Bit of Brexit info required. | Page 119 | Vital Football

Bit of Brexit info required.

It's a forecast and forecasting is a old as the hills!
I just wondered what you thought the obstacles were, or if you just thought there shouldn't be one for any reason?
 
Feco said:
A Leave Deal has been negotiated, if that is not acceptable to Parliament, then No Brexit should now be the default position, something the Right Honourable Member for Rushcliffe stated. I’m sure he probably knows.
Click to expand...

Ken Clarke wants us to remain. He says remain SHOULD be the default position. We can argue till the cows come home about the rights and wrongs of it, but my understanding of the FACTS are that we have implemented article 50 and unless Parliament does something about it we leave on no deal. That I understand is a FACT, but I guess Parliament won't let it happen. To stop it Parliament must agree to vote something through, whether it's pulling article 50 unilaterally, voting for a second referendum, Norway, Canada or whatever. My understanding is we still need the EUs agreement to extend article 50, though I guess they will do that to try and keep us in.

Theresa May SAYS (though I don't believe her) that we will leave no matter what, so she needs to do yet another U turn, or be removed if we are staying in.
 
I’m trying to think of a time when Parliament has been unable to agree on something and by default has chosen to move away from the current status quo.
I can’t think of one.

As far as I can remember, if something is not approved, then nothing changes.

What we seem to have suggested at the moment is a situation whereby the negotiated deal can’t gain approval in Parliament, so we move to something completely different in the no deal, which again can’t get approval in Parliament.
I just cannot see how that can legally be enforced.
If the deal is rejected, then it’s no Brexit by default.

The ruling from the ECJ yesterday confirmed that can be the case in regards to Article 50 too.

There should be no need for any further referendum, the process should die in Westminster.
 
Lienking said:
Ken Clarke wants us to remain. He says remain SHOULD be the default position. We can argue till the cows come home about the rights and wrongs of it, but my understanding of the FACTS are that we have implemented article 50 and unless Parliament does something about it we leave on no deal. That I understand is a FACT, but I guess Parliament won't let it happen. To stop it Parliament must agree to vote something through, whether it's pulling article 50 unilaterally, voting for a second referendum, Norway, Canada or whatever. My understanding is we still need the EUs agreement to extend article 50, though I guess they will do that to try and keep us in.

Theresa May SAYS (though I don't believe her) that we will leave no matter what, so she needs to do yet another U turn, or be removed if we are staying in.
Click to expand...

And I think Ken Clarke is correct. He did go on to say if this Parliament could not decide, then it should be left to future ones.
I suspect he was talking from a legal perspective then, obviously that’s his expertise.
I’m not sure that would be too helpful, keeping this hanging on for another 4 years but....

Article 50 has been implemented, and you are correct that they would need to revoke that. If they can’t agree a deal, be it the negotiated one or no deal, then the default position should be the status quo, and Article 50 should be revoked.

I believe you are correct regarding extending Article 50, although I think one or two countries would be glad to see the back of the UK.
That said, surely Parliament would have to approve that too?
 
I don't know the exact status of unilateral extension.

However, in practice:
a) I believe the member states would vote for it;
b) we could unilaterally revoke A50 and reinvoke it again the next day, buying another two years. It's silly and wouldn't win us any friends but we do know for sure that, legally, it is entirely possible. (Being forced to negotiate in good faith is not a great starting point for a second round!)
 
in_the_top_one said:
I don't know the exact status of unilateral extension.

However, in practice:
a) I believe the member states would vote for it;
b) we could unilaterally revoke A50 and reinvoke it again the next day, buying another two years. It's silly and wouldn't win us any friends but we do know for sure that, legally, it is entirely possible. (Being forced to negotiate in good faith is not a great starting point for a second round!)
Click to expand...

Personally in my ideal world we would pull Article 50 and resubmit it to end 31/12/2020 and get sorted for a no deal. Feco says that barring anything else the status quo will happen. The status quo at the moment is that we are leaving. That isn't a matter of opinion , but a fact, as Parliament voted to leave. Doesn't matter whether you are leave or remain, it's a fact that we will leave UNLESS Parliament agrees on something. Even pulling Article 50 has to be done in agreement with that countries constitution, so I would guess that would need a vote. Parliament would probably vote it through, but it won't if the government (or one of these strange opposition amendments) doesn't actually put it on the table.
 
Lienking said:
Personally in my ideal world we would pull Article 50 and resubmit it to end 31/12/2020 and get sorted for a no deal. Feco says that barring anything else the status quo will happen. The status quo at the moment is that we are leaving. That isn't a matter of opinion , but a fact, as Parliament voted to leave. Doesn't matter whether you are leave or remain, it's a fact that we will leave UNLESS Parliament agrees on something. Even pulling Article 50 has to be done in agreement with that countries constitution, so I would guess that would need a vote. Parliament would probably vote it through, but it won't if the government (or one of these strange opposition amendments) doesn't actually put it on the table.
Click to expand...

Parliament hasn’t voted to leave, it voted to trigger Article 50, which is now confirmed as being revocable and it passed a Withdrawal Act that set out the process of withdrawal.
That requires having something in place, either a deal or no deal to finalise the leave process.
If neither are in place, and either has to be approved by Parliament, then how do you legally leave?
That’s a question by the way, I’m just looking at past precedent and the way things have been done. I really don’t know.

I don’t know if you watched the debate last night, I’ve never seen so much confusion in Westminster....,they were like rabbits caught in headlights.

We really need someone to step up to the plate now, and I think we are sadly lacking in the bravery department in Westminster these days.
 
Lienking said:
Personally in my ideal world we would pull Article 50 and resubmit it to end 31/12/2020 and get sorted for a no deal. Feco says that barring anything else the status quo will happen. The status quo at the moment is that we are leaving. That isn't a matter of opinion , but a fact, as Parliament voted to leave. Doesn't matter whether you are leave or remain, it's a fact that we will leave UNLESS Parliament agrees on something. Even pulling Article 50 has to be done in agreement with that countries constitution, so I would guess that would need a vote. Parliament would probably vote it through, but it won't if the government (or one of these strange opposition amendments) doesn't actually put it on the table.
Click to expand...

You obviously do not know the true meaning of status quo. The status quo as of today is that we remain in the EU because that is the countries current status. Not what it might be, shall be , could be or any other be. It's what's the actual position.
 
Last edited:
Feco said:
Parliament hasn’t voted to leave, it voted to trigger Article 50, which is now confirmed as being revocable and it passed a Withdrawal Act that set out the process of withdrawal.
That requires having something in place, either a deal or no deal to finalise the leave process.
If neither are in place, and either has to be approved by Parliament, then how do you legally leave?
That’s a question by the way, I’m just looking at past precedent and the way things have been done. I really don’t know.

I don’t know if you watched the debate last night, I’ve never seen so much confusion in Westminster....,they were like rabbits caught in headlights.

We really need someone to step up to the plate now, and I think we are sadly lacking in the bravery department in Westminster these days.
Click to expand...

Bravery was lacking when parliament voted in favour of the Brexit Bill. Even more so those MP who voted against the wishes of the people they represent in Westminster. The braves ones were the 122 who voted against the bill.
 
Last edited:
If your MPs are anything like ours they do whatever they're told to do by their party bosses.
Ours no longer represent their local voters.
Mores the pity.

Although you may be better placed than we are. I'm out of touch.
 
Old Red Fart said:
If your MPs are anything like ours they do whatever they're told to do by their party bosses.
Ours no longer represent their local voters.
Mores the pity.

Although you may be better placed than we are. I'm out of touch.
Click to expand...

Nope the same foolishness happens here. The party whips get their whips out and make sure enough toe the party line to get things passed.
 
Bremen Tree said:
You obviously do not know the true meaning of status quo. The status quo as of today is that we remain in the EU because that is the countries current status. Not what it might be, shall be , could be or any other be. It is what'is the actual position.
Click to expand...

Of course I understand the meaning of status quo. It's rather ironic that whatever you believe is right, the current position is a matter of FACT. Everything I have read says that at the moment we have implemented article 50. That means the current legal position is we are heading towards leave. The status quo at the moment is that the ball is travelling towards the Leave goal. This isn't about whether you want to leave or not. Parliament has to (and probably will) pass something to stop us leaving with no deal.
 
Lienking said:
Personally in my ideal world we would pull Article 50 and resubmit it to end 31/12/2020 and get sorted for a no deal. Feco says that barring anything else the status quo will happen. The status quo at the moment is that we are leaving. That isn't a matter of opinion , but a fact, as Parliament voted to leave. Doesn't matter whether you are leave or remain, it's a fact that we will leave UNLESS Parliament agrees on something. Even pulling Article 50 has to be done in agreement with that countries constitution, so I would guess that would need a vote. Parliament would probably vote it through, but it won't if the government (or one of these strange opposition amendments) doesn't actually put it on the table.
Click to expand...

I like this idea-Motion would be to withdrawn and resubmitted at a time of our choosing. BTW, I don't believe this will ever happen
 
Feco said:
Parliament hasn’t voted to leave, it voted to trigger Article 50, which is now confirmed as being revocable and it passed a Withdrawal Act that set out the process of withdrawal.
That requires having something in place, either a deal or no deal to finalise the leave process.
If neither are in place, and either has to be approved by Parliament, then how do you legally leave?
That’s a question by the way, I’m just looking at past precedent and the way things have been done. I really don’t know.

I don’t know if you watched the debate last night, I’ve never seen so much confusion in Westminster....,they were like rabbits caught in headlights.

We really need someone to step up to the plate now, and I think we are sadly lacking in the bravery department in Westminster these days.
Click to expand...

Feco you are right. The People voted to leave and as representatives of the People MPs job is to implement the legislation to allow that to happen. Anything else is not respecting the vote and will almost certainly be legally challenged

We need someone to step up and lead us to a fulfillment of the manifesto pledges and the guarantee set out in the government leaflet
 
Lienking said:
Of course I understand the meaning of status quo. It's rather ironic that whatever you believe is right, the current position is a matter of FACT. Everything I have read says that at the moment we have implemented article 50. That means the current legal position is we are heading towards leave. The status quo at the moment is that the ball is travelling towards the Leave goal. This isn't about whether you want to leave or not. Parliament has to (and probably will) pass something to stop us leaving with no deal.
Click to expand...

There was a speaker on the BBC this morning who explained what I was trying to say, much more eloquently than I did.
She more or less confirmed what I said, the default position is we stay in the EU unless a deal is agreed and approved by Parliament.

Whilst I would be delighted to remain, I don’t think adopting a default position is in any way right.
There has to be a resolution from Parliament, one way or another, we cannot carry on like this.
 
How can the default position be we remain? We have implemented Article 50 which means that we leave on the 29th March. As I keep saying, it won't happen, but if Parliament doesn't do anything, what exactly stops us leaving?
 
http://theconversation.com/brexit-is-it-possible-to-stop-it-107750

The only way Brexit can be stopped is if the Article 50 notification, triggered in March 2017 to begin the UK’s departure from the EU, is revoked. Under EU law, once Article 50 is triggered, the departing state automatically leaves the EU after two years, unless Article 50 is extended.

So, to stop Brexit, Article 50 would need to be revoked, and, after that, the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 must be repealed. Even if parliamentary approval is not required for the former, it is for the latter.

Quite an interesting article !
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.