Brexit under threat

What was the point of voting if it can be reversed?

Bet the luvvies and handwringers will be jumping up and down now, wetting themselves with excitement.

Had it been the other way round, nothing would've changed. Can we have another vote to kick conservative out of government and put UKIP in, no chance!

If its changed then I wont vote no more. This country is becoming a Dictatorship.

It won't be reversed. They'll have to have another vote and all the same people will vote "out".

Ahh ok, thanks Eddie.

eddie wrote:It won't be reversed. They'll have to have another vote and all the same people will vote "out".

They'll avoid another vote at all costs - the aim is business as usual, in other words soft-Brexit, same old, same old but with the people believing their voice matters.

It's been good for the pound:

The pound jumped to an almost one-month high against the dollar on Thursday after a U.K. high court ruled the government can’t trigger the Brexit process without approval from parliament.

In what is seen as one of the nation’s most important constitutional cases in decades, the court said Prime Minister Theresa May does not alone have the power to trigger the so-called Article 50 that kicks off negotiations with the European Union, meaning she must put it up for a vote in parliament.

The government has said it will appeal the verdict, according to media reports.

Sterling GBPUSD, +1.0730% spiked after the decision, trading as high as $1.2495, its highest level since early October, according to FactSet data. The pound exchanged hands at $1.2302 late Wednesday in New York. The pound further got a boost from the Bank of England keeping rates on hold and signaling there will no more easing in 2016.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/pound-leaps-after-court-delivers-blow-to-uks-brexit-plan-2016-11-03

I also disagree that the referendum would go the same now -- a lot of people voted for it as a protest, thinking it wouldn't pass, and a lot of other people didn't vote who didn't want Brexit. There are also those who saw what happened after the measure passed and have probably changed their minds.

The voting cards are Legal and binding too. I wish I could remember what mine said but something about it being passed or agreed by parliament..?

If Parliament don't pass it, they will be going against the will of the people of the UK. If an MP votes against Brexit in an area where the majority voted to leave, that could affect their chances of being re-elected.

eddie wrote:The voting cards are Legal and binding too. I wish I could remember what mine said but something about it being passed or agreed by parliament..?

No they weren't, the referendum was always non-binding and advisory.

Still, the general agreement is that the Brexit vote was not legally binding: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-result-not-legally-binding-lawyers-letter-a7129626.html

The people have spoken but Parliament has the final say.

The people speaking...

And the weaseling continues...



Article 50 is just an announcement to the eu of our intention to leave the eu... the govt has every right to make this formal announcement to the eu after the British people have given the clear instruction in the referendum.


Not only was it a majority of people who voted to leave... but it was an even larger majority of uk constituencies that returned a leave vote...

"...John Mills, the Labour donor and Brexit backer, has also responded to the verdict.

I find it inconceivable that MPs would take a stand against the clear wishes of their own constituents - especially in the 70 per cent of Labour constituencies that voted Leave.

Many MPs may well have voted Remain but they are aware that they represent the people in their area and, in my view, they have a duty to reflect those people’s majority view.

Labour voters chose Leave because the EU is bad for working people, their families and their future. Nothing has changed since the referendum..."




Courts cannot frustrate the will of the British people
John Baron, the Conservative MP for Basildon and Billericay, has issued this is response to the Court's judgement.

The High Court’s decision must not be allowed to frustrate the will of the British people, which was clearly expressed in the referendum result.

It was made clear by the Government at the time that the referendum result would be respected by the political establishment.

David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn both said they would invoke Article 50 the day after a Brexit result. People voted in the referendum on this basis. We will man the barricades if the result is not respected.”

If the Supreme Court upholds this ruling, MPs must therefore not hinder the Government’s invocation of Article 50.

The electorate will rightly punish their elected representatives if they block the decision made by over 17 million people on 23rd June.



11:47am
EU vote was a 'binding decision'
Iain Duncan Smith, the former Work and Pensions Secretary, has just told Sky News: "It’s not the position of the courts to tell Parliament or the government at that stage how the process works.

"That’s not advisory. It’s absolutely clear that decision was a binding decision.

"What are we asking for? We’re asking for Parliament to have the opportunity to overturn that decision by the British people.

"That is a constitutional crisis - literally pitting Parliament against the will of the people."



David Davis said...


"The people have spoken on this we've got the biggest mandate in history, the result of the referendum must be respected.

