Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Winniesboy
The present argument isn't whether Parliament should be sovereign. Parliament is sovereign, regardless of whether or not it is voting.

The pro-EU faction want a parliamentary vote as a desparate last chance to stop BREXIT - whereas HMG Parliament already have the sovereign right to honor the declared wishes of the British people without further voting.


The government famously, and at great taxpayer expense, sent a referendum pamphlet to everyone in the UK declaring that:

"This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide".

But when we decided for Brexit, what happened? The pro-EU faction decided to attempt the same betrayal that they succeeded in in Ireland and France.

Those countries were betrayed and cheated out of their anti-EU decision. It's foolish therefore not to see the push for a second vote, this time in Parliament, as anything but a cynical ploy.

20 posted on 12/08/2016 1:45:36 PM PST by agere_contra (I will be glad and rejoice in your love, for You saw my affliction and knew the anguish of my soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: agere_contra
The motives of those who brought the case are indeed as you describe. But that doesn't mean that the High Court/Supreme Court case itself is not valid. What was invalid was the assumption by the Government that it could proceed with Brexit in whatever way it chose without further reference to the sovereign Parliament and the necessity of primary legislation.

The referendum vote did indeed determine that Brexit would happen: but it gave no instructions on how it should happen and which of the many possible interpretations of Brexit should be pursued. Only Parliament can do that.

Inserting a device of direct democracy (a referendum) into a system based on representative democracy is always going to be messy, which is one reason we have so few of them. But it would be less messy, and the Parliamentary consequences more straightforward, if Parliament had committed itself to being bound by the outcome in the first place. But it didn't, we are where we are, and given the government's apparent determination (since somewhat tempered) to ride solo, something like the High Court/Supreme Court case was inevitable, never mind who brought the case or what they were ultimately after.

21 posted on 12/09/2016 12:45:41 AM PST by Winniesboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson