BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

surrey_commuter

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

The ruling is literally what they wanted - all rules to be decided by commons & lords.

Not quite true - what the Brexiters wanted is for all rules to be decided by the UK, not the EU. They weren't addressing the distinction covered yesterday of whether the government can make a particular decision without the approval of the HoC and the HoL.

This isn't to say that the Judges got it wrong, rather it's to highlight that the Brexiters' issue was "UK vs EU" with a characteristic lack of detail as to what "UK" actually means in respect of various types of decision.

I think their current ire is understandable given the unabashed writings of the likes of Blair and Toynbee about how Brexit can still be reversed or watered down to something indistinguishable from being in the EU. They see - rightly or wrongly - that yesterday's ruling facilitates such a reversal/watering down.

My view is that whilst it gives the impression of the UK not knowing its a*se from its elbow, once all elements of the UK establishment (MPs, government, judges and the serious press) get involved and take the matter seriously then the end result is "the right answer". It's when things are rushed or not taken seriously (e.g. Iraq and passing the Referendum Bill in the first place) that problems arise.

You have to differentiate between the fanatics and the man in the street. The fanatics, reasonably, think that every days delay makes Brexit on terms acceptable to them more unlikely. They then whip up the anger levels of the man in the street who has no idea about royal prerogatives or the constitution.

surrey_commuter

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

It's a self imposed deadline, no need to worry about broken promises, it's hardly one of the worst.

Except it will p*ss of the EU folk who want the UK to either stay or get on with leaving ASAP.

Oh cheer up... May is starting to look like a genius. If we assume she wants to not do Brexit, or delay it as long as possible with as soft an option as possible then she is doing a good job. Whilst using unqualified fools is working well it must, as a plan, have a shelf-life.

You could be onto something here. At this rate, so much time will have passed between the referendum and triggering Article 50 that even if no-one has changed their voting intentions there will be a majority to remain given the relative propensity to vote one way or the other at either end of the age scale. As such a "confirmatory referendum" might well be a goer!

With hindsight, the remain campaign missed a trick. Rather than basing Project Fear on economics they should have simply said "Vote remain and avoid years of dull sh*t in the media about trade deals, customs unions, tariffs, vetos, qualified majority voting, plans, red lines, access to single market vs being in the single market, points systems vs work permits, tedious posts in the Guardian from people about 'Where's the extra £350m for the NHS?' or 'We've not left the EU yet' and best of all, minimise the risk of a return to mainline politics of Tony Blair." If they'd said that, they'd have walked it!

I see a big poster campaign "Don't know the difference between the single market and the customs union? Vote Remain!!!

I like to believe that the fix is in and that May is playing a blinder.

rolf_f

Surrey Commuter wrote:

I see a big poster campaign "Don't know the difference between the single market and the customs union? Vote Remain!!!

I like to believe that the fix is in and that May is playing a blinder.

As soon as she put the three stooges in charge of Brexit almost on day one it was obvious that she was either inspired or deranged. If she isn't mad then she seems to be almost the first politician in decades that actually understands what being a politician is about!

daniel_b

Rolf F wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

I see a big poster campaign "Don't know the difference between the single market and the customs union? Vote Remain!!!

I like to believe that the fix is in and that May is playing a blinder.

As soon as she put the three stooges in charge of Brexit almost on day one it was obvious that she was either inspired or deranged. If she isn't mad then she seems to be almost the first politician in decades that actually understands what being a politician is about!

Nicely put - I live in hope.

bendertherobot

In a world where Parliament can call BC in to explain dodgy TUE stuff you'd think that the Mail's editor would be called in to explain, well, every bloody front page this week.

bompington

Rick Chasey wrote:

The mail today

Scarily relevant comparison, Rick. (If your German's not up to it, it basically reads "betrayers of the people, chuck 'em out of the German community")

Anyone who knows even the tiniest bit of history of the 20th century's murderous totalitarianism will shudder at the the phrase "enemy of the people". Clue for the younger generation: it usually preceded getting shot.

I've always been a bit inclined to dismiss people who rant on about the Mail's fascist-supporting past, they usually seem just like one flavour of muck-raking tabloids among all the rest. But now I'm not so sure.

More than just the specifics of Brexit or Trump - I think these things are just symptoms - I am quite scunnered at the depths of bile and irrationality in politics just now, and genuinely worried at the possibility that it might spill over into real violence.

ugo.santalucia

About time...

I am in fact baffled that the government was keen to go ahead without a mandate from the parliament... I think in the UK people need a serious crash course on how democracy actually works

Jez mon

bendertherobot wrote:

In a world where Parliament can call BC in to explain dodgy TUE stuff you'd think that the Mail's editor would be called in to explain, well, every bloody front page this week.

I'm not sure they'd dare to. besides, the politicians are getting an easy ride atm. They are the ones that drafted the referendum bill in such a way that left it open to these legal challenges, yet it's the judges that get the blame for enforcing the law!

bianchimoon

And the Daily Telegraph 'The judges versus the people' I'm just an average Joe, but even I can tell the difference between 3 Judges 'judging' on a point of law and 3 Judges who have staged a coup. The government has lawyers they should be censured and or sacked for not seeing this coming as soon as they announced brexit.

mamba80

also, referendums are a bit of an anomaly in a representative democracy, Parliament really isnt there to carry out the will of the people, or we d never have got rid of capital punishment or slavery, we certainly would nt have gone to war against Hitler.
we have a GE, vote based on their manifestos etc and then they get on with it, if they mess up or we are fickle, kick them out 5 years later.

its also odd that ALL of the referendums the UK has ever had, have been enacted by Tory governments, dont they trust their own judgement?

bompington

mamba80 wrote:

also, referendums are a bit of an anomaly in a representative democracy, Parliament really isnt there to carry out the will of the people, or we d never have got rid of capital punishment or slavery, we certainly would nt have gone to war against Hitler.
we have a GE, vote based on their manifestos etc and then they get on with it, if they mess up or we are fickle, kick them out 5 years later.

its also odd that ALL of the referendums the UK has ever had, have been enacted by Tory governments, dont they trust their own judgement?

I agree. On the surface it's hyper-democratic - and I think that, for the most part, the intention is good - but in practice the binary choice does not make for good decision-making.

bendertherobot

The electorate ignore or are ignorant to what Parliament does. So, each piece of legislation is an expression of the will of the people, even where it is not. So, if you polled people about tax credit cuts they might be against the legislation, but that's irrelevant as our elected representatives decide what is the will of the people.

And that's all the judges did, told those who exercise law in relation to the will of the people to do so. Democracy, sovereignty and the rule of law all absolutely affirmed.

pinno

For all the Mail's influence, they are not going to change democratic process. They just want to sell papers. Monday's headline will be some navel gazing and their audience will have forgotten about today.

I'm wondering if the ruling will be the beginnings of potential political moves to stop Brexit. I think (having read somewhere on here) that the majority of parliament are remainers...

Interesting times ahead, if a bit uncertain.

bendertherobot

Pinno wrote:

For all the Mail's influence, they are not going to change democratic process. They just want to sell papers. Monday's headline will be some navel gazing and their audience will have forgotten about today.

I'm wondering if the ruling will be the beginnings of potential political moves to stop Brexit. I think (having read somewhere on here) that the majority of parliament are remainers...

Interesting times ahead, if a bit uncertain.

As I understand it the vote was not on a constituency basis but the data is available. And, if each MP voted aligned with the will of its constituents there would be a majority still, and a cross party one.

What is interesting, in relation to how democracy and parliament works, is whether each MP in a remain constituency will respect the will of its people.

kingstongraham

If that's one side, I'm on the other. They need to lose.

Pro-Brexit government representatives should be criticising coverage like that, even if they don't like the ruling. Have they?

mrfpb

mamba80 wrote:

its also odd that ALL of the referendums the UK has ever had, have been enacted by Tory governments, dont they trust their own judgement?

True of the referendums for the whole UK, but in my lifetime Labour have had devolution referendums in Wales in the 70s, thne the Scottish, Welsh and the North East devolution referendums in the 90s/00s.

Cameron gave a commitment in the 2010 manifesto that any act that 'significantly' changed the UK constitution should be put to a referendum.

bendertherobot

KingstonGraham wrote:

If that's one side, I'm on the other. They need to lose.

Pro-Brexit government representatives should be criticising coverage like that, even if they don't like the ruling. Have they?

May should publically rebuke the Mail.

pinno

KingstonGraham wrote:

If that's one side, I'm on the other. They need to lose.

Pro-Brexit government representatives should be criticising coverage like that, even if they don't like the ruling. Have they?

They wheeled out IDS and co. in response to the ruling.

Stevo_666

Since when has anyone taken the Dail Mail seriously? Or remembered what last week's sensationalist headline was for that matter. Although it was a good excuse for a minor spot of Godwins law related hysteria.

Stupid red top headlines aside, the decision will make this much more interesting and harder to call. I reckon May is a canny politician but as to whether her motives are to very subtly scupper the whole thing, who knows?

mrfpb

bendertherobot wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

If that's one side, I'm on the other. They need to lose.

Pro-Brexit government representatives should be criticising coverage like that, even if they don't like the ruling. Have they?

May should publically rebuke the Mail.

But then you get into an argument about press freedom if the gov't censures the press. And May looks like she at war with the free press and the independent judiciary.

There are plenty of pro-gov't commentators out there who could censure the Mail, and the judiciary themselves could complain to the Press Complaints Commission

bendertherobot

mrfpb wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

If that's one side, I'm on the other. They need to lose.

Pro-Brexit government representatives should be criticising coverage like that, even if they don't like the ruling. Have they?

May should publically rebuke the Mail.

But then you get into an argument about press freedom if the gov't censures the press. And May looks like she at war with the free press and the independent judiciary.

