Reality Check: Could High Court ruling on Article 50 scupper Brexit?

[Pfeffer]

From my view (i am not from the UK) I think the brexit wasn't the best move. Although I agree the EU is bollocks, I think the loss is also quite severe (with regards to trade). They should make a new EU with only healthy states, like the UK, DE, FR, BE, SE, FI, LU, AT and DK. I do agree we should invest in some former soviet states like PL, CZ, HU, RO etc (raw materials), but the amount we chip in should pay out on the long term. That's not really apparent at the moment.

The UK might be worse of without the EU. You are on an Island afterall, most of your raw materials come from mainland Europe. I'm sure brexit would stabilize over time (trade agreements etc), but image the cost that's associated with it.

If you guys pull through, I hope it's an eye opener for the EU. I wouldn't be surprised if there would be a new referendum to stay though. I think a lot of people didn't understand the impact and under estimated it. Anyway, the pill will be bitter at first.. but in 10 years everything will be back to normal.

 

[Russ146]

And ANYONE who says different should be classed as a Traitor to the democratic decision of the people and locked in the tower forever

 

[Russ146]

The Richest Countries in Europe, Norway and Switzerland are neither in the EU.

Its a no-brainer once the dust has settled. Will somebody get that moron Clegg out of it and make him get a proper job and work for a living like the rest of us.

 

[Russ146]

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/over-dollar10million-in-exclusive-supercars-seized-by-swiss-government/ar-AAjTgdj?li=AA8sb7&ocid=spartanntp

And here an example of why you never want Britain to become a Dictatorship.

 

[Pfeffer]

Per capita Luxembourg is richer than those two. EU also has very bright sides, not just negative ones. Unfortunately they push too many irrelevant laws that can be perfectly handled by the respective parliaments. Also they spend way too much on bottomless wells like Greece.

And that's were my concern is, you guys might end up "free" but that doesn’t help if your economy crashes. The pound already went from 1.47 to 1.21 USD, that's huge. Also, a lot of multinational companies have entities in tax heaven UK for sales to Europe.

Somehow politics never tend to turn they kinds of thing to the good.

 

[dad_of_jon]

Is it just me? One of the main arguments for Brexit was to return sovereignty to the UK courts and UK parliament from the EU. Now there's a fuss that the UK courts have judged that Parliament should decide...:lol: It would be funny...

the irony is not lost on me, wasn't it a hedgefund manager who brought this challenge? how many of you think that was done for altruistic reasons? I do understand the legalities, what I think is a little dangerous is if our elected government gets one hand tied behind it's back by parliamentary conditions.

DC didn't get a great deal from the EU if he had, the result could have gone the other way.

 

[Russ146]

Income tax mainly goes on over paid managers of quangoes and pensions and hoards of useless civil servants. We have more Admirals than Ships, more Chief Fire officers than Fire Engines and on it goes all living off the Tax payer.

80% of what you pay for Road fuel is TAX
20% VAT is added to everything you buy
60% of crippling council Tax and business rates goes on Wages for useless people doing pointless non-jobs and Gold plated pensions.
Insurance Tax doubled last week to 10%. Anyone notice that? or were you misled by the distraction news?

And you want yet another level of eyewatering overpaid cockroaches living off the tax payer on the basis of more EU regulations?

Sometimes i really wonder

 

[geetee]

And ANYONE who says different should be classed as a Traitor to the democratic decision of the people and locked in the tower forever

Well lock me up then because as much as I accept the decision of the electorate the LAW states that the people do not have the right to push this ahead without Parliamentary approval. To proceed without this step would put the whole process outside of the law and open to question.Anything other would open the system to chaos, the vote was after all advisory (with No absolute requirement to follow other than MPs future careers )
Much better to put it to a Parliamentary vote and most MPs will abide by the peoples decision however it is lawfully within their remit to vote against and damn the consequences.

 

[Russ146]

So are we a democracy or not?

You cant pick and choose to suit your own personal whims.

The democratically Elected parliament have to uphold the will of the people and approve the decision.

Because if we are not then overturning the will of the people will be a very bad day for Britain.

