If You Had A Twin, But Didn't Realise...
Family Life1 min ago
How Could Parliament Prevent A No Deal?
18 Answers
https:/
Surely if they do not pass the PM's "deal" then the status quo is all that is left, ie no deal. I don't see what mechanism Parliament has to prevent A50 with no deal. Can they create a bill to suspend A50 somehow? I assume the EU would need to cooperate.
Surely if they do not pass the PM's "deal" then the status quo is all that is left, ie no deal. I don't see what mechanism Parliament has to prevent A50 with no deal. Can they create a bill to suspend A50 somehow? I assume the EU would need to cooperate.
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The EU has been fairly consistent that if the UK changed its mind they would be very supportive of this -- which, I imagine, won't come as a shock to Leave voters. Which means that, yes, it is rather up to what Parliament decides. I think the current expectation is that the Deal will be voted on at least twice, being rejected the first time, and maybe also the second time. In that case, I suspect Parliament would probably move either (1) to have No Confidence in HM Government, or (2) to request a suspension of A50 while working out where to go next.
All of this is moot, for the time being, but, the sovereignty of Parliament being what it is, there may be mechanisms to annul the process.
At least one step might be to repeal the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017. Since it was deemed necessary to have such legislation to grant a notification of Article 50 in the first place, it may be correct to say that repealing the Act withdraws the permission Parliament had earlier granted. I *do not know* whether this argument is legally correct -- but, if it is, then the wording of Article 50 might imply that our notification is no longer valid, as continuing to view it as active might violate our constitutional requirements.
At the moment, though, I tend to expect that Parliament will eventually, after a great deal of fuss, accept the deal on offer. We'll see.
All of this is moot, for the time being, but, the sovereignty of Parliament being what it is, there may be mechanisms to annul the process.
At least one step might be to repeal the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017. Since it was deemed necessary to have such legislation to grant a notification of Article 50 in the first place, it may be correct to say that repealing the Act withdraws the permission Parliament had earlier granted. I *do not know* whether this argument is legally correct -- but, if it is, then the wording of Article 50 might imply that our notification is no longer valid, as continuing to view it as active might violate our constitutional requirements.
At the moment, though, I tend to expect that Parliament will eventually, after a great deal of fuss, accept the deal on offer. We'll see.
I don’t know if this is just a fantasy but...
Labour could form the next government without a general election if MPs don't back Theresa May's Brexit deal, John McDonnell has suggested.
https:/
Labour could form the next government without a general election if MPs don't back Theresa May's Brexit deal, John McDonnell has suggested.
https:/
To be sure, OG, I'm not clear on whether my argument is correct or not. But international law is sometimes as much a matter of consensus as anything else. If both the EU27 and the UK want Article 50 Notification to be rescinded, then it will be rescinded, even if it requires a separate (short) Treaty to achieve this. Whether or not we get to that point depends on a great deal yet, though.
If Treason does not deliver Brexit then there will be no more voting as there will only be one party left since the Tories will be finished.
Listening tot Traitor May on Skynews on Sunday I really got the feeling she is an arrogant dictator or neither cares nor belives if the the people should have their say.
No doubt also driven by her Globalist business husband. I'm sure they will be just fine especially when the treacherous woman gets her snout firmly in the EU trough as reward.
Listening tot Traitor May on Skynews on Sunday I really got the feeling she is an arrogant dictator or neither cares nor belives if the the people should have their say.
No doubt also driven by her Globalist business husband. I'm sure they will be just fine especially when the treacherous woman gets her snout firmly in the EU trough as reward.
This is a very good (if rather complex) explanation of what might happen:
https:/
https:/
I dont know the answer to that
Trump said the iran deal was off - and the world didnt fall apart.
Treaties are usually made by commissioners and then presented to the treaty maker - previously her maj.
This meant the treaty which became domestic law was signed into law only on the sign of the sovereign
George V in an unusual lapse said he didnt want anything to do with signing the treaty of Brest Litovsk 1919 and Lloyd George said Oh I will
SO treaty making power passed from King to Prime minister - cute huh ?
President Wilson 1919 signed the treaty of Versailles which was then NOT ratified by congress.
betcha didnt know that ! and nothing much happened
Masstricht was passed as an bill/of parliament
and the MPs ( bless!) started putting down amendments
"as" in clause 5 should read "because"
"dominions" should read "dominions overseas....."
and we dont like clause 26 chuck it out .....
and you know the kind of dumb cluck things you read everyday on AB
and John major had a hard time saying
no pass it as is .....
and the MPs whined 'then why are we discussing it?'
as they did not know the history - see above.
AND there is a case going thro the courts.....
so really I think we wait and see
yeah and most of this is about treaty making and not treaty abrogating
Trump said the iran deal was off - and the world didnt fall apart.
Treaties are usually made by commissioners and then presented to the treaty maker - previously her maj.
This meant the treaty which became domestic law was signed into law only on the sign of the sovereign
George V in an unusual lapse said he didnt want anything to do with signing the treaty of Brest Litovsk 1919 and Lloyd George said Oh I will
SO treaty making power passed from King to Prime minister - cute huh ?
President Wilson 1919 signed the treaty of Versailles which was then NOT ratified by congress.
betcha didnt know that ! and nothing much happened
Masstricht was passed as an bill/of parliament
and the MPs ( bless!) started putting down amendments
"as" in clause 5 should read "because"
"dominions" should read "dominions overseas....."
and we dont like clause 26 chuck it out .....
and you know the kind of dumb cluck things you read everyday on AB
and John major had a hard time saying
no pass it as is .....
and the MPs whined 'then why are we discussing it?'
as they did not know the history - see above.
AND there is a case going thro the courts.....
so really I think we wait and see
yeah and most of this is about treaty making and not treaty abrogating
1 to 18 of 18
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.