The article 50 revocation thing that's doing the rounds is the Advocate General's opinion on the case. It's a recommendation to the court that they are not obliged to follow (but usually do).
The actual ruling is sometime in December, I think.
broadly it would be astonishing if they said anything other than what he said simply because the drafter has made clear his intention (kerr), and the only real reason they could come up with to stop unilateral revocation is that it would render article 50 a procedural nonsense because it could be abused by a bad faith actor. the latter is already covered by the ags opinion; the court itself has no real reason to go much further i would have thought, not least because that would involve agreeing with the uk gov which would be fairly ridiculous for them to do...
I think it matters in a tactical sense because it means that revocation won't be a definitively available option at the time of the "meaningful vote".
Though it is interesting that the government hasn't made the argument that it isn't a sure thing (yet), instead choosing to argue that they simply refuse to acknowledge it as an option.
problem is parliament isnt constraining itself to things the eu has agreed anyway. things like trying to amend the withdrawal agreement to let parliament escape backstop is a far shakier thing that unlateral article 50 revocation...!
The article 50 revocation thing that's doing the rounds is the Advocate General's opinion on the case. It's a recommendation to the court that they are not obliged to follow (but usually do).
The actual ruling is sometime in December, I think.
broadly it would be astonishing if they said anything other than what he said simply because the drafter has made clear his intention (kerr), and the only real reason they could come up with to stop unilateral revocation is that it would render article 50 a procedural nonsense because it could be abused by a bad faith actor. the latter is already covered by the ags opinion; the court itself has no real reason to go much further i would have thought, not least because that would involve agreeing with the uk gov which would be fairly ridiculous for them to do...
I think it matters in a tactical sense because it means that revocation won't be a definitively available option at the time of the "meaningful vote".
Though it is interesting that the government hasn't made the argument that it isn't a sure thing (yet), instead choosing to argue that they simply refuse to acknowledge it as an option.
problem is parliament isnt constraining itself to things the eu has agreed anyway. things like trying to amend the withdrawal agreement to let parliament escape backstop is a far shakier thing that unlateral article 50 revocation...!
Edit: I suppose this nearly illustrates the problem with referendums. We have a government that has bound itself to an apparent public demand that is materially impossible to deliver.
When the initial referendum was proposed, the thought process was that if Remain won, it would simply secure power for Cameron and Co.
If Leave lost, it was always known there would be 1000 different decision trees to work through that just couldn't be decided based on a simple binary choice.
However, Cameron and Co never imagined they would lose the vote and so, never bothered to prepare to mitigate the 1000 decisions.
Jump to yesterday, and that failure to prepare for losing the vote suddenly caught up to Co sans Cameron in the worst way possible.
Co sans Cameron is only held together by time. Once that runs out (next Tuesday), chaos ensues.
...and a partridge in a pear tree~~
+4
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
What is this strange beast, some manner of 'politician' you say? Someone who looks at a forecast which says, "Everyone everywhere who knows anything agrees that remaining in the EU is literally better for every person in the UK than ANY possible alternative" and says, "Then we will stay in the EU and PERSUADE the public of its benefits"
Remain! Its not a question. The other options are WRONG! Every single other option. They are all worse on every level. There is nothing but an endless ocean of shit. Lets just remain.
That poll is clearly junk by the way, everything else I've seen shows FAR more support for remain and second referendum than that one.
This is why a 2nd referendum is a fucking stupid idea
we find ourselves in a world where literally all options are stupid
I'll take a punt on a second ref as the best shot of calling the whole thing off
Plus I'd feel marginally better about a stupid brexit of it had been voted for explicitly, as opposed to interpreted from a referendum mandate by the current shower that is this Tory government
Of course, in the back of my head I have that sneaking thought of ".. well there's always independence" however that is an urge I'm trying to ignore
The article 50 revocation thing that's doing the rounds is the Advocate General's opinion on the case. It's a recommendation to the court that they are not obliged to follow (but usually do).
The actual ruling is sometime in December, I think.
broadly it would be astonishing if they said anything other than what he said simply because the drafter has made clear his intention (kerr), and the only real reason they could come up with to stop unilateral revocation is that it would render article 50 a procedural nonsense because it could be abused by a bad faith actor. the latter is already covered by the ags opinion; the court itself has no real reason to go much further i would have thought, not least because that would involve agreeing with the uk gov which would be fairly ridiculous for them to do...
I think it matters in a tactical sense because it means that revocation won't be a definitively available option at the time of the "meaningful vote".
Though it is interesting that the government hasn't made the argument that it isn't a sure thing (yet), instead choosing to argue that they simply refuse to acknowledge it as an option.
problem is parliament isnt constraining itself to things the eu has agreed anyway. things like trying to amend the withdrawal agreement to let parliament escape backstop is a far shakier thing that unlateral article 50 revocation...!
Edit: I suppose this nearly illustrates the problem with referendums. We have a government that has bound itself to an apparent public demand that is materially impossible to deliver.
This is why when you want to do something that has this long lasting of impacts to your country and economy it should require a super majority. If you can get 60% of the country to tell you to move one way that is enough of a mandate to actually drive something like this through to completion. Short of that though its whichever way the wind blows and however the question was asked on any given day.
I wonder of how many people against the second referendum just want the goverment to have the balls to just ignore the referendum results as not binding.
Direct democracy is a failure, which is why people vote for leaders so they, you know, lead. Which is why I don't believe in referendums, they are just cover for politicians to do what they want anyways.
I wonder of how many people against the second referendum just want the goverment to have the balls to just ignore the referendum results as not binding.
Direct democracy is a failure, which is why people vote for leaders so they, you know, lead. Which is why I don't believe in referendums, they are just cover for politicians to do what they want anyways.
The modern trend is also to hold the referendum and then have legislators interpret the results in whatever way they want to anyway.
He predicted "absolutely calamitous" scenes of drunken thugs brawling outside Downing Street will be used to discredit leaving the EU "for years to come".
He really just quit UKIP just because it was getting too prole for him.
+1
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
This is why a 2nd referendum is a fucking stupid idea
we find ourselves in a world where literally all options are stupid
I'll take a punt on a second ref as the best shot of calling the whole thing off
Plus I'd feel marginally better about a stupid brexit of it had been voted for explicitly, as opposed to interpreted from a referendum mandate by the current shower that is this Tory government
Of course, in the back of my head I have that sneaking thought of ".. well there's always independence" however that is an urge I'm trying to ignore
yes i am screamingly sceptical of polls about second ref intentions done now
1) the "meaningful" vote hasnt happened yet and this will shift prefs
2) anybody thinking you can predict stable uk vote prefs even 10 weeks ahead of a vote is smonking the BIG herbs
3) the options on a second ref are hugely important
4) all result predictions rely on turnout predictions... that will be hugely unstable
He predicted "absolutely calamitous" scenes of drunken thugs brawling outside Downing Street will be used to discredit leaving the EU "for years to come".
He really just quit UKIP just because it was getting too prole for him.
Because his own motives for Brexit were highminded philosophical stances on sovereignty.
Put me down for another "Stuff is happening", just so that all of 2018s brutal plot threads begin to converge just in time for the subforums to disappear for christmas...
Put me down for another "Stuff is happening", just so that all of 2018s brutal plot threads begin to converge just in time for the subforums to disappear for christmas...
I thought the problem was that stuff isn't happening?
We're on page 100. I'm gonna close out this thread with a story.
In 1492 in Ireland, two families went to war; the FitzGeralds and the Butlers.
This wasn't terribly unusual. Medieval Ireland was filled with rival clans who often warred with one another. In fact, the dispute between these two families was so minor it was something that would never even make the history books; One family had a candidate for the position of Lord Deputy. The other family objected.
That's it. That's all it took to start a war back then.
It started with a skirmish outside the walls of Kildare town. It ended with the Butlers realizing they were defeated. Panic stricken, they fled to St. Patrick's Cathedral, relying on the ancient protocol of sanctuary to keep them safe.
The FitzGeralds, in the meantime, followed the Butlers to their shelter. Everyone assumed that the victorious FitzGeralds would finish their rival clan within days. Instead, at some point during the conflict, the head of the Clan, Gerald Fitzgerald, grew sick at heart and sued for peace.
It would have been the perfect reconciliation if it weren't for one minor problem; the Butlers didn't trust the Fitzgeralds. They didn't believe that they truly sought peace.
Gerald Fitzgerald knew a gesture of trust and reconciliation was the only thing that could ensure trust and reconciliation. So he decided to provide one. As the Butlers cowered inside the cathedral, he ordered one of his soldiers to cut a hole in the wooden door. Once a hole wide enough had been carved, he announced himself and thrust his arm through it.
Any Butler would have known him. Any Butler could have hacked his arm off at that moment and maimed him, possibly even killed him, and thrown his clan into disarray.
Gerald Fitzgerald's advisors no doubt warned him against such a reckless gesture, but it all worked out in the end. The Butlers and the Fitzgerlads made peace. Both became two of the most prominent noble families in Ireland. And Gerald Fitzgerald's gesture of peace and reconciliation was remembered for generations afterwards. It even became a popular saying.
