TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

90% of homeless rough sleepers are men. 10% are women. Worthing Council wants to criminalise them all. Please sign an online petition:
https://www.change.org/p/stop-criminali ... 64DhSd4%3D

Brexit: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/133618

To be quite honest G/S these government website petitions are a first class waste of time, there not even debated in parliament, they get discussed in some back room sub-committee and most, if not all go no where.

I understand what you're saying Forever, but at least they're noted, and if the Government received a petition signed by (say) a couple of million signatories asking for the referendum vote to be ignored, as opposed to (say) 200,000 in favour of immediate Brexit, you cannot be sure they will have no influence, particularly if the Government is in two minds or is already equally influenced both ways.

Gullscorer wrote:Brexit: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/133618

Incitement to commit a criminal offence is .... a criminal offence. Looks like over 60,000 could be in the dock already. If Article 50 were invoked by the Prime Minister (and we haven't got one at the moment) using their Executive powers he or she would be breaking the law. Membership of the EU is enshrined in legislation, and the only way that can be superceded is by legislation. So, the law has to be framed, it has to be debated in the House of Commons in the normal way, voted for and then sent to the House of Lords for scrutiny. That is a democratic system. A democratic system is not a crowd of people shouting that they voted in a referendum (which actually has no legal basis) so things must happen immediately. Of course the UK will leave the EU. In a democratic country that is what should happen. We also surely want to plan properly the way we are going to proceed so that those charged with that onerous responsibility obtain the best possible situation for the future of our country? Things might also move a bit quicker if the leading lights of the Brexit campaign had not already scuttled away like rats leaving a sinking ship (other than Andrea Leadsome who impressed me greatly with her mature arguments during the referendum debates).

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

First, a look in the dictionary will tell you that a petition is not an incitement, and in a court of law you'd not have a hope in hell of proving that it is.

Secondly, it can legitimately be argued that ultimate sovereignty in the UK lies with the people, i.e. the electors, not with the politicians, nor with the Government, nor with Parliament. Indeed, Parliament confirmed the people's sovereignty by passing legislation to seek the decision of the people regarding EU membership, in the European Referendum Act 2015.

Thirdly, no further Act of Parliament is required to authorise the Government to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. The European Referendum Act 2015 makes no provision for the result to be legally binding on the government or on any future government due to the generally accepted principle of parliamentary sovereignty (ignoring the fact that, as mentioned above, ultimate sovereignty lies with the people). However, there is nothing in the Act to say the referendum result does not grant the Government authority and permission to initiate the Brexit process should it decide to do so. The Government can indeed do so without further reference to Parliament, simply because the passing of the European Referendum Act 2015 confirms the people's sovereignty in the matter. No further Act of Parliament is needed.

No further act of parliament required to begin process, one might be needed to end though.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... awyers-say

That Guardian article smacks of a desperate clutching of straws by its journalists and their pro-EU friends in academia and the law, relying as they do on the opinion of the French Government legal service.

It can be argued that the repeal of the European Communities Act 1972 is implied by the 'Leave' decision of the 2016 referendum, since the European Referendum Act 2016 effectively cedes sovereignty in the matter to the British electorate, and therefore no further reference to Parliament need be made.

Indeed, it could be argued that the European Communities Act 1972 is itself unlawful since the decision in such constitutional matters was not put directly to the British people in whom the ultimate sovereignty resided.

The EEA option is almost certainly a non-starter, because a majority in the referendum made it clear that free and uncontrolled movement of people into the UK must end. Any attempt to back-track in the negotiations would have serious consequences for British politics and society. Better to leave with no agreement at all, which would mean trading under WTO rules. And even in that situation we would be better off outside the EU.

Balderdash

Blackadder..

Please sign this petition*: https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ ... -davies-mp

* you.38degrees.org.uk has taken down this petition to promote Philip Davies MP, but continues to allow the petition by man-hating feminists calling for his sacking.

There can be no clearer demonstration of the corrupting influence and evil power of feminism, insidiously embedding itself in all areas of society: what these Marxist totalitarian ideologues could not achieve by revolution they are now attempting by stealth, manipulation, mis-representation, and outright opposition to the issues adversely affecting men and boys. Which rather supports Philip Davies' case. And feminists still talk about equality!

Davies' speech is available to view via the icmi16 link here: https://icmi16.wordpress.com/2016/07/21 ... davies-mp/

Please sign the petition here:
shttps://www.change.org/p/theresa-may-mp-approve ... -davies-mp

And this one. It has long been known that women carry out a significant proportion of sexual offences against men, women, and children, but the criminal justice system turns a blind eye to the matter. Please sign the petition to amend the law (drafted by feminists) on rape: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/167582

All petitions: https://petition.parliament.uk/

Dump Kelloggs: if you serve any Kellogg's products at breakfast, you are serving up bigotry to your family:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... breitbart/
http://www.breitbart.com/dumpkelloggs/

Petition supporting the state visit of President Trump: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/178844

This is a genuine petition representing the whole country, whereas the anti-Trump petition
(https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928) has 'signatories' mainly from London and a few university cities: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/01 ... ignatures/

The anti-Trump petition is fraudulent: the Government software used for these petitions does not check your IP address; if you use a VPN which records your IP address from servers in the US and Netherlands and Germany or wherever you want, every time it accepts different email addresses and you can set many different email addresses if you choose. Somebody wrote a script and used this and a bot to make the record number of votes opposing Trump’s visit . There's no way these protests could have been organized so quickly without this, and without lots of funding from somewhere!

Remove Sadiq Khan as mayor of London: https://www.change.org/p/british-govern ... -of-london