12 ms·

British Government loses Article 50 court fight

171 points by wodow 10y ago

astannard 10y ago
This put a big smile on my face. I do wonder how many people have had a change of heart after the facts came out.
- UK-AL 10y ago
  Not many
  - hexiedexie 10y ago
    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-britain-british-election-study-insights-from-the-post-eu-referendum-wave-of-the-bes-internet-panel http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/brexit-bri...
    - philliphaydon 10y ago
      I'm surprised more people don't want to vote leave, it's like they want the UK economy to continue to die by remaining just so they can country hop.
      - pjc50 10y ago
        Other way round: the single market is extremely critical to the UK econonmy, as we've been seeing.
        UK-AL 10y ago
        What have we been seeing? Lower pound is probably a major advantage to working class people. We have such a high pound because we are a country driven by financial industry, people keep their wealth in pounds because of this. Ultimately it screws over other industries resulting in the south/north divide.
        pjc50 10y ago
        I've got a lot of sympathy for this argument, but without wage inflation coming as well there's going to be a short-term nasty squeeze as food and fuel jump 20%. We saw this play out in Greece. The situation there was far worse, both at government and private level, but there still wasn't enough support for jumping out back to the Drachma and devaluting. And meanwhile the shortage of hard currency caused medical shortages.
      - Desustorm 10y ago
        The UK economy was/is doing fine? Not sure you read up on all the facts.
    - osullivj 10y ago
      There are also remain voters who wish they'd voted leave.
      - dasboth 10y ago
        Source? Edit: The study linked above [0] showed the following for voter regret (specifically "do you have doubts about the way you voted?"): Remain Yes / No / Don't Know 98% / 1% / 1% Leave Yes / No / Don't Know 90% / 6% / 4% [0]: http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/brexit-britain-british-election-study-insights-from-the-post-eu-referendum-wave-of-the-bes-internet-panel/ http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/brexit-bri...
        UK-AL 10y ago
        I for one. I voted remain, but having actually gone partly down the brexit path, would be comfortable with it now. The treatment of leavers by remainers has been frankly disgusting. Accusing them of being racists, stupid, and various other things. Brexit has made them lose their minds. They simply refuse to believe their are people who would vote brexit for reasons other racism. I know many people who voted for brexit on informed reasons, that have nothing to do with racism.
        dasboth 10y ago
        > having actually gone partly down the brexit path What do you mean exactly? > The treatment of leavers by remainers has been frankly disgusting Completely agree. The whole thing of people taking sides, rather than discussing a political issue, has been absurd and awful. > voted for brexit on informed reasons Unfortunately this was badly communicated, the media's fault no doubt. It was genuinely quite difficult to find a reasoned, balanced view (especially on the leave side I have to say).
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
    - return0 10y ago
      This suggests that brexit is still supported (can't judge quality): http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/696760/british-no-regret-Brexit-majority-support-Leave-theresa-may-national-stats-poll-EU http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/696760/british-no-reg...
      - throwawayReply 10y ago
        The express is so low on quality that it doesn't even feature in most mainstream discussion.
- return0 10y ago
  Isn't the general stance still pro-brexit? If anything, this period has made brexit more acceptable to the eyes of everyone (it used to be taboo).
  - M2Ys4U 10y ago
    An opinion poll released today showed a (small) majority in favour of remaining in the EU.
afarrell 10y ago
Is this something that could split the conservative party between those in more UKIP-populated districts and those in more LibDem dominated ridings? What if the LibDems start campaigning in those ridings where they are strong in order to pressure those MPs? It wouldn't be in the interest of the LibDems as a party (who would benefit from backlash against triggering article 50), but it would be in the collective interest of individual LibDem-leaning voters who want brexit not to happen.
- ldjb 10y ago
  Although they didn't win, the Lib Dems did fairly well in the Witney by-election and they are certainly making a big deal about the upcoming Richmond Park by-election. A lot can happen before the next general election, and the next local elections aren't until May, after the government intends to trigger Article 50. And the Lib Dems still only have eight MPs. So whilst I'm sure the Lib Dems will be doing a lot of campaigning, they remain in a rather weak position.
venomsnake 10y ago
As everybody that was calm knew back in june - Brexit will never happen.
lordnacho 10y ago
Rather odd situation now. May was lukewarm on remaining, but may now be forced to whip her MPs into voting to leave. And the MPs will be under pressure to do as people had voted in the referendum. At the same time public opinion may well have moved.
- throwawayReply 10y ago
  And the MPs constituents who they are supposed to represent may be from areas that voted remain.
  - walshemj 10y ago
    And those MP's in rural areas will get pressure to vote remain as the farmers are getting scared about losing the CAP subsidies and the cheap eastern european labour to pick the crops.
throwawayReply 10y ago
Despite the ruling being kept under-wraps until 10:00, looking at GBP/USD it started rising at 09:20 suggesting it leaked at that time.
- andysinclair 10y ago
  Services PMI was released at 9:30 which caused a small move up, then around 10 when the A50 ruling was announced there was extreme volatility. I can't see any indication of a leak. Overall I can't see Parliament voting to remain, the ruling has only really delayed he process. It may result in a "softer" Brexit, maybe this is why the GBP has risen?
  - pjc50 10y ago
    I can; there are just enough Tory potential rebels to make it happen, led by Ken Clarke. I think that a big part of the reason article 50 hasn't been triggered already is that a lot of people know deep down that it's going to be a disaster in the long term and their names will live in infamy. Just as we invoke the name of Vidkun Quisling to this day. But at the same time they know that not doing so will be unpopular in the short term. They're in a comparable position to #NeverTrump republicans.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
simonswords82 10y ago
What a clusterfuck.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
ed_blackburn 10y ago
As a passionate remainer, as much as I want this to mean something sensible I hold little hope it'll be nothing more than a side show.
usgroup 10y ago
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 would pass this ...
- agd 10y ago
  If you've been following the case, this was not unexpected. Also the government have already confirmed they will appeal.
  - usgroup 10y ago
    Yes, 2 minutes ago on the BBC :) I had not seen it. What do you think will happen at Supreme Court? Same again?
    - walshemj 10y ago
      so? Parliament is sovereign here the UK supreme court is nothing like the US one
      - pmyteh 10y ago
        Judgments of the UK Supreme Court do bind the executive, though - so if they uphold the High Court judgment then the government needs to go to Parliament. In the event that they overturn the High Court judgment, you're right that Parliament could in principle pass an Act reserving to itself the right to activate Article 50. In practice, though, the government would use its majority in the Commons to stop that happening. Or alternatively send in the Article 50 notification while Parliament is debating the bill. In either case, the Supreme Court's judgment would be effectively final.
- ranko 10y ago
  Leaving the EU necessarily entails amending or (more likely) repealing the European Communities Act 1972. It's pretty fundamental to the UK constitution that this can only be done by parliament, which makes the judgment entirely expected in legal terms.
agd 10y ago
For those who don't follow British politics this is very significant. - Invocation of Article 50 is likely to be delayed from Q1 as the legislation will go through parliament and the (hostile) House of Lords. - A 'hard' Brexit is less likely due to incoming amendments from remainer MPs and Lords It also increases the chances of a general election before Article 50 is invoked if the PM feels that MPs will force too many changes to her negotiating stance. Of course this is all subject to appeal, and ironically, could eventually be decided by a European court!
- SideburnsOfDoom 10y ago
  MP's are in a hard place because of this. The majority of them are pro-remain, having concluded that brexit is damaging and dangerous and cannot result in a better deal. ... but they will be whipped into line by government (Tory) and party leadership (Labour) insisting that they follow the settled will of the clear majority of the people ... but the will of the people is neither settled nor a clear majority.
  - gpderetta 10y ago
    It seems that new elections with a clear mandate would be the best solution... except that the first-past-the-post system could possibly lead to a very different outcome than the purely proportional referendum.
  - emp_zealoth 10y ago
    How can they be whipped into pary line? Isn't the worst that can happen to them exclusion from said party?
    - lmm 10y ago
      "Whip" is a term of art here. Yes, they could choose to leave the party. Even if they don't feel any duty to said party or to the constituents they're representing (who, realistically, voted on party lines, despite nominally voting for an individual representative), that still means leaving their whole career behind. I would be extremely surprised if we saw more than a handful of MPs do it.
andrewclunn 10y ago
Just in case you thought (foolishly) that democracy was a real thing.
- Tomte 10y ago
  Involving Parliament instead of letting the Government do whatever it wants is democracy.
  - akhatri_aus 10y ago
    Is it? The party can simply use its whips to pass the vote. It is after all the MPs that elected the government there.
  - jstanley 10y ago
    Letting parliament vote on something after everybody has already had the chance to vote on it is not democracy, it's letting the political elite overrule the decision of the people.
    - gutnor 10y ago
      The government is the political elite, expect some you didn't vote (directly) for. If you voted for a MP that is a political elite that you despise and you believe that he is not representing your interest, you voted wrong ! edit: to take a not controversial example - Boris is part of the Government. Cameron was the government too.
    - padolsey 10y ago
      Referendums in the UK are, legally, glorified opinion polls and so any resulting democratic mandate is spurious.
      - pmyteh 10y ago
        The mandate is as strong as mandates ever are in a democracy. But the cost of ignoring it is political, not legal.
nicolapede 10y ago
I think it was quite arrogant from Theresa May to decide not to involve the Parliament in the first place. People did not give a blanket mandate to her for implementing whatever she thinks Brexit means.
- arethuza 10y ago
  One of the arguments for Brexit was the sovereignty of Parliament and they weren't going to let it vote on the subject!
- michaelt 10y ago
  The article says parliament will get a vote on whether to invoke Article 50. As I understand things, there was a vote on leaving the EU, and the UK voted to leave. And as I understand things, there's only one way to leave the EU, and that's by invoking Article 50. Seems to me that means there was a referendum on whether to invoke Article 50, and people voted to invoke it. Why should MPs get to block the referendum result?
  - return0 10y ago
    I 'm pretty sure the Courts know better than any of us.
  - nicolapede 10y ago
    And if Theresa May thinks that taking back board control is worth leaving the single market, can she do that, just because of the referendum? People also gave Tories majority in the Parliament and Tories' manifesto committed to stay in the single market. >As I understand things, there was a vote on leaving the EU, and the UK voted to leave. And as I understand things, there's only one way to leave the EU, and that's by invoking Article 50. You are interpreting people's reasoning here, as Article 50 was not mentioned in the referendum (another option to leave the EU is to declare war to it, is that what they voted for, then?) and as I understand things, in UK, that is the Parliament's job.
    - ldjb 10y ago
AWildWebDev 10y ago
Britain still has a higher court (Supreme Court) that this will now go to so this isn't a big deal.
cmdkeen 10y ago
Mrs May has a 14 point lead in the polls and justification to call an election were Parliament to block Article 50. Given the current state of the opposition, their leader, and the fact that many Labour seats voted Leave it is a pretty safe bet that the Conservatives could end up with a 100+ majority. The key thing comes down to what "block Article 50" means. If the Government decide to not give ground during the Parliamentary process and refuse to be bound on their negotiating strategy an election is pretty likely as I doubt they would get that through Parliament at the moment. That election would potentially enable May to purge some of the wetter Tories as well. If you think this ruling is going to stop Brexit or is a victory against the Government I suspect you're going to be disappointed.
- usgroup 10y ago
  Brexit before March, what do you think?
  - joosters 10y ago
    Current betting suggests 60% chance of article 50 triggered Jan - July 2017, 39% not triggered before July 2017, and 1% during 2016. Although the betting wasn't a great guide to the original brexit outcome, so you have to wonder about trusting it...
- lmm 10y ago
  Plenty of Conservative MPs and Conservative voters opposed Brexit. A general election would force the Conservatives to adopt a manifesto position on Brexit and be held accountable for the consequences of that position. It may not be a victory against Brexit, but it's a victory for democracy.
  - joosters 10y ago
    Since when have party manifestos been used to hold political parties to account?
    - 10y ago
Kenji 10y ago
Democracy is dead. The political class spits on your vote and laughs, and you can do nothing about it. Welcome to the 21st century.
