Brexit means Brexit means....what??

[newcastle]

Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if Britain and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, "This was their finest hour."

It was a tongue-in-cheek remark (in line with earlier posts)....and I removed the reference to Empire to make it more "current".

I don't know whether Britain, or indeed the Commonwealth, will last a thousand years....but it's looking increasingly likely that they'll outlast the EU - which appears to be coming apart at the seams

Racism (perhaps xenophobia is a more accurate term) is, alas, a feature of human societies everywhere and whilst I don't think one should over-egg the matter, it seems to have featured in the minds of some of the voters, before, during and after the referendum vote - as several reported incidents testify.

Whether, and to what extent, if affected the outcome is impossible to tell.

[newcastle]

Well...who'd have thought it

The High Court rules that MP's (not the PM) should have the final say on Clause 50.

Now for the Supreme Court.

Probably a waste of time as even though many (probably a majority of) MP's are dubious about Brexit, they are unlikely to vote with their conscience . Too messy.

For some reason the public view on Brexit (as delivered by the referendum) is considered more valid than, say, the public view on the death penalty.

I have to say it will be a pity for the MP's NOT to exercise their OWN judgement...if only to explain to the public at large the true nature of our parliamentary democracy (i.e. that the electorate do not command parliament. They only have the right to select its members periodically.)

[Who2]

So much for democracy and so much for the will of the people.
Democracy last as long as it takes to put a X on a piece of paper.....
Ps: I didn't vote being on my holidays but always knew they would wriggle out of any decision they didn't like.

[newcastle]

Democracy? Very overrated IMO

China's doing well enough without it.

As for "the will of the people". Spare me.....

[Horus]

I have to say it will be a pity for the MP's NOT to exercise their OWN judgement...if only to explain to the public at large the true nature of our parliamentary democracy (i.e. that the electorate do not command parliament. They only have the right to select its members periodically.)

I would disagree, the referendum was done under an act of parliament to determine the wishes of the British people with regards to the EU and to give a mandate on continued membership with a clear understanding that article 50 would be triggered if the result was to leave. The British people gave their opinion and that opinion then has to implemented by the those in parliament who were elected to represent our wishes. If anyone wants to give the MPs the sole decision on this issue then a general election should be called and every MP regardless of political affiliation should say clearly in which way they would vote, either in or out, that would be democracy as they would stand or fall on their intentions.

[newcastle]

I have to say it will be a pity for the MP's NOT to exercise their OWN judgement...if only to explain to the public at large the true nature of our parliamentary democracy (i.e. that the electorate do not command parliament. They only have the right to select its members periodically.)

I would disagree, the referendum was done under an act of parliament to determine the wishes of the British people with regards to the EU and to give a mandate on continued membership with a clear understanding that article 50 would be triggered if the result was to leave. The British people gave their opinion and that opinion then has to implemented by the those in parliament who were elected to represent our wishes. If anyone wants to give the MPs the sole decision on this issue then a general election should be called and every MP regardless of political affiliation should say clearly in which way they would vote, either in or out, that would be democracy as they would stand or fall on their intentions.

With regard to the EU Referendum Act 2015 :

The act made no provision for the result to be legally binding on the government or on any future government. The result of the referendum was to be a single majority vote of the United Kingdom and Gibraltar with no super majorities, double majorities of the constituent countries or any minimum turnout threshold required for the vote to pass. The act did not specify any specific consequences that would follow the result of the referendum. In the event of a "Leave" vote, the government would decide whether, when, and under what circumstances, the UK would invoke Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union to begin a two-year process of negotiations for Britain to leave the EU. European Union law would remain enforceable in the United Kingdom unless the European Communities Act 1972 were repealed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... m_Act_2015

"...to give a mandate.......a clear understanding...?"

With respect...this might be your interpretation but it doesn't accord with the facts. The referendum was never stated to be binding.

The opinion of the electorate expressed in a referendum is not binding on parliament. This is not how our form of democracy operates. Parliament is sovereign.....according to everything I've read....and it appears the High Court agrees.

But don't worry....it's highly unlikely that MP's will vote against implementing Clause 50. What the parliamentary debates might expose is the sheer fatuousness of the pre-referendum posturing, to the embarrassment of the government - who have, even now, little idea of how to proceed

[Horus]

So our last referendum to stay in the EU was also only advisory?
Anyway I suppose it gives all you Remoaners something to cling onto in the vain hope that you can reverse a democratic "one man, one vote" result.

[newcastle]

Either the supreme court will reverse the high court decision....or parliament will be allowed to debate the issue of Brexit. Either way...we'll be out of EU at some point because MP's fear the consequences of going against public opinion whatever their personal convictions might be.

Honour will be satisfied as we trundle into the unknown......

Unless of course Ms. May decides "bugger it....let's have a General Election"

[Horus]

Unless of course Ms. May decides "bugger it....let's have a General Election"

I wish she would trigger a General Election and make implimenting the referendum result their only election plaform, at least everyone would have a chance to either change their minds or to make it very clear what their wishes were, maybe then the remoaners would just accept that they lost.

