|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 30, 2023 11:45:20 GMT
First things first: Do you deny claiming that the golden rule of the constitution is that one parliament can't bind another? evidence darling.? link ? anything? Okay. Do you deny that the golden rule of the constitution is that one parliament can't bind another? You know that it can't. So, to distract attention from your claim that the Act of Union can't be changed, you're now demanding that I read through pages of your posts. Good luck with that, Toejam. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 30, 2023 11:46:12 GMT
LOL! You know very well that you wrote at length about how one parliament can't bind another. i have no idea what you are talking about hence why im asking you to show us a link or evidence ? over to you? We could make it very simple. We could avoid the need for either of us to read through pages of your bs. Just answer one question: can one parliament bind another? |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 30, 2023 11:46:35 GMT
evidence darling.? link ? anything? Okay. Do you deny that the golden rule of the constitution is that one parliament can't bind another? You know that it can't. So, to distract attention from your claim that the Act of Union can't be changed, you're now demanding that I read through pages of your posts. Good luck with that, Toejam. ok , so its made up claim after made up claim without any evidence in a game of last wordism?
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 30, 2023 11:48:38 GMT
i have no idea what you are talking about hence why im asking you to show us a link or evidence ? over to you? We could make it very simple. We could avoid to need for either of us to read through pages of your bs. Just answer one question: can one parliament bind another? i havent the foggiest idea what you are talking about darling , and im not sure you do either. If you make a claim , then generally its considered good form to back that claim up. The fact you cant speaks volumes.
What parliaments are you talkin about? In what context?
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 30, 2023 11:48:39 GMT
Okay. Do you deny that the golden rule of the constitution is that one parliament can't bind another? You know that it can't. So, to distract attention from your claim that the Act of Union can't be changed, you're now demanding that I read through pages of your posts. Good luck with that, Toejam. ok , so its made up claim after made up claim without any evidence in a game of last wordism?
Can one parliament bind another? If not, the Act of Union can be changed. So, your claim that the legal system in Scotland can't be changed because it is set out in the Act of Union is just more bs. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 30, 2023 11:49:14 GMT
We could make it very simple. We could avoid to need for either of us to read through pages of your bs. Just answer one question: can one parliament bind another? i havent the foggiest idea what you are talking about darling , and im not sure you do either. If you make a claim , then generally its considered good form to back that claim up. The fact you cant speaks volumes.
What parliaments are you talkin about? In what context?
Right. Support your claim that the Act of Union can't be changed, then. Good luck with that. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 30, 2023 11:49:35 GMT
ok , so its made up claim after made up claim without any evidence in a game of last wordism?
If not, the Act of Union can be changed. So, your claim that the legal system in Scotland can't be changed because it is set out in the Act of Union is just more bs. ok. Prove it? |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 30, 2023 11:50:30 GMT
If not, the Act of Union can be changed. So, your claim that the legal system in Scotland can't be changed because it is set out in the Act of Union is just more bs. ok. Prove it? Prove what? That one parliament can't bind another? Go Google it. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 30, 2023 11:51:53 GMT
i havent the foggiest idea what you are talking about darling , and im not sure you do either. If you make a claim , then generally its considered good form to back that claim up. The fact you cant speaks volumes.
What parliaments are you talkin about? In what context?
Right. Support your claim that the Act of Union can't be changed, then. Good luck with that. the fact that in 316 years it has never been changed sort of gives the game away. You implied the acts of union could be changed to say for example do away with the scottish legal system. Its down to you to prove they can do this , not me.
The status quo has prevailed for three centuries.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 30, 2023 11:53:25 GMT
Prove what? That one parliament can't bind another? Go Google it. you linked this claim to me , in your fevered imagination , and all im asking is for you to provide some proof i said this , or what context i used it in. I think you are telling porkies darling myself .
Give me a bit of substance to work with here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 30, 2023 11:55:32 GMT
Prove what? That one parliament can't bind another? Go Google it. you linked this claim to me , in your fevered imagination , and all im asking is for you to provide some proof i said this , or what context i used it in. I think you are telling porkies darling myself .
Give me a bit of substance to work with here.
One parliament cannot bind another. The parliament that legislated the Act of Union cannot bind a modern Parliament. Therefore, any provisions giving Scottish courts the right to make law in the Act of Union can be repealed. Westminster could only repeal a law that applies to Scotland if there was a UK-wide law. Therefore, your claim that there isn’t UK-wide law is completely and utterly incorrect. |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Jul 30, 2023 11:59:05 GMT
You are correct there is no such thing as a written British Constitution The UK is often said to have an ‘unwritten’ constitution. This is not strictly correct. It is largely written, but in different documents. But it has never been codified, brought together in a single document. In this respect, the UK is different from most other countries, which have codified constitutions. As for Laws yes Scotland makes its own Laws as you stated going back many years, NI makes its own Laws, England and Wales are combined thanks handyman . We dont always agree , but its nice to see honesty during the course of debate.
something our spotty nosed teenager doesnt appear to understand.
thats what i thought. Obviously another fantasy darling invented in his bedroom of his mums flat.
That is what debate is all about, sadly some do not understand that simple fact |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 30, 2023 12:05:49 GMT
you linked this claim to me , in your fevered imagination , and all im asking is for you to provide some proof i said this , or what context i used it in. I think you are telling porkies darling myself .
Give me a bit of substance to work with here.
One parliament cannot bind another. The parliament that legislated the Act of Union cannot bind a modern Parliament. Therefore, any provisions giving Scottish courts the right to make law in the Act of Union can be repealed. Westminster could only repeal a law that applies to Scotland if there was a UK-wide law. Therefore, your claim that there isn’t UK-wide law is completely and utterly incorrect. the act of union isnt a parliament that is binding another parliament. Its a treaty that created the united kingdom. The very bedrock that the whole uk sits on.
Thats what holds the uk togather , and the fact the so called sovereign uk parliament hasnt dared tinker with those acts in three centuries tells us the truth of what im saying.
If it could, it could do away with the scottish legal system , laws , education system and create a uk wide system that would make you comfortable in your pronouncements and of course more correct when you talk of uk law. Im not aware of too many so called countires arounf the world that have differing legal systems , or dont even issue basic things like brith certificates.
you admitted earlier there wasnt a uk wide law , and now you backtrack again?
you can legislate as a uk lawmaker on reserved matters for example in westmsinter , but those are then passed into scottish law. Hence there is no uk wide law. Its not a difficult principle to understand darling.
why do you think there is always a scotland act ? for example the creation of the nhs in scotland was passed by uk lawmakers , who legisalted into scottish law using a seperate (scotland ) act compared to the english and welsh one in 1947?
If there was one uk wide law ,you wouldnt need seperate acts ?
This is basic stuff that goes back to 1707 . It should be widely understood and accepted , and the fact this isnt is shocking dereliction of education and awareness.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jul 30, 2023 12:08:15 GMT
My words on page 10 I wouldn't use your words but yes banking is an essential service, just like water and power.
Do you remember how many years the government fought to get the banks to offer a basic bank account to everyone and how pathetic they were.Now wind your neck in you lying arsehole. LOL! What was that about black pots, Drippy? 🤣 LOL! LOL! Bout sums you up. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 30, 2023 12:09:31 GMT
you linked this claim to me , in your fevered imagination , and all im asking is for you to provide some proof i said this , or what context i used it in. I think you are telling porkies darling myself .
Give me a bit of substance to work with here.
One parliament cannot bind another. sure thats a given of modern democracy. Whats controversial ?
dear god above. It wasnt a single parliament that legisalted on the acts of union , but two parliaments in two countries.
|
|
