Brexit court defeat for UK government

I think to understand todays decision and realise it is actually a win for democracy, you have to look back in time..

Early 90's saw the begining of the current EU system, ladies and gentlemen I give you The Maasricht Treaty!

Wiki Maascricht Treaty

In accordance with British constitutional convention, specifically that of parliamentary sovereignty, ratification in the UK was not subject to approval by referendum.

I remember this way back when, they never gave us a referendum for the treaty, other countries did, as at the time Maascricht was the foundation for what we have now and was a departure from the common market we had prior to this treaty.

This is why we are in the mess we are today...because the Tories bulldozed it through, now they want to do it again, this musn't be allowed to happen, which is why todays ruling is so important and just.

Note to add: Although I actually have no problem with being in the E.U, yet I still used my vote to have a voice which we were denied when it mattered, the referendum, as any referendum is advisory, therefore just because the people vote for it doesn't mean the result will be adhered to, whilst I understand people believe this undermines democracy, it is also worth noting that the referendum was a propaganda fest on both sides, you could almost say people voted in the capacity of dimminished responsibility, which is why I guess these things are advisory, because truly nobody should have been swayed in either direction, there should have been no spin...just truth and fact.

Sadly truth and fact was far from what we got, so to be able to further scrutinise and take a breath is important, after all where will your democracy be if politicians blindly follow its people's wishes into oblivion...I know it's not popular, it's not what the people feel is democracy, but it is hopefully going to stop us from being bankrupted, isolated and generally f*cked over.

We might not know or trust our elected officials, we elect because this is the system we have.

a reply to: SprocketUK

Democracy isn't the government of the day making decisions that will affect the future of everyone of us without any parliamentry scrutiny. I thought part of the reason for us leaving was supposed to be about getting back sovereignty to our own parliament.

I don't think it is anything to do with not getting urony, more to do with not getting some other type of humour. Perhaps I am judging you too harshly on that comment and you would like to explain what you meant?

MPs voting with their own conscience (what we elect them to do) Is not bring a tyrant. Advocating acts of violence against against those we disagree with however....

originally posted by: auraofblack
a reply to: ScepticScot

The MP being killed wasn't in poor taste at all....... I'm sure her constituents were supremely happy when they elected her and she made it her sole purpose to represent the Syrian refugees.... Never mind the job she was elected to do..... See the theme?

Every single one should be strung to the nearest lamppost by their neck.

Fxxk this country and fxxk these rulers.

What the hell is wrong with you????? You are condoning the murder of a young mother because you disagree with her political views.

Okay, so referendums are not binding, merely advisory.

It's a good job the Scots decided to remain part of the Union, otherwise we would have had a revolt North of these Isles, if the decision had to go back to Parliament.

I think the Government will lose the appeal at the Supreme Court, but Brexit will still happen. All M.P's will need to vote the way in which the constituency voted, otherwise there will be an awful lot of M.P's out of work after the next General Election.

a reply to: Power_Semi

That's precisely how I see the whole sorry mess.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: SprocketUK

Democracy isn't the government of the day making decisions that will affect the future of everyone of us without any parliamentry scrutiny. I thought part of the reason for us leaving was supposed to be about getting back sovereignty to our own parliament.

I don't think it is anything to do with not getting urony, more to do with not getting some other type of humour. Perhaps I am judging you too harshly on that comment and you would like to explain what you meant?

MPs voting with their own conscience (what we elect them to do) Is not bring a tyrant. Advocating acts of violence against against those we disagree with however....

Just film flam.

There are about 5 MPs I can think of who can be relied upon to vote their conscience. The rest, as True Brit alluded to, vote their wallets.

There is a clear demarcation here between what the people want and what the rulers do.
If they choose to do the opposite of what we want, secure in the knowledge they can rig the system to protect themselves, then they get what they deserve.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: SprocketUK

If Parliament fail to follow the instructions of the voting public, that will simply mean that half the Members of Parliament involved in scuppering the enactment of our will, have to be replaced with considerable speed.

Further to that, I see no way that it could fail to pass through the commons, given that without the support of the electorate, the individuals in that building will not have jobs.

A small problem there though, any MP who may vote against Brexit could be justly saying he/she represents his electorate...same goes for an MP voting out. It's potentionally even worse for the Prime minister who is pretty bounden to vote out, even though she originally voted to stay in at the referendum, even had a private conference with Goldman Sachs in London in May 2016 when she said this,

"I think the economic arguments are clear," she said during the 26 May talk at the investment bank in London.