There are plenty of pro-gov't commentators out there who could censure the Mail, and the judiciary themselves could complain to the Press Complaints Commission

She doesn't need to do it herself, that's what leaks are for.

Jez mon

Stevo 666 wrote:

Since when has anyone taken the Dail Mail seriously? Or remembered what last week's sensationalist headline was for that matter. Although it was a good excuse for a minor spot of Godwins law related hysteria.

Stupid red top headlines aside, the decision will make this much more interesting and harder to call. I reckon May is a canny politician but as to whether her motives are to very subtly scupper the whole thing, who knows?

It's the most/second most read print newspaper in the UK. Its readers do take it seriously. Its online figures will obviously be skewed by people who go there for the shock value.

Stevo_666

Jez mon wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Since when has anyone taken the Dail Mail seriously? Or remembered what last week's sensationalist headline was for that matter. Although it was a good excuse for a minor spot of Godwins law related hysteria.

Stupid red top headlines aside, the decision will make this much more interesting and harder to call. I reckon May is a canny politician but as to whether her motives are to very subtly scupper the whole thing, who knows?

It's the most/second most read print newspaper in the UK. Its readers do take it seriously. Its online figures will obviously be skewed by people who go there for the shock value.

So do you think we are on the slippery slope to becoming like 1930s Germany? That's what one of the earlier post was trying make out :roll:

kingstongraham

Stevo 666 wrote:

Since when has anyone taken the Dail Mail seriously?

This isn't just the Daily Mail, the Telegraph also has an irresponsible headline today. And they should be taken seriously when the 4 papers with these opinions have a combined circulation of 4.5 million. Not taking them seriously got us where we are now.

mrfpb

Stevo 666 wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Since when has anyone taken the Dail Mail seriously? Or remembered what last week's sensationalist headline was for that matter. Although it was a good excuse for a minor spot of Godwins law related hysteria.

Stupid red top headlines aside, the decision will make this much more interesting and harder to call. I reckon May is a canny politician but as to whether her motives are to very subtly scupper the whole thing, who knows?

It's the most/second most read print newspaper in the UK. Its readers do take it seriously. Its online figures will obviously be skewed by people who go there for the shock value.

So do you think we are on the slippery slope to becoming like 1930s Germany? That's what one of the earlier post was trying make out :roll:

Well given the lack of anything from the government beyond stern words on the outbreak of racism since the vote, and May's adoption of a strict anti-immigration stance in her Brexit rhetoric, I think it extends beyond the front pages of newspapers.

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Since when has anyone taken the Dail Mail seriously? Or remembered what last week's sensationalist headline was for that matter. Although it was a good excuse for a minor spot of Godwins law related hysteria.

Stupid red top headlines aside, the decision will make this much more interesting and harder to call. I reckon May is a canny politician but as to whether her motives are to very subtly scupper the whole thing, who knows?

It's the most/second most read print newspaper in the UK. Its readers do take it seriously. Its online figures will obviously be skewed by people who go there for the shock value.

So do you think we are on the slippery slope to becoming like 1930s Germany? That's what one of the earlier post was trying make out :roll:

It is a slippery slope and its not about a repeat of the 30s, it about rubbishing another institution, nurses, doctors teachers the police, prison officers have all felt the wroth of politicians and the press and now, the very bastion of democracy itself, a free and independent judiciary and remember, all these judges have done or can do, is up hold the law, as laid down by Parliament.

If there is a constitutional crisis, then the Tories have caused it, not these judges.

and now a tory MP quits over Brexit.......

wallace_and_gromit

mamba80 wrote:

and now a tory MP quits over Brexit.......

He apparently wants to leave the EU but retain full access to the single market. What exactly does he want to achieve by this sort of "leaving"? Free movement and supremacy of the ECJ are integral to the single market, so maybe he just wants to give up the rebate!

I can understand the likes of Clegg saying they want to remain in the single market, as they didn't want to leave in the first place, but to vote to leave knowing you want to stay in the single market given the EU's long-established views on the 4 freedoms seems odd in the extreme.

Ben6899

Stevo 666 wrote:

Since when has anyone taken the Dail Mail seriously? Or remembered what last week's sensationalist headline was for that matter. Although it was a good excuse for a minor spot of Godwins law related hysteria.

Stupid red top headlines aside, the decision will make this much more interesting and harder to call. I reckon May is a canny politician but as to whether her motives are to very subtly scupper the whole thing, who knows?

It's unfair to call Godwin's Law. Anyone who went to school will recognise the Daily Mail headline as being of the same ilk as Nazi Party propaganda. You can't blame folk for pointing out the obvious.

mr_goo

Democracy? There is no democracy. We think we live in one, but this hasn't been the case since the 70s.

bendertherobot

This resignation is really the indicator of the greater problem. May triggering art 50 would have resulted in no issues yet. The fact that Parliament now has to debate it means that the type of Brexit is debated, proposed, amended, watered down, avoided, added, etc. Each MP has every right to determine what the will of the people is in that respect as all they need to do is give effect to leaving, in whatever form that might be.