A thousand lawyers send letter to Cameron over EU Referendum

[BrexitThunderbolt]

It starts:
TO THE PRIME MINISTER AND ALL MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

9 July 2016

Dear Prime Minister and Members of Parliament

Re: Brexit

We are all individual members of the Bars of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. We are writing to propose a way forward which reconciles the legal, constitutional and political issues which arise following the Brexit referendum.

The result of the referendum must be acknowledged. Our legal opinion is that the referendum is advisory.

The European Referendum Act does not make it legally binding. We believe that in order to trigger Article 50, there must first be primary legislation. It is of the utmost importance that the legislative process is informed by an objective understanding as to the benefits, costs and risks of triggering Article 50.

link to the whole letter here

I am particularly pleased to see this included in their reasons for writing as they do:
There is evidence that the referendum result was influenced by misrepresentations of fact and promises that could not be delivered.

Since the result was only narrowly in favour of Brexit, it cannot be discounted that the misrepresentations and promises were a decisive or contributory factor in the result.

I don't think that the ordinary vote Leave person should necessarily have a plan, but I do think, most strongly, that the Vote Leave campaign should have said exactly what they wanted and united around one stance.

Daniel Hannan and Boris Johnson clearly want an EEA agreement, Loathsome Leadsom wanted to come out completely, Farage - was more interested in taunting fellow MEPs so didn't have any ideas, and Gove, ???? , not sure what he wanted - apart from "smash the system, I don't like it".

The referendum was remain or leave EU

Not

Remain or leave EU - give reasons

Therefore we do not need to justify ourselves.

But I'll play along ...

My main reason for leave was I want controlled immigration

Now let's have the remainers slate, name call and insult me

My main reason for leave was I want controlled immigration

But less than 24 hours after the result, Daniel Hannan, MEP and prominent leaver said that this wasn't going to happen, and furthermore that they never claimed it would be the case.

And yet on sky new

The Six Tasks Facing Theresa May As PM
news.sky.com/story/the-six-tasks-facing-theresa-may-10499088

Free Immigration can't continue as it has done. It needs control

It would be nice if there had been some sort of plan though.

Prominent Leave campaigners all seem to have differing ideas though - Farage just wanted to thumb his nose at Juncker. Which he's now done, and promptly resigned from UKIP. Boris seemed to want to remain after all ("we will still have free trade, free movement of people etc") Gove & wife seemed to want to star in a Shakespearean tragedy. They all seemed to want to take back control - but then all stepped back from it so fast they fell over.

Now let's have the remainers slate, name call and insult me

I don't believe that all concerns about immigration are racist - and I say that as someone married to an immigrant.

For the last 20 years, governments have been happy to accept the taxes paid by immigrants but have not put the infrastructure (schools, healthcare etc) in place to support areas that have experienced high levels of immigration. So it is not surprising that people in those areas are resentful. Also, it can certainly be argued that immigration has suppressed wages - personally I am not totally convinced by this argument - but I don't think it is racist.

However, how is Brexit going to deliver reduced immigration? It can only do so if we leave the single market. Any other solution will require us to accept free movement and - even if it didn't (it will) - with the loss of our Schengen exemption, we will have no practical way of controlling it anyway.

It doesn't matter what the Brexit campaigners have said during the campaign, they have all Brexted now we all know that.

Theresa May said clearly Brexit means Brexit. However it has to be carted out in a legal manner otherwise it will always be contested. It has been said before, during and after the campaign: a referendum is an advisory process, not a legally binding decision. This is recognised in international law, and it is part of the U.K.'s 'constitution'.

It's not very difficult to understand, it's pretty basic.

If the current government doesn't follow the international law Brexit will always be contested and questioned. It has to be carried out correctly.

Supposing we do go for a points based system like Australia, who do we think will want to come? Australia is attracting Health Care Professionals in droves, so they are not likely to be supplying them back to us. People from the Indian sub-continent? Yes, possible. People from sub-Saharan Africa? Also possible. So what plans are there to house them and provide schools for their children? Come on Boris, Gove, Leasdom - you got us into this situation, tell us what solutions you have.

I have spoken to many people at work and in my area including my own father who voted leave. Not one of them made an informed and considered decision based on facts. I don't doubt that those people exist, and most of them are here debating on MN, but they were far from the majority. All of the people I have spoke to who voted leave did so because they felt there is too much immigration. My father works in the building trade. He is also a habitual Sun reader. Many of his colleagues and friends also voted leave, out of a sense of unease at jobs being taken by immigrants and wages being driven down. People debating this issue on MN are not representative of the country as a whole.

I am not convinced that the majority of people voting leave did so out of anything other than fear and xenophobia. Comments in the daily mail the day after the vote, revealed how upset people were to discover that they had voted leave based on misinformation. A lot of brexiters voted out as a form of protest and to give two fingers up to the establishment.

Sorry but I am feeling self righteous and angry still that my rights as an EU citizen have been taken away due in the main to ignorance. I suspect it will take me a long time to 'get over it'

Agree Peregrina. Also we already have a points-based system for non-EU immigration, yet non-EU immigration is rising faster than immigration from the EU. And Australia is has no land borders (we have NI/ROI) and is a very long way from any country other than NZ, yet it has still had to set up huge detention camps to contain immigrants. So it's not as if their points-based system has prevented uncontrolled immigration.

The Leave campaign just threw out vague slogans like "A points-based system" and no one seemed to care if what they promised was deliverable or would have the intended outcomes.

I don't blame people for having concerns about mass immigration. I do blame them for not scrutinising what they were promised by Leave.

I only know two people who admit to voting leave. Their reasons were:

• I like Boris Johnson
• I think a change would do us good.

Anecdotal, but still...

Leaving the EU will not stop immigration.

People should never have been told that it would. If Im honest I'd like to say that they should never have believed it.

I'm glad that all the leave voters would be happy for their kids to be picking all our produce all summer. I, on the other hand, remain very grateful to all the immigrants who come over and do this for us.

Sometimes on facebook I see people posting about the points system. Without exception they are the people who wouldn't fulfil the necessary criteria on a points system.

Why did some many Leavers think the EU had anything to do with the sort of 'immigration' that bothers them? What was that poster with the image of refugees about? Were the people depicted in that, Polish migrant workers?

However, how is Brexit going to deliver reduced immigration? It can only do so if we leave the single market. Any other solution will require us to accept free movement and - even if it didn't (it will) - with the loss of our Schengen exemption, we will have no practical way of controlling it anyway.

Agreed - going the EEA route is a 'Barely-brexit' but it is brexit.

As set out above not many actual things change, though you will be able to "take back(a little) democracy"

People I have spoken to have given these reasons:

Unelected bureaucrats (try unelected PM..!)
Need to save NHS (that fucking bus)
Need to save armed forces
Need to reduce immigration (from someone living in a small village with no immigrants)

Sorry but I am feeling self righteous and angry still that my rights as an EU citizen have been taken away due in the main to ignorance. I suspect it will take me a long time to 'get over it'

Yes antiquesinger - I feel totally robbed of my identity and I am furious. I don't want a shitty blue passport that signifies something I absolutely do not believe in.

Leaving the EU will not stop immigration.

No it won't and I don't think that's what leave voters wanted

They wanted CONTROLLED Immigration

Two very different things

We're going to end up with Brexit-Lite. If we Brexit at all, that is. Theresa May has to say "Brexit means Brexit" at the moment, but it doesn't mean she'll trigger A50 any time soon. She is a careful woman, she won't rush this.

I maintain that true Brexit (out of the single market) will be disastrous for us. And in an EEA, we will end up with a worse deal than full EU membership. And Schengen?

We seemed to have massively failed to realise that in the EU with our sterling and our border in Calais we had a very priviledged position.

That we just threw away.

As set out above not many actual things change, though you will be able to "take back(a little) democracy"

That's debatable. An EEA deal like Norway's, includes EU legislation, much of which we must implement as national law, without the power to make those laws or choose what we sign up to; it also includes EU contributions that are two thirds of what we are currently paying without the benefits of full membership.

We will become 'law-takers rather than law-makers'.

Two now famous quotes are doing the rounds. The first from a Norwegian MP:

'If you want to run the EU stay in the EU, if you want to be run by the EU feel free to join us'.

The second from a Norwegiain political commentator:

'If you want to give away democracy, pay a lot and keep to the same rules as those who make them that's your choice'.

They wanted CONTROLLED Immigration

But they won't get it.

Frankly if there was a strong case for the referendum only being advisory why does it need 1000 Barristers to point that out. The attorney general could make that point of law very clear. This is more of the 'experts' talking down to the little people.

They wanted CONTROLLED Immigration

We have controlled immigration as immigrants contribute more than they claim...............

If it was the other way around then you might have a point.

Breaking dad

We have controlled immigration as immigrants contribute more than they claim............

That is your definition of controlled?? Okaaaay