This is bullshit :- brexit

[EveOnline2016]

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-supreme-court-ruling-judges-defy-theresa-may-and-hand-power-to-parliament-a7542406.html

I can see the MP voting to stay in.

I rather not have another UKIP MP in parliament but it if leads to Corbyn stepping down and this nonsense of momentum controlling the labour party then its an unfortunate price worth paying

This ^^

I rather not have another UKIP MP in parliament but it if leads to Corbyn stepping down and this nonsense of momentum controlling the labour party then its an unfortunate price worth paying

Cutting nose to spite your face and all that... a large part of the Leave vote was based on this kind of sentiment too.

YABVU Take it to the Brexit topic - not here.

Cutting nose to spite your face and all that

Maybe, but if Labour were an actual opposition this wouldn't even be being considered.

YABVU Take it to the Brexit topic - not here.

What is this resistance people have to seeing any mention whatsoever of Brexit outside of the Referendum topic? So bizarre.

Leaving aside the comments suggesting that among millions of others I am a turkey, didn't know what I voted for, am ignorant, illogical, a howling leaver, and support mob rule (had remain won, I'm guessing you'd call them a "majority" not a "mob"? )...

I was hoping that this would go the other way, but the court has spoken and we Brexiters must of course respect the decision. On the other hand, surely it's now high time for the referendum result to be respected in return, and carried out (as promised by Cameron when he set it up, as outlined in the government booklet "we will implement what you decide", and as rightly expected by voters - if remain had won, Cameron would certainly have implemented that).

I hope there aren't any more efforts at delaying Article 50 (from Ken Clarke or anyone else) and I disagree with the Clegg stance of pushing for more referendums until the "correct" result is reached. Most of Labour seem to be taking a sensible approach of respecting the leave result but also wanting their proportional say in what's next for Britain.

While I don't think MPs should be trying to hold things up now (Ken Clarke... why?) I certainly agree with all of parliament being able to debate and be involved with what's important to the 100 per cent as we leave the EU, whether it's workers rights, the environment, business and enterprise, funding the NHS, forming a fair immigration policy and so on.

When Parliament voted on the referendum, it should have been on a binding referendum. But it wasn't. As it wasn't binding, the Government had no place making statements such as this...

This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide

People knew that it wasn't officially binding, but having been told that the Government would act on it, foolishly thought that the Government would act on it and would have the necessary i's dotted & t's crossed.

This really is just 'paperwork'. The Leavers need to accept that & the Remainers too - saying there's 'still hope' etc is just stirring up trouble.

Out of interest, why did you hope this would go the other way? I can't see how any Leaver who supports parliamentary sovereignty (tbf I'm just assuming you do, but I reckon most would) could possibly want the executive making this decision via Royal Prerogative. That's no good for any of us.

No. MPs are not there to vote on what they feel is right. They are there to represent the will of their constituents!

Not entirely, they are supposed to represent all their constituents, even ones who didn't vote for them, not necessarily the will of their constituents - they are not delegates. They are also supposed to consider the good of the country. So they would be perfectly entitled to vote in a different way to the majority of their constituents if they held a belief it was in the national interest.

Which MP is going to vote against his/her constituents' wishes?
Mine has expressed the intention of doing so. Redwood in Wokingham is one of the prime Eurosceptics who forced the Referendum but his constinuency voted overwhelmingly to Remain.

For goodness sake, The MPs are not voting on whether we leave or remain., They are debating and voting on how and when to trigger article 50.
The public were not given all the facts and details or the implications of a referendum.
The whole thing was a complete mess of misinformation and lies. It was Cameron thinking he could call a referendum to shut up some Tory MPs, never thinking the Country would vote to leave.

God knows why people vote Tory..None of them know what they are doing. It is a mess.

God knows why people vote Tory..None of them know what they are doing. It is a mess.

And Labour are an even bigger mess, and I say that as a former Labour member.

what has the leave vote to do with Corbyn leadership

at the moment we have an opposition that is an absolute shambles it needs to change and that has to be with Corbyn standing down (as he will win probably leadership contest again) Labour losing a strong hold seat to UKIP might just be the push he needs as Labour need an opposition leader that holds the government to account and can pull the party together Cornbyn has proved time and time again he is useless and is losing voters and is out of touch with so many - plus his terrorist connections will always stand in the way of him ever being PM

This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide

Cameron was stupid enough to promise this because he believed that Remain would win, so in practice he wouldn't have to implement anything new in the short term - there would just be the usual discussions going on with the rest of the EU.

In the same way the Official Leave campaign thought they were on safe ground with £350 million a week for the NHS, because they didn't expect to win, so they weren't going to be asked to make good on this. Hence their immediately reneging on the 'promise'.

I was sure this would be the ultimate outcome (and I last studied constitutional law 20 years ago). I'm furious that May has wasted taxpayers money on fighting this; particularly when a central tenet of the Brexiters argument was the upholding of Parliamentary sovreignty. It further highlights the dupicitous nature of those leading the Brexit charge.

What concerns me is May's statement that 'no deal will be better than a bad deal'. So no deal means WTO rules - is she implying that a bad deal would need to be WORSE than WTO rules? Have you read about what WTO would mean? Even the Brexiters themselves think WTO rules are a bad idea BlogfromLeaveHQ

Brexit = committing economic suicide. The 'deal' we get will just be the different between a maeaphorical hanging or bullet to the head.

The Tory party are looking far more professional and in control at the moment, they are good at this

I feel embarrassed to be a labour party member but staying one so I can vote should there be another leadership battle

It's nothing to do with brexit and everything to do with the fact that the government should not and does not have the power to make or change laws. It never has we have always had acts of parliament. And parliament is not the government they have always been different. Regardless of how you voted the conception of parliamentary sovereignty should remain supreme.

It could have been avoided by adding in the fact that it could be done this way in the act that created the referendum as parliament would haveoked it it didn't.

The problem is that people don't believe that parliament will follow it, that is different to saying that they should not have the right to do so. This of course brings up the point that it's the government who said the will of the people should've followed so arguably th per Conservative party should follow it. Other parties have made no such promises as that I guess is where difficulty could arise.

Leavers should relax.
It would be absolutely astonishing if Parliament doesn't vote for A50

• May has an overall Tory majority in Parliament and the official Opposition party is a disorganised rabble under their most incompetent leader ever.

It's just that, according to the (unwritten) UK constitution & longstanding custom, Parliament need to scrutinise & debate such important issues before agreeing A50

• not let Theresa May define the future of the country with a wave of her hand, like some mediaeval monarch

And the Government don't have the right to implement the decision that is not how are constitution works. The issue is that Government and Parliament have become synonymous with each other.

It's nightmare for labour they have never made any promises so in theory don't have to follow it but either way could result in a demotion from second party for them.

Why would Labour losing Stoke lead to Corbyn stepping down? Personally I think it'd take at least a general election loss to do it.

I'm furious that May has wasted taxpayers money on fighting this; particularly when a central tenet of the Brexiters argument was the upholding of Parliamentary sovreignty.

I agree. I also heard a commentator say this morning that if she had not wanted to invoked Henry VIII clauses, then none of the court cases would have happened and that she could probably have got A50 through already. (He put it better than that.) So another mess up by Theresa May.

On the positive side, if the law was not clear, then it's good to have that the position established.

valentine I think that doesn't really matter - I think there has to be some degree of face saving...
So whatever the UK goes to Brussels with - Brussels can't really just accept. They will have to try and get more/give less -otherwise the UK is leaving on its terms (even if they are terrible terms) ...and that may well set a precedent.

I'm looking forward to reviving these threads in a few years, to see if the sky fell in (unlikely)

Labour is not going to agree on a leader before the next election and, barring major unexpected events harming the tories, will be trounced.

it could do

He is unable to unite and with the result of today this will be a problem for the party and losing a very very safe labour seat could just push him to realise he simply can not take the party where he wants to and Labour MP's will have to be more outspoken about this

its a maybe but I think it seems more likely that him being once again challenged (as unfortunately he will probably will another leadership challenge)

Labour MPs WERE outspoken but the party members/funders voted to keep corbyn, and there are few credible (to general voters) candidates the hardcore Labour membership will elect.