Posted on 12/08/2016 3:12:51 AM PST by NYer
A vote to trigger Article 50, which would make the United Kingdom depart from the European Union, passed the British parliament today by a wide margin. Article 50 must be triggered by the end of March next year, setting up the "Brexit" once and for all. While this is certainly a step in the right direction for those in favor of leaving the EU, the move is largely symbolic and is not actually binding or a certainty that anything will happen.
Britain has taken a significant, although largely symbolic, step closer to Brexit after the MPs voted by a majority of almost 400 to back Theresa May’s plan to trigger article 50 by the end of March. In two votes, Labour and Conservative MPs joined forces to back a Labour motion saying the government should publish a “plan for leaving the EU” before article 50 is invoked, and a government amendment saying the government should invoke article 50 by 31 March. The vote is not technically binding on the government, but it is the first time parliament has backed May’s Brexit timetable, which would lead to the UK being out of the EU by the end of March 2019 (assuming that the two-year withdrawal process does not get extended.)
In June, the U.K. stunned the world when it voted to leave the European Union in what was dubbed the "Brexit" vote. In the fallout of Brexit, then-PM David Cameron resigned and was replaced by Theresa May.
Good News!
Jeez, is any vote in the UK binding? Do they just vote on stuff for shits and giggles?
...the will of the people
1st big step toward anti-globalism, Trump was 2nd
There would have been rioting in the street. The EU was a good idea at the time...but like every collective group, there's problems.
Yeah!!
Hypothetical: Germany bails out of the EU before the UK does. If that were to happen, would the UK be left holding the bag? If there’s even the slightest chance of that, the UK oughta leave a vapour trail getting out of the EU.
Plenty. But as in most legislatures, there are various levels of vote in the UK Parliament, ranging from those which simply reflect Parliament's opinion on a particular subject (such as this one) to those which create new laws or change old ones. The case currently being determined by the Supreme Court hinges on whether there has to be primary legislation - a new Act or Acts of Parliament - before the Brexit process can formally begin.
It’s parliamentary politics.
This was a fast, non-binding bill to knock down Remain momentum. It forced MPs to declare their broad position and become vulnerable to deselection.
A detailed and binding bill couldn’t have been scheduled into parliamentary time for months. This bill forced a declaration from MPs now.
Also: HMG doesn’t believe that a binding bill is required for Brexit.
They see no need to play into the left-wing Judges worldview.
While the EU *might* have seemed like a good idea at the time, it was never a good idea, because it was done in bad faith.
Europe had been traumatized by 1500 years of perpetual war, so the idea of creating a unified Europe, without borders or boundaries, all operating under the same rules, with free movement and commerce, had great appeal.
But what they did not consider was that nations existed not just as a social construct, but as a means to give those who lived withing their best alternatives to meet their goals and aspirations as a people.
Putting this in real terms, “Old Europe” was based in a progression from Roman Law, Napoleonic Law, to the modern French Civil Code. It influences every aspect and nuance of their nations.
Britain, however, has for a thousand years been the home of the evolution of Common Law. Again, every part of Britain is permeated with it, as are the expectations of its people.
And the French Civil Code and Common Law are totally incompatible with each other. And since the EU adopted the Civil Code, it was guaranteed to grate on and oppress the British.
But what about the bad faith part? Since ancient times, Europe has been the continent of kings, queens and princes. The nobility ruled over the peasantry. And eventually the nobility had to create a bureaucracy to do the actual ruling.
The year 1848 was the death knell of this system. Inspired by the American and French revolutions, those European countries that already hadn’t had revolutions had them. And though there was later a counterrevolution by the nobility, their collective fates were sealed.
Yet their descendants, and others, still long for the day when the nobility directed a bureaucracy to rule over the peasantry. And these were the people who created and evolved the EU. They didn’t want the old nobility, but themselves to be the new nobility.
They despise democracy and republican-democracy, so have shifted more and more power away from it to the bureaucracy.
It is no surprise that the EU is breaking up. The royals were repugnant then, and they are repugnant now.
Yes! This has emboldened others. Looks like Italy and France are next. Germans will soon follow.
Italy vote shows populists aren't buying elites' warnings
Fillon wins France’s conservative presidential primary
Angela Merkel's party beaten by rightwing populists in German elections
Court had ruled that the PM could not set the date, said parliament had to. So here it is.
WOOOOHOOOOO! GRRRRRRRREAT news! HOORAY Brits.
BTT
Congratulations Nigel Farage and all Brits
That was very well stated.
I don’t think this was symbolic, the Parliament was told by their court they had to pass a bill to trigger Brexit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.