emp_zealoth 10y ago
This is a big issue stemming from incredible divide that has happened and is widening ever faster You have two camps that are pretty much self contained - paper magazines, TV, radio, YouTube channels, Facebook groups, even fucking meme sites are now springing up to spew propaganda And the worst thing is that on the left you have SJW terrorists attacking anything and everything just to feel better about themselves, while the right has no fucking idea how to make anything work good and the only slightly reedeeming point is their pushback against extremism from the left And the bubbles just push most of the people off to either side Brexit done by cretins currently in power will just wreck UK. The tremors we are seeing now are just the beginning - my welsh friend tells me that power, water, gas, etc. prices are adjusted yearly, so next wave of pain is approaching already Staying in would be the best, IMO, but, it hardly matters - either way you are going to have ~30% population extremely unhappy
tobltobs 10y ago
It is the same screenplay as in Switzerland and their MEI referendum [1]. Difference is just that the Brits managed to trash all lot of porcelain before they will blink. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/06/swiss-eu-standoff-striking-similarities-uk-predicament https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/06/swiss-eu-stand...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- Zelmor 10y ago
  I didn't know about Horizon2020 and Erasmus, thanks for sharing. I do know decisions ought to happen before March 2017, when shit would hit the fan for the Swiss. It would be a shame, it is a country I would definitely would like to live in sometimes in the future.
SticksAndBreaks 10y ago
Good old - we dont like the outcome, lets revote?
- mavdi 10y ago
  Not sure if the majority of the population likes the outcome either. Promises were broken, lies were told, facts came out.
- sharrs 10y ago
  It's pretty clear that if they revoted the result of the referendum would be anti-Brexit so UK is in the absurd situation where they have to proceed with a major political/economic decision that does not reflect anymore the will of UK's citizens.
  - christoph 10y ago
    And if the vote outcome _does_ change, what do we do afterwards - make it best of three and have another one to finally settle it as the pro Brexit voters revolt about their decision being overturned?
return0 10y ago
They should have opted for elections long ago to give the electorate the responsibility to choose both leaving and who will take them out. I wonder if it is possible however for either Tories or Labours to go with a believable pro-brexit stance in the polls. Ideally one would take the "in" stance and the other the "out", the point is who is with what?
jbb555 10y ago
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 the government doesn't follow the will of the people, then the 18 million people who votes leave will ensure that we have a new government one way or another.
- alphadevx 10y ago
  > 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?
  - KaiserPro 10y ago
    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
    - matthewking 10y ago
      These are all lies told by the leave campaign, not the remain campaign?
      - KaiserPro 10y ago
        The Leave side. The Remain camp had "project fear" which basically translated the top end of the economic consensus into tabloid.
Zelmor 10y ago
Isn't it a well known fact for everyone by now that leaving the EU would have dire consequences to England? Losing the shared market access, researchers not being allowed into shared EU projects, the European Stock Exchange moving from London OR London leaving the UK, Scotland leaving the UK, maybe even N. Ireland leaving as well to unify the island (erin go bragh by the way!). How would it be in the interest for anyone to go on chasing this rabid dog that is Brexit?
- dig1 10y ago
  I believe many voters didn't see other side of the coin. Mass media bragging about independence, market and money control did pretty decent brainwashing for mass population.
- antocv 10y ago
  Someone should send a memo Bashar al Assad that "dire consequences" are a valid reason to postpone democracy. In fact, democracy seems to be reserved only for use by western NATO powers, even when not respecting a democratic vote, while imposing democracy "with dire consequences" on the rest of the world.
  - thesimon 10y ago
    >even when not respecting a democratic vote The "Brexit" vote was nothing more than an opinion poll. There is no direct democracy in the UK.
    - antocv 10y ago
      Indeed. al Assads next interview "Sure, I did not win the vote, but this is not a direct democracy, the presidential ballot is mere a poll". Direct democracy for export to some (exclude Saudi), power for others. All this Brexit event just highlights the hypocrisy when calling Russian political system names and criticizing it for lack of democracy and other positive terms-on-paper.
      - 10y ago
pavlov 10y ago
I can't believe the UK government allowed this to happen. They went ahead with the referendum without ever explaining what Leave means. They should have drafted the Leave plan first, with very specific dates, and have people vote on that. "Do you want Britain to invoke Article 50 by 31 Dec 2016?" That would have been the responsible thing to do. (If anyone argues that you can't have a referendum on such a specifically worded question -- well, if the electorate doesn't understand even the basics, is it a good idea to have a referendum in the first place?) Cameron must be one of the least competent political leaders of our time. Maybe the Venezuelan ruling party could hire him as a consultant.
- zigzigzag 10y ago
  There can't be any leave plan because the EU refused to ever even discuss the possibility, as did unfortunately large chunks of the British civil service. Their primary strategy, since more or less forever, has been to resolutely insist that the EU is irreversible and forever and reducing its power is utterly unthinkable. Given that both governments refused to contemplate the possibility, how much of a plan did you expect there to be? Planning for the outcome of referendums is the governments job!
  - pavlov 10y ago
    Who are you blaming exactly when you say that "EU refused"? What should this other party have done -- written a Leave plan when the UK government wouldn't do it? The referendum was a matter between the UK electorate and their government. Other EU states played no part in that. The Treaty of Lisbon specifically offers a way for a member state to withdraw in the timespan of two years. Not sure how you read that as "irreversible".
    - zigzigzag 10y ago
      The EU should absolutely have been willing to talk about it, yes! Article 50 was only put there because the British insisted on it. Read what the guy who wrote it thinks: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-britain-theresa-may-article-50-not-supposed-meant-to-be-used-trigger-giuliano-a7156656.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-refe...
bb101 10y ago
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 parliament demonstrating they are ready to meddle and overrule the majority will of the people, I have a feeling we are going to see many, many more votes for UKIP and BNP in any subsequent election. It's a ratchet effect along the lines of "if they didn't get the message with this vote, perhaps they'll get the message with this one." For the Americans out there, this is akin to Trump receiving a 52% majority by US voters (yes, 52% is still a majority, no matter how thin), and then the Electoral College deciding to vote amongst themselves instead about who becomes President: of course it would be Clinton.
- antouank 10y ago
  > By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen. By what logic?? Most reports says otherwise.
- dabeeeenster 10y ago
  "By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen." That's hugely uncertain.
- exox 10y ago
  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.
- laurent123456 10y ago
  > By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen There's nothing sure about this. In general most MPs are against Brexit but they are expected to roughly follow the will of the people, so there's a good change they'll still vote in favour of article 50. I mean the whole government right now is working hard to make Brexit happen, while at the same time being against it.
cletus 10y ago
David Cameron is really the architect of this clusterfuck. The referendum legislation should've made it clear what needed to happen. May's position is that the PM can wake up one day and decide to irrevocably and unilaterally leave the EU. That's a ridiculous position. You can argue there was a referendum but it was non-binding. MPs from Scotland and Northern Ireland will oppose leaving as their constituents vote overwhelmingly to remain so much so that many in Scotland want to revisit the question of independence. The leave vote was a proxy for two issues: first and foremost was immigration. The second is control of territorial waters and the resulting overfishing. On immigration, there is no access to the single market without freedom of EU has made that clear. That will mean paying into the EU coffers too but without any voting rights. So the alternatives are both terrible (for the U.K.). The U.K. while in the EU can and has extracted concessions on the threat of leaving. This is the best position for them. After pulling the trigger the UK has far less leverage. The EU does want access to the U.K. market but I think the U.K. needs the EU more than the EU needs the U.K. Hopefully this decision is upheld but even the delay is good. Maybe cooler heads will prevail. An uninformed 52% fueled by a Leave campaign making a bunch of promises they cannot keep and had no intention of delivering upon (since they expected to lose) is hardly a clear mandate.
pjc50 10y ago
Hoisting a comment of mine from a previous thread: The UK has never been through a "year zero" forcible reconstitution, so its constitutional and administrative arrangements are full of little adhoc anomalies (the various islands like Sark and Man, the City, "County" Durham, chancel repair liability, and so on). Mostly these are a fine and picturesque addition to the texture of the nation. There's certainly no real appetite to "fix" things, although Scotland managed to abolish the feudal system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_Feudal_Tenure_etc... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_Feudal_Tenure_etc...) However, this means that the sort of internal tensions which in the US get nailed to the mast of the constitution instead float around, un-crystallized. Until now, when the "brexit" vote has triggered a cascade of constitutional crises: is parliamentary consent required to leave the EU? How does this affect the Good Friday Agreement? What about Scotland? What exactly is the constitutional status of the Human Rights Act and why do the conservatives keep trying to abolish it? And so on. Right now the fight is about "sovereignty", but everyone seems to be operating with a sixteenth-century Henry VIII view where sovereignty must be absolute and means getting to do whatever you want. People keep talking about trade deals without realising that they also involve a compromise in arbitrariness, especially when things like ISDS are involved. Pretty much any international agreement involves the governments binding their hands and refraining from doing certain things (e.g. preferential subsidies) in exchange for the counterparty also accepting the same restriction. There seem to be a lot of people who simply cannot handle the idea that other countries are free to not go along with what Britain wants if it's not also in their interests. Compromise lacks the stirring power of "sovereignty", but it's necessary if you want to get on in the global economy.
- thesmallestcat 10y ago
  > Hoisting a comment of mine from a previous thread: Ugh.
user5994461 10y ago
Meanwhile for the young tech immigrant in the UK: "Well, time to move to another European country... oh wait, they're all economically f* and have no jobs for me. Well, gonna stay in the UK for a bit longer, see how it goes."
- M2Ys4U 10y ago
  The UK is pretty much slap-bang in the middle of the table when it comes to EU economies. The idea that the UK is an economic powerhouse within the Union is mostly a myth.
  - user5994461 10y ago
    I don't know what you mean. If you're a software engineer, London has many [good] jobs for you. Your home country may not.
tom_mellior 10y ago
For anyone else who likes primary sources on this sort of thing, here is the court's very readable 2-page summary: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/summary-r-miller-v-secretary-of-state-for-exiting-the-eu-20161103.pdf https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/summ... (PDF) And here's the actual ruling: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/judgment-r-miller-v-secretary-of-state-for-exiting-the-eu-20161103.pdf https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/judg... (PDF)
anon4this1 10y ago
The common working class person has no real ability to alter the globalisation and pro-immigration agenda pushed by mainstream politicians. Successive governments have indicated that they would reduce immigration but all it has done is increase. My father was born in Birmingham, a city in which people of english-descent will be a minority by 2020. When a city is only 40% english-descent, it is no longer an English city. Karachi is still a pakistani city. Lagos is still a nigerian city. Birmingham is not an english city. Most brexiters aren't particularly fussed with the finer points of the common market, or EU centralised decision making. They just want border control and feel completely powerless as things stand to change anything. There is no neat referendum question regarding immigration, and there seems to be no way other than a referendum for real democratic hearing of people's views on this issue.
- pmyteh 10y ago
  Brummies born in Birmingham with brown skin are still Brummies, I suggest, just as the British descendents of Roman, Saxon, Viking, Norman, Jewish, Huguenot, German, Irish, Jamaican and American immigrants remain British. That, and it's a bit cheeky to pray-in-aid Karachi as some kind of purely Pakistani city given how much influence we Brits have had over the place as a result of conquering it.
devnull791101 10y ago
hopefully they hold a general election and Mrs May can continue doing her good work unimpeded for the foreseeable future. You may haggle on the terms of a "clear majority" on the referendum but there is no mistaking the majority the tories currently have over their opponents.

171 points by wodow 10y ago

astannard 10y ago

This put a big smile on my face. I do wonder how many people have had a change of heart after the facts came out.

UK-AL 10y ago
Not many
- hexiedexie 10y ago
  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-britain-british-election-study-insights-from-the-post-eu-referendum-wave-of-the-bes-internet-panel http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/brexit-bri...
  - philliphaydon 10y ago
    I'm surprised more people don't want to vote leave, it's like they want the UK economy to continue to die by remaining just so they can country hop.
    - pjc50 10y ago
      Other way round: the single market is extremely critical to the UK econonmy, as we've been seeing.
      - UK-AL 10y ago
        What have we been seeing? Lower pound is probably a major advantage to working class people. We have such a high pound because we are a country driven by financial industry, people keep their wealth in pounds because of this. Ultimately it screws over other industries resulting in the south/north divide.
        pjc50 10y ago
        I've got a lot of sympathy for this argument, but without wage inflation coming as well there's going to be a short-term nasty squeeze as food and fuel jump 20%. We saw this play out in Greece. The situation there was far worse, both at government and private level, but there still wasn't enough support for jumping out back to the Drachma and devaluting. And meanwhile the shortage of hard currency caused medical shortages.
    - Desustorm 10y ago
      The UK economy was/is doing fine? Not sure you read up on all the facts.
  - osullivj 10y ago
    There are also remain voters who wish they'd voted leave.
    - dasboth 10y ago
      Source? Edit: The study linked above [0] showed the following for voter regret (specifically "do you have doubts about the way you voted?"): Remain Yes / No / Don't Know 98% / 1% / 1% Leave Yes / No / Don't Know 90% / 6% / 4% [0]: http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/brexit-britain-british-election-study-insights-from-the-post-eu-referendum-wave-of-the-bes-internet-panel/ http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/brexit-bri...
      - UK-AL 10y ago
        I for one. I voted remain, but having actually gone partly down the brexit path, would be comfortable with it now. The treatment of leavers by remainers has been frankly disgusting. Accusing them of being racists, stupid, and various other things. Brexit has made them lose their minds. They simply refuse to believe their are people who would vote brexit for reasons other racism. I know many people who voted for brexit on informed reasons, that have nothing to do with racism.
        dasboth 10y ago
        > having actually gone partly down the brexit path What do you mean exactly? > The treatment of leavers by remainers has been frankly disgusting Completely agree. The whole thing of people taking sides, rather than discussing a political issue, has been absurd and awful. > voted for brexit on informed reasons Unfortunately this was badly communicated, the media's fault no doubt. It was genuinely quite difficult to find a reasoned, balanced view (especially on the leave side I have to say).
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - return0 10y ago
    This suggests that brexit is still supported (can't judge quality): http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/696760/british-no-regret-Brexit-majority-support-Leave-theresa-may-national-stats-poll-EU http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/696760/british-no-reg...
    - throwawayReply 10y ago
      The express is so low on quality that it doesn't even feature in most mainstream discussion.
return0 10y ago
Isn't the general stance still pro-brexit? If anything, this period has made brexit more acceptable to the eyes of everyone (it used to be taboo).
- M2Ys4U 10y ago
  An opinion poll released today showed a (small) majority in favour of remaining in the EU.

afarrell 10y ago

Is this something that could split the conservative party between those in more UKIP-populated districts and those in more LibDem dominated ridings? What if the LibDems start campaigning in those ridings where they are strong in order to pressure those MPs? It wouldn't be in the interest of the LibDems as a party (who would benefit from backlash against triggering article 50), but it would be in the collective interest of individual LibDem-leaning voters who want brexit not to happen.

ldjb 10y ago
Although they didn't win, the Lib Dems did fairly well in the Witney by-election and they are certainly making a big deal about the upcoming Richmond Park by-election. A lot can happen before the next general election, and the next local elections aren't until May, after the government intends to trigger Article 50. And the Lib Dems still only have eight MPs. So whilst I'm sure the Lib Dems will be doing a lot of campaigning, they remain in a rather weak position.

venomsnake 10y ago

As everybody that was calm knew back in june - Brexit will never happen.

lordnacho 10y ago

Rather odd situation now. May was lukewarm on remaining, but may now be forced to whip her MPs into voting to leave. And the MPs will be under pressure to do as people had voted in the referendum. At the same time public opinion may well have moved.

throwawayReply 10y ago
And the MPs constituents who they are supposed to represent may be from areas that voted remain.
- walshemj 10y ago
  And those MP's in rural areas will get pressure to vote remain as the farmers are getting scared about losing the CAP subsidies and the cheap eastern european labour to pick the crops.

throwawayReply 10y ago

Despite the ruling being kept under-wraps until 10:00, looking at GBP/USD it started rising at 09:20 suggesting it leaked at that time.

andysinclair 10y ago
Services PMI was released at 9:30 which caused a small move up, then around 10 when the A50 ruling was announced there was extreme volatility. I can't see any indication of a leak. Overall I can't see Parliament voting to remain, the ruling has only really delayed he process. It may result in a "softer" Brexit, maybe this is why the GBP has risen?
- pjc50 10y ago
  I can; there are just enough Tory potential rebels to make it happen, led by Ken Clarke. I think that a big part of the reason article 50 hasn't been triggered already is that a lot of people know deep down that it's going to be a disaster in the long term and their names will live in infamy. Just as we invoke the name of Vidkun Quisling to this day. But at the same time they know that not doing so will be unpopular in the short term. They're in a comparable position to #NeverTrump republicans.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

simonswords82 10y ago

What a clusterfuck.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

ed_blackburn 10y ago

As a passionate remainer, as much as I want this to mean something sensible I hold little hope it'll be nothing more than a side show.

usgroup 10y ago

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 would pass this ...

agd 10y ago
If you've been following the case, this was not unexpected. Also the government have already confirmed they will appeal.
- usgroup 10y ago
  Yes, 2 minutes ago on the BBC :) I had not seen it. What do you think will happen at Supreme Court? Same again?
  - walshemj 10y ago
    so? Parliament is sovereign here the UK supreme court is nothing like the US one
    - pmyteh 10y ago
      Judgments of the UK Supreme Court do bind the executive, though - so if they uphold the High Court judgment then the government needs to go to Parliament. In the event that they overturn the High Court judgment, you're right that Parliament could in principle pass an Act reserving to itself the right to activate Article 50. In practice, though, the government would use its majority in the Commons to stop that happening. Or alternatively send in the Article 50 notification while Parliament is debating the bill. In either case, the Supreme Court's judgment would be effectively final.
ranko 10y ago
Leaving the EU necessarily entails amending or (more likely) repealing the European Communities Act 1972. It's pretty fundamental to the UK constitution that this can only be done by parliament, which makes the judgment entirely expected in legal terms.

agd 10y ago

For those who don't follow British politics this is very significant. - Invocation of Article 50 is likely to be delayed from Q1 as the legislation will go through parliament and the (hostile) House of Lords. - A 'hard' Brexit is less likely due to incoming amendments from remainer MPs and Lords It also increases the chances of a general election before Article 50 is invoked if the PM feels that MPs will force too many changes to her negotiating stance. Of course this is all subject to appeal, and ironically, could eventually be decided by a European court!

SideburnsOfDoom 10y ago
MP's are in a hard place because of this. The majority of them are pro-remain, having concluded that brexit is damaging and dangerous and cannot result in a better deal. ... but they will be whipped into line by government (Tory) and party leadership (Labour) insisting that they follow the settled will of the clear majority of the people ... but the will of the people is neither settled nor a clear majority.
- gpderetta 10y ago
  It seems that new elections with a clear mandate would be the best solution... except that the first-past-the-post system could possibly lead to a very different outcome than the purely proportional referendum.
- emp_zealoth 10y ago
  How can they be whipped into pary line? Isn't the worst that can happen to them exclusion from said party?
  - lmm 10y ago
    "Whip" is a term of art here. Yes, they could choose to leave the party. Even if they don't feel any duty to said party or to the constituents they're representing (who, realistically, voted on party lines, despite nominally voting for an individual representative), that still means leaving their whole career behind. I would be extremely surprised if we saw more than a handful of MPs do it.

andrewclunn 10y ago

Just in case you thought (foolishly) that democracy was a real thing.

Tomte 10y ago
Involving Parliament instead of letting the Government do whatever it wants is democracy.
- akhatri_aus 10y ago
  Is it? The party can simply use its whips to pass the vote. It is after all the MPs that elected the government there.
- jstanley 10y ago
  Letting parliament vote on something after everybody has already had the chance to vote on it is not democracy, it's letting the political elite overrule the decision of the people.
  - gutnor 10y ago
    The government is the political elite, expect some you didn't vote (directly) for. If you voted for a MP that is a political elite that you despise and you believe that he is not representing your interest, you voted wrong ! edit: to take a not controversial example - Boris is part of the Government. Cameron was the government too.
  - padolsey 10y ago
    Referendums in the UK are, legally, glorified opinion polls and so any resulting democratic mandate is spurious.
    - pmyteh 10y ago
      The mandate is as strong as mandates ever are in a democracy. But the cost of ignoring it is political, not legal.

nicolapede 10y ago

I think it was quite arrogant from Theresa May to decide not to involve the Parliament in the first place. People did not give a blanket mandate to her for implementing whatever she thinks Brexit means.

arethuza 10y ago
One of the arguments for Brexit was the sovereignty of Parliament and they weren't going to let it vote on the subject!
michaelt 10y ago
The article says parliament will get a vote on whether to invoke Article 50. As I understand things, there was a vote on leaving the EU, and the UK voted to leave. And as I understand things, there's only one way to leave the EU, and that's by invoking Article 50. Seems to me that means there was a referendum on whether to invoke Article 50, and people voted to invoke it. Why should MPs get to block the referendum result?
- return0 10y ago
  I 'm pretty sure the Courts know better than any of us.
- nicolapede 10y ago
  And if Theresa May thinks that taking back board control is worth leaving the single market, can she do that, just because of the referendum? People also gave Tories majority in the Parliament and Tories' manifesto committed to stay in the single market. >As I understand things, there was a vote on leaving the EU, and the UK voted to leave. And as I understand things, there's only one way to leave the EU, and that's by invoking Article 50. You are interpreting people's reasoning here, as Article 50 was not mentioned in the referendum (another option to leave the EU is to declare war to it, is that what they voted for, then?) and as I understand things, in UK, that is the Parliament's job.
  - ldjb 10y ago

AWildWebDev 10y ago

Britain still has a higher court (Supreme Court) that this will now go to so this isn't a big deal.

cmdkeen 10y ago

Mrs May has a 14 point lead in the polls and justification to call an election were Parliament to block Article 50. Given the current state of the opposition, their leader, and the fact that many Labour seats voted Leave it is a pretty safe bet that the Conservatives could end up with a 100+ majority. The key thing comes down to what "block Article 50" means. If the Government decide to not give ground during the Parliamentary process and refuse to be bound on their negotiating strategy an election is pretty likely as I doubt they would get that through Parliament at the moment. That election would potentially enable May to purge some of the wetter Tories as well. If you think this ruling is going to stop Brexit or is a victory against the Government I suspect you're going to be disappointed.

usgroup 10y ago
Brexit before March, what do you think?
- joosters 10y ago
  Current betting suggests 60% chance of article 50 triggered Jan - July 2017, 39% not triggered before July 2017, and 1% during 2016. Although the betting wasn't a great guide to the original brexit outcome, so you have to wonder about trusting it...
lmm 10y ago
Plenty of Conservative MPs and Conservative voters opposed Brexit. A general election would force the Conservatives to adopt a manifesto position on Brexit and be held accountable for the consequences of that position. It may not be a victory against Brexit, but it's a victory for democracy.
- joosters 10y ago
  Since when have party manifestos been used to hold political parties to account?
  - 10y ago