"I think being part of a 500-million trading bloc is significant for us. I think, as I was saying to you a little earlier, that one of the issues is that a lot of people will invest here in the UK because it is the UK in Europe," she added.

"If we were not in Europe, I think there would be firms and companies who would be looking to say, do they need to develop a mainland Europe presence rather than a UK presence? So I think there are definite benefits for us in economic terms."

That story was leaked out recently, so she has gone against her electorate in a big way, and against her own beliefs stated above, in fact what she is saying in parliament now, (for our delection) is exactly the opposite to that private discussion, indeed glosses on as she tells us investors are queing at the door to get into the UK, which is a pack of lies.

Not only that, she's not interested in the rest of the UK, just London.......the little EU.

a reply to: SprocketUK

48 % o f people voted against leaving the EU. Do they not get the right to be represented as well?

All this case means is that leaving requires proper parliamentry scrutiny and legislation. You know what we use MPs are actually meant to do. Not give a free hand to May & co.

Notice you still haven't explained the irony regarding your Ghanian comment, any particular reason?

a reply to: ScepticScot

The appeal is likely to reverse this ruling, but the PM could use this politically in a number of ways ... none of them salutary to the United Kingdom as a whole.

If the will of the people expressed in the BREXIT vote which means LEAVE won and REMAIN lost, then Parliament cannot be brought in to validate or invalidate the will of the people. If the will of the people expressed by referendum cannot direct the government how to proceed then the entire system is a farce.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: SprocketUK

48 % o f people voted against leaving the EU. Do they not get the right to be represented as well?

All this case means is that leaving requires proper parliamentry scrutiny and legislation. You know what we use MPs are actually meant to do. Not give a free hand to May & co.

Notice you still haven't explained the irony regarding your Ghanian comment, any particular reason?

More sleight of hand.
Your masters and betters will be pleased with you.

Democracy is never about doing what the smallest number of voters want. Otherwise we'd have had a monster raving looney party become government.


Shoulda read Guyana not Ghana. My phone obviously has its own preference.
She's a multi millionaire over and over, not born here, married to another member of the wealthy super elite that wants everything their own way.
NOTHING about brexit will adversely affect her she's one of those international types that doesn't really have a country, they flit between them on a whim and she was allowed to screw this up for everyone when she'll be on the first private plane back home or wherever the moment things don't suit her selfish, foreign arse.

My primary reason for voting to leave the EU was to re-establish the authority of The House of Commons in the UK.
In accordance with current legislative procedure it is therefore right that Parliament should have an opportunity to debate the issue.

But I am concerned that this whole process is being dragged out and there seems to be a complete lack of urgency and despite the usual political soundbites and rhetoric very little leadership and direction.

People were enthused by the whole debate surrounding the referendum and its result.
The complete inertia displayed by our so called leaders and representatives has resulted in the general public sinking back into their apathetic and catatonic state.

Parliament needs urgent and radical reform if it is to meet the expectations we put on it today.
We need to eliminate and eradicate the current party political system and career politician model that has evolved.
MP's need to realise they are merely representatives and even servants of the electorate.


So, whilst I recognise Parliaments right to debate etc I am also very concerned about the motivations of those who seek to have this debate.
If Parliament decides it has the power to somehow delay, dilute or even veto the result of the referendum then surely the time will then be right for the people of this country to re-establish its authority over our Members of Parliament.

As Joe said; Anger can be Power!

a reply to: ScepticScot

Even Jo Cox's husband has publicly stated that her murder should not be used as a tool for either side in the Brexit debate.

A solitary person with a well documented history of mental issues has been charged with her horrific murder.

Its somewhat ironic, and possibly outright hypocritical, that most of those who bring up her murder to demonise those who voted to leave the EU are also the very self same people who say we should not demonise a whole religion for the terrorist activities of numerous individuals of that religion.

The simple fact is the British people voted to leave the EU.
What we need now is a clear strategy of how we are to achieve that whilst ensuring that the wishes and best interests of the British people are looked after.
To achieve that we require the input and active participation of the best of all sections of UK society.

Playing the party political game or seeking to further other agenda's will only serve to hinder that process and so prove counter productive to the best interests of all of us 'ordinary people'.

a reply to: SprocketUK


Sleight of hand? Masters? Really?

