Whitey Grandad

Yes, I certainly did for decisions which involve a major constitutional change. As is the case in many countries, for example Australia has compulsory voting and: 'Any alteration to the Consitution must be approved by a 'double majority', that is: a national majority of electors (more than half the voters in Australia must vote YES); and a majority of electors in a majority of the States (i.e. at least four of the six) (more than half the voters in more than half the States must vote YES)' And a discussion here about Ecuador: http://aceproject.org/electoral-advice/archive/questions/replies/572011840 Now I am well aware that we are neither of these countries but British democracy does not have a tradition of holding referendums for major decisions. The practicality of the situation is that Parliament is sovereign and has to make the ultimate decision. From what I had heard before the referendum many people did not have a clear idea about what they were voting for and were confused about the possible outcomes. Yes, one big clusterf*ck.

If the EU don't offer an arrangement that we can agree to the we fall back on WTO rules. We have no say in what they will offer, it is purely take it or leave it. If this doesn't convince you of the need for EU access then it should: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/745d0ea2-222d-11e6-9d4d-c11776a5124d.html#axzz4CmUmF1BC "A WTO analysis had calculated the cost of the additional tariffs on goods imports to British consumers at £9bn, while British merchandise exports would be subject to a further £5.5bn in tariffs at their destination." This from February: http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit01.pdf This from the Leavers themselves: http://leavehq.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=128 And: http://www.freshfields.com/en/global/Britain_and_the_EU/home/ And finally the Telegraph from 14th June: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/what-would-brexit-mean-for-british-trade/ These WTO tariffs range from 32 per cent on wine, to 4.1 per cent on liquefied natural gas, with items like cars (9.8 per cent) and wheat products (12.8 per cent) somewhere in between.

You now this for a fact? OMG another ITK.

His replacement might have scored three. Yes, it was a great result but there were also games where he went missing and fluffed some easy sitters.

Unbelievable arrogance. Do you have any idea how international trade works? Do you know how much these tariffs are?

The big difference between a referendum and an election is that the former is advisory and the second definitive. The enabling act for this one did not make the result compulsory. It is up to parliament to implement and interpret 'the will of the people' which in this instance is not decisively clear majority. Farage said this before and Boris has said it yesterday.

I have consistently maintained that for a constitutional change there should be a much bigger margin than 50%. If not then the outrage will continue as Farage stated well before the vote..

Intra-community dealings do not normally attract VAT. I don't know about personnel contracts but it is certainly true of goods which is one reasonwhy the Single Market is so important to us.Items such as cars, boats and planes are different. 'm sure they would like VAT to apply but they couldn't agree over who should receive it. For example, if you had paid VAT to one country would you then be able to claim it back from your own?

I'm pretty sure that they are unless you're Portsmouth who argued that they didn't have to hand over any of the VAT that they received from player sales. That was part of the claim against them.

Let's be honest, who had heard of him two years ago?

Like a t**d that won't go away?

They would say that, wouldn't they. Or they could be right.

I'm more concerned about his replacement to be honest.

2011 is irrelevant. This was not an election it was a referendum. The enabling Act did not specify that the result was binding. It could have but it didn't.

I, for one, have always respected you for your service.

That principle was for general elections. Whatever you might want this referendum was 'advisory' and not binding as was the one in 2011 where the outcome was written into the relevant Act. Advisory in the sense that it is up to parliament to interpret and implement its result. That is the stage at which the actual democracy takes place.

Sorry to disappoint you but the choice is not ours. This will be a take it or leave it situation.

Not very hopeful is it. Let's just dismiss it as part of Project Fear and hope for the best shall we.

Dead men walking. No authority, no power, nowhere men.

He did. The plan was to resign.

Very true. The current situation is not good for democracy as we have seen.

Whilst Osborne has been locked in a dark room with a loaded revolver?

The situation regarding EU membership is unclear to say the least. Previously they would have left the UK and would have had to apply as a new state. At the moment they are part of the UK and if there was separation it could be argued that they are already a member and that it was England etc that were leaving. Nobody knows but you can bet your boots that discreet enquiries will be taking place at the moment. In any case EU membership is just the trigger for their ambitions. This will be seen as yet another case of England telling them what to do.

The petition was set up in May apparently, not that many people knew about it.

What's to stop the Scots holding their own referendum without Westminster's permission? Imagine what would happen if London said no.