Kenji 10y ago

Democracy is dead. The political class spits on your vote and laughs, and you can do nothing about it. Welcome to the 21st century.

emp_zealoth 10y ago

This is a big issue stemming from incredible divide that has happened and is widening ever faster You have two camps that are pretty much self contained - paper magazines, TV, radio, YouTube channels, Facebook groups, even fucking meme sites are now springing up to spew propaganda And the worst thing is that on the left you have SJW terrorists attacking anything and everything just to feel better about themselves, while the right has no fucking idea how to make anything work good and the only slightly reedeeming point is their pushback against extremism from the left And the bubbles just push most of the people off to either side Brexit done by cretins currently in power will just wreck UK. The tremors we are seeing now are just the beginning - my welsh friend tells me that power, water, gas, etc. prices are adjusted yearly, so next wave of pain is approaching already Staying in would be the best, IMO, but, it hardly matters - either way you are going to have ~30% population extremely unhappy

tobltobs 10y ago

It is the same screenplay as in Switzerland and their MEI referendum [1]. Difference is just that the Brits managed to trash all lot of porcelain before they will blink. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/06/swiss-eu-standoff-striking-similarities-uk-predicament https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/06/swiss-eu-stand...

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Zelmor 10y ago
I didn't know about Horizon2020 and Erasmus, thanks for sharing. I do know decisions ought to happen before March 2017, when shit would hit the fan for the Swiss. It would be a shame, it is a country I would definitely would like to live in sometimes in the future.

SticksAndBreaks 10y ago

Good old - we dont like the outcome, lets revote?

mavdi 10y ago
Not sure if the majority of the population likes the outcome either. Promises were broken, lies were told, facts came out.
sharrs 10y ago
It's pretty clear that if they revoted the result of the referendum would be anti-Brexit so UK is in the absurd situation where they have to proceed with a major political/economic decision that does not reflect anymore the will of UK's citizens.
- christoph 10y ago
  And if the vote outcome _does_ change, what do we do afterwards - make it best of three and have another one to finally settle it as the pro Brexit voters revolt about their decision being overturned?

return0 10y ago

They should have opted for elections long ago to give the electorate the responsibility to choose both leaving and who will take them out. I wonder if it is possible however for either Tories or Labours to go with a believable pro-brexit stance in the polls. Ideally one would take the "in" stance and the other the "out", the point is who is with what?

jbb555 10y ago

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 the government doesn't follow the will of the people, then the 18 million people who votes leave will ensure that we have a new government one way or another.

alphadevx 10y ago
> 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?
- KaiserPro 10y ago
  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
  - matthewking 10y ago
    These are all lies told by the leave campaign, not the remain campaign?
    - KaiserPro 10y ago
      The Leave side. The Remain camp had "project fear" which basically translated the top end of the economic consensus into tabloid.

Zelmor 10y ago

Isn't it a well known fact for everyone by now that leaving the EU would have dire consequences to England? Losing the shared market access, researchers not being allowed into shared EU projects, the European Stock Exchange moving from London OR London leaving the UK, Scotland leaving the UK, maybe even N. Ireland leaving as well to unify the island (erin go bragh by the way!). How would it be in the interest for anyone to go on chasing this rabid dog that is Brexit?

dig1 10y ago
I believe many voters didn't see other side of the coin. Mass media bragging about independence, market and money control did pretty decent brainwashing for mass population.
antocv 10y ago
Someone should send a memo Bashar al Assad that "dire consequences" are a valid reason to postpone democracy. In fact, democracy seems to be reserved only for use by western NATO powers, even when not respecting a democratic vote, while imposing democracy "with dire consequences" on the rest of the world.
- thesimon 10y ago
  >even when not respecting a democratic vote The "Brexit" vote was nothing more than an opinion poll. There is no direct democracy in the UK.
  - antocv 10y ago
    Indeed. al Assads next interview "Sure, I did not win the vote, but this is not a direct democracy, the presidential ballot is mere a poll". Direct democracy for export to some (exclude Saudi), power for others. All this Brexit event just highlights the hypocrisy when calling Russian political system names and criticizing it for lack of democracy and other positive terms-on-paper.
    - 10y ago

pavlov 10y ago

I can't believe the UK government allowed this to happen. They went ahead with the referendum without ever explaining what Leave means. They should have drafted the Leave plan first, with very specific dates, and have people vote on that. "Do you want Britain to invoke Article 50 by 31 Dec 2016?" That would have been the responsible thing to do. (If anyone argues that you can't have a referendum on such a specifically worded question -- well, if the electorate doesn't understand even the basics, is it a good idea to have a referendum in the first place?) Cameron must be one of the least competent political leaders of our time. Maybe the Venezuelan ruling party could hire him as a consultant.

zigzigzag 10y ago
There can't be any leave plan because the EU refused to ever even discuss the possibility, as did unfortunately large chunks of the British civil service. Their primary strategy, since more or less forever, has been to resolutely insist that the EU is irreversible and forever and reducing its power is utterly unthinkable. Given that both governments refused to contemplate the possibility, how much of a plan did you expect there to be? Planning for the outcome of referendums is the governments job!
- pavlov 10y ago
  Who are you blaming exactly when you say that "EU refused"? What should this other party have done -- written a Leave plan when the UK government wouldn't do it? The referendum was a matter between the UK electorate and their government. Other EU states played no part in that. The Treaty of Lisbon specifically offers a way for a member state to withdraw in the timespan of two years. Not sure how you read that as "irreversible".
  - zigzigzag 10y ago
    The EU should absolutely have been willing to talk about it, yes! Article 50 was only put there because the British insisted on it. Read what the guy who wrote it thinks: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-britain-theresa-may-article-50-not-supposed-meant-to-be-used-trigger-giuliano-a7156656.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-refe...

