EU referendum: The UK votes to leave the EU

[Tani Coyote]

About at what point do you all think the Leave camp will stop trying to downplay the high chances Britain's going to go to Hell in a handbasket?

Other than the economic chaos, it's pretty much a given Scotland's going to jump ship, and a few other parts of the UK with it in all likelihood, causing even more chaos. Then England will be well on its way to being a European, monarchist America in terms of politics.

I just don't see how anything good is going to come of this unless one buys into optimism that a non-EU England is somehow going to be able to achieve so much more economically.

I keep hearing all sorts of optimism about the situation, but really. Pretty much any Historian or Economist can tell you this was a REALLY bad idea. This is a textbook case of right-wing nationalism not squaring with the historical record or economic study.

Really, Shaun of the Dead's "wait for this to all blow over" scene is what comes to mind.

[Salamander]

1 hour ago, Hyp3hat said:

Boris Johnson is Foreign Secretary. This is it, lads, prepare to go to war.

I did an actual double-take.  Jaw-dropping stuff - I can only imagine he was offered a post as a sop to the Leave camp, and he insisted on a prize like this.

I'm amazed that it took May less than a day in the job to torpedo her own "steady as she goes" reputation.

[Patticus]

Boris Johnson as Foreign Secretary?

I know that she probably just wants to heal the party following the positively Shakespearean display of backstabbing we witnessed following the referendum, but... is this some sort of monumental exercise in trolling? For the Americans of the board who aren't sure what this means, this is like if you had a President John Kasich (a conservative leader who isn't too wildly bathshit nuts), appointing Donald Trump as Secretary of State.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Oh, boy. This just keeps getting better, doesn't it?

[PaddyFancy]

I really resent the implication that World War III is coming and that my life is coming to an end with all this "who's put in charge of where" and why its a bad thing at the most extreme possible terms.

[Spin Attaxx]

I can only hope that Boris fucks up so badly that he gets ousted from the position before he does any serious damage.

But then again, that he was put there at all after his "marvelous" track record pretty much means that'll never happen, and we're stuck with him for as long as May's in Downing Street.

[Hyp3hat]

5 hours ago, Fancy said:

I really resent the implication that World War III is coming and that my life is coming to an end with all this "who's put in charge of where" and why its a bad thing at the most extreme possible terms.

There aren't many nations, dignitaries and foreign institutions that BoJo hasn't insulted, which of course is a great basis for being the minister to deal with foreign nations, dignitaries, and institutions. I was joking when I said we're going to war, in case that wasn't clear, but it's still a disastrous appointment. Newsreaders and The White House responded to the news with stifled laughter, which should tell you something.

[Salamander]

The best-case scenario I can imagine is that May put him in the post knowing that it wouldn't be too long before he said or did something unacceptable and had to resign.

[Tani Coyote]

11 hours ago, Fancy said:

I really resent the implication that World War III is coming and that my life is coming to an end with all this "who's put in charge of where" and why its a bad thing at the most extreme possible terms.

World War III is hyperbole, but the situation really doesn't bode well for Britain.

The historical record says chances are Brexit's fallout won't just blow over. The UK is going to be screwed economically, and it's very possible it will fall apart. Scotland's a fairly safe bet on leaving, but who is to say the other pro-EU parts don't split as well?

That leaves England to drift further rightward, and with an unstable economy (right wing policy isn't how you solve economic problems), that probably doesn't bode well.

[Spin Attaxx]

So the UK's told the mostly-pro-Leave Wales to not expect the same level of funding it got as part of the EU.

As much as I expected Wales to reap what they sowed, I really just wish none of this crap ever happened to begin with.

[Hyp3hat]

I mean... what did they expect? The reason EU funding was so necessary in Wales in the first place is that the Tories have actively been destroying Wales or ignoring it since the 80's.

[Patticus]

12 hours ago, Hyp3hat said:

I mean... what did they expect? The reason EU funding was so necessary in Wales in the first place is that the Tories have actively been destroying Wales or ignoring it since the 80's.

