Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Drakken]

I think the whole referendum thing is monumentally wrong.  Our aim is to overturn this mistake by doing the following -

1. Refuse to invoke Article 50;

2. Talk to EU to know the specific exit conditions;

The EU made it already and perfectly clear that they will not have any talks with London without Article 50 invoked.

[Monoriu]

The EU made it already and perfectly clear that they will not have any talks with London without Article 50 invoked.

That's what they say.  If they want to keep Britain in they better help

[jimmy olsen]

We're not Asian, we do lots of things you wouldn't understand. For example we don't live in shoeboxes, or eat durian.

That has nothing to do with being Asian. Plenty of people in Korea, Japan and Taiwan join political parties.

Hell, a hundred million people in China belong to the Communist Party.

[Valmy]

So, have they found a way to overturn the will of the people as expressed in a lawful referendum yet? 

As opposed to an unlawful referendum? Or is that what you are telling yourself about 1995 these days?

Anyway the British will have to leave. To not leave would expose their referendum as a farce no matter how bad of an idea it is. Which is why you don't have referendums. So I wouldn't worry.

[Valmy]

They just have to hold an election and elect a government that doesn't want to follow through.  In the Westminster system parliament is sovereign, not the people. 

I wouldn't at all be surprised if a party running on "fuck the referendum" got elected.  There's a whole lot of reconsideration going on as people discover that the school water fountains won't really be filled with kool-aid.

I just don't think you can hold a referendum like this, even an advisory one, and NOT follow through. They will have to invoke article 50 as soon as their government gets its shit together..

[LaCroix]

I just don't think you can hold a referendum like this, even an advisory one, and NOT follow through. They will have to invoke article 50 as soon as their government gets its shit together..

they can do anything the law permits. whether the british leadership are willing to go down that route is another matter.

[Valmy]

they can do anything the law permits. whether the british leadership are willing to go down that route is another matter.

Well that's the rub isn't it? I don't think they can or will. They are on their seven stages of grief right now but will get to acceptance eventually.

[OttoVonBismarck]

It was theoretically possible in the recent past to need the monarch's involvement in undemocratic ways very rarely. It somewhat happened earlier in Elizabeth's reign, as recently as the 1960s, back then it was possible for a premier to have to leave office and then his party would need to come up with a replacement. Unlike today there wasn't a clear-cut process in place for handling this. When Eden and Macmillan resigned (consecutively), there was genuine potential for the Queen's involvement. In both cases the Queen surveyed the cabinet to come up with the replacement, and picked the one recommended. But in the case of Macmillan, he advised her to nominate Lord Home (whom she did), but his support in the cabinet was tepid. There was a genuine and real possibility that without a clear political consensus, the Queen would essentially have to pick based on her preference. This situation wouldn't happen today because there are better fleshed out ways of presenting a successor who has essentially guaranteed political support.

On a situation where there was a clear, constitutional, democratic decision making process that's already handled the question (the referendum) and Parliament is still functional and could call a general election to seek a new mandate there is absolutely no acceptable political role for the monarch.

[grumbler]

I just don't think you can hold a referendum like this, even an advisory one, and NOT follow through. They will have to invoke article 50 as soon as their government gets its shit together..

I just said how they could do it:  hold an election, and elect a government which refuses to honor the referendum.  No Parliament is bound by any precedents or decisions of any previous Parliament.  The sitting Parliament is sovereign.

[grumbler]

they can do anything the law permits. whether the british leadership are willing to go down that route is another matter.

And they can write whatever law they want (subject, in theory, to the unwritten constitution).  A party like the LDP has nothing to lose by taking the lead on something like this.

[Monoriu]

I think a referendum probably holds the most weight in terms of mandate, and it will be very difficult to ignore it.  But a fresh referendum can fairly erase the result of a previous one.  When the British electorate know the real cost of their decision, say by understanding the specific conditions under which they will leave the EU, there is a reasonable chance that they may change their minds in a second referendum. 

[citizen k]

So, have they found a way to overturn the will of the people as expressed in a lawful referendum yet? 



G.

They're working hard.

http://heatst.com/uk/exclusive-brexit-2nd-referendum-petition-a-4-chan-prank-bbc-report-it-as-real/

[celedhring]

Incidentally in another reason of why this should be resolved pronto: the uni I do some work for (which employs loads of international personnel) is pausing hires from the UK since they have no idea of what their visa situation will be in the near future.

[Richard Hakluyt]

grumbler is correct, Parliament can ignore the referendum result if they want to.

A better way forward though is to be offered a really shit deal by the EU then have another one.

As an aside, one consequence of the referendum result is that the British media are plastered with Juncker and Martin Schulz; if only Remain had vigorously pointed out this out as a likely consequence, the leave vote would have been weaker 

I approve of Merkel's dithering by the way, let things settle down a bit first before making irrevocable decisions.

[Josquius]

I wonder. Are numbers available for the turnout of old people ?
I wonder how long we have to wait forstatistically enough of them to be dead that remain has a majority even based off the last ref....

So, have they found a way to overturn the will of the people as expressed in a lawful referendum yet? 

As opposed to an unlawful referendum? Or is that what you are telling yourself about 1995 these days?

Anyway the British will have to leave. To not leave would expose their referendum as a farce no matter how bad of an idea it is. Which is why you don't have referendums. So I wouldn't worry.

It was a farce.
It was bullshit tory factional manoeuvring with absolute lies sprinkled on top.