And The Brexit Mess Grows Ever Deeper

[Zacs-Master]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/11/more-than-80-mps-join-lib-dem-plot-to-force-government-to-hold-a/

[Davemano]

Zacs I think you must have misunderstood my point.

[Zacs-Master]

Dave, I wish I had your faith.

[Zacs-Master]

You just seem to have proved my point. To,say it's not a mess is a bit 'head in the sand'.

[Davemano]

I'm confident that common sense will prevail and Article 50 will go ahead.

[Zacs-Master]

I like a chap with a positive outlook in such times. I hope you're right. But is suspect your not.

[Peter Pedant]

I ( as a remoaner ) have no doubt that mrs may will damn well go for A50

it is a question of when and how much damage will occur

I think that there will be so much uncertainty and the losses which occur on that - that when the pound reaches parity with the Italian Lira or Zimbabwe Dollar ( new ) that there will be a groundswell of
o for chrissakes let's do it and be done with it - no matter what

( exactly opposite to Trump who is saying even tonight - even as you read this: " yeah well folks, I think that there are bits of obamacare which are good for americans and therefore good for America etc etc )

[jim360]

To be fair, PP, I got the message about separation of powers *after* the ruling in the High Court recently.

[ToraToraTora]

ok Zacs we are getting bogged down in events since June 23rd. Here's what I am asking and I think you know anyway but I'll spell it out.
Ignore everything except the vote on June 23rd. Do you personally think that the "leave" result should be implemented?

[Zacs-Master]

I can't ignore everything. My post is about the events since the 'leave' vote.

[vulcan42]

Zacs-Master, if as you say it's the law, why wasn't this mentioned until those people took it to court? Why didn't the MP's who opposed leaving, all those people involved in the law and especially the newspaper's bring it to the publics attention? No doubt you will say how would you know but do you not think it was strange that nobody pointed this out before the referendum?

[ToraToraTora]

gawd elp us, I'm just off to nail some jelly to a wall, you are as slippery as a bucket of eels. Answer the straight question above.

[Zacs-Master]

I can't answer your question Tora, it's hypothetical in the current situation. I can't just ignore the fact that the law of the land has made a ruling which changes the whole landscape of Brexit. I'm not being slippery at all. You just seem to want to me to answer a question which, for the moment, is irrelevant. I've given you some very honest answers and you know I'm a remainer.

[Peter Pedant]

// Ignore everything except the vote on June 23rd.// 3T

- what ignore everything ? the election of Trump is a game changer innit ? yeah ! farage could act as a pro-Brit go between and have the UK hitch itself onto american renegotiation of trade treaties....

Jim - the high court decision on A50 and its trigger is well worth a read.
( sorry vis is AB - worf a read, yeah ? )
https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/judgments/r-miller-v-secretary-of-state-for-exiting-the-european-union/

as soon as they say in 1687 James II declaration of indulgence which suspended the operation of anti catholic laws - was declared to be unlawful you know that the game is up

[ToraToraTora]

Ive started a new thread for you to answer the question so you don't have to step out of the line of BS since June.

[Peter Pedant]

// I can't just ignore the fact that the law of the land has made a ruling which changes the whole landscape of Brexit.//

no the ruling didnt change the law
it is not true to say - well on Monday the minister could have blapped the "A50 activate!" button without question and now it is Wednesday and he damn well cant because of the ruling on Tuesday

it more true ( hey I am getting to sound like dat 3T ! ) to say the landscape wasnt as the crazy turkeys called Brexiters said it was ( "yeah bruvva just leave the common markit ! " ) - and was more complicated than they said

Sometimes the law does change ( the house of Lords could overrule itself but obviously didnt do so often ) but this isnt one of them

as for
// Why didn't the MP's who opposed leaving, all those people involved in the law and especially the newspaper's bring it to the publics attention?//

because there are some pretty crap lawyers in parliament
Goldsmith got his law arguably wrong on the Iraq War in his advice to Bliar

and anyway the question in the referendum was about leaving the EU
and not "do you fink the ministers have got their fingers in the wrong holes when it comes to triggering A50 ?" - answer even for the Brexiters woud be "yes defintiely" even if they would have voted "no we want to leave the EU"

Ministers aren't 'know-alls' Vulcan even if they say they are ....
Jack Straw got his international law memoraboy wrong and explained in Parliament " erm I didnt do international law when I read my law degree"

[Zacs-Master]

I didn't say the law had changed. I said the legal ruling had changed the landscape of Brexit.

[EDDIE51]

^ It is now beyond doubt that if A50 had been triggered under 'Royal Prerogative' as the PM intended, it would have been illegal and overturned by the Law Lords. I can see no reason other than it being intended to fail, as it was obvious that it could never work.
Now she is now embarked on a clearly hopeless appeal against the unanimous decision. She did not manage to fail , as intended, the first time so now she is having a second attempt to fail.