The Brexit Arms. For all those who like a good drink, a good flounce, & a bit of trickery.

[surferjet]

Pull up a chair & relax......

As far as I understand it, this is absolutely not what this court case is about at all.

One of us is massively missing the point here mango and I'm pretty sure it's not me.

Yes- The court case is to decide whether or not the government can invoke A50 without a parliamentary vote.

But, if as predicted, the Supreme Court upholds the High Courts ruling, then the government are going to need one of those pesky plan things they've been avoiding up to this point, in order to get the ruling through parliament because Parliament aren't just going to have to vote yes or no to invoking A50 after this- they'll have to discuss the terms.

You just conceded that it was indeed you that was massively missing the point

Yes- The court case is to decide whether or not the government can invoke A50 without a parliamentary vote.

That is all this court case is about - nothing more, nothing less.

See, that seems to be the trouble with Leavers as far as I can see- many don't think of the consequences of a particular situation and this is a perfect example.

Yes the court case is about whether the government can invoke A50 without Parliament, but, if as widely predicted, the government lose, the consequence of that is it will have to get debated in parliament and questions will have to be answered.

Exactly - it's not about whether we leave the EU or not, that was decided on June 23rd.

There's part of me that would enjoy sitting down to watch the proceedings just to see the legal process at work but Christmas cards are more important.

Still don't understand why the Government is bothering with this appeal, if it gets turned down all it has to do is ask Parliament whether it supports the Referendum result or not. In fact if I was TM I'd not bother with A50, just leave. Simples.

As Ed Balls said in a Telegraph article, Parliament should have a vote ('cos that's the process) but would be foolish to oppose the Referendum result.

Did I mention some time ago about reporting untaxed vehicle to DVLA? Well there's a much better way of reporting things – fixmystreet.com. Not sure which one worked but haven't seen the car for a week.

In fact if I was TM I'd not bother with A50, just leave. Simples

I agree. The longer it all drags on the longer people like Blair and other randoms start more legal crap.

In fact if I was TM I'd not bother with A50, just leave. Simples

Proves my point about consequences really

the consequence of that is it will have to get debated in parliament and questions will have to be answered.

The terms of the type of Brexit were always going to scrutinised by parliament, as they should be.

This court case has cock all to do with that.

I am happy for parliament to debate terms of leaving but are all the mps on board with leaving ie. we need to be on a war footing now, with every mp behind brexit to get us the best deal as a country.

what we don't need is mps deliberately fudging and holding up process, to delay it and ruin it.

Petronius - I've stopped watching it now as it was getting interminably boring!

One of the arguments made in the opening statement though was interesting - it was about why the prerogative thing is important and if the court decides that it is not ok to use prerogative then that opens up numerous cans of worms.
Prerogative is used for many things in international relations and it would be counterproductive to debate each and every thing about everything in parliament.

The ramifications apparently go much further than just A50 & Brexit.

brexit means brexit
elite
enemy of the people

I think someone's swallowed 'The Little Book of Daily Mail Empty Rhetoric'.

See, that seems to be the trouble with Leavers as far as I can see- many don't think of the consequences of a particular situation and this is a perfect example.

Bear, what is your position on the consequences of this case if the ruling is that the use of prerogative is not ok?

Not Brexit related, but the wider ramifications?

The massive difference is that it will be debated before the pin is pulled out of the A50 hand grenade not after if the ruling is upheld.

This is what concerns me going down this road Mango. Cans of worms. Opened and time wasted sorting it all out.

many don't think of the consequences of a particular situation

But most leavers will have addressed the consequences of staying in the EU and decided to leave. You could argue, Remainers have not thought through the long term consequences of staying in, but I am not going to go down that narrow way of thinking.

What difference does it make before or after?
A50 is a formality, that is all.

In this instance prerogative is being, or attempted to be used to by-pass the sovereignty of parliament.

I see it only as a good thing that government cannot choose its own direction without the agreement of parliament on something that affects the whole country so much.

Words like 'democracy' and 'sovereignity' have been thrown around by Leavers all this year, now those things are actually in action but not going their way, it seems those terms are being forgotten- the irony is actually hilarious.

What difference does it make before or after?

The fact that is actually a serious question scares the shit out of me

Why?

If you really can't see a problem with only debating the specifics on how we leave the EU once we have triggered a 2 year countdown at the end of which we're stuck with whatever we've managed to agree, then I can't begin to convince you otherwise.

Bear Mango isn't our PM you know, I am wondering why a random anonymous poster posing a question on a forum scares the shit out of you.

We joined the EU by way of royal prerogative by the way.

And then Labour promised 'the people' a vote on whether or not to accept changes to the EU constitution- they then conveniently side-stepped that pledge and signed up to changes to the Lisbon treaty as it was 'just some treaty changes' (when in fact it was signing away many of our sovereign rights).

How can you be ok with prerogative and not being consulted wrt joining and agreeing to sweeping changes, yet be apoplectic at the thought of it happening the other way?

We joined on prerogative, we should therefore be able to leave on prerogative (as the majority of those who voted in the ref expressed their wish to leave).

Bear Mango isn't our PM you know, I am wondering why a random anonymous poster posing a question on a forum scares the shit out of you.

That was my thought too winter.
*
Bear,* I'm not asking to be convinced of anything - I'm asking why:

The fact that is actually a serious question scares the shit out of me

(The question being what difference is there between scrutinising terms of Brexit before or after A50 triggering).

And winter - how do you know I'm not the PM?!

Interesting thanks for putting all this into plain English its so dry and stop start, hard to follow.

maybe Bear senses some sort of superior knowledge and power from your posts?