"Parliament voted by 6 to 1 to give the decision to the people no ifs or buts and that's why we are appealing this to get on with delivering the best deal for Britain, the best deal for growth, the best deal for investment, the best deal for jobs. The people want us to get on with this and that's what we intend to do.

"The judges have laid out what we can't do but not exactly what we can do, but we're presuming it requires an act of parliament therefore both the Commons and the Lords.

"The first thing to say is this was the decision of the British people that decision was taken after a 6 to 1 vote in the commons to give the decision to the British people so that's why we're appealing it and we're appealing it intending to win that appeal so we can deliver the best deal for Britain... that's what the government is about; delivering the mandate the people laid down in the best way in the best national interest.

"Well parliament is sovereign, has been sovereign but of course the people are sovereign, the people are the ones parliament represents, 17.4m of them, the biggest mandate in history, voted for us to leave the EU and we're going to deliver on that mandate in the best way possible for the British national interest ... and we're going to do that, the people want us to get on with it and that's what we're going to do.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/03/high-court-to-rule-on-brexit-legal-battle-and-theresa-mays-decis/#update-20161103-1435

Ben Reilly wrote:Still, the general agreement is that the Brexit vote was not legally binding: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-result-not-legally-binding-lawyers-letter-a7129626.html

The people have spoken but Parliament has the final say.

Whether you agree with Brexit result or not, it's not a wise move on the part of the government to go against the majority of its people.

Makes you wonder why the government didn't check the legal status of the Brexit vote beforehand, then announce whethwr it would need to pass the Commons and Lords before finalising.

Handy Andy wrote:Makes you wonder why the government  didn't  check the legal status of the  Brexit vote beforehand, then announce whethwr it would need to pass the Commons and Lords before finalising.

they did, the attorney general said they had the right.

you know that guy who said blair didn't have the right to go to war with iraq and then changed his mind.

Of course it was a different attorney general back then.


Of course the best thing to do would introduce a single line motion along the lines of

should the government sign article 50

and then see which MP's are suicidal enough to vote it down.

the tories could whip their mp's and ensure they win, although I imagine many labour mp's will be voting for them as it was many labour heartlands that helped the vote go leaves way.

eddie wrote:It won't be reversed. They'll have to have another vote and all the same people will vote "out".

we dont need another vote, we are not ireland, france or any of those other country's that had to keep voting until they got it right.
the government will win the vote on article 50.

Ziz wrote:

eddie wrote:It won't be reversed. They'll have to have another vote and all the same people will vote "out".

They'll avoid another vote at all costs - the aim is business as usual, in other words soft-Brexit, same old, same old but with the people believing their voice matters.

there is no such thing as soft or hard brexit, there is brexit or stay.

You cannot leave the EU without leaving the single market.

We voted to leave the EU pure and simple.

Ben Reilly wrote:It's been good for the pound:

The pound jumped to an almost one-month high against the dollar on Thursday after a U.K. high court ruled the government can’t trigger the Brexit process without approval from parliament.

In what is seen as one of the nation’s most important constitutional cases in decades, the court said Prime Minister Theresa May does not alone have the power to trigger the so-called Article 50 that kicks off negotiations with the European Union, meaning she must put it up for a vote in parliament.

The government has said it will appeal the verdict, according to media reports.

Sterling GBPUSD, +1.0730%  spiked after the decision, trading as high as $1.2495, its highest level since early October, according to FactSet data. The pound exchanged hands at $1.2302 late Wednesday in New York. The pound further got a boost from the Bank of England keeping rates on hold and signaling there will no more easing in 2016.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/pound-leaps-after-court-delivers-blow-to-uks-brexit-plan-2016-11-03

I also disagree that the referendum would go the same now -- a lot of people voted for it as a protest, thinking it wouldn't pass, and a lot of other people didn't vote who didn't want Brexit. There are also those who saw what happened after the measure passed and have probably changed their minds.

it's more or less the same as it was a week ago.

eddie wrote:The voting cards are Legal and binding too. I wish I could remember what mine said but something about it being passed or agreed by parliament..?

the governments (who were campaigning to stay) £9million leaflet said they would implement the will of the people.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Ziz wrote:

They'll avoid another vote at all costs - the aim is business as usual, in other words soft-Brexit, same old, same old but with the people believing their voice matters.

there is no such thing as soft or hard brexit, there is brexit or stay.

You cannot leave the EU without leaving the single market.

We voted to leave the EU pure and simple.

Yes you can - Norway and Switzerland have access to the single market.

Raggamuffin wrote:If Parliament don't pass it, they will be going against the will of the people of the UK. If an MP votes against Brexit in an area where the majority voted to leave, that could affect their chances of being re-elected.

this about the only thing that could save ukip. Should they vote it down then there is a chance of a snap election and ukip could very well take huge numbers of labour seats and quite possibly some tory ones too, if they can sort out their own internal problems

Raggamuffin wrote:If Parliament don't pass it, they will be going against the will of the people of the UK. If an MP votes against Brexit in an area where the majority voted to leave, that could affect their chances of being re-elected.

this was the view a couple of weeks ago on who should make the decision

Ziz wrote:

eddie wrote:The voting cards are Legal and binding too. I wish I could remember what mine said but something about it being passed or agreed by parliament..?

No they weren't, the referendum was always non-binding and advisory.

the governments £9million leaflet said they would implement what the people decided.

the government were campaigning to stay

Ziz wrote:The people speaking...

people who cannot be arsed to vote are not counted.

they certainly are not automatically added to one side or another.


if that was the case then 76% of londoners did not vote for sadiq khan as mayor.
I haven't heard any remainers saying his election was not legitimate.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Ziz wrote:

No they weren't, the referendum was always non-binding and advisory.

the governments £9million leaflet said they would implement what the people decided.

the government were campaigning to stay

Regardless, legally the referendum was non-binding - governments often say things that they do not mean or are untrue.

Tommy Monk wrote:

And the weaseling continues...



Article 50 is just an announcement to the eu of our intention to leave the eu... the govt has every right to make this formal announcement to the eu after the British people have given the clear instruction in the referendum.


Not only was it a majority of people who voted to leave... but it was an even larger majority of uk constituencies that returned a leave vote...

if it had been done under a first past the post system the vote would have been something like 60 -40 for leave

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Ziz wrote:The people speaking...

people who cannot be arsed to vote are not counted.

they certainly are not automatically added to one side or another.


if that was the case then 76% of londoners did not vote for sadiq khan as mayor.
I haven't heard any remainers saying his election was not legitimate.

Irrelevant, the diagram is propaganda in a battle that will run for years.

Tommy Monk wrote:

"...John Mills, the Labour donor and Brexit  backer, has also responded to the verdict.

I find it inconceivable that MPs would take a stand against the clear wishes of their own constituents - especially in the 70 per cent of Labour constituencies that voted Leave.

Many MPs may well have voted Remain but they are aware that they represent the people in their area and, in my view, they have a duty to reflect those people’s majority view.

Labour voters chose Leave because the EU is bad for working people, their families and their future. Nothing has changed since the referendum..."




Courts cannot frustrate the will of the British people
John Baron, the Conservative MP for Basildon and Billericay, has issued this is response to the Court's judgement.

The High Court’s decision must not be allowed to frustrate the will of the British people, which was clearly expressed in the referendum result.

It was made clear by the Government at the time that the referendum result would be respected by the political establishment.

David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn both said they would invoke Article 50 the day after a Brexit result. People voted in the referendum on this basis. We will man the barricades if the result is not respected.”

If the Supreme Court upholds this ruling, MPs must therefore not hinder the Government’s invocation of Article 50.

The electorate will rightly punish their elected representatives if they block the decision made by over 17 million people on 23rd June.



11:47am
EU vote was a 'binding decision'
Iain Duncan Smith, the former Work and Pensions Secretary, has just told Sky News: "It’s not the position of the courts to tell Parliament or the government at that stage how the process works.

"That’s not advisory. It’s absolutely clear that decision was a binding decision.

"What are we asking for? We’re asking for Parliament to have the opportunity to overturn that decision by the British people.

"That is a constitutional crisis - literally pitting Parliament against the will of the people."



David Davis said...


"The people have spoken on this we've got the biggest mandate in history, the result of the referendum must be respected.

"Parliament voted by 6 to 1 to give the decision to the people no ifs or buts and that's why we are appealing this to get on with delivering the best deal for Britain, the best deal for growth, the best deal for investment, the best deal for jobs. The people want us to get on with this and that's what we intend to do.

"The judges have laid out what we can't do but not exactly what we can do, but we're presuming it requires an act of parliament therefore both the Commons and the Lords.

"The first thing to say is this was the decision of the British people that decision was taken after a 6 to 1 vote in the commons to give the decision to the British people so that's why we're appealing it and we're appealing it intending to win that appeal so we can deliver the best deal for Britain... that's what the government is about; delivering the mandate the people laid down in the best way in the best national interest.

