Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Zanza]

Hard to see how Parl could not vite in favour of triggering article 50 when the EU has said that there can't be any negotiations until it has been triggered.

It might be a different story if Parliament got to vote on the terms following negotiation, that would give political cover - i.e. not the terms promised by the Leave campaign on which electorate voted.

Parliament is sovereign right? So they can just make an Act of Parliament that enables the government to trigger Article 50 but not sign a treaty with the EU without another Act of Parliament.

[Zanza]

Would be nice but AFAIK once Article 50 is triggered, that's it - if the UK won't sign an agreement on the divorce when the two years expire, they are just booted out completely.

That assumes an extremely hostile EU-27 and something that parliament can't mitigate anyway, so it shouldn't be relevant to parliament checking government.

[Gups]

Hard to see how Parl could not vite in favour of triggering article 50 when the EU has said that there can't be any negotiations until it has been triggered.

It might be a different story if Parliament got to vote on the terms following negotiation, that would give political cover - i.e. not the terms promised by the Leave campaign on which electorate voted.

Parliament is sovereign right? So they can just make an Act of Parliament that enables the government to trigger Article 50 but not sign a treaty with the EU without another Act of Parliament.

But if there is no treaty, then we have Brexit after two years, no matter what.

In any event, Parliament doesn't work like that. Acts aren't magicked up. Parliamentary time has to be found for them and they have to be drafted. There's no chance of a Bill of that sort coming forward without Government sponsorship.

[Gups]

Would be nice but AFAIK once Article 50 is triggered, that's it - if the UK won't sign an agreement on the divorce when the two years expire, they are just booted out completely.

That assumes an extremely hostile EU-27 and something that parliament can't mitigate anyway, so it shouldn't be relevant to parliament checking government.

It makes no assumption whatsoever. Two years after article 50 is triggered, the UK leave the EU. Whether the EU is hostile or friendly or indifferent makes no difference unless the rules are changed.

[Zanza]

It makes no assumption whatsoever. Two years after article 50 is triggered, the UK leave the EU. Whether the EU is hostile or friendly or indifferent makes no difference unless the rules are changed.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in
paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

The EU-27 can with a simple vote in the Council prolong that period. So the UK leaving the EU without any agreement assumes that the EU-27 are so hostile that they wouldn't prolong that period by whatever time is necessary. Despite the acrimony now, I don't think that has any chance of happening. As long as negotiations haven't completely broken down and the EU has reestablished Napoleon's continental system I would always expect postponement of the deadline over just a break.

[Zanza]

In any event, Parliament doesn't work like that. Acts aren't magicked up. Parliamentary time has to be found for them and they have to be drafted. There's no chance of a Bill of that sort coming forward without Government sponsorship.

Okay, I don't know enough about how your parliament and government work. I had - wrongly apparently - assumed that parliament can create its own acts in addition to the the plethora of government sponsored acts. I made that assumption because while government with its huge bureaucracy obviously drafts most laws here, parliamentarians can create their own drafts and counter-proposals and that's what e.g. the opposition, with its much smaller parliamentarian staff, does all the time.

[Gups]

It makes no assumption whatsoever. Two years after article 50 is triggered, the UK leave the EU. Whether the EU is hostile or friendly or indifferent makes no difference unless the rules are changed.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in
paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

The EU-27 can with a simple vote in the Council prolong that period. So the UK leaving the EU without any agreement assumes that the EU-27 are so hostile that they wouldn't prolong that period by whatever time is necessary. Despite the acrimony now, I don't think that has any chance of happening. As long as negotiations haven't completely broken down and the EU has reestablished Napoleon's continental system I would always expect postponement of the deadline over just a break.

OK sure. But the stupid hard Brexit the UK Govt its promoting would mean two years and we're out, agreement or not. Question is whether Parl. uses this opoortunity to force back down on hard Brexit. Don't forget Parliament is both Commons and Lords. And the Lords don't give a flying fuck about how people voted in the referendum!

Constitutional crisis ahoy!

[Gups]

In any event, Parliament doesn't work like that. Acts aren't magicked up. Parliamentary time has to be found for them and they have to be drafted. There's no chance of a Bill of that sort coming forward without Government sponsorship.

Okay, I don't know enough about how your parliament and government work. I had - wrongly apparently - assumed that parliament can create its own acts in addition to the the plethora of government sponsored acts. I made that assumption because while government with its huge bureaucracy obviously drafts most laws here, parliamentarians can create their own drafts and counter-proposals and that's what e.g. the opposition, with its much smaller parliamentarian staff, does all the time.

That's true here as well and private members' bill can get through. The trouble is the allocation of Parliamentary time which is largely controlled by the Govt. A complicated Bill of the kind you are talking about just could not get off the ground. Amendments to whatever the Gov puts forward to trigger art 50 are probably the way to go (assuming Gov loses its appeal to the Supreme Court)

[celedhring]

If there is something I learnt from my cursory knowledge of English history, is that you really don't want to fuck over Parliament.

[Tamas]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbFhlfnJep0

[Zanza]

And the Lords don't give a flying fuck about how people voted in the referendum!

I just read a bit of the High Court decision and I love how it cites stuff from the Glorious revolution and how you have a Duke of Wellington in your House of Lords. It's quaint and part of the charme of Britain. After the various constitutional crisis and changes that Germany has experienced in 1803-1806, 1848, 1871, 1919, 1933-1945, and last in 1949 there is very little of these traditional elements of our ancient history left. Mostly related to the two quasi-state churches.

[Zanza]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbFhlfnJep0

I like that much more than the Downfall Hitler. I have no idea what he's talking about but his laughing sure is contagious.

[Hamilcar]

Meanwhile, quality service from Manchester city hall: http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2016/11/02/letter-manchester-city-council-strong-contender-facepalm-year/

[Valmy]

Geek passport. Awesome.

[Admiral Yi]

Confusion over Hellas/Greece is perhaps understandable,  but misuse of question marks is not?