To think this could mean the end of brexit?

[jdoe8]

Now MPs will be able to block it. Could this be the end of this ridiculous brexit? MPs can not vote for something that they think will not be in peoples interest and its very clear the people that voted to brexit would be the ones worse off.

JO'B is doing a fab job on LBC today and most brexiters seem to be happy that it might not go ahead as they were fooled by lies!

Potentially. It's late now, I usually have many ideas but I can't remember them right now 💤

Tuckers, the ones I wrote were aimed at MPs. They would outline proposed legislation and what it would mean in practice. If being written on behalf of a particular group, say, coal miners (I never wrote a briefing on behalf of coal miners, mind, this is just an example), then various clauses would be highlighted, generally the ones the miners considered 'bad', explain in what way that clause would be bad and what would likely come of it, perhaps the briefing would include suggested amendments though amendments generally got a briefing of their own.

If necessary, a new briefing would be written for the Lords - sometimes it was far more likely that amendments would succeed in the Lords. That depends upon what sort of majority the Government had and whether 'unwelcome' Bills were just going to sweep through on their first reading. I also wrote EDMs and Questions.

With Trump being elected it should be a warning what will happen if government ignore the people. If their is a parliamentary stitch up to reverse the referendum decision we could end up with a UKIP surge and a hard right PM.

It wouldn't be a 'stitch up' though, that's the point... the referendum was always only advisory and it always only asked whether we should leave or stay which deals with virtually zero of the issues re the EU. Parliament should be free to consider what is in the public interest and TBF given the result was 48/52 it is not as simple as 'we voted to leave'.

Trump is a warning re what happens when you have that toxic combination of inequality and ignorance in the public coupled with consensus politicians like Clinton.

You can keep repeating, 'the referendum was always only advisory', but that is not what most people believed when they voted. So most people will see it as a stitch up if Parliament frustrates the will of the people. We will have to have another election, get a larger Conservative majority, likely Corbyns Labour wiped out in the North of England by UKIP and an even harder Brexit than is currently planned. That's democracy for you, Grammar schools anyone?

But it was not reasonable for people to believe the referendum was binding and it is even less reasonable for them to continue to believe that now or be angry about a 'stitch up'.

Sorry but people do have to take responsibility for how they behave. You can't complain about the behaviour of 'the establishment' whilst also behaving like a pitchfork waving ignoramus yourself...

Cuts both ways...

Sinn Fein may take up their seats to vote against Article 50, or at least that was the news a few days ago

Not the same as forming an alliance with the other parties, but perhaps a step towards it?

You know who is responsible for making sure you are informed? you

Well said Offred.

I do believe that lessons in politics should be compulsory in Secondary schools. It can only help combat some of the ignorance out there.

Maybe David Cameron should be referred to the CPS re his triggering a50 claim. Why not? Much more misleading than a red bus slogan.

More ambiguous since Government may have mistakenly thought it could use prerogative powers after referendum if came back leave.

Not so clearly and directly misleading.

They didn't make a claim the referendum was binding etc just they would enact the wishes of the people.

Didn't claim they would enact the result even. A 48/52 split is hardly a resoundingly clear expression of the wishes of the people.

Should the supreme court over turn the ruling I hope everyone doesn't start remoaning about what they are calling 'democracy in action'.

As for no one calling saying they will vote against article 50, I must need a hearing aid because lots of MP's have. And even more have said they will vote against it unless its Brexit in name only.

If the MPs vote against or for Brexit it will still be democracy in action.

The Supreme Court will not overturn the ruling. Even if they did using prerogative powers to push through something as important as membership/leaving the EU would not be 'democracy' it would be circumventing democracy.

Prerogative powers are anti-democratic.

Should the supreme court over turn the ruling I hope everyone doesn't start remoaning about what they are calling 'democracy in action'.

Of course they should keep on campaigning, just as leavers would certainly have been free to carry on campaigning to leave.

One of the few half way decent motivations for leaving the EU (most people making it didn't seem to know much about the EU or how it functions but in theory it was a well meant argument) was to protect UK parliamentary democracy. Now it seems that for many, understanding democracy was also a bit of a stretch.

A large part of the population did not and do not want to leave the EU. Some people need to stop moaning and come to terms with that fact.

I don't think TM will want a GE as then she would have to layout what Brexit means in her manifesto and the court case is all about avoiding having to do that. The likely delay means that inflation is more likely to have taken hold and interest rates may have risen. The "little prople" as Farage likes to call them, will have had a chance to realise what they have really voted for and with any luck will not vote for a brexit
Party. This is my hope anyway.

The problem is, who is the non-Brexit party?

Yes, there is likely to be a brexit.

Within that there has to be room for parliament to properly consider all of the issues including that 48% of the voters in the referendum voted to stay.

Yes that is the problem. I have joined the Lib Dems as the obvious pro EU party but somehow they need to dramatically increase their support base.

Suppermummy you may not have noticed but we have a hard right pm already.

As for no one calling saying they will vote against article 50, I must need a hearing aid because lots of MP's have.

And why should they not, if they genuinely believe that staying in the EU is the best option for the country? Arguments put forward in a Parliamentary debate might persuade them to reconsider their views. And as Theresa May tartly reminded one of her constituents at one of her surgeries, MPs are representatives not delegates, so this would apply even when their constituents, as far as they are able to tell, voted differently from them.

Having said that I haven't heard many say that they will vote against art 50 except the SNP - which is what they could be expected to say.