"Well parliament is sovereign, has been sovereign but of course the people are sovereign, the people are the ones parliament represents, 17.4m of them, the biggest mandate in history, voted for us to leave the EU and we're going to deliver on that mandate in the best way possible for the British national interest ... and we're going to do that, the people want us to get on with it and that's what we're going to do.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/03/high-court-to-rule-on-brexit-legal-battle-and-theresa-mays-decis/#update-20161103-1435

there have been a whole host of mp's on twitter today saying they will vote for the will of the people, most I have never heard of so I presume they are labour MP's, two however were frank field and kate hoey who said it would be madness for labour mp's to vote against it

Ziz wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
there is no such thing as soft or hard brexit, there is brexit or stay.

You cannot leave the EU without leaving the single market.

We voted to leave the EU pure and simple.

Yes you can - Norway and Switzerland have access to the single market.

they also have freedom of movement. so no they are not good examples to prove your point.

canada does not however have freedom of movement with their trade deal with the EU.

nor do most of the country's that have managed to sign a deal with the EU, many of which are now reconsidering their EU deals

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Ziz wrote:

Yes you can - Norway and Switzerland have access to the single market.

they also have freedom of movement. so no they are not good examples to prove your point.

They are perfect examples as I suspect you will see - but if we get access without price or penalty then great.

Ziz wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
they also have freedom of movement. so no they are not good examples to prove your point.

They are perfect examples as I suspect you will see - but if we get access without price or penalty then great.

they get to pay, but dont get to play

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Ziz wrote:

They are perfect examples as I suspect you will see - but if we get access without price or penalty then great.

they get to pay, but dont get to play

True - perhaps we can do better?

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Handy Andy wrote:Makes you wonder why the government  didn't  check the legal status of the  Brexit vote beforehand, then announce whethwr it would need to pass the Commons and Lords before finalising.

they did, the attorney general said they had the right.

you know that guy who said blair didn't have the right to go to war with iraq and then changed his mind.

Of course it was a different attorney general back then.


Of course the best thing to do would introduce a single line motion along the lines of

should the government sign article 50

and then see which MP's are suicidal enough to vote it down.

the tories could whip their mp's and ensure they win, although I imagine many labour mp's will be voting for them as it was many labour heartlands that helped the vote go leaves way.

Can you show me the Attorney General's official ruling on that?

The people voted by a small majority to leave but it is entirely right that parliament should hold the three Brexiteer's, Davies, Fox and Johnson to account to make sure that they don't sell out our country at any price.

I would think that even those who voted to leave would also want to see what deal they are looking to secure.

Irn Bru wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
they did, the attorney general said they had the right.

you know that guy who said blair didn't have the right to go to war with iraq and then changed his mind.

Of course it was a different attorney general back then.


Of course the best thing to do would introduce a single line motion along the lines of

should the government sign article 50

and then see which MP's are suicidal enough to vote it down.

the tories could whip their mp's and ensure they win, although I imagine many labour mp's will be voting for them as it was many labour heartlands that helped the vote go leaves way.

Can you show me the Attorney General's official ruling on that?

The attorney general acquiesced, he didn't mandate.  It never ceases to amaze me that you Brits cannot think systematically.  FGS...and we are your spawn, and we don't even own that problem.  

There was never an enabling clause in the referendum.  Hence it's without power to effect.  

It's like, Oh, you want to vote on the 'get out of the eu' issue?  

Yes, we do.  

Ok, you can vote on it.  

Vote, vote, vote...tally.

Ok, we voted yes, so we want out.  

Good for you...go and get it.  

But we voted 'yes'!  

Good for you...now go away!

You can't just express a sentiment, and then expect it to happen.  You have to provide for it to happen.  That's why Captain Picard would typically say, "make it so."  It's called an 'enabling clause'...turn your thoughts into an order.  Brexit never had an enabling clause.  It ain't gonna happen.

Man...where were you guys when god handed out brains?

Irn Bru wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
they did, the attorney general said they had the right.

you know that guy who said blair didn't have the right to go to war with iraq and then changed his mind.

Of course it was a different attorney general back then.


Of course the best thing to do would introduce a single line motion along the lines of

should the government sign article 50

and then see which MP's are suicidal enough to vote it down.

the tories could whip their mp's and ensure they win, although I imagine many labour mp's will be voting for them as it was many labour heartlands that helped the vote go leaves way.

Can you show me the Attorney General's official ruling on that?

The people voted by a small majority to leave but it is entirely right that parliament should hold the three Brexiteer's, Davies, Fox and Johnson to account to make sure that they don't sell out our country at any price.

