High Court Ruling.?

[anneasquith]

8-3 against TM. Fair ?

[Sqad]

I am a bit confused here.......perhaps some help?

The High Court has ruled that Parliament should vote on WHEN Article 50 should be triggered and not IF Article 50 is triggered.

Is that correct?

[jim360]

More precisely, they should now vote on *if* Article 50 is triggered, but are politically and morally obliged to do so (owing to the result of the referendum.

That is, MPs now have the theoretical option of refusing to allow Brexit to happen (as do the Lords), by voting down the relevant Bill, but to take this option is political suicide.

[Sqad]

O.K Jim...thanks.
I must say that here in Spain, the endogenous population are rather confused as to exactly what is happening in the UK..........so am I.

[New Judge]

"I must say that here in Spain, the endogenous population are rather confused as to exactly what is happening in the UK..........so am I."

It's not surprising.

What should be a fairly simple transaction (triggering A50) seems to have turned into a dog's breakfast. This is principally caused by those wishing to thwart Brexit. Even now, with an unambiguous Supreme Court ruling which insists on nothing but a vote in Parliament to trigger the action, the Remoaners are insisting on pre-conditions before that agreement is given. There is no need for this. The UK is leaving the EU whatever the results of "negotiations". Leaving is not conditional on those results. So unless the Remoaners are suggesting that it is, there is no need for Parliament to give anything other than its unconditional agreement to A50 being triggered.

[Sqad]

NJ.....LOL.......thanks. I think.