[Bombay]

Never going to happen.

[Horus]

What exactly? the enactment of article 50 or the parliamentary vote?
Interesting that 3 judges effectively over rule the wishes of 17.5 million people who voted to leave and even better still if the remoaners get their way we will also have an unelected House of Lords also sticking their oar in, democracy, what democracy?
And out of interest, as all MPs had a vote in the referendum, why should they also get a second one? are they more equal than the rest of us?

[newcastle]

Forgive me for being repetitive

In my view, and in the view of many lawyers. and , it appears, the High Court, the general public has no right to dictate to parliament how they should act. You may say it's not your interpretation of democracy.....but that's how it is and always has been! We elect MPs to represent us.....but not, necessarily, to simply rubber stamp our wishes. It's a system that has served us well for centuries. Government by referenda would be a nightmare.

The government , in debating the EU Referendum Act, said they would accept the decision of the public. Again. in my view, and the view of the High Court, they had no right to do so as it overrides parliamentary sovereignty . It's a fine legal point and if the Supreme Court decides to reverse the High Court judgement I, for one, will have no complaints. The buck stops with the highest court in the land....a body distinct from the legislature and politics.

As I've already said, the likelihood of parliament overturning the referendum vote is vanishingly small.

I'm not sure why the Brexiteers are so against the issues being debated. What are they afraid of?

I have a suspicion, no more than that, that many who voted to leave did so on emotive grounds....regaining 'sovereignty", dismay at the Brussels system, control of immigration etc.....with no reliable information regarding the price to be paid for leaving, and now would rather we just got on with it than have a closer look at the economic issues in case they show the decision to have been, on balance, a bad one.

[Major Thom]

Going tone interesting how this pans out.

[Horus]

Well I suppose we will have to agree to disagree in that one.

I'm not sure why the Brexiteers are so against the issues being debated. What are they afraid of?

Quite simple really, we have the current dictators of the EU namely Junkers and Tusk who have been to say the very least pedantic about refusing any discussions whatsoever before we implement article 50. Once this becomes just another political football (as it will) in the House of Commons, we will see every man and his dog demanding some concession or another, it will become a complete dogs breakfast. Although more to the point who in their right minds would go into negotiations with the EU after showing every card that they hold beforehand? Sheer madness. Once it gets debated to death by MPs not to mention Scotland making hay out of the situation we will be left with a list of demands that the EU negotiators will already have discussed in private and decided upon in advance without giving us the same courtesy. I now truly hope that Teresa May calls for a snap election with the article 50 implementation as the main election pledge, then we can all vote on the issue and end the legal chicanery that we are currently seeing as each day passes. Unlike the remoaners I will be happy to abide by the results of a general election, but I would also support any legal challenge to the legality of our being in the EU in the first place, that issue has never been fully exploited.

[Bombay]

there should be a second vote and anyone old enough to vote the first time round should be excluded ie anyone over 60 its younger peoples future they should decide. Not a load of old gits who think they got it wrong before.

Democracy in the UK is PARLIAMENT not referendums.

[Horus]

there should be a second vote and anyone old enough to vote the first time round should be excluded ie anyone over 60 its younger peoples future they should decide. Not a load of old gits who think they got it wrong before.

Democracy in the UK is PARLIAMENT not referendums.

And in your opinion democracy is deciding who gets to vote?

[newcastle]

I find some irony in the sight of Brexiteers arguing that one of the most important decisions of our lifetime - the nature of our relationship with Europe once we leave the EU - should not involve our sovereign parliament at all, but merely a cabal of government ministers and a hastily-cobbled -together team of negotiators.

Wasn't our loss of sovereignty to Brussels one of the key arguments of those that voted to leave?

[Horus]

Wasn't our loss of sovereignty to Brussels one of the key arguments of those that voted to leave?

It certainly was and by extension as our own government is subservient to the laws emanating from unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, then it cannot be deemed to be sovereign until it leaves the EU, so your argument does not hold water.

[Who2]

[quote="Bombay"]there should be a second vote and anyone old enough to vote the first time round should be excluded ie anyone over 60 its younger peoples future they should decide. Not a load of old gits who think they got it wrong before.

"Young people think old people are stupid, Old people know young people are stupid " Miss Marple.
You seem to fit the former camp... "Who am I to argue ? "Not me said, the Eskimo....

[newcastle]

Wasn't our loss of sovereignty to Brussels one of the key arguments of those that voted to leave?

It certainly was and by extension as our own government is subservient to the laws emanating from unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, then it cannot be deemed to be sovereign until it leaves the EU, so your argument does not hold water.

Our parliament can always, at any time, unilaterally cancel any legislation which, for the time being, gives Brussels primacy on any matter. In that sense, our parliament remains sovereign.

Brexiteers would withdraw the limited & temporary supremacy our parliament has ceded to Brussels and give it wholeheartedly to the hoi polloi. Sounds hypocritical to me!

I didn't realise I was debating with a Jesuit