I would think that even those who voted to leave would also want to see what deal they are looking to secure.

Over a million people more voted Leave... and if you look at the result by parliamentary constituency then you will see that an even bigger majority result for leave...


All this is is weaseling!

Ben Reilly wrote:Still, the general agreement is that the Brexit vote was not legally binding: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-result-not-legally-binding-lawyers-letter-a7129626.html

The people have spoken but Parliament has the final say.

And I have to say you called it

Not going be what Tommy and Co thought it was going to be,
Big business will make sure what happens is what is best for big business

A stronger Pound Sterling isn't good for the British economy...

General wage earners, importers, Brit's holidaying abroad and foreign investors will all like the looks of a higher pound..

As after all, the British Pound was just a wee little overvalued before the Brexit vote.

However, farmers and manufacturers with an eye on export markets would like the Pound to be lower; as would the government, keeping watch on Britain's "balance of payments" and national debt levels..      

Maybe the Pound is now floating about around a more realistic level for the time being, than it was a few months ago ? Closer to its long term average valuations..

veya_victaous wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Still, the general agreement is that the Brexit vote was not legally binding: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-result-not-legally-binding-lawyers-letter-a7129626.html

The people have spoken but Parliament has the final say.

And I have to say you called it

Not going be what Tommy and Co thought it was going to be,
Big business will make sure what happens is what is best for big business

Of course they will - but the gullible have been on their knees for so long they just can't give up believing.

Lefties suddenly support big business interests over that of the people...


We are still leaving the eu!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:Lefties suddenly support big business interests over that of the people...


We are still leaving the eu!!!

I know. Who knew they were such big fans? So much for them supporting ordinary people.

Tommy Monk wrote:Lefties suddenly support big business interests over that of the people...


We are still leaving the eu!!!

But not its claws - enjoy.

Thing is we the people, or peasants to the elite, shocked them all by thinking for ourselves and voting to leave EU.

So they say we didn't know what we were doing.  How ignorant is that?

We working ants have woken up and shoved it up them and they don't like it. How dare we go against our betters.

Now lefties who say they support the workers are cosying up to the very people who won't give them the time of day.

Well for once we the people have spoken.  We will leave EU.

magica wrote:Thing is we the people, or peasants to the elite, shocked them all by thinking for ourselves and voting to leave EU.

So they say we didn't know what we were doing.  How ignorant is that?

We working ants have woken up and shoved it up them and they don't like it. How dare we go against our betters.

Now lefties who say they support the workers are cosying up to the very people who won't give them the time of day.

Well for once we the people have spoken.  We will leave EU.

The will of the rich will prevail no matter what - in or out.

Ziz wrote:

magica wrote:Thing is we the people, or peasants to the elite, shocked them all by thinking for ourselves and voting to leave EU.

So they say we didn't know what we were doing.  How ignorant is that?

We working ants have woken up and shoved it up them and they don't like it. How dare we go against our betters.

Now lefties who say they support the workers are cosying up to the very people who won't give them the time of day.

Well for once we the people have spoken.  We will leave EU.

The will of the rich will prevail no matter what - in or out.

Too true!   We had a democratic vote that was legally non binding and the Courts have decided, as they are legally entitled to do (and aren't we glad we are democratic and have a judiciary that goes by the law, not the will of Government) that the law says the Prime Minister cannot use the Royal Perogative (a very feudal concept and not democratic) to trigger Article 50 and must get the consent of Parliament, democratically elected by the people to make such decisions.  Hooray for democracy.

What if Parliament vote for Brexit? Will all the remainers still kick up a fuss?

Raggamuffin wrote:What if Parliament vote for Brexit? Will all the remainers still kick up a fuss?

Did those opposed to the EEC cease their opposition after the 1975 decision?

The court decision means that Parliament will have a say in how we negotiate and May etc cannot do what they like.   BTW, according to the latest poll, there are now more remainers than leavers.   The people that didn't vote are now coming out for remaining in higher numbers than leaving.   Would that they had not been so stupid and had voted in the first place.

What if MPs vote to remain, and the Government ignores them?

Raggamuffin wrote:What if MPs vote to remain, and the Government ignores them?

That won't happen - either way.

Sorry but this is just madness! A vote is a vote is a vote. Fucking hell! What point was there in me dragging my arse to the polling station and ticking a box?

And I'm sure you all know me well enough to know that I'd still be saying this if it were the other way round.