Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

British Government loses Article 50 court fight

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 316 posts

Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight

#131

Post by dabeeeenster »

bb101 wrote: post #123

Many people voted pro-Brexit in the referendum due to the increasing disparity and alienation between the ruling/political class and the rest of the country. By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen. That's a sound result for the politicians and chiefs of industry based in London, but what will it mean for the wider UK? Both the courts and parliamen…

"By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen."

That's hugely uncertain.

Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight

#132

Post by exox »

bb101 wrote: post #123

Many people voted pro-Brexit in the referendum due to the increasing disparity and alienation between the ruling/political class and the rest of the country. By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen. That's a sound result for the politicians and chiefs of industry based in London, but what will it mean for the wider UK? Both the courts and parliamen…

However in comparison to the American election, where Trump has been explicitly clear in his plans and prejudices.

A number of voters opting for Leave did so based on information provided by the Leave campaign, a lot of which turned out to be very misleading or just plain false.

Edit: And so it's not unreasonable to think that a portion of Leave voters may have already changed their minds in the wake of what has transpired.

Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight

#133

Post by usgroup »

pmyteh wrote: post #110
usgroup wrote: post #11

This was frankly unexpected. I wonder what P(supreme=no|high=yes) ? If anyone knows please say. Will the gov bother appealing? The ruling makes available a sabateurs toolbox and could potentially delay Brexit for some time. My bet is that the government don't appeal and then go onto put serious media pressure on parliament to pull the trigger quickly. Having said that I was definitely betting that the high court woul…

Not sure about P(supreme=no|high=yes). I've read the judgment in some depth; although I'm not a lawyer I am a political scientist with a strong interest in constitutional law. The principle that rights established by Parliament cannot be abrogated by the executive in exercise of prerogative powers is a really strong one in English common law and the judgment seems very strong there. The technical question about wheth…

Very grateful for the depth of your answer, thank you ...

Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight

#134

Post by KaiserPro »

alphadevx wrote: post #74
jbb555 wrote: post #67

Ultimately a clear majority of the UK population is in favor of leave. This has increased since the vote as the lies of the remain campaign proved not to be true. Much of the remain support is concentrated in a handful of London consistences meaning that almost all english MPs have a significant majority of leave supporters. They have to vote for that or they won't be selected in a future election. In any case. If th…

> This has increased since the vote as the lies of the remain campaign proved not to be true. Just curious as an outsider, what lies are those?

The main rallying cry was:

o there are no down sides to leaving

o Leaving would give us 350 million pounds extra a week to improve healthcare

o We would have a strong currency

o The world would fall over it's self to give "free trade deals" to the UK

o UK tourists would be able to go to the EU without a visa

o No businesses would leave the UK to avoid trade tarrifs/customs hops

o The UK wouldn't loose service "passport rights" that allow banks, IT companies and service providers to provide services to the continent without extra taxes or hurdles

o that more good and secure jobs would be created, and globalisation would be rolled back

Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight

#135

Post by [deleted] »

mavhc wrote: post #93
koolba wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I really wish they'd stop calling it a "clear majority". I'm not sure when 52-48 was ever such. It's a majority though. If they wanted to have a higher threshold for the vote (say 60%) they should have done as much when writing the referendum.

Only 27% of UK people voted to leave, out of all of them.

[deleted]

Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight

#136

Post by return0 »

hexiedexie wrote: post #56
UK-AL wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not many

6% of leave voters regret their choice according to an academic study published about a month ago, enough to swing the vote the other way.... And as the effects of a potential Brexit continue to bite, this percentage will only increase http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/brexit-bri...

This suggests that brexit is still supported (can't judge quality):

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/696760/british-no-reg...

Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight

#137

Post by ldjb »

nicolapede wrote: post #72
ldjb wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parliament is involved in the Brexit process, including through the Brexit Select Committee. Politicians from across different parties will have their say on how the UK leaves the EU. However, the British people have voted to leave the EU, and it would be an affront to democracy if the will of the people were denied by Parliament. It would be unacceptable for Parliament to vote against triggering Article 50, so why e…

The referendum gave the What. Parliament would give the How and When.

The government has already set out how they want Brexit to work. I haven't heard Labour or other parties set out how they want Brexit to work, except the Lib Dems who don't want Brexit to happen at all.

If the only plan for Brexit out there is the one the government has, then of course that's the one that is going to be implemented. Parliament does have the opportunity to influence that plan, though.

Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight

#138

Post by zigzigzag »

_delirium wrote: post #92
jlangenauer wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, of course, that how "hard" Brexit is, is not really up to the UK, or its parliament. It'll depend what sort of deal the rest of the EU is willing to strike, and unless either the UK is willing to compromise on allowing free movement of people, or the EU is willing to compromise on the indivisibility of the "four freedoms" - neither of which seems likely - then the Brexit is, in fact, going to be quite…

There are a reasonable number of MPs who support compromise on free movement, i.e. leave the EU but reach an agreement with the EU similar to the ones that non-EU members Norway, Iceland, and Switzerland have signed. That's one of the "soft Brexit" options. It's not guaranteed that the EU would accept this proposal, but it's something the British government could choose to seek. Whether this is consistent with the re…

There are no soft brexit options. Anyone who thinks this hasn't been paying attention and isn't aware of the facts (ironic, considering how often such people accuse others of not knowing the facts).

No such offers are on the table anymore, not even to Switzerland, which has been told by the EU that there will never be any more negotiations unless they agree to replacing their current arrangements with a new one that's basically EU membership by another name. Additionally the Swiss also voted to impose immigration quotas years ago and the deadline for that referendum (a legally binding one) is February. The EU have told them to vote again. The Swiss Parliament is now desperately pretending that a law change that doesn't involve quotas is sufficient to satisfy a referendum that specifically asked the population about implementing quotas.

Even Switzerland is no longer able to get a Switzerland style agreement. The chances of the UK getting one are zero.

The UK has to accept that the EU is now an enemy of the country and is fully committed to the impoverishment and exclusion of the British people. There won't be any cooperation on anything with the EU ever again, and not because the UK doesn't want it but because the EU is held together by fear.

Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight

#139

Post by ricksplat »

koolba wrote: post #61
midgetjones wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish they'd stop calling it a "clear majority". I'm not sure when 52-48 was ever such.

> I really wish they'd stop calling it a "clear majority". I'm not sure when 52-48 was ever such. It's a majority though. If they wanted to have a higher threshold for the vote (say 60%) they should have done as much when writing the referendum.

My take on this is that it was a "qualified" majority to "Leave" but no specific plan was outlined as to what "Leave" entailed. "Remain" is easy: Status quo. "Leave" means many different things to many people.

In a constitutional republic (such as Ireland for instance) a referendum clearly specifies the change to the constitution down to the wording and an open informed debate is had on what the consequences, and possibilities of those unforeseen etc.

There was nothing like this with "Leave". Article 50 as a the mechanism by which leave might be initiated was never even mentioned.

Even since the vote there has been all sorts of inferences based on opinion polls about what the "Leave" constituency desire and it has largely been interpreted as "keep the foreigners out" - and that is an interpretation that clearly has no constitutional footing.

Brexit was at best a plebiscite, dressed up as a referendum. There is a mandate for leaving the EU, but there is no prerogative at all for any of the specifics of how that happens nor has there been a robust discussion over what "Leave" even means.

It will be sad to see the UK go and it will be disruptive for many but if that is her will then so be it, but I wouldn't want it to happen before all that are involved get to have their say on what it means.

Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight

#140

Post by colmvp »

exox wrote: post #90
midgetjones wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish they'd stop calling it a "clear majority". I'm not sure when 52-48 was ever such.

Given the 72.2% turnout[1] it was just 37.5% of the voting-eligible population that voted for Brexit. The whole Brexit saga makes me think more than ever that voting on issues of such national importance (including general elections) should be made mandatory. [1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/how-did-turnout-a...

Kind of surprised that only 72.2% turned out, given the implications of the vote. When Quebec was voting for sovereignty in 1995, 93.52% of the eligible voters in the province voted. When Scotland voted for the same recently, it was around 85%.

In any case though, if people don't want to show up, then why force them? I'd put the 'blame' on the campaigners for not underlining the importance to get out to vote to constituents.

Post reply on HN