I'd say mostly ignoring. Devolution was all about allowing Westminster to carry on ignoring it.

[-Robin-]

So. 

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/03/500487714/british-court-deals-blow-to-brexit-says-parliament-must-approve-exit-plans?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=npr&utm_medium=social&utm_term=nprnews

 

Quote

A British court has ruled that the U.K. government must get approval from Parliament in order to initiate the country's departure from the European Union.

The High Court's decision is a blow to the government's plans for how to trigger a "Brexit."

...

The court's decision could delay the Brexit — whatever form it ultimately takes — by months, the BBC says.

After the public called for the departure, it was up to the government to determine how the separation would actually happen. No country had ever withdrawn from the EU like this before.

Prime Minister Theresa May had been planning to define the terms of the Brexit by herself and launch negotiations with the EU early next year.

"Now, all that is up in the air," NPR's Frank Langfitt reports from London. The court's ruling means that Parliament must first pass legislation approving Brexit to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which formally begins the process for negotiating Britain's withdrawal.

"This could vastly complicate the government's already fraught plans to leave the world's largest collective economy," Frank says. "Before the June 23 Brexit vote, members of Parliament were overwhelmingly against leaving the EU. The court's ruling could put members in the awkward position of opposing the will of the voters in last summer's referendum."

 

 

 

Put shortly, the High Court of London has now required Parliament to vote for legislation to actually approve of Brexit in order to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Most of Parliament is filled with Remainer representatives.

 

If the court's decision stands - the decision is now on appeal - the UK may stay in the EU on technicality, as long as Remainers retain a majority in Parliament. If it stands, the UK could stay until 2020 at the earliest due to term limits.

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/04/enemies-of-the-people-british-newspapers-react-judges-brexit-ruling?CMP=share_btn_tw

Papers like the Daily Mail are going nuts over it, calling the judges "enemies of the people."

But here's the thing. The PM is the representative of the representatives. Doesn't it make more sense to require Parliament to verify the results of a popular referendum before the PM proceeds?

Sounds to me like the court's trying to keep power in the hands of the people if anything. Letting the PM use popular referenda to do whatever they want is the start of Presidential government, because now the PM is acting on his or her own rather than as an extension of Parliament.

[NeoZero]

See, the thing is, the nature of the referendum was not set in stone. Even with a Leave vote, Parliament could veto it, if they voted on it. As was said in a BBC article, "

"A court challenge to Theresa May's right to trigger the Article 50 process without getting the backing of Parliament has been successful in the High Court."

So Parliament can still veto it, and this was made clear. It's not their fault if many people are too "patriotic" to pay attention to any news that comes from anything but the Sun or Daily Mail.

[Patticus]

I would be more inclined to call each of the newspapers going ballistic over the judges' decision the "enemies of the people", given that they continue to publish misleading bile and outright lies every day, with not even a hint of impartiality. Whatever rules there are to ensure that newspapers cannot lie to or mislead the public obviously aren't being upheld.

British newspaper journalism, the tabloid genre in particular, is in dire need of some sort of drastic reform.

[Phos]

Enemy of the people? More like "Enemy of ~51% of the people", which is something I've been thinking about this whole thing for a while, that ignoring the results of the referendum wouldn't really be the career suicide I've heard it made out as when the majority was so narrow and fleeting. 

Calling that court enemies of the people is just another example of political discourse being a bunch of self selecting echo chambers. 

[Salamander]

Considering turnout, it wasn't even half of all eligible voters who voted for Brexit.  We're being dragged out of Europe by a political minority.

[Tani Coyote]

11 hours ago, FFWF said:

Considering turnout, it wasn't even half of all eligible voters who voted for Brexit.  We're being dragged out of Europe by a political minority.

And that seemingly not too negligible share of voters who voted Leave out of protest, expecting it to have no result.

That... that's not how protest voting works. You vote for the third option or don't vote at all if you want to protest vote. You don't literally choose one of two options.