Democracy is also not about mob rule. That's why we have a parliamentary democracy.

Oh and her home is here in the UK where she has lived since being a child but thanks for confirming what I suspected of your view point.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: ScepticScot

Even Jo Cox's husband has publicly stated that her murder should not be used as a tool for either side in the Brexit debate.

A solitary person with a well documented history of mental issues has been charged with her horrific murder.

Its somewhat ironic, and possibly outright hypocritical, that most of those who bring up her murder to demonise those who voted to leave the EU are also the very self same people who say we should not demonise a whole religion for the terrorist activities of numerous individuals of that religion.

The simple fact is the British people voted to leave the EU.
What we need now is a clear strategy of how we are to achieve that whilst ensuring that the wishes and best interests of the British people are looked after.
To achieve that we require the input and active participation of the best of all sections of UK society.

Playing the party political game or seeking to further other agenda's will only serve to hinder that process and so prove counter productive to the best interests of all of us 'ordinary people'.

I have literally never seen a single person suggest that leave voters are in anyway responsible for her murder.

I have however read two separate posters on here tonight suggest violence against MPs who hold pro EU views.

Some people on here urgently need to get a sense of perspective.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: SprocketUK


Sleight of hand? Masters? Really?

Democracy is also not about mob rule. That's why we have a parliamentary democracy.

Oh and her home is here in the UK where she has lived since being a child but thanks for confirming what I suspected of your view point.

Meh.

www.express.co.uk...

There is no conflict of interest in this judge ruling on Article 50, is there? Oh lordy no.

a reply to: ScepticScot

I have literally never seen a single person suggest that leave voters are in anyway responsible for her murder.

Then with all due respect, why did you bring it up in the first place?
What was the relevance in mentioning it in context with the subject under debate?

So many times I've seen her name brought up by pro-EU people.
Why?
They may not directly link the two but the insinuation is always there.

Its not an uncommon tactic and I'm absolutely certain that if it was the other way round many of those with anti-EU views would do exactly the same thing.

Naivety is not one of my many faults.

I have however read two separate posters on here tonight suggest violence against MPs who hold pro EU views.

I would never support indiscriminate violence against individual MP's - but if Parliament decides its will is greater than that of the people then maybe some sort of direct action is needed to remind them that they are civil servants and only representatives of the people.

You and I have debated with each often enough for you to know of my contempt for our politicians and how I firmly believe our current party political system is no longer fit for purpose.

Some people on here urgently need to get a sense of perspective.

Indeed.
But what course of action will be left for people if Parliament overrules the will of the people?

a reply to: Freeborn

It was brought up in response to the OP calling for the fire bombing of MPs offices. In that case I think it was entirely relavent. Another poster has basically said she deserved it for supporting refugees.

We already have a way of taking action against MPs if they don't represent the people. It's called elections.

The people calling for 'direct action' are the ones who oppose democracy.

For those on ATS disgusted and angry with today's ruling you may want to join www.leave.eu. They apparently have been unindated today with people wanting to join. Hopefully looks like they are trying to organise demonstration. The time has come I think to show MP's we are no longer asleep!

a reply to: ScepticScot

We'll have to agree to disagree on whether it was relevant or not.

We already have a way of taking action against MPs if they don't represent the people. It's called elections.

Indeed we do.
The existing electoral process offers an opportunity once every five years to vote these people out.
In the mean time these people can wilfully ignore the wishes of their constituents and do as they choose.
Personally I think that's inadequate and current electoral and parliamentary processes require radical reform - just my opinion and one that I recognise is not shared by many.

The people calling for 'direct action' are the ones who oppose democracy.

Direct action only if Parliament chooses to ignore the will of the people.
Direct action can take many shapes and forms - fire bombing MP's offices is not one I personally would advocate or support.....not unless Parliament was to impose some sort of totalitarian clampdown, a scenario I find unlikely, at present.

In the meantime I accept that due Parliamentary procedure has to be followed - I just suspect the motivations of many who are actively seeking Parliamentary debate etc.

Only time will tell what the outcome will be, but we must be aware of the possible abuses and manipulations of Parliamentary procedures and power and be prepared to hold those involved to the highest level of public scrutiny.

The ultimate authority in this country could and should lie with the people themselves and not our elected representatives.