Do we have to leave the EU a QC says no
Discussion
Jinx said:
Hugo a Gogo said:
UK is not ruled by the tyranny of the masses, it's an elective democracy. For example if 56 million people said we should kick out everyone who lives in Hull, send them to the Falklands, MPs can quite rightly say "no, we're not doing that no matter what you say"
And the elective democracy decided to offer a referendum which asked a simple question and requested a simple majority. If the elective democracy then decides to ignore said result or uses other means to get around said result I hope the Queen uses her powers to remove the said elective democracy. Greg66 said:
^ Seems a bit artificial.
The current Government has stated its policy is to implement the referendum result. S-L-O-W-L-Y it seems.
A new Conservative PM could take up those reins or reject them. And could either way go to the country (pretty sure Labour would give the necessary votes for a 2/3 majority to dissolve Parliament) to seek a fresh mandate - eg for a very specific Leave route/option.
The outcome of that GE could be a Government - single party or coalition - which has pledged as a manifesto promise not to implement the referendum.
Democracy: as good as the last vote on the subject.
(By way of postscript: the potential constitutional puzzle would be if a new Remain Government had more seats but fewer votes across the country than the defeated Leave side - by no means impossible with FPTP - and fewer votes than were cast in favour of Leave in the referendum.)
Its not the governments decision - its parliaments. If parliament votes against it.....The current Government has stated its policy is to implement the referendum result. S-L-O-W-L-Y it seems.
A new Conservative PM could take up those reins or reject them. And could either way go to the country (pretty sure Labour would give the necessary votes for a 2/3 majority to dissolve Parliament) to seek a fresh mandate - eg for a very specific Leave route/option.
The outcome of that GE could be a Government - single party or coalition - which has pledged as a manifesto promise not to implement the referendum.
Democracy: as good as the last vote on the subject.
(By way of postscript: the potential constitutional puzzle would be if a new Remain Government had more seats but fewer votes across the country than the defeated Leave side - by no means impossible with FPTP - and fewer votes than were cast in favour of Leave in the referendum.)
lostkiwi said:
carinatauk said:
lostkiwi said:
Doesn't mean it will happen. Our democratically elected representatives could decide otherwise.
What do you think will happen then? It will make the turn out for the GE's interesting!For one, they won't all vote against it. Two, if they did overturn the referendum vote then they are taking a big chance with the electorate; which could go one of three ways, reduction in numbers voting, voting towards an extreme, or people don't remember what has happened and carry on.
The credibility of the elected representatives is in the balance, vote against the people who elected you and we will have to see what happens.
Who will I vote for? who knows, water under the bridge, who is in charge, what does the landscape look like. If I chose to vote for UKIP, Conservative, Labour etc then that is my business not others, but I question why I will vote at all as it could be a farce as this is.
What I see now is MPs not following the will of the people; one elected representative even had the audacity to tweet that they as "leaders" knew better than us the voters. With reference to how, why and what the reasons are for the referendum vote is a historical; how the MPs go from here will determine the political landscape for the future
lostkiwi said:
Greg66 said:
^ Seems a bit artificial.
The current Government has stated its policy is to implement the referendum result. S-L-O-W-L-Y it seems.
A new Conservative PM could take up those reins or reject them. And could either way go to the country (pretty sure Labour would give the necessary votes for a 2/3 majority to dissolve Parliament) to seek a fresh mandate - eg for a very specific Leave route/option.
The outcome of that GE could be a Government - single party or coalition - which has pledged as a manifesto promise not to implement the referendum.
Democracy: as good as the last vote on the subject.
(By way of postscript: the potential constitutional puzzle would be if a new Remain Government had more seats but fewer votes across the country than the defeated Leave side - by no means impossible with FPTP - and fewer votes than were cast in favour of Leave in the referendum.)
Its not the governments decision - its parliaments. If parliament votes against it.....The current Government has stated its policy is to implement the referendum result. S-L-O-W-L-Y it seems.
A new Conservative PM could take up those reins or reject them. And could either way go to the country (pretty sure Labour would give the necessary votes for a 2/3 majority to dissolve Parliament) to seek a fresh mandate - eg for a very specific Leave route/option.
The outcome of that GE could be a Government - single party or coalition - which has pledged as a manifesto promise not to implement the referendum.
Democracy: as good as the last vote on the subject.
(By way of postscript: the potential constitutional puzzle would be if a new Remain Government had more seats but fewer votes across the country than the defeated Leave side - by no means impossible with FPTP - and fewer votes than were cast in favour of Leave in the referendum.)
In my hypothetical, the present Govt acts sufficiently slowly such that Parliament never gets to consider giving an art 50 notice before the GE. The GE then overtakes the unimplemented referendum result.
ETA: Boris has it seems ruled out a snap GE. Which tells you all you need to know about the landmines he sees littering that particular path through the maze...
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 28th June 18:08
ATG said:
jshell said:
vonuber said:
jshell said:
People f
king whinging all the time make us look like retards.
Actually people voting leave on the basis of getting rid of foreigners , an imaginary amount of money appearing to fund the NHS and, of course, making britain great again rooooaaarrrrrr! makes us look like retards.king whinging all the time make us look like retards.Well, 52% of us anyway.
On this occasion the democracy construct fell apart and showed it to be what it really is. That is, sometimes it may not be healthy, but if you give people choice, be prepared to live with it!
We should be exploring every possible avenue to undo the damage, and if some of those avenues include a constitutionally acceptable way of staying in the EU, then so be it. We're not going to look any worse for it.
Course we should...
So, someone please clarify this. CMD gets elected with the promise of a referendum. Its held and the result is as is. If it were not a legal and binding vote to leave, then why was £9M of government money spent telling us to stay, if indeed the result is nothing more that optional. Especially when CMD repeatedly said that the result would stand and result in an exit. Is this the case that there are more ways to exit and the leave campaign failed to highlight that the vote had to be passed through the commons if we leave via Art 50?
Radio 4 Law in Action today is worth a listen.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07kdsdl
They had 3 Professors of European and Constitutional Law on discussing the situation. They basically said the following:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07kdsdl
They had 3 Professors of European and Constitutional Law on discussing the situation. They basically said the following:-
- There are no presidents here to work from.
- The referendum result is not binding on either Government or Parliament (note the distinction).
- It is the PM who invokes Article 50 and timing is at their discretion - There is no need for a Parliamentary vote as this is effective an extension of foreign policy set be government not directly by either parliament or the people.
- Article 50 notification has to be a conscious act and cannot be interpreted from a slip of the tongue or mis-translation in a memo from civil servant.
- There is nothing in European Law to stop early stage negotiations with either the EU or other member states on either an official or unofficial level.
- The 2 year negotiation period is from Article 50 notification, anything not decided at that point just falls apart with no agreement.
- Anything that is European Law no longer applies from the exit date but is would be possible to do a block incorporation via single act of parliament and then repeal or amend on a case by case basis at a later date.
EnglishTony said:
Ought to be a bit careful about wanting Article 50. There's a bit in there about holding a legally binding referendum. Which means including all citizens.
You have made this up.The text is:
"Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."
Which basically means that a state can choose to leave but does nothing to define what might be behind that decision. 'Constitutional requirements' really depends on the state in question and in the case of the UK I'd love to see where it says anything about a 'legally binding referendum' as opposed to (for example) just having the Prime Minster use the delegated Royal Prerogative which is actually the more likely route.
There might be some argument about whether the Royal Prerogative can actually be used in this case but that's a different argument & based on some interpretations rather than actual statute. I'm pretty sure the EU won't push the point.
rb5er said:
Desperate remainers clutching at straws again. How sad.
We know we'll stay though don't we ..Conservative leadership contest = referendum 2
The immediate election = referendum 3
All this against the backdrop of zero Brexit leadership or plan B & visible chaos caused by the witless Brexit liars
Also Brexit needs the backing of parliament who are against it.
Common sense will prevail . Just a shame that Boris & co caused a few billions in damage for their vanity project
What I want to know is, is there any Conservative MP who will be brave enough to stand up and press the button - knowing full well they could go down in history as not only a PM to deliberately cause a recession, but potentially lead to the break up of the UK. They could make the party unelectable for decades.
The more I look at it, the more I have a grudging respect for the greasy, pasty faced DCI John Baranaby lookalike Cameron.
The more I look at it, the more I have a grudging respect for the greasy, pasty faced DCI John Baranaby lookalike Cameron.
Jimboka said:
We know we'll stay though don't we ..
Conservative leadership contest = referendum 2
The immediate election = referendum 3
All this against the backdrop of zero Brexit leadership or plan B & visible chaos caused by the witless Brexit liars
Also Brexit needs the backing of parliament who are against it.
Common sense will prevail . Just a shame that Boris & co caused a few billions in damage for their vanity project
You seem very confident. Unlike Labour there are 4 or 5 up for the position, I doubt any pro-eu MP would have the bare faced balls to reneg on Camerons decision. In fact, I wonder if CMD's final act may well be instigate Art 50...Conservative leadership contest = referendum 2
The immediate election = referendum 3
All this against the backdrop of zero Brexit leadership or plan B & visible chaos caused by the witless Brexit liars
Also Brexit needs the backing of parliament who are against it.
Common sense will prevail . Just a shame that Boris & co caused a few billions in damage for their vanity project
Look above a few posts, one of the bullet points in there is no need for the approval for Art 50, it can be triggered by the PM.
I am firmly in the Remain camp.
I am reasonably sure that leaving the EU will hurt me both personally and my business.
I do however respect the choice of the majority, even though I disagree with it.
The various threads on here (and arguments between facebook friends) show just how divisive this subject is.
I don't want a second referendum, I don't want parliament to block the exit. Take a decision, stick to it, and move on.
I am reasonably sure that leaving the EU will hurt me both personally and my business.
I do however respect the choice of the majority, even though I disagree with it.
The various threads on here (and arguments between facebook friends) show just how divisive this subject is.
I don't want a second referendum, I don't want parliament to block the exit. Take a decision, stick to it, and move on.
Jonesy23 said:
EnglishTony said:
Ought to be a bit careful about wanting Article 50. There's a bit in there about holding a legally binding referendum. Which means including all citizens.
You have made this up.The text is:
"Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."
Which basically means that a state can choose to leave but does nothing to define what might be behind that decision. 'Constitutional requirements' really depends on the state in question and in the case of the UK I'd love to see where it says anything about a 'legally binding referendum' as opposed to (for example) just having the Prime Minster use the delegated Royal Prerogative which is actually the more likely route.
There might be some argument about whether the Royal Prerogative can actually be used in this case but that's a different argument & based on some interpretations rather than actual statute. I'm pretty sure the EU won't push the point.
Also, if the RP is used then I can see a legal challenge emanating from this Country. Out of 17m+ Remainers there will be plenty of people willing to put up the cash, not to mention corporations. A Court can't quezstion an Act of Parliament but it can with the RP The Case of Proclamations [/i]and the [i]Fire Brigades Union] of the 1990's shows that much.
Starfighter said:
- Anything that is European Law no longer applies from the exit date but is would be possible to do a block incorporation via single act of parliament and then repeal or amend on a case by case basis at a later date.
sunbeam alpine said:
I am firmly in the Remain camp.
I am reasonably sure that leaving the EU will hurt me both personally and my business.
I do however respect the choice of the majority, even though I disagree with it.
The various threads on here (and arguments between facebook friends) show just how divisive this subject is.
I don't want a second referendum, I don't want parliament to block the exit. Take a decision, stick to it, and move on.
Well said that man I am reasonably sure that leaving the EU will hurt me both personally and my business.
I do however respect the choice of the majority, even though I disagree with it.
The various threads on here (and arguments between facebook friends) show just how divisive this subject is.
I don't want a second referendum, I don't want parliament to block the exit. Take a decision, stick to it, and move on.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff