to be taken-up in deadly earnest because these so-called newspapers are getting away with fraudulent misselling of their goods.
But who would decide if something was news or not and hence subject to VAT …..
… The judiciary … lol
For good or ill, Parliament voted (by a massive majority) that a referendum should be held to determine the will of the people in regard to whether UK stay in, or leave, the EU.
Parliament, I repeat, decided. Question: remain or leave? No strings attached.
Answer:- leave.
So what is this faffing-about with asking Parliament if it actually meant what it decided? It decided. Full-stop.
Let’s please at least be honest. What we are seeing are delaying-tactics by those on the losing side in the referendum calculated to obstruct and string-out by every possible means the carrying-out by the govt of the decision that was made in the hope that by those means the decision made by the referendum will in effect be nullified. and the eventual outcome will be that the will of the *minority* will overturn that of the majority.
The judges had the unenviable task of trying to interpret the law where no law exists. Maybe or maybe not, within the remit they had their decsion was technically correct; the Supreme Court will decide that one way or the other. I think it is totally irresponsible of papers like the Mail and the Telegraph to attack the judges in the way they are doing.
But to pretend that wilful obstruction is morally justified on the part of a disaffected minority who invoked the law solely in pursuit of their own partisan purposes is sheer cant. It is opportunism pure and simple.
This is utter nonsense
I will write a blog on Brexit as divorce to explain why
The referendum was advisory. So – it moves back to parliament – who have been duly “advised”. Which bit of that don’t you get? Or do you trust May & the three halfwits? & what about the people that want to remain in the EU? What about them? – or don’t they count?
The right wing press have been a cancer in the heart of Britain for many years and have been gradually becoming more virulent. I has expected they would not like the High Courts decision yesterday, which I though was sensible, reasonable and cast iron.
The response has been hysterical, self contradictory and in my view treasonable.
From the Express:
“Today this country faces a crisis as grave as anything since the dark days when Churchill vowed we would fight them on the beaches.”
“Truly, November 3 2016 was the day democracy died.”
I presume this has been reported correctly as I don’t buy the right wing press as a matter of principle.
Truly my anger over the Brexit referendum increases rather than decreases. I definitely want to stand up and be counted, but don’t really know how. I have let my Labour Party membership lapse. I could forgive the Lib Dems and join which might electorally be fairly sensible, or the Greens which are much closer to my viewpoint but get nowhere in Northumberland.
The mantra of doing the will of the British people with a close 52-48% result on a supposedly advisory referendum is frighting. Returning to Dublin seems even more attractive this morning.
Please fight
Keep Dublin as a back stop
The offer of employment I have in Europe is my back stop
But I will never not want the UK (with or without Scotland) to work
Indeed not. I absolutely want the UK to succeed but it seems to be going down the path of 1930’s Germany. I’m sure the end point will be very different. Few seem to remember that Britain was considered to be the poor man of Europe before we joined the EU.
I am disappointed with the Telegraph, I thought it was a naive and stupid newspaper and an Irish 3 year old would have had a greater understanding of the Northern Ireland situation; on which it was editorially consistently inept. It had in my eyes today at least some integrity – a bit like my view of some of the old Republicans in the US. After this headline however I class it a gutter press along with the Telegraph and Express. Sorry I am still hopping mad
And rightly so
The parallels with Germany following 1933 become ever more apparent, as the right wing press descend further into the sewer, with this utter rubbish. Goebbels would be at home writing for these rags. Cameron’s gutlessness in not forcing through stiff press regulation a la Levenson is yet another of his failures as a PM.
I think it’s time that the all those involved in these vile publications come under personal attack on popular media. Name and shame them; they deserve a dose of their own medicine.
Maybe its time to pay Dacre a visit – or indeed Rothermere – in his French chateau – make life uncomfortable for them – after all Dacre and his owners have incited people to acts of violence – apparently a Polish woman was attacked on the tube today – because she was Polish.
There you go – this is why I wanted us to leave asap – get it over with. I knew this would happen and its going to be horrible.
I know that you are not too keen on press regulation Richard but the above is an absolute disgrace – it’s irresponsibility of a breathtaking level.
The respective editors of these rags need to be escorted from their orifices (yes – ‘orifices’) by military escort and frog marched into Parliament to explain themselves. This is nothing but incitement.
If a trades union behaved like this they’d be in trouble.
As you can tell I’m beside myself – I’m FUMING. How can they get away with it? They must not. It has to stop now.
Depressing I agree, but I just knew these people would fight dirty. Give them an inch and they take a mile. Even after the phone tapping revelations (and a lot of that was quite sickening), they continue unrestricted. There as a good drama/documentary about the landlord (Jefferies) framed for the murder of Joanna Yates. Chilling was my feeling about how Jefferies was treated, it could happen to any one of us.
“As you can tell I’m beside myself — I’m FUMING.”
You’re told lots by politicians in every manifesto printed. None of it is binding. None of the referendum documentation was binding.
Because there is no way to bind politicians in the UK. All you can do is put your X next to a different name next time.
To override politicians you have to use EU law 🙂
Agreed 100% Richard. I was totally shocked to see those – and other similar – headlines today:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/04/enemies-of-the-people-british-newspapers-react-judges-brexit-ruling
With a (so-called) press like this (which I note now includes even the Telegraph), for whom facts are clearly optional, is it any surprise that 52% voted for Brexit?
