scotland wants to end monarchy

Ok, I will try one more time and if this doesn’t succeed then I will just leave you guys to stick with whatever it was that your primary school teacher apparently explained to you many decades ago. Apparently, for some of us, whatever our primary teacher taught us is the pinnacle of understanding and is an unshakable truth.

Go to the “How Legislation Works” page in the attached government document. Scroll down to the “UK Parliament” subsection of the “Parliament and jurisdictions” section. Then go to the 2nd paragraph of that sub-section. You should have arrived at an explanation of Public and General Acts. Then either read that and accept that there are, indeed, laws that meet the description of UK laws (say, when one of these Public and General Acts applies to the whole UK,  as some of them do, including the tax legislation that I pointed at earlier), or just push it to one side and fall back on your “ ma primary teacher telt me” approach.

www.legislation.gov.uk/understanding-legislation

Here’s what it says if you choose to take my word for it rather than spend time following the route to the original source above.


“Public and General Acts passed by the UK Parliament provide laws for the whole of the UK (England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland). Separately Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have powers to make legislation solely for their own jurisdiction.”

No, the discussion was about whether there was such thing as UK Law. I provided a description of what is meant by that term and I provided a link to that source. You have never responded to that.

Instead you went down the 3 separate legal systems route ( which, like you, I have been aware of since my school days although almost certainly not primary school) and the requirement for any UK wide law to be adopted into the respective systems. I don’t think that I ever challenged that adoption process and I am happy enough to accept that that might be the case (although my understanding is that tax laws, for example, don’t have to go down that route). However, whether that happens or not is not the point. The point is that there are single instrument pieces of legislation passed by the UK Parliament (something that Jaydee seemed to focus on as being necessary to prove that there is UK law at one point in the exchanges - although it is very difficult to interpret what he says) that become law in all corners of the UK. That type of legislation meets the description of UK law in the link that I posted.

As for the content of your 2nd paragraph above, I presume that you are aiming that one at me. If so, then you have got a cheek, quite frankly. From what I have seen, you need to have a good look in the mirror.

Thomas

You obviously haven’t looked in that mirror yet. What was it you said about humility etc?

I have offered a description of what UK law is held to be and provided the source. There is nothing delusional about that.

I have then given examples of legislation (laws, if we are to accept the terminology in the UK government link above) that meet that description. Again, nothing delusional in that.

As for the middle section of your post, that is just in your mind. I have hardly posted any links and I have only discussed a couple of pieces of legislation, and even then only in terms of whether they qualified as UK law under the description that I rely on. I didn’t engage in any other dialogue on legislation, legislatures, or passing into a country’s laws (as you erroneously continue to describe constituent territories within the UK) with you because I didn’t and don’t consider any of the stuff that you posted on this relevant in the context of where the discussion had got to.

I don’t consider myself to have fallen flat on the last bit at all. I would have let myself down if I had allowed someone to accuse me of things that he demonstrates in such abundance himself and not have pointed this out to him.

Your last couple of lines are mostly gobbledygook to me but I note that you again make some sort of reference to Scots Law being preserved for all time under the Act of Union.. As I have already responded (although I haven’t checked) I accept that is what the Act says if you say that is so.

However, if you believe that the Act of Union must be honoured in respect of Scots Law being preserved for all time  (as you clearly do otherwise you wouldn’t have raised this point) then you must also believe that it must be honoured in other respects, including the requirement that the union with England must also be preserved for all time. Strangely (or maybe not) you have chosen just to ignore that inconvenient point rather than address it. That’s what comes from buying into and pursuing false and twisted narratives.

Hope you've had a good Hogmanay Morayloon, Happy New Year.

Well there you go. By your tacit agreement  , i accept your surrender , and we can finally see you do talk utter guff while wriggling on a hook.