The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

[Cata1yst]

	Quote:	Blueangel
	Legally, it makes a hell of a lot of difference. I'm not a solicitor, but my brother was for his entire career. He and his former colleagues all say, from the moment Cameron resigned, the game changed, and that's been borne out by the High Court judges today. Read the full statement regarding their decision.

Legality has nothing to do with the selection of the Prime Minister.

The method by which a party leader and then Prime Minister is chosen is up to the party in question, these are the rules, it could be a flip of a coin or a party vote.

She is the Prime Minister, the chosen leader of the conservative party. The UK is does not carry out presidential elections = tough sh**.

BTW I'm no Tory.

Now today's ruling is absolutely correct and as it should be and I patiently await the House of Commons/Lords to implement the will of the people.

If not public disorder and rioting/civil war is my guess. - Its that serious.

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:	Blueangel
	But he didn't try to do something that would change the country to such an effect without a Parliamentary vote. He just got on with the job of running the country. Take it up with the High Court judges if you disagree.

Parliament voted 6:1 in favour of the referendum, it's clear they wanted the people to decide........ The people have decided so if they must think very carefully before voting against BREXIT.

[Cata1yst]

	Quote:
	Yes, they were also told 350m a day would be given to the NHS !

I don't see that on the ballot paper? Perhaps I missed it.

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:	Cata1yst
	I don't see that on the ballot paper? Perhaps I missed it.

Oddle must have had a different one to the other 35 million people, thats how she is always one step ahead.

It was 350 million per week if I'm to nitpick...

[Medea Fleecestealer]

	Quote:	Blueangel
	Legally, it makes a hell of a lot of difference. I'm not a solicitor, but my brother was for his entire career. He and his former colleagues all say, from the moment Cameron resigned, the game changed, and that's been borne out by the High Court judges today. Read the full statement regarding their decision.

I don't see how. The fact that the remaining candidate pulled out because of overwhelming support for May in the previous votes doesn't negate the fact that she's duly elected as leader of the Conservative Party.

"May won the first round of voting on 5 July, receiving support from 165 MPs, while Andrea Leadsom received 66 votes and Michael Gove collected 48. According to The Guardian, May was "almost certain to be among the final two candidates."[124] After the results were announced, May said she was "pleased" and "grateful" for the support of other MPs and confirmed that she wanted to unite the party and the UK, to negotiate the "best possible deal as we leave the EU", and to "make Britain work for everyone".[125] The two candidates with the fewest votes, Liam Fox and Stephen Crabb, immediately announced their support for May.[126] May came in first place in the second ballot on 7 July with an overwhelming majority of 199 MPs against 84 for Leadsom and 46 for Gove, who was eliminated.[127] Afterwards, May stated that she was delighted with her support among MPs, and she progressed to a vote of the Conservative Party membership against Leadsom[128]

On 11 July, Leadsom announced her withdrawal from the leadership contest hours after May had made her first campaign speech, citing her lack of support amongst Conservative MPs as being a hindrance to becoming a credible prime minister.[129] As the sole remaining candidate, May was declared Leader of the Conservative Party that evening.[130][131] Soon after she became Leader of the Conservative Party by default on 11 July 2016, David Cameron announced that he would tender his resignation as prime minister two days later, making May the UK's second female Prime Minister after Margaret Thatcher."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theres...rship_election

Assuming Leedsom got all of Gove's supporters she would still only have 130 votes against May's 199. Are you or your brother saying that if any candidate drops out of any election for any post then the result of whoever wins is invalidated?

At least Mrs May is in good company:

"Herbert Henry Asquith (1908); David Lloyd George (1916); Winston Churchill (1940); Anthony Eden (1955); Harold Macmillan (1957); and James Callaghan (1976), John Major (1990) and Gordon Brown (2007)" - all "unelected" PMs.

http://www.historyandpolicy.org/opin...rime-ministers

[Cata1yst]

	Quote:
	It was 350 million per week if I'm to nitpick...

I read through that bullsh** and voted out for other reasons..

Financial numbers on all sides were crackpot economics, so I discounted them.

Talking of crackpots anyone seen Osborne recently?

[marton]

	Quote:	amogles
	In that case, the entire referendum was just a massive opinion poll, and the likes of Junker and Merkel have no right to demand Britain invoke article 50 soon, or indeed at all.

Exactly, that is what it was and still is, an opinion poll

Junker and Merkel have no right to demand Britain invoke article 50; that is true whether we had the referendum or not

[marton]

	Quote:	bigblue2
	she was elected by the people in her constituency, she was elected by her party, the fact her only remaining opponent dropped out before the last round of voting is neither here not there, she would have won even if they had the vote, probably why she dropped out (and of course her stupid interview) she is the prime minister, there is no blurred lines, half measure yes, she could call another election, but what a waste of time, effort and money that would be, the last thing the UK needs is an even weaker opposition

"she was elected by her party" actually she was not, they never had the vote.

Let us try to keep to the truth here

[marton]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Yet they spent 9 million making it. And none of these were brought up during the campaign. Nevertheless the outcome will remain the same. All that's been confirmed today is that Parliamentary representative democracy is not democratic.

"one of these were brought up during the campaign." you seemed to have missed a lot during the campaign

[marton]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Yet they spent 9 million making it. And none of these were brought up during the campaign. Nevertheless the outcome will remain the same. All that's been confirmed today is that Parliamentary representative democracy is not democratic.

"Parliamentary representative democracy is not democratic." So you believe that having our sovereign Parliament voting on a topic is not Parliamentary representative democracy" Can you please explain?

[marton]

	Quote:	Medea Fleecestealer
	I don't see how. The fact that the remaining candidate pulled out because of overwhelming support for May in the previous votes doesn't negate the fact that she's duly elected as leader of the Conservative Party. "May won the first round of voting on 5 July, receiving support from 165 MPs, while Andrea Leadsom received 66 votes and Michael Gove collected 48. According to The Guardian, May was "almost certain to be among the final two candidates."[124] After the results were announced, May said she was "pleased" and "grateful" for the support of other MPs and confirmed that she wanted to unite the party and the UK, to negotiate the "best possible deal as we leave the EU", and to "make Britain work for everyone".[125] The two candidates with the fewest votes, Liam Fox and Stephen Crabb, immediately announced their support for May.[126] May came in first place in the second ballot on 7 July with an overwhelming majority of 199 MPs against 84 for Leadsom and 46 for Gove, who was eliminated.[127] Afterwards, May stated that she was delighted with her support among MPs, and she progressed to a vote of the Conservative Party membership against Leadsom[128] On 11 July, Leadsom announced her withdrawal from the leadership contest hours after May had made her first campaign speech, citing her lack of support amongst Conservative MPs as being a hindrance to becoming a credible prime minister.[129] As the sole remaining candidate, May was declared Leader of the Conservative Party that evening.[130][131] Soon after she became Leader of the Conservative Party by default on 11 July 2016, David Cameron announced that he would tender his resignation as prime minister two days later, making May the UK's second female Prime Minister after Margaret Thatcher." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theres...rship_election Assuming Leedsom got all of Gove's supporters she would still only have 130 votes against May's 199. Are you or your brother saying that if any candidate drops out of any election for any post then the result of whoever wins is invalidated? At least Mrs May is in good company: "Herbert Henry Asquith (1908); David Lloyd George (1916); Winston Churchill (1940); Anthony Eden (1955); Harold Macmillan (1957); and James Callaghan (1976), John Major (1990) and Gordon Brown (2007)" - all "unelected" PMs. http://www.historyandpolicy.org/opin...rime-ministers

"May was declared Leader of the Conservative Party" Indeed, declared, not elected.

[amogles]

	Quote:	Blueangel
	Come on!!! You're not thick and there's no way you can pin this on Merkel and Junker! It always was a massive opinion poll. Didn't you see the several hundred posts in this thread saying the same? I'm not saying "We told you so", but why did it take so long to join the dots?

Only Merkel and Juncker don't normally demand countries invoke Article 50 based on mere opinion polls.

So why, with all their smart advisers and lawyers, did nobody tell them they were being taken for a ride?

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	amogles
	Only Merkel and Juncker don't normally demand countries invoke Article 50 based on mere opinion polls. So why, with all their smart advisers and lawyers, did nobody tell them they were being taken for a ride?

It's now clear that the EU was correct to required A50 to be invoked before negotiations other wise they'd have been wasting their talking to a government that does not have the legal competence to negotiate on this.

[Medea Fleecestealer]

	Quote:	marton
	"she was elected by her party" actually she was not, they never had the vote. Let us try to keep to the truth here

Yes, let's. She won 2 out of 3 rounds of voting, both by wide margins. For the 3rd round the other candidate dropped out citing lack of support from Conservative MPs. If that's not wining a vote I don't know what is.

As for a referendum only being advisory and not binding Parliament has never rejected the results of previous UK/National referendums held. So not only has that set up in the minds of the UK public that a referendum is in fact binding, there is precedence - and I would argue that makes legal precedence too - that Parliament cannot now vote against Brexit.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Parliament voted 6:1 in favour of the referendum, it's clear they wanted the people to decide........ The people have decided so if they must think very carefully before voting against BREXIT.

The parliament actually made the referendum consultative - meaning it was an opinion poll. If they had wanted the people to make the decision it would have been binding one assumes.

[marton]

	Quote:	bigblue2
	the high court isn't saying SHE can't do it, they are saying NO PM can do it without a parliament vote, would have been the same if Dave was still PM

Must admit I was surprised. Usually the Courts chicken out of making decisions that upset the political apple cart. Look at the fate of the various German court challenges to the EU like the one about euro bailouts.

Must mean the High Court see this as a very serious issue that they could not walk away from.
Will be interesting to see the Supreme Court view.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	bigblue2
	the high court isn't saying SHE can't do it, they are saying NO PM can do it without a parliament vote, would have been the same if Dave was still PM

Exactly! A sovereign parliament has been the lynchpin of democracy in the U.K. for a long time and the idea that a PM could pick and choose when to consult it would amount to dictatorship - it's that serious.

[marton]

	Quote:	Medea Fleecestealer
	Yes, let's. She won 2 out of 3 rounds of voting, both by wide margins. For the 3rd round the other candidate dropped out citing lack of support from Conservative MPs. If that's not wining a vote I don't know what is. As for a referendum only being advisory and not binding Parliament has never rejected the results of previous UK/National referendums held. So not only has that set up in the minds of the UK public that a referendum is in fact binding, there is precedence - and I would argue that makes legal precedence too - that Parliament cannot now vote against Brexit.

"If that's not wining a vote I don't know what is." There was no vote! Repeat, no vote! You cannot win a vote that did not exist!

"not only has that set up in the minds of the UK public that a referendum is in fact binding" In the UK our Parliament is sovereign and referendums are not binding in the UK, no extra binding provision was contained within the EU referendum legislation.

[NomadAmericano]

	Quote:	marton
	Must admit I was surprised. Usually the Courts chicken out of making decisions that upset the political apple cart. Look at the fate of the various German court challenges to the EU like the one about euro bailouts. Must mean the High Court see this as a very serious issue that they could not walk away from. Will be interesting to see the Supreme Court view.

The English-Welsh courts (and U.K. courts in general) have gotten much more activist since Blair's legal reforms. The reforms we based heavily on US judicial organization and the result was more US-style judicial activism, especially as U.K. jurists are overwhelmingly EU-centric.