11–20 of 109 posts
It looks like a disguised way of putting at least some of the responsibility back into the parliament as a way to say "not my fault"
This is only useful if the binding vote is to decide whether to accept the deal or revert Article 50.
The idea that Article 50 is unilaterally reversible is an odd one. I know that one of the people that helped write it says it was written with that intent, but the wording gives no indication or mechanism to reverse it. And if it is unilaterally reversible, surely that's a really bad thing? There are two reasons I can think of for that. Firstly, countries might start to use it as a form of leverage and brinkmanship i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea that Article 50 is unilaterally reversible is an odd one. I know that one of the people that helped write it says it was written with that intent, but the wording gives no indication or mechanism to reverse it. And if it is unilaterally reversible, surely that's a really bad thing? There are two reasons I can think of for that. Firstly, countries might start to use it as a form of leverage and brinkmanship i…
Practically speaking, if the United Kingdom on January 1st, 2019 declares its previous Article 50 declaration was unlawfully issued, I have a hard time seeing the EU gathering the stomach to essentially enforce sanctions against the United Kingdom. This could all end up being a weird "did you know Britain isn't technically in the EU?" factoid in a hundred years.
I'm not quite sure how that would work, given article 50 was issued after an act of parliament.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Practically speaking, if the United Kingdom on January 1st, 2019 declares its previous Article 50 declaration was unlawfully issued, I have a hard time seeing the EU gathering the stomach to essentially enforce sanctions against the United Kingdom. This could all end up being a weird "did you know Britain isn't technically in the EU?" factoid in a hundred years.
>> Practically speaking, if the United Kingdom on January 1st, 2019 declares its previous Article 50 declaration was unlawfully issued I'm not quite sure how that would work, given article 50 was issued after an act of parliament.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/9/pdfs/ukpga_201700...
very simple and unambiguous
saying that, the UK parliament can declare things to be unlawful retroactively, so it's possible
just at "bernie can still win" levels of possibility
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EU rules don't allow article 50 to be reverted. The binding vote is between accepting the deal and a hard drop.
> EU rules don't allow article 50 to be reverted Those rules can be changed by the unanimous opinion of European states. Practically speaking, the deal Britain had before is gone. It might be able to re-enter if it gives up its asterisks, though. Bone-headed move by its people, either way.
By a minority I'd like to clarify. 51.8% voted for it, of a 72% turnout, of an electorate that is only around 69% of the population.
That works out at around 25% of the population voting for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s news because this is part of May’s attempt to convince people that Brexit is set in stone, and irreversible. Edit: http://www.businessinsider.com/legal-advice-brexit-can-be-re... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/10/brexit-date... More nuance: http://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/63955?lang=en
This news doesn't mean it's reversible. If the parliament rejects the deal PM negotiates, UK will still leave the EU - just without said deal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> EU rules don't allow article 50 to be reverted Those rules can be changed by the unanimous opinion of European states. Practically speaking, the deal Britain had before is gone. It might be able to re-enter if it gives up its asterisks, though. Bone-headed move by its people, either way.
> Bone-headed move by its people By a minority I'd like to clarify. 51.8% voted for it, of a 72% turnout, of an electorate that is only around 69% of the population. That works out at around 25% of the population voting for it.
By that line of reasoning, every government we've had in my lifetime has been illegitimate, elected only by a tiny minority of the population.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/11/david-davis...
This is only useful if the binding vote is to decide whether to accept the deal or revert Article 50.
^ Best article I've seen on Brexit options and why "reversing article 50" is not a viable option as far as the EU is concerned. It is based on an interview with a former Lib Dem MEP (Andrew Duff), who is basically a consultant constitutional lawyer advising both sides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bone-headed move by its people By a minority I'd like to clarify. 51.8% voted for it, of a 72% turnout, of an electorate that is only around 69% of the population. That works out at around 25% of the population voting for it.
I dislike this argument. By that line of reasoning, every government we've had in my lifetime has been illegitimate, elected only by a tiny minority of the population.