• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UK government expects to lose Brexit trigger case, making contingency plans

Status
Not open for further replies.

Beefy

Member
The British government expects to lose its legal battle to start the Brexit process without going through parliament, and has drafted versions of a bill to put to lawmakers after the ruling, the Guardian newspaper reported on Tuesday.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule in the next two weeks on whether the government can trigger Article 50 of the European Union's Lisbon Treaty, the first formal step toward leaving the bloc, without first getting parliament's approval.

Citing unnamed sources, the Guardian reported that ministers had privately conceded they were very likely to lose the case, and had drawn up at least two versions of a bill to be presented to parliament after the ruling. [bit.ly/2iiL6oP]

The report also said the government had asked the court for early sight of the ruling before it is made public, to allow for contingency planning.

During the Supreme Court hearing in December, government lawyer James Eadie said that if judges ruled parliament had to give its assent to the triggering of Article 50, the solution would be a "one-line" bill.

The Guardian said ministers were hoping the ruling would allow Prime Minister Theresa May to put forward a short bill or motion, narrowly focused on Article 50, to make it difficult for lawmakers to amend.

Those in favor of a clean break with the European Union are concerned that parliament, where a majority of members were in favor of remaining in the bloc, could seek to water down ministers' plan in pursuit of a so-called "soft Brexit".

The government's opponents in the legal battle argued that triggering Article 50 would nullify the 1972 act of parliament that opened the way for Britain to join the EU, and therefore parliament had to give its assent for its act to be undone.

London's High Court backed that argument, prompting the government to appeal to the Supreme Court, Britain's highest judicial body, in December.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...1145&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter
 
300
 
Just curious from anyone in the know; is it possible for the UK to simply hold another vote and undo this all? Or is it set in stone with no backsies?
 
Just curious from anyone in the know; is it possible for the UK to simply hold another vote and undo this all? Or is it set in stone with no backsies?

There's nothing legally to stop it happening. As people have said millions of times over, it wasn't really much more than an opinion poll.

It also will never ever happen.

what a colossal waste of money, for what purpose other than sour grapes did this whole legal battle even start?

I'm not ok with the PM unilaterally making decisions without following proper legal protocol. Why on earth would I be?
 

deli2000

Member
Just curious from anyone in the know; is it possible for the UK to simply hold another vote and undo this all? Or is it set in stone with no backsies?

A referendum isn't binding, no. But it would be career suicide if the tories tried to call another referendum.
 

danowat

Banned
Just curious from anyone in the know; is it possible for the UK to simply hold another vote and undo this all? Or is it set in stone with no backsies?

Possible? yes, probable?, no, there would be public uproar.

I voted to stay in, and even I'd be angry if they offered a backsies dealio.
 
Just curious from anyone in the know; is it possible for the UK to simply hold another vote and undo this all? Or is it set in stone with no backsies?
Yes, the referendum was an advise to the government, nothing binding. Parliament can just vote against it. Or they can ignore the referendum. But well, nobody seems to have the balls to tell the public: you are wrong, we need to stay in the EU.
 

Wiseblade

Member
Just curious from anyone in the know; is it possible for the UK to simply hold another vote and undo this all? Or is it set in stone with no backsies?
Backing down would immediately end May's career. At least if you drive off a cliff, you're behind the wheel for the fall.
 

twobear

sputum-flecked apoplexy
what a colossal waste of money, for what purpose other than sour grapes did this whole legal battle even start?

I think it's actually pretty important in what's nominally supposed to be a democracy to clarify that the government cannot strip some 70,000,000 citizens of some of their rights based on the outcome of a legally non-binding referendum without the consent of the legislative body in the UK, in spite of said government's posturing that that's exactly what it intends to do, no?
 

Wiseblade

Member
I think it's actually pretty important to clarify that the government cannot strip 70,000,000 citizens of some of their rights based on the outcome of a legally non-binding referendum without the consent of the legislative body in the UK in spite of their posturing that that's exactly what said government intends to do, no?
The argument is that shouldn't have needed expensive clarification.
 

mrklaw

MrArseFace
Just curious from anyone in the know; is it possible for the UK to simply hold another vote and undo this all? Or is it set in stone with no backsies?

No stone. Referenda aren't legally binding at all. May could turn around and go 'fuck it let's stay in' and nobody could do anything.


Saddest thing for me so far this week is May talking about how the vote for brexit was also a vote for :insert whatever bullshit agenda they want to push:
 

Heartfyre

Member
This isn't about stopping or even debating the terms of Brexit.

This is all about putting the responsibility of it on MPs. Rather than being able to say "we were just following the will of the people" and eschewing all liability for the consequences, it will be on the head of any MP that supported it.
 

theaface

Member
This will change little. Very few MPs from any party would dare to defy the overwhelming mandate of the 52%.

I only hope this gives the sensible MPs some leverage in rejecting the madness of leaving the single market (which the binary referendum gives absolutely no mandate for).
 
