Is Britain about to leave the EU?

[EnglishEdward]

Whether there should or should not be an advisory referendum is a separate issue.
The fact is that on 3 November 2016, the High Court ruled:
"...a referendum on any topic can only be advisory for the lawmakers in Parliament".

Which completely misses the point. The key lawmakers are not in the UK Parliament, but in European institutions.

The purpose of sending the letter re article 50 is not so that Theresa May can make laws without the UK Parliament's consent.
It is to stop the European Union and its foreign courts making laws without the UK Parliaments' consent.
So if the point is that the law in the UK should only be made with the consent of the UK Parliament
(or for the testing ground, the Scottish Parliament), the court should be supportve of sending the Article 50 letter.

 

[Ferocitus]

Which completely misses the point. The key lawmakers are not in the UK Parliament, but in European institutions.

The purpose of sending the letter re article 50 is not so that Theresa May can make laws without the UK Parliament's consent.
It is to stop the European Union and its foreign courts making laws without the UK Parliaments' consent.
So if the point is that the law in the UK should only be made with the consent of the UK Parliament
(or for the testing ground, the Scottish Parliament), the court should be supportve of sending the Article 50 letter.

The salient point is that the High Court made the decision regarding referenda and that they are not binding.
Your points about EU laws vs UK laws are separate issues that the High Court was not asked to rule on.
They don't operate on a basis of "throw these in for consideration too while you're at it, M'Luds."

 

[FriendlyFire]

I am unaware of getting any special privileges from the EU that are not offered to others.

Really ?
UK demanded and recieved the rights to opt out of any EU treaty as it see fit. It the only EU country with this special position.

Opting out of the
Schengen
Economic and Monetary Union
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
Area of freedom, security and justice

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opt-outs_in_the_European_Union

 

[FriendlyFire]

You seem to have difficulty reading simple English. I said the Brexit vote would have gone differently if EU officials like Junckers had actually a

Thats right the EU is already hardening its immigration stance, refugee policies in effect reversing its policies. The Euro is another problem that needs to be dealt with and finally the EU is slowly turning around its austerity policies in exchange for limited stimulus as EU is printing out euromonies perhaps not quite enough though.

You Leavers cannot have it both ways, an efficient EU means a centrally empowered EU government able to push through changes quickly and efficiently
The EU is slow and inefficent because it needs to build concessions and agreement between all its member states. Has very little executive and law making power. Every nation has veto rights on certain actions.
You cannot have both at the same time its just impossible

 

[EnglishEdward]

Really ?
UK demanded and recieved the rights to opt out of any EU treaty as it see fit. It the only EU country with this special position.

Opting out of the
Schengen
Economic and Monetary Union
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
Area of freedom, security and justice

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opt-outs_in_the_European_Union

I suggest that you consider actually reading the wikipedia article that you referenced.

Ireland is also not part of Schengen and Denmark also does not use the Euro and has an opt out re the Charter and the Area.

 

[EnglishEdward]

The salient point is that the High Court made the decision regarding referenda and that they are not binding.
Your points about EU laws vs UK laws are separate issues that the High Court was not asked to rule on.
They don't operate on a basis of "throw these in for consideration too while you're at it, M'Luds."

I await the outcome of the UK Supreme Court to see how narrowly or widely it has decided its scope is on this case.

 

[Lillefix]

Really ?
UK demanded and recieved the rights to opt out of any EU treaty as it see fit. It the only EU country with this special position.

Opting out of the
Schengen
Economic and Monetary Union
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
Area of freedom, security and justice

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opt-outs_in_the_European_Union

You forgot the UK rebate.

 

[Ferocitus]

I await the outcome of the UK Supreme Court to see how narrowly or widely it has decided its scope is on this case.

Appeals are very specific. The SC is being asked to rule on whether the government can use royal prerogative powers
to implement A50 without the explicit approval of MPs and peers.
Not long to wait: Tuesday, 9.30am, unless somebody leaks it beforehand.

 

[Mega Tsunami]

The whole point of the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act is so that the PM can't just call a GE any time they like. There needs to be a no-confidence vote (plus other stuff) or two-thirds of the sitting MPs agree that there should be a GE for it to happen.

Fixed term was designed to protect minority parties in a coalition government.
If May was to try the two-thirds option, the LibDems and others such as UKIP would jump at the chance – even the Greens perhaps.
And how could HM’s official opposition say no to it? They would never live it down if they refused. Indeed Corbyn said late last year he would welcome a GE, especially if it comes before the proposed boundary changes. (And yes, I know he flip flops from hour to hour never mind month to month, but still…)
Not sure about the Nationalist up north – chances are they will just be their normal bolshy selves and vote against it – but that won’t be enough to stop it.

Of course a lot might depend upon the two by-elections coming up on 23rd Feb.
Both are Labour strongholds but there is a chance that UKIP might double, or even treble their number of MPs. If that happens Corbyn might shy away from a GE but if he wins he might want to go for it.

There are other ways for a majority government to get round the fixed term act:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...n-theresa-may-actually-call-one-a7132846.html

Appeals are very specific. The SC is being asked to rule on whether the government can use royal prerogative powers
to implement A50 without the explicit approval of MPs and peers.
Not long to wait: Tuesday, 9.30am, unless somebody leaks it beforehand.

The general consensus is that the government will lose 7-4
And they already have a tweet size bill to put through parliament to negate it.

And Corbyn has instructed his MPs to support Article 50. But then he said maybe not. Or did he? Something like that anyway.

 

[Arakhor]

I read about the Welsh burning homes bought by English people in the newspapers and watched reports on television.

So, why slur an entire national group when what you really mean is an nationalist group from 20 years ago? That's just barmy.

The purpose of sending the letter re article 50 is not so that Theresa May can make laws without the UK Parliament's consent. It is to stop the European Union and its foreign courts making laws without the UK Parliaments' consent.

What? The whole issue is whether the PM has the prerogative power to activate Article 50 unilaterally. How on earth do you manage to somehow turn this imminent Government defeat into some sort of triumph over the EU?

If May was to try the two-thirds option, the LibDems and others such as UKIP would jump at the chance – even the Greens perhaps.

It's certainly not impossible, no, but it's no longer something any PM can just do. I really wouldn't be surprised if some Tory MPs rebelled against it, as your link suggests.

 

[FriendlyFire]

I suggest that you consider actually reading the wikipedia article that you referenced.
Ireland is also not part of Schengen and Denmark also does not use the Euro and has an opt out re the Charter and the Area.

Yeah Denmark the superpower of the EU forcing the rest of the EU to bend to its will and provide opt outs for new EU treaties
Meanwhile little UK piggy back on the opt out wrestled from the EU by Denmark

An immigration emergancy break was next too
The UK as the third most powerful EU member of course welded the third most influence and third most political power.

 

[EnglishEdward]

An immigration emergancy break was next too

Which would have been available to any other member state.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Why accuse me of slurring an entire national group?

I never said that all the Welsh were currently burning homes.

The fact is that a large number of homes were burned.

Once again you do not argue in favour of the EU, you merely snipe at myself as a Leaver.

 

[Verbose]

The UK as the third most powerful EU member of course welded the third most influence and third most political power.

Problem with that is that the UK didn't, not really. Not so much because it couldn't, but rather because for several years before Brexit it just wouldn't. Couldn't be arsed to. Effectively the UK was on its way out for quite a while before the referendum.

 

[Ferocitus]

And Corbyn has instructed his MPs to support Article 50. But then he said maybe not. Or did he? Something like that anyway.

Something not like what The Guardian said, that's certain!

Did you get duped by The Guardian’s ‘three-line’ Brexit farce?
http://www.thecanary.co/2017/01/20/did-you-get-duped-by-the-guardians-three-line-brexit-farce/

 

[JohannaK]

Why accuse me of slurring an entire national group?

I never said that all the Welsh were currently burning homes.

The fact is that a large number of homes were burned.

Once again you do not argue in favour of the EU, you merely snipe at myself as a Leaver.

You said the Welsh burn English people's houses. Your wording implied actuality and relevance. As if it was a custom of Welsh people in general to, still today, set about burning houses of the darned English invaders!

And then some unrelated nonsense about the EU and being a victim.

 

[EnglishEdward]

burnt down or otherwise damaged

There are two words in the above and they are both past tense.

Yes it actually happened, just like the Americans landing on the moon.

 

[Arakhor]

Yes it actually happened, just like the Americans landing on the moon.

Lots of things actually happened but given that your bringing that up was to excuse your believing that English population density is all that matters in the UK, that does speak volumes.

 

[JohannaK]

The Great Plague also happened. Coincidentally, it is as relevant to the discussion as those Welsh nationalist arsonists.

 

[Ajidica]

Has Theresa May/ pro-Brexit people put forward any new arguments about why people should totally go along with Brexit, or is there argument still basically limited to this?