The Consequences of Brexit (part 2)

[retep]

So all over but for the shouting,

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/759172/Brexit-News-David-Davis-publishes-Article-50-bill-EU-negotiations-Theresa-May

[unbeliever]

Perfect. Basically one line, the second is just to make sure the courts don't get any ideas.

 

1. Power to notify withdrawal from the EU

 

(1) The Prime Minister may notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom’s intention to withdraw from the EU.

 

(2) This section has effect despite any provision made by or under the European

Communities Act 1972 or any other enactment.

Article 50 white paper.

[Obelix]

Now then lets add an amendment to that short little bill...

 

The Government shall ensure during and after those citizen of the UK who wish to remain citizens of the EU shall be permitted to do so and the Govt shall negotiate with good faith to that intention in the withdrawal process.

 

---------- Post added 26-01-2017 at 13:25 ----------

 

I remember the massive, unprepossessing and hysterical gloatfest by remainers in the immediate aftermath of the referendum, when remainers were feasting on news of the decline in the stock market and currency, a mood fueled by the various doom-laden forecasts of imminent catastrophe peddled by the Treasury, the Bank of England and a plethora of dodgy 'think tanks.

 

Perhaps Brexiteers can therefore be allowed a smidgeon of gloating, given that the predictions and forecasts of imminent economic catastrophe by the remain side have turned to dust.

 

What gloatfest?

 

Oh you are making it up out of whole cloth... Mind you with the current values of the markets its clear that UK plc has tanked in value and is still tanking....

[unbeliever]

Now then lets add an amendment to that short little bill...

 

The Government shall ensure during and after those citizen of the UK who wish to remain citizens of the EU shall be permitted to do so and the Govt shall negotiate with good faith to that intention in the withdrawal process.

 

(

 

How would that work? In which constituency/region would you vote?

Or are you referring specifically to the right to work/reside in the EU?

[L00b]

Perfect. Basically one line, the second is just to make sure the courts don't get any ideas.

Not the Courts, but would-be litigants.

 

Methinks it's an inelegant fudge that might lead to complications for May & Davis (or might not; depends if anyone grabs it and runs with it like Miller did), in view of Section 18 of the European Union Act 2011:

“Directly applicable or directly effective EU law (that is, the rights, powers, liabilities, obligations, restrictions, remedies and procedures referred to in section 2(1) of the European Communities Act 1972) falls to be recognised and available in law in the United Kingdom only by virtue of that Act or where it is required to be recognised and available in law by virtue of any other Act.”

Paraphrasing the SC's judgement of 2 days ago, the above was enacted by Parliament to make it clear that the primacy of EU law over domestic legislation did not prevent it being repealed by domestic legislation. But that simply confirmed the position as it had been since the beginning of 1973: the primacy of EU law means that, unlike other rules of domestic law, EU law cannot be implicitly displaced by the mere enactment of legislation which is inconsistent with it (whence my use of "inelegant fudge", because that's what Section 2 of the draft Bill effectively is & does: attempting to enact legislation regardless, notwithstanding that it may be inconsistent with it).

 

I'd expect Remainer MPs to attack the bill on that point. Still, Parliament is sovereign, so a majority vote may still carry it as is.

Edited January 26, 2017 by L00b

[unbeliever]

Not the Courts, but would-be litigants.

 

Methinks it's an inelegant fudge that might lead to complications for May & Davis (or might not; depends if anyone grabs it and runs with it like Miller did), in view of Section 18 of the European Union Act 2011:Paraphrasing the SC's judgement of 2 days ago, the above was enacted by Parliament to make it clear that the primacy of EU law over domestic legislation did not prevent it being repealed by domestic legislation. But that simply confirmed the position as it had been since the beginning of 1973: the primacy of EU law means that, unlike other rules of domestic law, EU law cannot be implicitly displaced by the mere enactment of legislation which is inconsistent with it (whence my use of "inelegant fudge", because that's what Section 2 of the draft Bill effectively is & does: attempting to enact legislation regardless, notwithstanding that it may be inconsistent with it).

 

I'd expect Remainer MPs to attack the bill on that point. Still, Parliament is sovereign, so a majority vote may still carry it as is.

 

I didn't understand this at all.

Is there an English version (or French or German for that matter) for those of us who don't speak Lawyer?

[Obelix]

Not the Courts, but would-be litigants.

 

Methinks it's an inelegant fudge that might lead to complications for May & Davis (or might not; depends if anyone grabs it and runs with it like Miller did), in view of Section 18 of the European Union Act 2011:Paraphrasing the SC's judgement of 2 days ago, the above was enacted by Parliament to make it clear that the primacy of EU law over domestic legislation did not prevent it being repealed by domestic legislation. But that simply confirmed the position as it had been since the beginning of 1973: the primacy of EU law means that, unlike other rules of domestic law, EU law cannot be implicitly displaced by the mere enactment of legislation which is inconsistent with it (whence my use of "inelegant fudge", because that's what Section 2 of the draft Bill effectively is & does: attempting to enact legislation regardless, notwithstanding that it may be inconsistent with it).

 

I'd expect Remainer MPs to attack the bill on that point. Still, Parliament is sovereign, so a majority vote may still carry it as is.

 

That's a very good point I'd not considered that before. I wonder how that's going to fly with the BoR... they might have been better off leaving it out.

[mafya]

Britain defies brexit warnings again as Government on course to meet borrowing costs= http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/758345/Britain-defies-Brexit-warnings-again-government-course-meet-borrowing-targets

[Obelix]

Daily Express defies reality and makes up it's own news about what people said and did after the referendum as the economy actually does what most people expected anyway..

[unbeliever]

Having the express on my side of this matter is most disturbing.