So prepare yourselves for huge tax increases, more and more pointless rules and regulations and oppression for a non elected EU Dictatorship. You read it here first.

 

[geetee]

the irony is not lost on me, wasn't it a hedgefund manager who brought this challenge? how many of you think that was done for altruistic reasons? I do understand the legalities, what I think is a little dangerous is if our elected government gets one hand tied behind it's back by parliamentary conditions.

DC didn't get a great deal from the EU if he had, the result could have gone the other way.

It's the LAW, not parliamentary conditions that is driving this . The Government cannot just choose which laws to obey especially where the consequences are this big.Sovereignty lies with Parliament on behalf of the people.
Imaging if this person had left this challenge until next year and it was found that Article 50 was launched illegally and the whole Brexit process had to be reversed? Chaos and financial disaster would ensue so much better to clarify now and follow the proper process albeit a little slower.

A lot of people have queried why she brought this case but the reason is irrelevant, she has every right to ask for clarification without having to explain herself. After all no one queries why the majority of people voted Leave, they just did for whatever reason they wanted as was their right!
In the long run she has done the government a big favour by avoiding problems later and at NO point has she asked the judges to reverse the referendum only to reinforce the sovereignty of Parliament in this issue.

 

[geetee]

So are we a democracy or not?

You cant pick and choose to suit your own personal whims.

Because if we are not then overturning the will of the people will be a very bad day for Britain.

Our system is a Parliamentary democracy which means that people vote for MPs to act on their behalf however MPs are vested with the power to vote as they see fit but must face their voters in a democratic vote for re-election.
You cannot have a system where teh people on the street just decide what happens without it going through parliament and the referendum was always advisory with MPs advised to follow the will of the people BUT not bound to do so!

 

[Pfeffer]

Wasn't the referendum basically like 49.9/50.1 anyway? So even there, what is going against the will of people. You are screwing the other half anyway. Imho they are obliged to consider the options and see what's best for the country. That's what they are chosen for. If they decide on something you don't agree with, you can retry after the next election. Unfortunately we keep retrying with politicians.

PS. Don't be offended for me being an outsider. I don't care what you guys end up with, just enjoying the discussion whilst enjoying some Ariana lager. Hopefully it turns out for the best either way.

 

[zippy40]

Income tax mainly goes on over paid managers of quangoes and pensions and hoards of useless civil servants. We have more Admirals than Ships, more Chief Fire officers than Fire Engines and on it goes all living off the Tax payer.

80% of what you pay for Road fuel is TAX
20% VAT is added to everything you buy
60% of crippling council Tax and business rates goes on Wages for useless people doing pointless non-jobs and Gold plated pensions.
Insurance Tax doubled last week to 10%. Anyone notice that? or were you misled by the distraction news?

And you want yet another level of eyewatering overpaid cockroaches living off the tax payer on the basis of more EU regulations?

Sometimes i really wonder

I would agree with most of what you say except about gold plated pensions. The public sector workers pensions are what ALL pensions should be like not 'gold plated'. We should stop looking on with jealousy about public sector pensions and instead look on with envy - so we can lobby government to ensure all people have this level of income.

 

[zippy40]

Wasn't the referendum basically like 49.9/50.1 anyway? So even there, what is going against the will of people. You are screwing the other half anyway. Imho they are obliged to consider the options and see what's best for the country. That's what they are chosen for. If they decide on something you don't agree with, you can retry after the next election. Unfortunately we keep retrying with politicians.

PS. Don't be offended for me being an outsider. I don't care what you guys end up with, just enjoying the discussion whilst enjoying some Ariana lager. Hopefully it turns out for the best either way.

not quite half but close. Basic premise of democracy is that the greater view wins - no matter how little. So brexiteers won the race. We can debate the intricacies and how it is not really the will of the people, but it was definitely a democratic decision.

I would suggest that the MPs delegated their responsibility for 'whats best for the country' to the electorate and as a result they should abide by that decision. It may not be the best decision but it is the one that we have been left with. Anything less would be undemocratic and may make the british electorate wake up and realise that their laws are not as democratic as they may have realised!

 

[HebridesRob]

https://www.indy100.com/article/whe...re-being-investigated-in-one-map--bylZ35tQIXb

So, potentially, the Conservatives won the General Election illegally, then, with a tiny majority, enacted a referendum that was designed to unify their party, which took us out of Europe with a tiny majority.

Apparently the EU is corrupt and undemocratic.

Still waiting for the government to condemn attacks on the judiciary. Is this why they appear to be undermining the judges?

What would Erdogan do?

 

[Pfeffer]

not quite half but close. Basic premise of democracy is that the greater view wins - no matter how little. So brexiteers won the race. We can debate the intricacies and how it is not really the will of the people, but it was definitely a democratic decision.

I would suggest that the MPs delegated their responsibility for 'whats best for the country' to the electorate and as a result they should abide by that decision.

I get your point, but a referendum is only the opinion of people (to see how the masses think). It's not a binding outcome. In my opinion a good, democratic country is one that weighs these kind of decisions in a chosen parliament with multiple political parties, with the referendum being a way to get stuff pushed on the political agenda.

Remember that Hitler was also democratically chosen. Propaganda can change your mind set without you knowing, together with the rest of the masses. There are a lot of psychological trics politics, school books, media and especially bad news can play on a man. Some decisions should be made rationally, not with emotion.

So in the end it's good that a parliament with different parties/views look into it first. Freedom of choice is nice, but if your economy collapses the first two generations after you will be in poverty. These things can have huge impacts.

Again a little note - nothing personal, just healthy discussion.

 

[dad_of_jon]

It's the LAW, not parliamentary conditions that is driving this . The Government cannot just choose which laws to obey especially where the consequences are this big.Sovereignty lies with Parliament on behalf of the people.
Imaging if this person had left this challenge until next year and it was found that Article 50 was launched illegally and the whole Brexit process had to be reversed? Chaos and financial disaster would ensue so much better to clarify now and follow the proper process albeit a little slower.

A lot of people have queried why she brought this case but the reason is irrelevant, she has every right to ask for clarification without having to explain herself. After all no one queries why the majority of people voted Leave, they just did for whatever reason they wanted as was their right!
In the long run she has done the government a big favour by avoiding problems later and at NO point has she asked the judges to reverse the referendum only to reinforce the sovereignty of Parliament in this issue.

As far as I was concerned the conservatives pledged the people would get a vote on the re-negotiated eu deal if they were voted in.

They got in labour didn't. So the government had the referendum result to deliver. I'd have thought they would have considered what needed to be in place for a leave vote because for a stay vote it would been an agreed process and less work? The government surely has a right to govern the country without the micro-management of parliament. If they missed something that parliament should have been consulted on I think that's only because expected the UK to vote remain.

Clearly the government didn't take the right advice if the ruling is upheld.
as they thought they could go right ahead.

What saddened me was that bringing this matter up SEEMED TO ME to be against the spirit of what the UK people in %age terms narrowly voted for.

What concerns me now is, as our Nederlander Forumite has pointed out is that the Country is pretty much split on this issue.

I'll stop now as i'm veering OT - time for a cycle, then a beer :grin:

 

[Strollon15]

Wasn't the referendum basically like 49.9/50.1 anyway? So even there, what is going against the will of people. You are screwing the other half anyway. Imho they are obliged to consider the options and see what's best for the country. That's what they are chosen for. If they decide on something you don't agree with, you can retry after the next election. Unfortunately we keep retrying with politicians.

PS. Don't be offended for me being an outsider. I don't care what you guys end up with, just enjoying the discussion whilst enjoying some Ariana lager. Hopefully it turns out for the best either way.

Way off, 51.9% out against 48.1% in, a majority of 1,269,501 votes, not really that close at all. Even if it was by 1 vote the result shouldn't be questioned, that's what a referendum is all about.
The sooner we sort this out and cut all ties the better for the country !!

 

[Russ146]

I would agree with most of what you say except about gold plated pensions. The public sector workers pensions are what ALL pensions should be like not 'gold plated'. We should stop looking on with jealousy about public sector pensions and instead look on with envy - so we can lobby government to ensure all people have this level of income.

Interesting comment, lets make income tax 90% so we can all have full pay, index linked pensions shall we?

It all comes from Tax payers. Slash and burn 90% of quangoes, get these people into jobs where they have to do REAL work for a change, like picking carrots something worthwhile.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Theresa May has insisted the government is "getting on" with Brexit, following a High Court ruling that Parliament must vote on when the formal process of leaving the EU can get under way.

The prime minister urged MPs and peers to "remember" the referendum result.

UKIP leader Nigel Farage warned of protests on the streets if the decision in favour of Brexit was ignored.

But the campaigner who brought the High Court case said it would stop ministers acting like a "tin-pot dictatorship".

Judges ruled on Thursday that Parliament should vote on when the government could trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.

Mrs May has promised to get this done by the end of next March.

The government, which argues ministers already have the powers to trigger Article 50 without MPs and peers having a vote, has vowed to fight to get the ruling overturned next month in the Supreme Court.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said his party would block the triggering of Article 50 in Parliament if Mrs May did not guarantee continued access to European the single market.

Speaking on BBC One's Andrew Marr Show, Gina Miller, the investment manager who brought the High Court case against the government, said: "Everyone in this country should be my biggest fan, because we have used our own money to create certainty about the way ahead."

She added: "Do we want a country where we have no process?"

But Mr Farage said the court's decision meant the country was faced with "half Brexit", adding that the "reach of the European Union into the upper echelons of this country makes it quite difficult for us to trust the judgement".

He warned: "If the people of this country think that they're going to be cheated, they're going to be betrayed, then we will see political anger, the likes of which none of us in our lifetimes have ever witnessed."

Asked if there was a danger of disturbances in the street, he replied: "Yes, I think that's right."

Mr Farage said: "The temperature of this is very, very high. I'm going to say to everyone who was on the Brexit side, 'Let's try and get even. Let's have peaceful protests and let's make sure, in any form of election, we don't support people who want to overturn this process.'"

The row has escalated in recent days, with several newspapers being highly critical of the judges who made the decision, the Daily Mail branding them "Enemies of the people".
Mrs May insists the government will not be put off its Brexit timetable. Under this, the two years of negotiations with the EU are due to end in 2019, when the UK will leave the 28-member organisation.

Speaking at Heathrow Airport as she left for a trade mission to India, Mrs May said: "I think we all have to remember, and what MPs and peers have to remember, is that we had a vote on 23 June.
"The British people, the majority of the British people, voted to leave the European Union. The government is now getting on with that."

'Latitude'

She added: "I want to ensure that we get the best possible deal for the UK as we leave the EU, that's the best possible deal for trading with and operating within the single European market.

"But alongside that, the UK will be a confident, outward-looking nation, taking its place on the world stage, looking to build relationships around the globe."

Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt told The Andrew Marr Show said Mrs May had to be allowed "latitude" when negotiating with the EU over Brexit.

He said: "The impact on the economy will be far worse if through some parliamentary mechanism Theresa May is forced to lay out her entire negotiating strategy."

It was, anyway, "highly unlikely that Parliament would not, in the end, back a decision to trigger Article 50", Mr Hunt said.

'Spanner in works'

However, Jeremy Corbyn said Labour would block the prime minister from triggering Article 50 unless she agreed to the party's "Brexit bottom line", which includes access to the European single market.

He told the Sunday Mirror: "The court has thrown a big spanner in the works by saying Parliament must be consulted. We accept the result of the referendum.

"We are not challenging the referendum. We are not calling for a second referendum. We're calling for market access for British industry to Europe."

Mr Corbyn said the opposition would not allow Article 50 to go ahead unless Mrs May agreed four principles:

access to the single market

a commitment to EU workplace rights

guarantees on safeguarding consumers and the environment

A pledge to commit funds for any EU capital investment lost by Brexit

The Labour leader said his party "would be ready" if the government decided to call an early election.

But Mr Hunt said: "I think a general election is, frankly, the last thing the government wants.

"Theresa May wants to get on with the job and frankly it is the last thing the British people want, with all these very, very important national decisions."


BBC News.