Worrying times indeed.
I saw that Guardian piece after I wrote mine
But it does no harm to have multiple voices on the issue
‘It does no harm’?
I disagree.
The sort of over the top portrayal of matters as seen in the Mail and Telegraph above lead to results like Jo Cox. Remember her?
Although I agree that to have a variance in opinion is OK, if those opinions are not expressed in a rational manner or point the finger as they are doing here then that cannot tolerated at all. It’s incitement.
Last night on Channel 4 news they interviewed people in the constituency where that Tory MP had just resigned. Already people interviewed were talking about the Judges involved in this correct decision. So already this sick perverted way of presenting the news is winding people up.
PSR – I think you may have misunderstood Richard’s comment? At least as I understood it, the “multiple voices” he referred to were simply his and the Guardian’s to which I had provided a link.
The latest Guardian editorial make its position on this very clear: “the response to the courts threatens to undermine the bedrock of a democratic society”. And how! What we are seeing is chilling indeed and the fact that no-one in the government – neither the Lord Chancellor nor the PM (who seems well on her way to becoming Europe’s newest dictator) – has seen fit to speak out to defend the judiciary is perhaps the most worrying of all. Where is the country heading?
Hell, in a hand cart with a flat tyre
I like it, too. What is the definition of “substantial” these days, given that “overwhelming” means 4%?
Good question
I don’t get what all the fuss is about. The wording in the referendum was not “We instruct whoever happens to be Prime Minister at the time to leave the EU on whatever terms he or she chooses regardless of the damage it causes and without regard to parliament”.
We are luckier than most people, we live in a representative democracy. Isn’t this precisely what the massive, vast, substantial, overwhelming majority voted for – taking back control (not vesting all power in one absolute ruler)?.
I am not sure I follow your logic
The first para was true
There was a tiny majority
And massive ambiguity left which it is necessary that parliament address
And the Court has ruled that parliament should be involved in that decision making
That’s it
There’s a much more truthful version of the Daily Mail front page here
https://twitter.com/J_VoiceUK
One of the key goals of the Leave campaign was to return sovereignty to the British Parliament. This is what happened and Jacob Rees-Mogg and Nigel Farage will have to get used to it. This enormous mandate was in fact a majority of under 1.3 million out of the 33.5 million who voted so under 2% of the British population. It is clear that the promises on both sides were substantially hot air. Therefore it is right and proper that Parliament have a say in the direction that these negotiations will take. Theresa May’s government clearly has very little idea of what to do. After the negotiations it is likely that Parliament would again want its approval of the arrangements. If there is a feeling that this really does not reflect the will of the country then that is the time to have another referendum. When Nigel Farage, expecting to lose the referendum was interviewed he said that if there was a 52-48 outcome there would be unfinished business and pressure for a second referendum. That is what we have. We do not want Brexit to be the Titanic success that Boris Johnson promised. The Titanic is deep under the ocean complete with its Captain. We want Brexit to be a genuine success for everyone in the UK and not just the far right of the Tory government.
Agreed
And we may even want the chance to change our minds, although we may not do so
We’ll have our own version of Trump very soon. They are right on one thing though, democracy is indeed virtually dead, killed by this hideous right wing press.
Not only do they contaminate the nationals, but many local papers are part of the same stable.
Another take re this reaction that the judiciary had opposed the will of ‘the people’ i.e. the 52% that voted for Brexit, or as I heard quoted they have gone against 33 million people.
Well actually it could be said that what they’ve done is stood up for the 48% – 30 million ish, which is a lot of people – who didn’t vote for Brexit 🙂
I assume you think the same about double taxation treaties then 🙂
http://judicialpowerproject.org.uk/john-finnis-terminating-treaty-based-uk-rights-a-supplementary-note/
I see no parallel at all
That is pure fantasy
Double tax treaties are revoked by prerogative and thereby directly remove rights from citizens.
But there is an even worse argument. There is the the directional argument. It appears that the Crown can restrict rights by Royal Prerogative when it accepts EU regulations in the council of ministers (that is the effect of ECA 1972), but when it activates a pre-existing provision in the EU Treaty it can’t. That is inconsistent.
TBH I think the decision is a good thing even if wrong.
Oh come on: they’re not introduced by statute either
The description of three senior judges making a valid if arguable decision as “Enemies of the People” is chilling. This is the language of Stalin and Hitler. (for once I think the Hitler reference is valid).
Once the room for peaceful disagreement is removed you create a society run purely on the basis of force. And of course one of the first thing totalitarians do on taking power is to remove an independent judiciary.
Good to see Richard Burgon and Lord Falconer standing shoulder to shoulder on this. It will be interesting to see if Liz Truss or Theresa May mount a defence of judicial independence or decide to give Paul Dacre’s most sensitive feature a kiss instead.
We must all (even the non believers)pray for Hillary Clinton !
You are right: on this occasion the reference to Hitler is appropriate
Not sure if you can publish, but I like this https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bye-rupert/ehdikikkfbfjjemfadgggcohkjoggoof
There have been multiple comments comparing the UK now to the rise of fascism in Germany in the 30ies. Let me add that Germany does not have referendums today on the federal level because referendums have been misused back then to destroy democracy. In this context it is telling to see how, by decarling the judges to be enemies of the people, the referendum is used now in the UK to attack the foundations of democracy.
Oh yes