Lads, I won't lie. We're all a bit pissed off about Brexit on this side of the Irish Sea. We're all a bit demoralized about it all. Even so, we'd probably let it go, if you let it go. If you found some way to revoke Article 50, we'd slag you off for about a decade afterwards, but we wouldn't actually do anything else.
What I'm saying here is, if you're willing to let this whole Brexit thing go...
...I'm pretty sure we'd be willing to chance our arm.
Put me down for another "Stuff is happening", just so that all of 2018s brutal plot threads begin to converge just in time for the subforums to disappear for christmas...
I thought the problem was that stuff isn't happening?
Depends on your view, there's a lot of stuff that could be happening I'm glad isn't - but I think historical contempt charges and Parliament deciding they're going to come up with their own plan when May's gets voted down next Monday (or when it reaches the Lords) counts as stuff. Feels like a lot of time has been spent with nothing happening, and now the floodgates are starting to open.
Plus we get the Spiderman and Avengers trailers soon, so they could also become "Stuff is happening" threads.
I have a question for those of you in the UK: at present, what do you think is the scenario that is both reasonably likely and most positive in your opinion? Some of the media I read and people I have on my FB feed seem to think that a second referendum with a Remain option is reasonably likely, but I get the impression that they're more optimistic than the situation suggests.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I have a question for those of you in the UK: at present, what do you think is the scenario that is both reasonably likely and most positive in your opinion? Some of the media I read and people I have on my FB feed seem to think that a second referendum with a Remain option is reasonably likely, but I get the impression that they're more optimistic than the situation suggests.
I think a No Deal Brexit is more likely than May's deal, I think that a Norway deal seems possible, I think a 2nd Referendum seems possible.
Anyone who says they can tell you what will happen is kidding themselves I think though. We're very much off the script here. I will say that since the Referendum I think the liklihood of Brexit going through have actually gone down.
I have a question for those of you in the UK: at present, what do you think is the scenario that is both reasonably likely and most positive in your opinion? Some of the media I read and people I have on my FB feed seem to think that a second referendum with a Remain option is reasonably likely, but I get the impression that they're more optimistic than the situation suggests.
I think a No Deal Brexit is more likely than May's deal, I think that a Norway deal seems possible, I think a 2nd Referendum seems possible.
Anyone who says they can tell you what will happen is kidding themselves I think though. We're very much off the script here. I will say that since the Referendum I think the liklihood of Brexit going through have actually gone down.
The Times did an amazing flowchart this morning that probably best describes the complexity of our current situation:
Posts
problem is parliament isnt constraining itself to things the eu has agreed anyway. things like trying to amend the withdrawal agreement to let parliament escape backstop is a far shakier thing that unlateral article 50 revocation...!
Apparently, neither is the public...
Edit: I suppose this nearly illustrates the problem with referendums. We have a government that has bound itself to an apparent public demand that is materially impossible to deliver.
If Leave lost, it was always known there would be 1000 different decision trees to work through that just couldn't be decided based on a simple binary choice.
However, Cameron and Co never imagined they would lose the vote and so, never bothered to prepare to mitigate the 1000 decisions.
Jump to yesterday, and that failure to prepare for losing the vote suddenly caught up to Co sans Cameron in the worst way possible.
Co sans Cameron is only held together by time. Once that runs out (next Tuesday), chaos ensues.
...and a partridge in a pear tree~~
we find ourselves in a world where literally all options are stupid
esther webber is a reporter
What is this strange beast, some manner of 'politician' you say? Someone who looks at a forecast which says, "Everyone everywhere who knows anything agrees that remaining in the EU is literally better for every person in the UK than ANY possible alternative" and says, "Then we will stay in the EU and PERSUADE the public of its benefits"
Remain! Its not a question. The other options are WRONG! Every single other option. They are all worse on every level. There is nothing but an endless ocean of shit. Lets just remain.
That poll is clearly junk by the way, everything else I've seen shows FAR more support for remain and second referendum than that one.
I'll take a punt on a second ref as the best shot of calling the whole thing off
Plus I'd feel marginally better about a stupid brexit of it had been voted for explicitly, as opposed to interpreted from a referendum mandate by the current shower that is this Tory government
Of course, in the back of my head I have that sneaking thought of ".. well there's always independence" however that is an urge I'm trying to ignore
This is why when you want to do something that has this long lasting of impacts to your country and economy it should require a super majority. If you can get 60% of the country to tell you to move one way that is enough of a mandate to actually drive something like this through to completion. Short of that though its whichever way the wind blows and however the question was asked on any given day.
Direct democracy is a failure, which is why people vote for leaders so they, you know, lead. Which is why I don't believe in referendums, they are just cover for politicians to do what they want anyways.
The modern trend is also to hold the referendum and then have legislators interpret the results in whatever way they want to anyway.
He really just quit UKIP just because it was getting too prole for him.
yes i am screamingly sceptical of polls about second ref intentions done now
1) the "meaningful" vote hasnt happened yet and this will shift prefs
2) anybody thinking you can predict stable uk vote prefs even 10 weeks ahead of a vote is smonking the BIG herbs
3) the options on a second ref are hugely important
4) all result predictions rely on turnout predictions... that will be hugely unstable
Because his own motives for Brexit were highminded philosophical stances on sovereignty.
I'd actually agree with him, but our definitions for the verb "to Trump" differ a smidge
mark carney obviously getting increasingly irritated by brexiter mp questions
"this is something you learn in 5 minutes..."
Steam | XBL
The only point of a 2nd referendum is to give enough MPs cover to do the thing they know they should do anyway and kill Brexit.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/1624720/aberdeen-mp-ross-thomson-tricked-by-underhanded-yet-blindingly-obvious-tv-prank/
I thought the problem was that stuff isn't happening?
In 1492 in Ireland, two families went to war; the FitzGeralds and the Butlers.
This wasn't terribly unusual. Medieval Ireland was filled with rival clans who often warred with one another. In fact, the dispute between these two families was so minor it was something that would never even make the history books; One family had a candidate for the position of Lord Deputy. The other family objected.
That's it. That's all it took to start a war back then.
It started with a skirmish outside the walls of Kildare town. It ended with the Butlers realizing they were defeated. Panic stricken, they fled to St. Patrick's Cathedral, relying on the ancient protocol of sanctuary to keep them safe.
The FitzGeralds, in the meantime, followed the Butlers to their shelter. Everyone assumed that the victorious FitzGeralds would finish their rival clan within days. Instead, at some point during the conflict, the head of the Clan, Gerald Fitzgerald, grew sick at heart and sued for peace.
It would have been the perfect reconciliation if it weren't for one minor problem; the Butlers didn't trust the Fitzgeralds. They didn't believe that they truly sought peace.
Gerald Fitzgerald knew a gesture of trust and reconciliation was the only thing that could ensure trust and reconciliation. So he decided to provide one. As the Butlers cowered inside the cathedral, he ordered one of his soldiers to cut a hole in the wooden door. Once a hole wide enough had been carved, he announced himself and thrust his arm through it.
Any Butler would have known him. Any Butler could have hacked his arm off at that moment and maimed him, possibly even killed him, and thrown his clan into disarray.
Gerald Fitzgerald's advisors no doubt warned him against such a reckless gesture, but it all worked out in the end. The Butlers and the Fitzgerlads made peace. Both became two of the most prominent noble families in Ireland. And Gerald Fitzgerald's gesture of peace and reconciliation was remembered for generations afterwards. It even became a popular saying.
Lads, I won't lie. We're all a bit pissed off about Brexit on this side of the Irish Sea. We're all a bit demoralized about it all. Even so, we'd probably let it go, if you let it go. If you found some way to revoke Article 50, we'd slag you off for about a decade afterwards, but we wouldn't actually do anything else.
What I'm saying here is, if you're willing to let this whole Brexit thing go...
...I'm pretty sure we'd be willing to chance our arm.
Depends on your view, there's a lot of stuff that could be happening I'm glad isn't - but I think historical contempt charges and Parliament deciding they're going to come up with their own plan when May's gets voted down next Monday (or when it reaches the Lords) counts as stuff. Feels like a lot of time has been spent with nothing happening, and now the floodgates are starting to open.
Plus we get the Spiderman and Avengers trailers soon, so they could also become "Stuff is happening" threads.
I'm honestly not sure!!
Throwing down my forum cred and betting the next Hiberno-Britannic politics thread outlives the next UK government.
There! I've said it!
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I think a No Deal Brexit is more likely than May's deal, I think that a Norway deal seems possible, I think a 2nd Referendum seems possible.
Anyone who says they can tell you what will happen is kidding themselves I think though. We're very much off the script here. I will say that since the Referendum I think the liklihood of Brexit going through have actually gone down.
The Times did an amazing flowchart this morning that probably best describes the complexity of our current situation:
Nobody knows; if I was betting, I’d say Norway Plus, or maaaaybe Ref2; But I’ve Been wrong this whole way, so....dunno, mate.
Goodreads
SF&F Reviews blog