Govt has to go back to Parliament over Brexit

[whoputthecatout]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37857785

Well, that's set the cat among the pigeons.

Govt. will appeal but the referendum is only advisory constitutionally so the remainers will be hand-rubbing in glee, sensing an opportunity to thwart the referendum result.

Suppermummy - you don't seem to understand how the British political system works. We don't have a direct democracy, where everyone votes on every policy individually. We have a representative democracy governed by the rule of law. It doesn't matter if the majority of the public want policy X. We have a parliamentary system, not mob rule.

Whether you happen to think Brexit is a great idea or not is neither here nor there. It may be the best thing since sliced bread - you still can't just ignore the rule of law because you feel like it. It's the judges' job to uphold the rule of law. That's it. If they'd failed to do that, you'd have a point. I fail to see how you or anyone can object to judges making correct judgements based on the law. That's what they exist to do.

Would you rather live in an anarchy, where there was no rule of law and powerful leaders just did whatever the fuck they wanted as long as they could persuade enough people by lying to them enough? Like Hitler did?

How can any sane person be happy to sleepwalk into fascism? Do you genuinely not know what happened last time? How can anyone possibly defend the Mail's disgusting headline??

Okay supermummy. I'll bite. Brexit might be turbulent for a few years but so far seems to be pretty good for the UK

In what ways has it been good for the UK so far?

flowersandsunshine
I accept the rule of law, that doesn't mean I agree it was a good judgement, please tell that to remoaners who are trying to stop Brexit. I do not read the Mail and do not know or defend whatever its head line was.

twofingerstoGideon
So far our exports are cheaper, inward investment has increased, and the FTSE is at all time highs. So far so good.

So far our exports are cheaper, inward investment has increased, and the FTSE is at all time highs. So far so good.

Good for who? The pound is tanking, so small businesses that rely on imports from abroad are suffering. Parliament is in disarray and there's been a sharp drop in student applications from EU countries (why do you suppose that is?). More importantly, so far as I'm concerned, , racism is increasing and the country is bitterly divided, but hey, exports are temporarily cheaper, so apparently all is well.

You can't have it both ways. Brexiters wanted the supremacy of British law. British law insists that this should be debated in parliament. It does not mean they will over turn the vote. It means there will be oversight of the process. Which is a Good Thing. Obviously.

Iwilldoit: you're right it means the vote means very little. Remainers' concern for sovereignty is fake. It's amazing they think they're convincing anyone.

Infinite spot on about silly pompous pie chart.

Winchester the vote was always advisory. And under British law needs to be discussed in parliament.
A civil war was fought in this country to ensure decisions were discussed and thought through.
The court has said NOTHING about overturning the referendum, and no one thinks the MPs will do so (they value their seats). This will enable oversight of the process. Do you trust people who has no plan to manage this without oversight? I certainly do not.
You wanted parliamentary sovereignty; you've got it. May is a prime minister NOT a president or a Queen.

It doesn't need to be discussed in parliament. If the constitution demands there could be vote on a simple yes no resolution, in which MPs should follow the lead of the country. Remainers are showing they'll stop at nothing to overturn a majority. Theresa may is right: a principle is at stake.

Remainers spent four months on a campaign proving they don't give a shit about parliamentary sovereignty. Co opting it now for an anti democratic cause is shameless. So hypocritical.

For leavers parliamentary sovereignty has always meant OUR voice heard, not a legalistic constutional detail. Our voice has been heard already: it is for no one to pretend June 23 did not happen.

It's not just remainers who are critical of the govt's approach.

One of the claimants in the court case was a leave supporter, and a leave-supporting Tory MP has just resigned because he was unhappy with the government bypassing parliament.

Those who are frantically waving the government leaflet about are missing the point. There's no contradiction between this ruling and what the govt said in the leaflet. The leaflet sets out government policy (implement whatever voters decide in referendum), the ruling clarifies what legal procedure the govt has to go through to implement that policy (pass act of parliament).

That leave claimant is so obviously a plant

Tivola: so long as remainers are happy with a yes no resolution: or we might begin to suspect their motives.

I think may should just go ahead and do it. No reason not to.

May knows perfectly well that it was impossible to just trigger Article 50. It was literally never going to happen. This way she gets to have it both ways- there will be a vote, it'll slow things down a bit and she can look like she was against it.

The alternative- that her small group of appointees would get to decide everything- is obviously nonsense.

That leave claimant is so obviously a plant

I suppose the leave-supporting Tory MP is also a plant - what an elaborate conspiracy!

I suppose the leave-supporting Tory MP is also a plant

He left because he wanted to be promoted to Attorney General but TM over looked him and he has gone back to his £750,000 job as Queen’s Counsel. The idea that it was because he wanted more parliamentary say on a day when the court ruled parliament should have more say, is ridiculous.

Good for who? The pound is tanking

The pound is around the same exchange rate level verses the Euro as it was in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. I don't remember the world ending, currency rates go up and down, it was probably over valued at the start of this year. If remoaners were a bit more optimistic about the UK instead of trying to make it more uncertain, then we would have more stability.

Winchester there is a reason she can't just go ahead - BRITISH LAW!!

Winchester, I really don't think you understand how our representative parliamentary democracy works. Nor do you appear to understand what advisory means.
Legally the government could just ignore the referendum. They won't do that though.

under British law needs to be discussed in parliament

And it was, the house of commons debated it and then voted 544 to 53 in favour of holding a referendum asking the people to decide what to do. And the people decided what to do with a majority of 1.27 million.

Donna, I really think you'll find you're wrong.

It's so boring all this fake concern for sovereignty. They must be so stupid if they think anyone's buying it.

It does not need to be discussed any more: if the court says we need a vote then let's do it, yes no. Done. But remainers will start more moaning, more legal challenges, more lies, more pretence, more hypocrisy, if we do that. They just can't stand that a direct democratic vote didn't go their way. The arrogance is breathtaking.

It does. If you think Brexit is a simple case of us telling EU how it's going to be you're in for a shock. Damn right there should be oversight on the process.
This goes for any decision by the way. The ruling isn't Brexit specific. It's how we've done things ever since a certain monarch thought he could just demand things from parliament.
As I've said this decision does NOT stop Brexit. It will still happen. Just with oversight from a range of people. This is good.

No one is saying parliament should not have a say on Brexit negotiations but this ruling gives the un-elected House of Lords the right to stop the UK from leaving the EU.

Not really, they can only delay legislation. They used to be able to block legislation now they can only bounce it back to committee a couple of times. Rushed legislation is rarely good legislation. There are ways round the House of Lords - ask David Lloyd George.

No one is saying parliament should not have a say on Brexit negotiations but this ruling gives the un-elected House of Lords the right to stop the UK from leaving the EU.

No it doesn't. The Lords have the power to delay things for a bit if they really want to, but the Commons can ultimately over-rule them if necessary.