4 ms·

Clause 28 of the 1998 Act notes at sub-clause 7, in dry terms, with regard to legislative competence that "this section does not affect the power of the Parliam

by robhu 10y ago

Clause 28 of the 1998 Act notes at sub-clause 7, in dry terms, with regard to legislative competence that "this section does not affect the power of the Parliament of the United Kingdom to make laws for Scotland." In that single little line is the subordinate nature of devolution. Generally, Westminster will let the Scottish Parliament get on with devolved legislation. Carry on governing. But it is also made clear that Westminster's ultimate sovereignty over the UK, the entire UK, is unaffected. So in other words, no. The UK Parliament is sovereign over the Scottish one, although by convention they do not usually override it.

romanovcode 10y ago
Good, then they would again argue and whine that EU is putting them down like they did for the past 10 years. Enough is enough.
jamescun 10y ago
Correct. My view is that Scotland CAN veto, but Westminster can override that veto. It creates a brilliant scenario for Scottish politicians, particularly those who seek independence; by vetoing they gain the support of their constituents while kicking the toxic can down the road to Westminster politicians, who should respect the results of the referendum, creating louder calls for a second Scottish referendum.
- simonh 10y ago
  They can only veto it if the legislation comes before the Scottish parliament for review, and it won't. What they can do is pass resolutions in Scottish law incompatible with Brexit that Westminster will have to repeal or get struck down in the courts.
  - gsnedders 10y ago
    > What they can do is pass resolutions in Scottish law incompatible with Brexit that Westminster will have to repeal or get struck down in the courts. Acts of Parliament cannot be struck down in the courts, in general. This is one of the cornerstones of Parliamentary Supremacy. I believe the only case where they can be is where they are found in contradiction to obligations of the EU treaties.
simonh 10y ago
You're right, but I think they could make it very difficult for Westminster if they wanted to. It's not a fight they can legally win, but it could still be in their interests to fight it anyway. There's a joke going around here in London that we should devolve with them forming Scotlondon and set up immigration controls at M25 junctions. It's becoming pretty clear that a lot of exit voters never imagined it could actually happen and are suffering buyer's remorse.
- codecamper 10y ago
  Sounds funny, but maybe closer to the reality of the modern age? So much of GDP now comes from cities & information workers, I'd imagine. Is it just London that wanted to remain? What about the other cities? I haven't followed the race closely, but I'm guessing it was the country bumpkins mostly in favor of leaving?
  - mhw 10y ago
    > Is it just London that wanted to remain? What about the other cities? Despite much of the media describing this as the north voting to leave, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle upon Tyne, Harrogate and York all voted to remain. Further south there's also Bristol, Cardiff, Cambridge, Oxford. There are cities and urban areas that voted to leave, but generally speaking it does seem to be that the areas with lower population density voted to leave. I'd be interested to see a visualisation which examined this correlation.
    - gmac 10y ago
      And Brighton. Lots of university towns.
  - simonh 10y ago
    As always with these things it’s a mixed bag. How close some of these results were matters. Many of the other cities went remain by 50%-60%. London was a full 75% for remain though. Totally overwhelming. There was an interview with people at a market on the BBC yesterday and a stall holder was selling Spanish cherries. He voted brexit, but had a haunted look on his face and said he never believed it would happen. The journalist asked if he regretted it, he said something like "No..... but I wonder whether I made the right decision.". So that would be yes, then. Interactive results map: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36616028 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36616028

by robhu 10y ago

romanovcode 10y ago

Good, then they would again argue and whine that EU is putting them down like they did for the past 10 years. Enough is enough.

jamescun 10y ago

Correct. My view is that Scotland CAN veto, but Westminster can override that veto. It creates a brilliant scenario for Scottish politicians, particularly those who seek independence; by vetoing they gain the support of their constituents while kicking the toxic can down the road to Westminster politicians, who should respect the results of the referendum, creating louder calls for a second Scottish referendum.

simonh 10y ago
They can only veto it if the legislation comes before the Scottish parliament for review, and it won't. What they can do is pass resolutions in Scottish law incompatible with Brexit that Westminster will have to repeal or get struck down in the courts.
- gsnedders 10y ago
  > What they can do is pass resolutions in Scottish law incompatible with Brexit that Westminster will have to repeal or get struck down in the courts. Acts of Parliament cannot be struck down in the courts, in general. This is one of the cornerstones of Parliamentary Supremacy. I believe the only case where they can be is where they are found in contradiction to obligations of the EU treaties.

simonh 10y ago

You're right, but I think they could make it very difficult for Westminster if they wanted to. It's not a fight they can legally win, but it could still be in their interests to fight it anyway. There's a joke going around here in London that we should devolve with them forming Scotlondon and set up immigration controls at M25 junctions. It's becoming pretty clear that a lot of exit voters never imagined it could actually happen and are suffering buyer's remorse.

codecamper 10y ago
Sounds funny, but maybe closer to the reality of the modern age? So much of GDP now comes from cities & information workers, I'd imagine. Is it just London that wanted to remain? What about the other cities? I haven't followed the race closely, but I'm guessing it was the country bumpkins mostly in favor of leaving?
- mhw 10y ago
  > Is it just London that wanted to remain? What about the other cities? Despite much of the media describing this as the north voting to leave, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle upon Tyne, Harrogate and York all voted to remain. Further south there's also Bristol, Cardiff, Cambridge, Oxford. There are cities and urban areas that voted to leave, but generally speaking it does seem to be that the areas with lower population density voted to leave. I'd be interested to see a visualisation which examined this correlation.
  - gmac 10y ago
    And Brighton. Lots of university towns.
- simonh 10y ago
  As always with these things it’s a mixed bag. How close some of these results were matters. Many of the other cities went remain by 50%-60%. London was a full 75% for remain though. Totally overwhelming. There was an interview with people at a market on the BBC yesterday and a stall holder was selling Spanish cherries. He voted brexit, but had a haunted look on his face and said he never believed it would happen. The journalist asked if he regretted it, he said something like "No..... but I wonder whether I made the right decision.". So that would be yes, then. Interactive results map: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36616028 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36616028