Paphos People

It appears that we should know the decision of the Supreme Court by next week - 8 December.
I really have no idea whatsoever what the findings will be but I bet my bottom dollar that it will be the opposite of whatever the Polls say!

The last poll that I have seen says that Theresa May faces an 11-0 defeat over her attempt to ride rough shod over parliamentary democracy.

But polls can be wrong, she might only lose 8-3.

Sadly, I cannot see 8 judges 'letting down' their 3 'oppos'. They all 'sup from the same trough' !
Never mind..... Mrs. May can go to Parliament with a very simple proposal, requiring just a one word answer .... Then we can proceed to get OUT.

As the case only starts on 5 December it will very probably not even finish by 8th December. Undoubtedly the process will be drawn out by the decision to allow the Scottish and Welsh regional governments to have a say. More recently even a pro-brexit group have been granted leave to make a submission.

This will be a land mark ruling that will have long running consequences for the interpretation of the law regarding the very fundamentals of parliamentary procedure. It is an absolute certainty that the judgement will not be handed down till after New Year at the very earliest.
The case will be live on Utube I understand, good viewing? How sad is that?
However Bossy B, if you want a take a bet on an 8th December judgement - I would put €20 against.

Your €20 is safe Dave.
The latest opine from the Westminster village is that it will finish up with the ECJ, and
we all know what they will say.
It was just cream crackers of Mrs May not to have accepted the High Court ruling, and then
to have put a one liner motion to Parliamemt (last week!) to implement Article 50.
Labour would not have dared to oppose it for fear of being accused of not going along with
the wishes of the British people - especially as he (Corbyn) had said over and over he accepted the
23rd June referendum result.
Meantime the only winners are the UK and EU (ECJ) legal eagles.
If all this does go belly-up then Farage will be proved to be right - substantial civil
unrest in the UK.
I'm pleased we are in Cyprus when they start chucking the petrol bombs around!!!!
Geoff.

I agree with you. So why is she wasting money on an appeal?

Surely, that depends on the outcome from the Supreme Court? If the Supreme Court upholds the decision of the High Court, I can't see the Government appealing to the ECJ. Can you?

KP ... Your quote :- "Surely, that depends on the outcome from the Supreme Court? If the Supreme Court upholds the decision of the High Court, I can't see the Government appealing to the ECJ. Can you?"


Nope !!!

Dave - €20 Bet?!!! No way! I only ever bet for cents not Euros!!

It may not matter. If the remain submission [which I don't know the details of] contains a reference to the impact of the 1972 Act on legal matters especially the supremacy of the CJEU in setting precedence for the UKSC, then the UKSC can ask for advice from the CJEU, it being a superior court, which they will answer in their own sweet time which could push the UKSC decision beyond May's March deadline.

Of course it would cause a constitutional crisis, and force May to call a general election in all likelihood with a new Parliament bill as item 1 on the manifesto, but if I were a remainer, so desperate to stop Article 50 at any cost, regardless of the carnage, political uncertainty and economic damage it would cause and an unlimited budget, I'd give it a go

That's the problem ... Remainers causing crisis,carnage, uncertainty, damage and acting as spendthrifts ... the majority voters will find it hard to forgive them !

That's the problem ... Remainers causing crisis,carnage, uncertainty, damage and acting as spendthrifts ... the majority voters will find it hard to forgive them ![/quote

Ifs, buts and maybes. I'll wager you €20 PG that the Supreme Court will not refer the matter to the CJEU. There will be a unanimous decision of the Supreme Court.

If only Theresa May wasn't out of her depth ... or perhaps she is cleverer than she appears ...

I have no doubts that the objectionable oiks (so called because what I really want to call them would be censored by the swear-o-meter), who brought this case to the High court showing their utter contempt to the 17.4 millions who voted a majority decision to leave that corrupt cess pit that is the EU,, plus the likes of the war criminal Blair, and the VAT dodger Branson, and all the luvvies like Geldof, and of course the Wee Harpie who thinks she speaks for Scotland,must be rubbing their hands with glee at the way this is going.
A great pity this sort of thing didn't happen when Blair got elected by about 50 people for him to continue ruining the UK during his third term.
Come on Teresa, all you have to do is chat to parliament and get this over with.

The UK doesn't have to use the A50 route to leave the EU! We can just give say two years notice that we will be seeking other methods of trading with businesses in the EU - Free Trade. But the legal actions has exposed to the public who the radical Remainers are. All treaties the UK as ever entered into, including the EU ones, all came into force via the Royal Prerogative and will be removed the same way.

When ready the new Repeal Bill, wiping away all the previous EU diktats will be passed into law, listen to Queens Speech carefully. The High Court cannot stop a Parliamentary Bill from being enacted.

Lawyers don't make the UK laws MP's do. When the High Court tried this stunt the last time in 1993, Rees-Mogg vs UK Government over the Maastricht Treaty, the High Court had to admit that the UK government can use the Royal Prerogative whenever it wishes without recourse to the Law by non-government persons or bodies. In 1993, the then Speaker Betty Bothroyd told the High Court in no uncertain terms to keep their noses out of the Parliamentary business.

_________________
Clive of Payia

The court’s judgment means that the process must be subject to parliamentary control and oversight. Importantly (especially in the light of some recent media comments), the court stressed that this is purely a question of law and that the court is not concerned with, and does not express any view about, the merits of leaving the EU. That is a political consideration.

During the EU referendum, voters were constantly urged to “take back control” and regain parliamentary sovereignty from the EU.

Yet in what sense is parliament taking back control, if the government is able, using its ancient prerogative powers, to manage the whole EU withdrawal process without any significant parliamentary involvement? That would be extremely undemocratic – and democracy is what we are told the EU referendum was about.

Every UK national has been endowed with rights under EU law. Some of these will vanish on triggering article 50 ....Furthermore, the court’s judgment makes clear that the exclusion of parliament in the process is not only undemocratic, it is illegal.

No more to be said, Parliament is in charge of HOW we leave the EU, I'm happier with that...

Parliament isn't just answerable to 26% of the country, it has to look after all.

It's sensible, safer and I'm glad that brakes are being applied...it's not stopping the process at all...

Listening to Boris's thoughts today ( which he claims are wrong ) four eu ambassadors say he wants freedom of movement!

Honestly? I'm just shopping and enjoying the lovely run up to Christmas in the UK, they can all fight it out amongst themselves...first Christmas Meal out tomorrow...

_________________
First they ignore you, then they mock you, then they fight you...then you win.

Super - enjoy!
Seasons Greetings
Geoff
In a very wet, cold, and soggy Vrysoulles

Television coverage of the Supreme Court on Monday on Sky Politics channel

I cannot find this channel - ??
Unless you mean Adam Boulton Politics show on SKY News UK?
Help please - I would like to watch it.
Thanks
Geoff.

BBC will cover it, also, Geoff.

Hi Geoff - yes I believe that it is the Adam Boulton show on Sky News - sorry to confuse you!! You know when they have the Breaking News items scrolling along the bottom of the screen - well it was there.

I think its on You Tube.

_________________
Clive of Payia

Thank you, and thanks also to SFD and Clive. We get both SKY News and BBC1 and U-Tube, so no problem.
Geoff.

If, as predicted, the Supreme Court judges uphold the previous High Court ruling, the government has a short piece of legislation that will enable A50 to be passed. Any MP that votes against what is the majority of the populations wishes are toast. Many Remain MP's now realise that they have shot themselves in the foot for they will be lucky to hold on to their Seats at the next General Election, if their constituents don't Unseat them before 2010.

I believe after the next general election, Supreme Court judges will be chosen by a cross party Select Committee to ensure we end up with a fairer judiciary and not one locked into the European Court system where they do as they are told by foreign judges.

_________________
Clive of Payia

Thank you Clive, very interesting.
Any idea of the likely timescale for that "..short piece of legislation.." being put to the house
for debate/vote? Before Xmas maybe, or are we stuck with the end of next March?
Geoff.

Appears pretty fair to me; I for one wouldn't like to see politically favoured Judges holding office.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/about/appoi ... tices.html

It appears most only support Democracy when it favours their own particular point of view.

Jim

I believe it could be in the Queens Speech, May 2017, or next general election. This information comes from a contact in Lincolns Inn Field Chambers. Also lawyers not involved in Brexit are assuring their worldwide clients that they are not involved in the Supreme Court action or support it.

Still tomorrow Sunday in Italy could render the whole business irrelevant.

_________________
Clive of Payia

In the Queen's Speech is favourable.
Admirable that some lawyers disassociate themselves from foreign intervention, in what should be a Sovereign Country.
Fingers crossed for tomorrow (but still too many fingers in the pie).
At least Richmond was a negligible result.

Isn't that what the Nazi's did in the nineteen thirties, by fair means or foul. Point three looks familiar.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/hi ... evision/2/

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/Reports2 ... ingact.htm

Jim

What next if the Government loses its' Brexit Appeal?

The "Beebs" thoughts.... Mark D'Arcy writes:

Full article here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-p ... s-38187867

_________________
Busy exploring England's green & pleasant lands since May 2016 after 12yrs in Cyprus.
There appears to be a misapprehension I run a photography business... it's my passion as a hobby.
I sell and buy postage stamps!