bb101 10y ago

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 parliament demonstrating they are ready to meddle and overrule the majority will of the people, I have a feeling we are going to see many, many more votes for UKIP and BNP in any subsequent election. It's a ratchet effect along the lines of "if they didn't get the message with this vote, perhaps they'll get the message with this one." For the Americans out there, this is akin to Trump receiving a 52% majority by US voters (yes, 52% is still a majority, no matter how thin), and then the Electoral College deciding to vote amongst themselves instead about who becomes President: of course it would be Clinton.

antouank 10y ago
> By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen. By what logic?? Most reports says otherwise.
dabeeeenster 10y ago
"By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen." That's hugely uncertain.
exox 10y ago
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.
laurent123456 10y ago
> By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen There's nothing sure about this. In general most MPs are against Brexit but they are expected to roughly follow the will of the people, so there's a good change they'll still vote in favour of article 50. I mean the whole government right now is working hard to make Brexit happen, while at the same time being against it.

cletus 10y ago

David Cameron is really the architect of this clusterfuck. The referendum legislation should've made it clear what needed to happen. May's position is that the PM can wake up one day and decide to irrevocably and unilaterally leave the EU. That's a ridiculous position. You can argue there was a referendum but it was non-binding. MPs from Scotland and Northern Ireland will oppose leaving as their constituents vote overwhelmingly to remain so much so that many in Scotland want to revisit the question of independence. The leave vote was a proxy for two issues: first and foremost was immigration. The second is control of territorial waters and the resulting overfishing. On immigration, there is no access to the single market without freedom of EU has made that clear. That will mean paying into the EU coffers too but without any voting rights. So the alternatives are both terrible (for the U.K.). The U.K. while in the EU can and has extracted concessions on the threat of leaving. This is the best position for them. After pulling the trigger the UK has far less leverage. The EU does want access to the U.K. market but I think the U.K. needs the EU more than the EU needs the U.K. Hopefully this decision is upheld but even the delay is good. Maybe cooler heads will prevail. An uninformed 52% fueled by a Leave campaign making a bunch of promises they cannot keep and had no intention of delivering upon (since they expected to lose) is hardly a clear mandate.

pjc50 10y ago

Hoisting a comment of mine from a previous thread: The UK has never been through a "year zero" forcible reconstitution, so its constitutional and administrative arrangements are full of little adhoc anomalies (the various islands like Sark and Man, the City, "County" Durham, chancel repair liability, and so on). Mostly these are a fine and picturesque addition to the texture of the nation. There's certainly no real appetite to "fix" things, although Scotland managed to abolish the feudal system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_Feudal_Tenure_etc... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_Feudal_Tenure_etc...) However, this means that the sort of internal tensions which in the US get nailed to the mast of the constitution instead float around, un-crystallized. Until now, when the "brexit" vote has triggered a cascade of constitutional crises: is parliamentary consent required to leave the EU? How does this affect the Good Friday Agreement? What about Scotland? What exactly is the constitutional status of the Human Rights Act and why do the conservatives keep trying to abolish it? And so on. Right now the fight is about "sovereignty", but everyone seems to be operating with a sixteenth-century Henry VIII view where sovereignty must be absolute and means getting to do whatever you want. People keep talking about trade deals without realising that they also involve a compromise in arbitrariness, especially when things like ISDS are involved. Pretty much any international agreement involves the governments binding their hands and refraining from doing certain things (e.g. preferential subsidies) in exchange for the counterparty also accepting the same restriction. There seem to be a lot of people who simply cannot handle the idea that other countries are free to not go along with what Britain wants if it's not also in their interests. Compromise lacks the stirring power of "sovereignty", but it's necessary if you want to get on in the global economy.

thesmallestcat 10y ago
> Hoisting a comment of mine from a previous thread: Ugh.

user5994461 10y ago

Meanwhile for the young tech immigrant in the UK: "Well, time to move to another European country... oh wait, they're all economically f* and have no jobs for me. Well, gonna stay in the UK for a bit longer, see how it goes."

M2Ys4U 10y ago
The UK is pretty much slap-bang in the middle of the table when it comes to EU economies. The idea that the UK is an economic powerhouse within the Union is mostly a myth.
- user5994461 10y ago
  I don't know what you mean. If you're a software engineer, London has many [good] jobs for you. Your home country may not.

tom_mellior 10y ago

For anyone else who likes primary sources on this sort of thing, here is the court's very readable 2-page summary: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/summary-r-miller-v-secretary-of-state-for-exiting-the-eu-20161103.pdf https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/summ... (PDF) And here's the actual ruling: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/judgment-r-miller-v-secretary-of-state-for-exiting-the-eu-20161103.pdf https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/judg... (PDF)

anon4this1 10y ago

The common working class person has no real ability to alter the globalisation and pro-immigration agenda pushed by mainstream politicians. Successive governments have indicated that they would reduce immigration but all it has done is increase. My father was born in Birmingham, a city in which people of english-descent will be a minority by 2020. When a city is only 40% english-descent, it is no longer an English city. Karachi is still a pakistani city. Lagos is still a nigerian city. Birmingham is not an english city. Most brexiters aren't particularly fussed with the finer points of the common market, or EU centralised decision making. They just want border control and feel completely powerless as things stand to change anything. There is no neat referendum question regarding immigration, and there seems to be no way other than a referendum for real democratic hearing of people's views on this issue.

pmyteh 10y ago
Brummies born in Birmingham with brown skin are still Brummies, I suggest, just as the British descendents of Roman, Saxon, Viking, Norman, Jewish, Huguenot, German, Irish, Jamaican and American immigrants remain British. That, and it's a bit cheeky to pray-in-aid Karachi as some kind of purely Pakistani city given how much influence we Brits have had over the place as a result of conquering it.

devnull791101 10y ago

hopefully they hold a general election and Mrs May can continue doing her good work unimpeded for the foreseeable future. You may haggle on the terms of a "clear majority" on the referendum but there is no mistaking the majority the tories currently have over their opponents.