Brexit Thread

[Husar]

fun fact: I fitted my new RX480 whilst tipsy - seems fine so far.

Since we don't seem to agree on a lot otherwise, maybe we can be RX 480 buddies? Also, welcome to the club!

[Gilrandir]

We're only having Brexit now because the Lisbon Treaty was forced on us,

You are having Brexit because some politicians spouted too many fairy visions of the Promised EUless land.

So, now we have a REAL Constitutional crisis instead of an imagined one looming. Great fucking job, guys.

I thought you lot didn't HAVE a constitution. We went and printed ours up and everything. Sometimes, our political leaders even follow it.

You don't have to have a constitution to enjoy constitutional crisis.

[Husar]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...P=share_btn_tw

On Thursday morning, the high court ruled that parliament – and not the prime minister by use of prerogative powers – would need to trigger Article 50 to start the UK’s exit from the European Union.

On Thursday evening, a portion of the British media exercised its own prerogative: to attack the judges behind the ruling.

Apart from the obvious issue of not respecting the highest court (disagreement obviously happens here as well, but never as strongly as in this case AFAIK), I would also like to ask why the judges look like sad christmas presents wearing carpets from the 70s on their heads?

I get that judges are meant to look ridiculous in every country, but those wigs really take the cake.
And no, that does not mean one shouldn't respect the ruling, it is merely about maybe updating the looks just a tad little bit once in a thousand years. I mean they probably also, hopefully, don't talk anymore like they did in the 1070s.

[Sarmatian]

To paraphrase dear old Furunculus, there's no connection between demos and kratos in the UK.

The people clearly want out, but the bureaucratic machine won't let them. Maybe Brits should get the EU to help them cut through all that red tape and regulations.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

To paraphrase dear old Furunculus, there's no connection between demos and kratos in the UK.

The people clearly want out, but the bureaucratic machine won't let them. Maybe Brits should get the EU to help them cut through all that red tape and regulations.

City mice/country mice. The city mice "know better" and think the country mice voted Yes for silly reasons.

[edyzmedieval]

You don't have a constitutional crisis - the UK doesn't have a constitution. At most you have a discussion about the rule of law, and let's not forget the referendum was advisory and in no way legally binding.

And the High Court judges simply respected the rule of law.

[Kralizec]

You don't have a constitutional crisis - the UK doesn't have a constitution. At most you have a discussion about the rule of law, and let's not forget the referendum was advisory and in no way legally binding.

And the High Court judges simply respected the rule of law.

Well, strictly speaking 'constitution' just means 'foundation'. As in, the fundamental principles that underpin the state and its laws. In most countries the word is translated and understood as meaning a document containing these principles (i.e. Grundgesetz/Grondwet, meaning 'basic (written) law')
That would have been perfectly fine except, well, we have the UK.

Even in countries that have written constitutions there are principles or conventions that are not literally included in the written document, but which are considered important enough that violating them would cause outrage and political upheaval. I don't think the Brexit court case qualifies though. I'm not even sure I understand PVC's point.

From the angle of the EU, article 50 is drafted under the assumption that countries which start the exit procedure had better be serious about wanting to leave. And from the UK angle, such a commitment would have to be approved by parliament first.
It certainly sucks for the UK parliament that they "have" to agree to an exit procedure without knowing beforehand what the final terms will be, or without being able to dismiss the final terms if it turns out they're not beneficial....but I don't see how any of that amounts to a constitutional crisis. Or why it reflects badly on the EU, which seems to be PVC's implied point.

[Pannonian]

City mice/country mice. The city mice "know better" and think the country mice voted Yes for silly reasons.

The city mice know the country mice voted for stupid reasons. They know this because, immediately after the result, the country mice asked the government to guarantee what the EU had previously given them. When the tendency over the past few decades indicates that the government has little inclination to give them that, and in some cases (eg. Liverpool), deliberately starve the region into irrelevance in favour of the city mice. Given the option of spending 5bn on London or spending numerous packets of 100m in outlying regions, Westminster can be relied on to give London 4.8bn while the regions have to make do with 10m each. Londoners know this, despite the regioners desperately asking Westminster for assurances that they won't miss out on the 100m that the EU had previously given them. The city mice have little sympathy for the almighty shafting that the country mice are going to get in coming years.

[Brenus]

"The people clearly want out, but the bureaucratic machine won't let them" Nope. The decision of the Parliament ruling over the Monarchy, as May evoked the "Royal Prerogative" was dealt with by the Civil War (1642 to 1646).

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

How? What circumstances are you thinking of, if we have already covered those in which the Parliament explicitly invokes the article and the government proceeds with negotiation, the Parliament rules out the referendum result and maintains the status quo, or the Parliament rules out the referendum with the caveat that the government is directed to otherwise seek modifications or accommodations to EU membership standards (as the UK has always done)?

What specifically could happen or come into legal conflict in these or unmentioned circumstances? Clandestine diplomacy at the highest levels? That would be a more run-of-the-mill political crisis.

Are you sure you haven't gotten confused and weren't just thinking of this the whole time?

Well, I told you I wasn't sober.

Really though, I think it's two issues. You have Parliament backing a Referendum and then possibly disregarding it. Then you also have Parliament trying to curtail the government's Royal Prerogative using the Referendum as a stalking horse.

Of course, Parliament may just rubber stamp the Referendum - we don't know. However, at the time the Referendum was held it was generally understood that it would decide the issue. In a country where Common Law still governs that's actually very important. The Referendum Bill apparently didn't specify if it was Mandatory or Advisory. The Government position is that it was understood to be mandatory and therefore is. The Judges to the opposite view.

Since we don't seem to agree on a lot otherwise, maybe we can be RX 480 buddies? Also, welcome to the club!

We can be buddies, just don't expect me to vote with you. Also, thanks. I'm liking it so far.

You are having Brexit because some politicians spouted too many fairy visions of the Promised EUless land.

You don't have to have a constitution to enjoy constitutional crisis.

No, we're having Brexit because, with regards to the EU, Parliament has repeatedly acted Contrary to the Will of the People. This has created a Democratic Deficit, as Sarmation says, and because we are a democracy it made a referendum on membership inevitable. The British don't really want what the EU is selling, except for trade. We want trade

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...P=share_btn_tw

Apart from the obvious issue of not respecting the highest court (disagreement obviously happens here as well, but never as strongly as in this case AFAIK), I would also like to ask why the judges look like sad christmas presents wearing carpets from the 70s on their heads?

I get that judges are meant to look ridiculous in every country, but those wigs really take the cake.
And no, that does not mean one shouldn't respect the ruling, it is merely about maybe updating the looks just a tad little bit once in a thousand years. I mean they probably also, hopefully, don't talk anymore like they did in the 1070s.

To be fair, the current costume is only about 2-300 years old, and those are bad wigs. It's perfectly possible to have a good wig and not look like an idiot. However, now that woman can be judges (and powdered wigs never look good on women) it seems all male judges must now have poorly fitting wigs.

To address your main point, this will now go to the Supreme Court (that was always going to happen, I see no reason why the government should no appeal - the hedge fund managers would have). I personally think the judges are wrong, and it's clearly a matter of opinion, their opinion being that the Government cannot proceed because the Referendum was not mandatory.

If Parliament DOES try to stop us leaving in the end it will poison politics in this country for decades. It will also destroy the Labour Party, as they will never be able to call themselves "party of the people" afterwards.

The city mice know the country mice voted for stupid reasons. They know this because, immediately after the result, the country mice asked the government to guarantee what the EU had previously given them. When the tendency over the past few decades indicates that the government has little inclination to give them that, and in some cases (eg. Liverpool), deliberately starve the region into irrelevance in favour of the city mice. Given the option of spending 5bn on London or spending numerous packets of 100m in outlying regions, Westminster can be relied on to give London 4.8bn while the regions have to make do with 10m each. Londoners know this, despite the regioners desperately asking Westminster for assurances that they won't miss out on the 100m that the EU had previously given them. The city mice have little sympathy for the almighty shafting that the country mice are going to get in coming years.

The City Mice think they know better, they also think they know why the country mice voted the way they did.

What they don't think about is what politics will be like after we leave the EU - there will be no more cover for Westminster, so when someone dumps two tons of manure outside the entrance to Downing Street and demands to know why British farmers are being driven into the ground the Government won't be able to blame the CAP.

The people trying to overturn the result keep going on about "our democracy" but they refuse either to address the fact that Europe has been used as anti-democratic cover for successive UK government for decades (whether true or not) or the fact that outside London life is pretty bad for a lot of people. EU subsidies pump in money, they don't give people jobs or a livelihood they can be proud of.

Again Cornwall - tin. Go ask a Cornishman and a lot of them would rather be down a mine breathing in toxic fumes that handing our leaflets to German tourists about all the old, sad, closed mines. That's not a dig at the Germans btw, they just seem to be over represented in Cornwall in the summer.

[Furunculus]

To paraphrase dear old Furunculus, there's no connection between demos and kratos in the UK.

The people clearly want out, but the bureaucratic machine won't let them. Maybe Brits should get the EU to help them cut through all that red tape and regulations.

this voter is quite content with the court ruling, people are getting a taste of what the sovereignty of parliament means in practice, and they will grow to like it. we are refounding the link between the demos and the kratos, and this leaver is smiling.