One. The 1992 Communities Act was enacted using the Royal Perojative without a murmur if I remember correctly. So its OK to use the Royal Perojative to bring in EU laws to the UK but not to repeal them! That's the EU for you.

Two. The EU might not last much longer so will become irrelevant.

_________________
Clive of Payia

This decision is extremely important, one of the most important a court could ever make. This is bigger than Brexit, this will determine whether we live in a democratic country with a Sovereign Parliament or if we have an Executive Dictatorship which can make any decision it wants once it's been elected them without consulting Parliament. The later verdict would reverse hundreds of years progress moving power away from the Crown and would mean that power is concentrated in the hands of a small elite. It would turn our whole system of government on it's head!

Decision expected next month...you can follow it live ..https://www.supremecourt.uk/live/court-01.html

_________________
First they ignore you, then they mock you, then they fight you...then you win.

Creative ambiguity for short.
Geoff.

Agreed, Geoff !
Painted into a corner ?
Our Parliament has already agreed (by a vote of 6 to 1) to pass the decision to the Sovereign Population of the UK.
Sounds very reminiscent of the EU Dictatorship which we are trying to get out of !

In case anyone struggles to get onto the live video feed, you can get rolling textual updates here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-37976580

_________________
Busy exploring England's green & pleasant lands since May 2016 after 12yrs in Cyprus.
There appears to be a misapprehension I run a photography business... it's my passion as a hobby.
I sell and buy postage stamps!

According to the DM, there is to be a vote in parliament today.

Hopefully the result will end the monotonous diatribe by the remainers & serve to counter the prospective judgement from the politically compromised Superior Court 'elite'.

_________________
I'll be back!

Yes, and today could be the day when so many Remain MP's who's constituents voted Leave are Deselected. Hilary Ben I believe is to be the first casualty.

_________________
Clive of Payia

Wednesday’s amendment vote is not binding - meaning that it technically does not have any bearing whatsoever on the Supreme Court case.

What is the point of the court ruling if the Government has already held a Commons vote on Article 50?

Wednesday’s amendment only states that Parliament “should respect the wishes of the United Kingdom as expressed in the referendum on 23 June; and further calls on the Government to invoke Article 50 by 31 March 2017”.

Crucially, it does not trigger Article 50. It is only a commitment to do so by the end of March next year.

But it will force Europhile MPs to say whether or not they will back the triggering of Article 50.

The Supreme Court will rule on whether or not Mrs May must seek a binding vote in Parliament before she tells Brussels that she has formally triggered Article 50 and that negotiations have started.

If the Supreme Court rules against her, that vote would give MPs an opportunity to block Brexit by voting against the Government.

It means that Mrs May will need an Article 50 Act of Parliament, which will also have to be passed by the House of Lords.

So what is the point of Wednesday’s Commons vote?

Although the vote will not make a difference legally, it is politically significant.

It will force MPs to state their position, making it very difficult for them to reverse their position and block Brexit if the Supreme Court rules against the Government.

Wether there will be a division or not remains ( ) to be seen..

_________________
First they ignore you, then they mock you, then they fight you...then you win.

On the other hand if the Supreme Court finds in favour of Mrs May, then she can just
activate Article 50 when she is ready with no reference to Parliament.
She would be well advised to do so as whereas the House of Commons might support the move,
there is no guarantee the House of Lords would.
Geoff.

The vote resulted in a 'Brexit majority' in the House. Only 89 MP's (remainers/ne-traitors) voted against. The list of 'traitors' names was published in the DM. Unsurprisingly the majority (59) were of the SNP party, but also included the only Tory Ken Clarke & the dimwit Lib.Dem.Tim Farren.

In the news article Richard Tice, Co-Chair of Leave Means Leave said: “This vote is a very significant step forward in the Brexit process.

“Parliamentarians who, today, backed the Government’s amendment have honoured the democratic decision taken by the British people in the EU referendum.

“Going forward, these parliamentarians who voted with the Government must not sabotage the Brexit process."

Some believe this effectively makes the Supreme Court judgement redundant.

_________________
I'll be back!

Maybe they voted the way their constituents voted, there were many area's that voted to remain.


Jim

Isn't that what they were elected to do ? .... To represent their constituents ( not their own personal view) !
But the constituencies who voted 'leave', heavily outnumbered those who want to stay in.

So you agree ; you would expect the MP's in constituencies where the majority who voted to remain represent their constituents?

Jim

Yes .... after all, it's supposed to be a Democracy !

So some abstained, I take it?

_________________
Busy exploring England's green & pleasant lands since May 2016 after 12yrs in Cyprus.
There appears to be a misapprehension I run a photography business... it's my passion as a hobby.
I sell and buy postage stamps!