Article 50 - Leaving The Eu

[Gromit]

Surely invoking Article 50 will have to be debated in Parliament where the majority of MPs are Remainers. As has been pointed out previously, the result of the Referendum was not binding.

Would they dare NOT to invoke it?

[Hypognosis]

Someone was on the Beeb News Channel saying that, constitutionally, repeal of the 1972 Act was required BUT, wrapped inside that Act are items relating to *the devolved Parliaments* which, in essence, enshrine their very existence and cannot be repealed without *their* consent.

I think I've misunderstood what was being said but it is a potential spanner in the works.

[jourdain2]

Parlia.ment, and the Europeans, have already accepted it. I think that Europe is glad to be rid of us t.b.h.

[tonyav]

I think that Europe is glad to be rid of us t.b.h.

Not as glad as I am to be rid of them, jourdain.

[Zacs-Master]

We're not yet. That's exactly what we're discussing.

[Jackdaw33]

I don't understand what is meant by 'devolved' parliaments as there were none in the UK in 1972.

[Zacs-Master]

There's no such thing and there's the rub.

[Hypognosis]

via Zacs-Master's link

"
4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.
"

The existence of Lord Hall only entered my consciousness yesterday, when he announced his resignation from the European Council. Or was it the commission? Either way, a Cameron appointee, so clearly a Bremainer.

I like the commenter who says the ECHR should be invoked with regard to states having to meet certain specifications to qualify as Democratic! Ha ha.

[Gromit]

// Quite clear to me that Parliament's approval is not required. //

From the FT link....

// In the UK, it would seem that some form of parliamentary approval would be required — perhaps a motion or resolution rather than a statute. The position, however, is not clear and the UK government has so far been coy about being specific. //

[Jackdaw33]

Exactly my point. The Queen can get up tomorrow and issue an Order in Council to trigger Article 50 immediately.

[Gromit]

No she couldn't and she certainly will not.

Parliament has to approve it at some stage. The Referendum result is not binding, so some form of adoption by the HofC is needed to set the process going.

[Jackdaw33]

The referendum is not binding? Double ROFL. Who is going to risk the possibility of a revolution by ignoring it?

[Gromit]

If you think Boris can proclaim Article 50 is invoked, you will be sadly disappointed. Parliament has to do it.

I doubt there would be a revolution when nearly 50% of the population didn't vote for it anyway. The youth might revolt, but the geriatric Brexiters wouldn't.

[vetuste_ennemi]

"The youth might revolt, but the geriatric Brexiters wouldn't."
Which means?

[Jackdaw33]

'Geriatric Brexiters'. Charming! No wonder you lost.

[Gromit]

Birdie,

This will have to go to parliament, where remainers are in the majority. They were democratically elected and therefore if they voted to ignore the referendum or delay implementing it, that would not be undemocratic.

The process is that MPs vote on changes to the law, and they can ignore any consultation they don't like. The Referendum was a consultation exercise.

There is great possibility for a fudge. MPs could say they fully consulted their constituencies before blocking invoking Article 50.

We shall have to see how this pans out, but I doubt it will be as straight forwardas it appears.

[Svejk]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClyhYInWgAAOVUo.jpg

[Jackdaw33]

I reckon that if I were caught in possession of what Gromit is on I could be looking at a long stretch.