British Supreme Court Says Corrupt British Parliament Must Vote on Brexit Start

by Scott Creighton

The British Supreme Court has ruled that the Brexit vote held last year, June 2016, which simply asked “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?” was essentially meaningless other than serving as a sort of massive opinion poll. According to them by an 8 to 3 count, the United Kingdom cannot leave the European Union without a vote in Parliament first. In fact, the ruling says Theresa May cannot even begin talks with the EU about Britain’s exit without a vote.

Parliament must vote on whether the government can start the Brexit process, the Supreme Court has ruled.

The judgement means Theresa May cannot begin talks with the EU until MPs and peers give their backing – although this is expected to happen in time for the government’s 31 March deadline.

But the court ruled the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Ireland assemblies did not need a say.

Brexit Secretary David Davis will make a statement to MPs later on Tuesday.

During the Supreme Court hearing, campaigners argued that denying the UK Parliament a vote was undemocratic.” BBC

The British parliament is about as corrupt as the American congress. Maybe more so. I don’t know how anything could be more corrupt, but I guess it’s possible. What’s interesting is the fact that their Supreme Court decided that taking the will of the people and acting upon that would be “undemocratic”

It’s an interesting definition of the term they use I suppose. Perhaps it’s something akin to all those “democracies” we install, promote and prop-up in other countries across the globe.

Lead plaintiff Gina Miller said that only parliament was sovereign and that the MPs would bring their “experience” to the table and help shape the Article 50 negotiations. She said it wasn’t a victory for her, but rather for the constitution. That’s funny isn’t it because the SC justices argued that they couldn’t do it because it violated the laws of the EU, not Britain.

This will significantly kneecap the Brexit process. Some are even calling for another referendum after Parliament drags out the negotiation process as long as they can. That will give ’em a chance to steal that vote like I’m sure they wish they stole it back in June.

The SNP responded to the ruling by saying it would table 50 “serious and substantive” amendments.

Labour said it too would seek to amend the bill but would not “frustrate” the Brexit process.” BBC

How long do you think it will take Parliament to debate and agree on 50+ “serious” amendments to the bill? Could take a while don’t you think?

Hell, the UK’s leaving the EU might be scrapped altogether according to some:

“Events in the Lords – where the government does not have a working majority and there are 178 non-affiliated cross-bench peers – could be more unpredictable. Mark D’Arcy says there are murmurings of an organised attempt to resist Article 50 and a “doomed last stand” by diehard Remainers.” BBC

Though they don’t think it is “likely” at this time, who knows what reforms will take place between now and the eventual Article 50 vote in Parliament. Anything could happen.

This decision just adds to the bureaucracy of the process which will slow it down considerably and allow for various corporate interests to use their considerable influence on the MPs they own to cripple the exit plans or derail them completely.

Prime Minister May’s efforts to move forward with Brexit have garnered her some rather harsh, conspiracy-ladened criticism of late.

Nick Clegg seems to think by following the will of the British people, the Prime Minister is doing the bidding of dirty protectionists like President Trump and Vladamir Putin.

Theresa May’s approach to Brexit risks making her the “unwitting tool” of aggressive nationalists seeking to tear the European Union apart, former deputy prime minister Nick Clegg is warning.

Speaking ahead of the Prime Minister’s talks with Donald Trump in Washington on Friday, Mr Clegg will name the new US president as part of an “axis of aggressive nationalism” stretching from the White House to the Kremlin and taking in hardline Brexiteers in the UK and populist parties in countries across Europe.” The Independent

God help the Queen and the blessed European Union of Undemocratic Technocratic Control if the damn “populist parties” across Europe start acting on the will of the unwashed masses. Chaos could ensue and we all know how much Big Banking and Big Business prefer “stability” to chaos.

Cute isn’t it? Equating following the will of the people to the threat of the Red Menace?

The ruling is really much ado about nothing in terms of giving Parliament a say in the matter of Brexit. May said last week that whatever deal they strike with the EU would be put to both houses of Parliament for a vote. Of course she also said that Britain would leave the single market of the union, which may be something that the globalist banksters from London wish to have their houseboys in Commons and Lords put a nix on before she can even negotiate.

Theresa May made the following statement through a spokesperson today:

The British people voted to leave the EU, and the government will deliver on their verdict – triggering Article 50, as planned, by the end of March. Today’s ruling does nothing to change that.”

“It’s important to remember that Parliament backed the referendum by a margin of six to one and has already indicated its support for getting on with the process of exit to the timetable we have set out.”

“We respect the Supreme Court’s decision, and will set out our next steps to parliament shortly.” Prime Minster May

We will see, but I disagree with the prime minister. Today’s ruling will have an effect on the process if not the outcome itself.

May finds herself in a difficult position and doesn’t wish to invoke the clause that stipulates there must be new elections if the Brexit referendum is not honored by the British government. She doesn’t want to be the known as the British Prime Minister who served the shortest amount of time in office because she defied the democratic process. That also explains that 6 to 1 vote in Parliament as well.

We will see how it goes but the phrase “delay and destroy” seems to apply here in my opinion. God only knows what great war may develop between now and Exit time that would force the Brits to remain a unified block with Europe. And by “God” I mean the masters of the universe of course.

4 Responses

  1. Let’s not get too worried about this one. There’s a 10,000 kilometer line of Europeans chomping at the bit for the chance to vote and put it up the gool of the EU … not that voting will change anything.
    The important thing for Europeans is not to war against each other (or anyone else, for that matter). I think the history of the 20th century is still fresh in the minds of millions of survivors of two devasting World Wars and their kin. The bankster version of a Common Market has failed. Better, more human ways of cooperating and thriving are in the offing for Europeans.

  2. Nice. Brexiteers voted to leave the EU in a non-binding referendum because they want to restore Parliamentary Sovereignty, unless they’re worried that Parliament might disagree with them, in which case authoritarian executive rule without oversight via “Royal Prerogative” (a kind of constitutional hangover from the days of Absolute Monarchy) will do nicely instead. Never expected to see you back L’Ancien regime so explicitly on here!

    You don’t care about the state of democracy in the UK. You just want to see the partisan outcome that you want to see, and are casting around to justify it.

    God damn independent judiciary, “Enemies of the People” backed by the Liberal Lugenpresse as the Mail the Express and the alt-right would have it I suppose. 😀

    FYI there’s a significant body of moderately Euroskeptic pro-Article 50 Tory and Labour MPs who have no intention of ingnoring the referendum result or defying their respective party whips who are in favour of the Supreme Court ruling.

    Dude, even if we accept the desirability of Brexit as a working hypothesis, your constitutional argument here is still pure bunkum.

    (Otherwise Scott, still love the blog and keep up the good work – this issue is a particular bugbear of mine as you know! 😛 )

    • I’m not sure what the argument is about. Didn’t Parliament vote to uphold the referendum outcome by a landslide?

    • and second of all, I do care about the state of democracy in the UK. I care about it in Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Iraq, Mexico, Afghanistan, Yemen, Brazil… all sorts of places. You dismiss my side of the argument as “artisan” but it isn’t. I don’t know, nor do I care, which political parties supported Brexit and which didn’t. What I know is the EU is not democracy. Not even close. That Farage guy, or whatever his name is, is far right and he says that. And I’m far left. So how is that partisan on my part? It’s not partisan, it’s just fact. The people, by a wide margin, voted to leave the EU. That’s democracy. The people determining the fate of the nation’s foreign policy dealings.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: