Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think

Lewes Forum New message

Brexit Cancelled (again)

On 3 Nov 2016 at 1:16pm You caught a fish wrote:

Lol to the government losing the court case, will parliament ever agree (I think not...).

On 3 Nov 2016 at 3:01pm Tasty Tracy wrote:

�� will be on the rise again hopefully.

On 3 Nov 2016 at 5:22pm The people wrote:

Not cancelled as people have voted for out. Our constitution reflects that the will of the people is upheld by the government. The law does not in this instance take preference over the people. There will be much debate again but out is out. If it is overruled what stops a non elected body of people ruling Endgalnd.

On 3 Nov 2016 at 5:27pm A Person wrote:

Oh good. Someone how knows better than the best legal brains in the land.

On 3 Nov 2016 at 6:57pm The people wrote:

A person, the legal challenge was on a narrow tennant that if not over ruled, would require ALL government future decisions being put to the MPs. In effect the Government chosen by the people would not rule, but require Parliament to approve or decline decisions that the Government wants to take. Also if you read the wording on the Vote slip it is binding on any government. The terms of exit, the real issue today, are for the Governement to determine. They have to negotiate with the EU and if these strategies are debated by MPs in advance any negotiating advantage would disappear.

On 3 Nov 2016 at 9:31pm John Stockdale wrote:

@The People, the Referendum was advisory - Parliament could have made its result binding, but didn't - and that is why the Court said Parliament had to vote to rescind the provisions of the European Communities Act before taking an irretrievable step. A number of MPs from all parties who campaigned for a Remain vote have said they will support the implementation of Article 50. That may be a majority. The House of Lords have also indicated they won't frustrate the will of the people.

On 3 Nov 2016 at 10:16pm The people wrote:

John, the wording on the Referendum IS binding and stated that the Government would follow the vote majority. The word advisory was not used on the voting slip.

On 3 Nov 2016 at 10:36pm Johnkay56@gmail.com wrote:

A Person: If you had any experience of the law you would know that pretty well everyone knows better than the best legal brains in the land.

On 3 Nov 2016 at 10:43pm A Person wrote:

The referendum was advisory: there are so many links which explain that, but I assume you can google that yourself.

In any case, the case today was not to prevent Brexit but to insist that the government must consult Parliament about the process and any proposed deal. The government's plan was to use the Royal prerogative to avoid this, and the High Court agreed with the claimants today that such a move was unconstitutional. It found that no-one but Parliament can overturn an Act of Parliament, and it was by Act of Parliament that we joined the EEC in the first place. What it actually means is that Parliament is sovereign, and correct me if I'm wrong but that was one of the reasons people gave for voting Leave in the first place. What a marvellous irony...

On 4 Nov 2016 at 5:08am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:

I've had many a chuckle at the outrage from Brexiteers, who wanted out of the EU so that the British parliament would be sovereign again, getting their knickers in a knot because the High Court has deemed that ... parliament is sovereign.
I'm also baffled as to why people don't get it. Only parliament can repeal an act of parliament, invoking A50 will require the repeal of the ECA, therefore the A50 decision has to be taken by parliament. This was discussed before the referendum even took place.
Time for British Constitution to be taught in schools, I think.
Cameron's cunning plan to pacify the Brexiteers both inside and outside the party has turned out to be such a shambles it almost seems deliberate.