Time is short this morning so I must blog in haste.
In that case might I simply draw attention to Jolyon Maugham's blog on whether any prime minister has the legal right to invoke Article 50 using the Royal prerogative?
The question he raises is constitutionally important in the rapidly deepening crisis that we face.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
And this from the very end of the Constitutional Law Association’s blog to which Jolyon links (and worth reading in full):
‘A quick pull of the Article 50 trigger is unlikely to be feasible under the UK’s constitutional arrangements and may well not be desirable for any UK Government or Parliament, even one committed to eventual withdrawal from the EU.
Brexit is the most important decision that has faced the United Kingdom in a generation and it has massive constitutional and economic ramifications. In our constitution, Parliament gets to make this decision, not the Prime Minister.’
The best discussion I’ve seen is on this website:
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/blog/
There are at least four articles (and more being added rapidly) covering the issue of whether the triggering of Article 50 must be debated in parliament. As far as I can see, there’s no consensus.
Cameron’s messaging has been ambiguous, and somewhat careful. It’s noticeable that he consistently states that the wishes of the public must be “respected”. This does not necessarily have the same meaning as “followed”.
In some strange and probably perverse moment, I just had a thought that Parliament or Government had decided to go against the democratic will of the people and block Brexit.
That is the most frightening thing I have thought about for a very long time!
Can you imagine the public reaction (not to mention the inevitable violence on the streets) which would most probably result in the end of representative politics in this country in its current non-democratic form.
We would then have a new date to celebrate each year as a more radical alternative to November the 5th.
I think Brexit is now very unlikely
I can’t imagine any oilurucian who will actually ask the Commons to vote in it or that the Commins would
And without such a vote I do not see it happening
I was listening to the BBC World at One today (Tuesday) and it was pointed out by someone (I forget the name but they were qualified to comment) that the only constitional way to leave Europe was the reverse of how Britain joined – by an Act of Parliament. That Act can stand on its own two feet and does not need to be linked to Article 50.
If when a Bill is introduced the House of Commons cannot vote decisively for it, one way or another, then it is likely that the UK would be facing a General Election. One presumes that the Tory leader who replaces Cameron would be leading a Conservative Party that was in favour of a split by Britain from the EU.
On the contrary, we are a parliamentary ie. a representative democracy first and foremost. That, and the constitutional issues raised above, requires a debate in parliament on the issue, during which MPs will need to consider both the referendum outcome and the views of those who elected them at that time – and those views could very well change over the coming weeks/months.
Far from such a process heralding the demise of representative democracy – whatever the outcome – it will in fact enhance it. If may of course, contribute to the demise of direct democracy ie the referendum, but this would be no bad thing. It was entirely inappropriate that 47 million people were asked to vote on such a hugely complex issue with no idea whatsoever of the consequences of that vote. The information provided by both sides during the campaign has ranged from woefully inadequate to deliberately misleading – hardly a basis for sound democracy in the 21st century developed world.
Recommend good legal blog on this.
http://www.headoflegal.com/
I asked some heavy duty lawyers I know and in their view it must go to Parliament…so Spring next year then.
The Euro’s, not least Holland are in hurry – the mood is very much put up or shut up. Looks like “shut up”. In a meeting i Bx, generalised sympathy from assembled Euros.
And there is nothing they can do it