The irony being if they hadn't attempted to use Royal Prerogative and just went through Parliament it would have obviously been successful but now there is a risk the Supreme Court adds other stipulations like NI/Scotland getting a say and the Government making things more difficult for themselves just through arrogance.

And the other irony of the get on with it, waste of money crowd who so badly wanted to take back control but then at the first step don't want Parliament to fulfill it's role. It's almost like that was a load of rubbish and empty rhetoric.
 

twobear

sputum-flecked apoplexy
In case it wasn't clear, I agree with you.

I know; I was just saying that the process is not the correct target of anyone's ire here, it's the cretins in government who thought they'd be able to use the Royal Prerogative to bypass the legislature over the most significant political event to happen in the UK in 50 years.
 

StayDead

Member
I hope they do lose, because what they wanted to do is called a dictatorship.

There's a reason we have a parliament and removing their right to vote on something is breaking our fundamental idea of democracy.
 
what a colossal waste of money, for what purpose other than sour grapes did this whole legal battle even start?

Theresa May and Brexiters were content to run roughshod over parliamentary sovereignty, which is one of the cornerstones of our system. This legal battle is to clarify once and for all whether the executive legally needs to attain parliamentary approval first or whether it can unilaterally use Royal Prerogative powers. The latter is constitutionally anachronistic anyway, because for centuries it has been established that parliament is sovereign. And quite honestly, a lot of us would rather a government not arrogantly hurry through some half-arsed plan unopposed without even a single vote.

I remember the "Enemies of the People" headline from the Daily Mail a couple of months ago. How dare these High Court judges choose to uphold parliamentary sovereignty, which is a very British constitutional arrangement. How un-British!
 

Biske

Member
It's astounding that we really live in a world where politicians can create these problems.

You run a campaign to do something bonkers like this, it happens and they all go "oh shit, we didn't actually mean to be successful... Dunno what to do now!"

Yet you some how still have even a single voter that's like "oh yeah this is a serious idea, needs to happen"
 

What's the source on this? Cause it might literally be one of the dumbest things I have ever read. People aren't thinking their views are more valid than someone without a university degree (at least not any rational person). The issue is when people don't look into a variety of sources to explain to them what the hell a political issue is even about.

So yeah these "elite" get upset when a huge chunk of the populace only get their political news through social media. Cause it's been demonstrated just how easy it is to spread news that is outright false. And nobody is blaming people for falling for predatory articles. The issue is when people act like whatever article they saw on Facebook is the truth when they haven't even looked into other sources. Hell nobody is even blaming people who legitimately hold opposing viewpoints. It's just when they defend their political view with "Well I saw this article on Facebook/Reddit/whatever..."
 
Jesus just let the whole Brexit business die already.

What a total misdirection of blame as to why peoples lives suck too. Like holy fuck.

Yes let's blame an institution that's been around for 70 odd years, yes it must be that, that's the problem.

I honestly have an impending sense of dread as to what's going to happen over here when automation blows through.
 

twobear

sputum-flecked apoplexy

None of this has anything to do with whether the standing government can use the Royal Prerogative to strip rights from every single British citizen.

'The will of the people' is not a free slate for the government to start acting beyond its legally-defined powers. Especially not when referendums have absolutely no legal authority in themselves.
 

TimmmV

Member
The Spectator columnist James Bartholomew.

A quick google for him returns this page, which says:

He originally trained as a banker in the City of London but before long moved into journalism first with the Financial Times and then the Far Eastern Economic Review, for whom he worked in Hong Kong and Tokyo. His experience in Hong Kong influenced his political outlook – an influence which was re-inforced when he returned to England on the Trans-Siberian Railway through communist China and the Soviet Union.

After some years of freelancing and then being employed to investigate investment opportunities in the newly liberated Easter Europe, he became a leader writer on The Daily Telegraph, the Daily Mail and then back on The Daily Telegraph again.
...
One temporary and very satisfying interlude in his working life was when he gave it all up to home-educate his younger daughter for two years. This involved visiting Italy (more than anywhere else), France and China.
...
For two years he was the Earhart Foundation Senior Fellow in Social Policy at the Institute of Economic Affairs. He remains a fellow of the Institute of Economic Affairs and is also a fellow of the Adam Smith Institute. During 2011 he did some research in Sweden and Italy. Other research visits are to be arranged from the Autumn of 2011 into 2012 will be to Switzerland, France, the Netherlands, Poland, Singapore, Australia and the USA

Yeah, he definitely sounds like someone outside of the elite that he is writing that bollocks about
 
It'll be a red Brexit, on the blood of our enemies and forebears.
It'll be a white Brexit, for the love our great country and the fear on every man, woman & child in the EU for their traitorous institution.
It'll be a blue Brexit, for the fractious EU will weep their salty tears on the remnants of their ruined flag.
RULE BRITANNIA!

/s
 

Protome

Member
So they are going to try and pass their three line law that basically says "Yo, let's do this Brexit thing."

And I'm sure May can get her majority in line for it too. What a mess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom