For the Brits: When will BREXIT referendum happen ?

[holzz]

even as a child of immigrants to our country, i don't get how polish or czech people are moaning. most do hard work, but not all immigrants do. we should be more selective of who does come in, only select people who share similar values. there's a reason why blacks and Indians of immigrants groups do the best in the UK, not Pakistanis or Bangladeshis, different cultures and religions.

[Stavros]

even as a child of immigrants to our country, i don't get how polish or czech people are moaning. most do hard work, but not all immigrants do. we should be more selective of who does come in, only select people who share similar values. there's a reason why blacks and Indians of immigrants groups do the best in the UK, not Pakistanis or Bangladeshis, different cultures and religions.

In my Eden, the person who dislikes Bellini has the good manners not to get born (Auden)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._and_education

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ss_and_finance

http://bbpower-inspiration.com/

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics...-so-successful

[Stavros]

A week is a long time in politics. Since my last post Nissan have committed themselves to build the new model Qashqai at their plant in Sunderland, a boost for the motor industry but one that has come with bells and whistles provided by the tax-payer in the form of subsidies, although the government, of course is not calling them that. If the UK leaves the EU any tariffs imposed on British made goods may be met by the tax-payer to maintain car production, though one doubts the steel industry will also be subsidised.

This morning -Thursday 3rd November- the High Court has judged that the Government cannot invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to begin the UK's exit from the European Union without Parliament's approval. The Government claimed the Referendum gave it the authority to use the 'Royal Prerogative' to enact a constitutional change without reference to Parliament, the Court disagreed. This (I think) is the key passage in the judgement-

The most fundamental rule of the UK’s constitution is that Parliament is sovereign and can make and unmake any law it chooses. As an aspect of the sovereignty of Parliament it has been established for hundreds of years that the Crown – i.e. the Government of the day – cannot by exercise of prerogative powers override legislation enacted by Parliament. This principle is of critical importance and sets the context for the general rule on which the Government seeks to rely – that normally the conduct of international relations and the making and unmaking of treaties are taken to be matters falling within the scope of the Crown’s prerogative powers.[*] That general rule exists precisely because the exercise of such prerogative powers has no effect on domestic law, including as laid down by Parliament in legislation...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...log-navigation

*For example the Govt doesn't need Parliamentary approval to sever diplomatic relations with a state (as happened in 1986 when the UK severed diplomatic relations with Syria).

Obviously the Govt will appeal, and I expect it to lose again because the case for Parliamentary approval is in my frail opinion unassailable. But if it does fail, this means that not only will Parliament have to vote on a Bill that gives some detail as to what the Exit negotiating terms will be, it will take some time for the Bill to pass through Parliament and will give decisive powers to the unelected House of Lords, which would put the UK in the amusing situation where a vote which the Brexit camp said would take powers back from an unelected European Commission could be scuppered by an unelected House of Lords right here in our own Parliament. Or this could just be an exercise in 'smoke and mirrors' whereby much gets said, words printed, opinions challenged, amendments made -but what you see: Brexit, is what you get. And anyway most of it will be decided by the negotiating teams in the EU.

Or we could re-assert the primary of Parliament and stop holding 'advisory' referendums on divisive subjects and transforming them into policy, but as the leader of the Labour Party and Chief Weasel, Jeremy Corbyn is committed to taking the UK out of the EU, as he always has been, I expect much temper and tedious debate, with the prospect that the exit may take longer than expected but happen in its own messy way.

[flabbybody]

still digesting this AM development after a long night of World Series viewing.
I agree the government appeal will likely fail. It'll be facinating to see the thing play out in Parliament next year. In the states, they made a big deal about a lot of Leave folks having immediate buyers remorse. Now they'll actually get the chance.
can't wait to hear from Nigel and Bojo

[peejaye]

As usual Stavros, a very informative piece. You & I know; a large number of influential people, mainly wealthy, Politicians and other "hangers -on" have done their best to derail the UK's departure from the Brexit result, refuse to accept democracy. I know we differ on this subject but does all this mean there is a possibility this country will not be leaving the EU after all? This may result in serious unrest and possible anarchy on our streets, understandably so as people feel so strongly about it. Look at voter turn out!
I happen to agree; Cameron was a total fool in holding a referendum but it was so typical of him being so distant from ordinary working people in this country! What's done is done.

[Stavros]

As usual Stavros, a very informative piece. You & I know; a large number of influential people, mainly wealthy, Politicians and other "hangers -on" have done their best to derail the UK's departure from the Brexit result, refuse to accept democracy. I know we differ on this subject but does all this mean there is a possibility this country will not be leaving the EU after all? This may result in serious unrest and possible anarchy on our streets, understandably so as people feel so strongly about it. Look at voter turn out!
I happen to agree; Cameron was a total fool in holding a referendum but it was so typical of him being so distant from ordinary working people in this country! What's done is done.

A realist will argue that the opportunity to derail Brexit has been given to Parliament, but that it is unlikely to happen, not least because the main opponents, the Scottish National Party need all of the Labour Party to vote with them together with a number of Tories, but Labour is in disarray and many Labour MPs have always wanted out of the EU anyway. May could calculate that in these extraordinary times we need a new election to re-affirm Brexit, which I would expect her to win with an increased majority at the expense of Labour, with incidentally, the Tories winning at least 5 seats in Scotland owing to Ruth Davidson's stellar impact on that country and indeed the party.

What today's judgement has done is to take control of the timetable away from the government and hand it back to Parliament. The debate on Brexit will in effect be a re-run of the arguments we have heard before and since the referendum, with the key issue being access to the Single Market. In theory, Parliament could therefore attach conditions to Article 50 so that once invoked, the understanding would be that the British will press for a 'modified' Brexit which severs formal legal and institutional relations, while retaining access to all or part of the Single Market, yet European Ministers of various countries have already said they would oppose compromises of this kind just to keep the UK in touch at some level.
There could also be a measure designed to protect the combined academic and industrial research and development programmes that are at risk if the UK leaves the Single Market, as well as the Erasmus programme that allows student exchanges across the EU.

But again, the fundamental problem is that the EU has indicated it does not want a pick 'n mix solution but a simple In or Out across the board, and as that is what most of the Brexit team in the UK want, I fear that whatever package the British take to the negotiating table the end result will be a 'hard Brexit' if only to prevent other EU member states extracting special privileges -we should always factor in what the EU wants as well as what the UK wants.

In the meantime, we face daily debates on what Brexit means, as if the public were not weary of it already, and markets will rise and fall as one issue dominates another. At least Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has captured the spirit of this voyage on which we are embarked, having said in a speech at an awards ceremony yesterday that the UK will make 'a titanic success of Brexit'...

[holzz]

this high court bollocks.

parliament is sovereign.

no court can strike down parliament's actions.

acccept we remainers LOST and get over it!!!

[flabbybody]

this high court bollocks.

parliament is sovereign.

no court can strike down parliament's actions.

acccept we remainers LOST and get over it!!!

That's essentially what the court decided...the sovereignty of parliament.
begs the question... has the court made the BREXIT referendum irrelevant ?

[broncofan]

That's essentially what the court decided...the sovereignty of parliament.
begs the question... has the court made the BREXIT referendum irrelevant ?

Maybe not if mps vote brexit out of respect for the referendum even if they wouldn't in their own wisdom. That's all I got...that was also my understanding of the court decision as well so I'm glad you said it.

[flabbybody]

Stavros said it way before the court ruling. The referendum is not legally binding. An Article 50 trigger is strictly a parliamentary function.