Gransnet forums

News & politics

Government must have vote on Brexit

(367 Posts)
Ginny42 Tue 24-Jan-17 10:33:55

Supreme Court has ruled that Parliament must vote on whether the government can start the Brexit process.

This means Theresa May cannot begin talks with the EU until MPs and peers give their backing - although BBC says this is likely to happen in time for the government's 31st March deadline.

Howver, the court ruled the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Ireland assemblies did not need a say. Not sure why.

David Davis to make a statement to MPs at 12:30.

However wasn't British law, sovereignty largely what a Brexit was about and this is a judgement by the highest court in the land. As Theresa May was originally a remainer, do you think she's been secretly hoping this would happen?

tanith Tue 24-Jan-17 10:40:22

Although I think its a good thing that they ruled against the Government its not going to make any difference in the end, is it?

rosesarered Tue 24-Jan-17 10:45:01

It was obvious ( the ruling) as was the first one.All done on a point of law.So now it is up to the MP's ( who will support it) and the Lords ( being mainly Lib Dems they may drag their heels.)
Why should Scotland Wales and NI have a say, they are part of the UK just as much as England is.

Alima Tue 24-Jan-17 10:57:18

Snap election, would that sort it?

tanith Tue 24-Jan-17 10:59:34

There will be very few MPs who are brave enough to vote against Brexit now I think.

Ana Tue 24-Jan-17 11:00:47

The Tories would win, so that wouldn't change anything (except that they'd probably get a bigger majority!)

trisher Tue 24-Jan-17 11:01:50

Thank goodness for the Supreme Court, of course Parliament should be consulted and have a vote on the Brexit process. The interesting thing now is if the political parties will introduce a three line whip or allow MPs to make their own minds up, and if an MP should vote for Brexit if his constituency voted to stay in.
As far as S, W and NI go I haven't looked at the reasons behind this decision, but I shouldn't imagine the Scots are very happy about it.

whitewave Tue 24-Jan-17 11:06:41

It has nothing to do with the Brexit vote but everything to do with our constitution. May and the Brexiters were entirely wrong and acting illegally in insisting that they and they alone could decide what the terms of leaving the EU. Now the people through our parliamentary representatives will decide exactly what sort of Britsin we want after we leave. Even the most rampant Brexiters cannot be sure if that at this point.

Ana Tue 24-Jan-17 11:13:48

Now the people through our parliamentary representatives will decide exactly what sort of Britsin we want after we leave.

I'm not sure that was the point of the ruling.

rosesarered Tue 24-Jan-17 11:18:05

No, I didn't think so either, more of a 'MP's agreeing to the legality of the vote on Brexit and triggering article 50' kind of thing.

whitewave Tue 24-Jan-17 11:22:12

Then you don't understand the British constitution

whitewave Tue 24-Jan-17 11:25:35

We don't have government by referendum. We have government by parliamentary representatives. This judgement simply pointed out this fact - a fact that May and her coterie were trying to override.

MaizieD Tue 24-Jan-17 11:25:35

and the Lords ( being mainly Lib Dems they may drag their heels.)

Do you ever check the truth before you post, roses?

www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/lords/composition-of-the-lords/

Cons. 253
Lab. 204
Lib Dems. 102
Others. 247

MaizieD Tue 24-Jan-17 11:27:00

It was a verifiable fact, after all...

Ana Tue 24-Jan-17 11:31:14

'Government lawyers have been quietly drawing up various bills in recent weeks in preparation for the verdict and they will pore over the ruling to work out exactly what type of bill they will need to put through Parliament.

Ministers will welcome the latitude given by the Supreme Court justices who have ruled "a very brief statute" will suffice.'

So not much to debate, really. Just a question of voting it through or not. And tabling various amendments of course, which may or may not delay things.

rosesarered Tue 24-Jan-17 11:33:45

Ok... should have said, that the Lib Dem Lords being very ANTI the idea of Brexit, would drag their heels.There are a lot of them if they ALL decide to block it.

rosesarered Tue 24-Jan-17 11:35:08

Do you HAVE to be so confrontational Maizie there are ways of pointing things out in an amicable fashion you know.

rosesarered Tue 24-Jan-17 11:37:06

That's what I thought Ana 11.31.14

whitewave Tue 24-Jan-17 11:42:28

I want a Brexit that reflects and benefits the entire population of the United Kingdom.

Ginny42 Tue 24-Jan-17 13:01:26

Absolutely agree with you ww. This would also diminish a hard Brexit to something less harsh and a compromise for people feeling disenfranchised by such a narrow win last June. That's what would make the difference Tanith.

This is a far more transparent way to deal with such a huge issue and actually strengthens Parliament.

Anniebach Tue 24-Jan-17 13:23:44

I fully agree with parliment voting on the terms of leaving .

tanith Tue 24-Jan-17 13:31:16

Thanks Ginny42 hopefully it will make it less hard.

whitewave Tue 24-Jan-17 13:33:42

There are extreme Brexiters - largely UKIP supporters, and then there are those with more level heads - these are the people who should now be listened to.

Anya Tue 24-Jan-17 13:46:17

This will be interesting - a stand off between those electors who voted 'leave' and their 'remain' MP, who was elected to reflect their wishes hmm

Luckygirl Tue 24-Jan-17 13:47:05

I'm puzzled as May said it would go to a vote in parliament, but if the vote went against Brexit then it would go ahead anyway. I have slightly lost the plot.