84% of voters backed parties committed to leaving EU

Westmonster ^ | June 10, 2017 | by Westmonster

[GonzoII]

A grand total of 84.2% of General Election voters stumped for a party that has promised to take Britain out of the European Union.

It’s proof, if proof were needed, that an overwhelming majority of people just want us to get on with Brexit.

[Klemper]

And yet, they remain in the EU. Our elite overlords know what is best for us commoners.

[kabar]

And yet, they remain in the EU.

The exit negotiations are set to start in about a week. On March 29, the UK triggered Article 50, the official mechanism that starts the ball rolling for the UK to leave the EU. These talks are expected to end in autumn next year - and then MPs at Westminster, the European Council in Brussels, and the European Parliament will each get a vote on any deal that has been agreed.

The time-frame allowed in Article 50 is two years - and this can only be extended by unanimous agreement from all EU countries.

If no agreement is reached in two years, and no extension is agreed, the UK automatically leaves the EU and all existing agreements - including access to the single market - would cease to apply to the UK. If that happens, Brexit Day would be Friday, 29 March 2019.

What is Article 50?

Article 50 is the plan for any country that wishes to exit the EU. It was created as part of the Treaty of Lisbon - an agreement signed up to by all EU states which became law in 2009. Before that treaty, there was no formal mechanism for a country to leave the EU.

It's pretty short - just five paragraphs - which spell out that any EU member state may decide to quit the EU, that it must notify the European Council and negotiate its withdrawal with the EU, that there are two years to reach an agreement - unless everyone agrees to extend it - and that the exiting state cannot take part in EU internal discussions about its departure.

Any exit deal must be approved by a "qualified majority" (72% of the remaining 27 EU states, representing 65% of the population) but must also get the backing of MEPs. The fifth paragraph raises the possibility of a state wanting to rejoin the EU having left it - that will be considered under Article 49.

[mewzilla]

The Brits have a uniparty, too.

[MrEdd]

Nowhere near as bad as here, because individual parties only have a fraction of the power that parties in US politics have. Also not as bad because it is much easier to launch a new party.

Unfortunately they are the British, and most of the people who didn’t march off and die in The Great War were socialists.

[Gay State Conservative]

It's my understanding that the real battle...which seems to be happening largely behind the scenes...is “hard Brexit” or “soft Brexit”.I've come to believe (incorrectly,perhaps) that “soft Brexit” isn't really Brexit at all.I suspect it would still mean open borders which,thanks to the East German currently in charge of the EU,would mean an unlimited number of Romanians,Syrians *and* Libyans..as well as European courts trumping British ones.And lets not forget billions and billions of pounds still paid to Brussels.

[Grampa Dave]

Mayday! Will a British Trump be the UK’s next prime minister?

Excerpted:

Which raises the very real and colorful possibility that she will be succeeded as prime minister by Boris Johnson, the closest answer Britain has to Donald Trump.

A onetime journalist and author who parlayed his wit and eccentric personality into election in 2008 as London’s mayor, Johnson, currently the foreign minister, has outraged and entertained Britons for years. His shaggy blond hair even looks a bit like Trump’s mane, and his public antics and outlandish utterances bear a resemblance to the 45th president’s.

Johnson knows how far out of the mainstream he is. “My chances of being prime minister are about as good as the chances of finding Elvis on Mars,” he once said, “or my being reincarnated as an olive.”

Of his tenuous relationship with standard grammar, he remarked, “My speaking style was criticized by no less an authority than Arnold Schwarzenegger. It was a very low moment, my friends, to have my rhetorical skills denounced by a monosyllabic Austrian cyborg.”

Like Trump, Johnson is an unrepentant nationalist.

Excerpted: Go to the link below for full article:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/06/09/mayday-will-british-trump-be-uks-next-prime-minister.html

[naturalman1975]

It's my understanding that the real battle...which seems to be happening largely behind the scenes...is “hard Brexit” or “soft Brexit”.I've come to believe (incorrectly,perhaps) that “soft Brexit” isn't really Brexit at all.

Not quite. Even a soft Brexit could accomplish the goal of protecting and preserving British sovereignty which was beginning to be put at serious risk by continuing membership of the EU. The principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty - that the British Parliament (Parliament in this particular sense being comprised of the House of Commons, the House of Lords, and the Monarch - there's another more common casual useage of the term where the Monarch isn't included) - is the ultimate decision maker for the United Kingdom and cannot be overruled or bound by any other body is the cornerstone of the British constitution - but continuing EU membership could have changed that. Even a soft Brexit can stop that problem.

That isn't to say soft Brexit is a good outcome - it would still leave a lot of problems in place like porous borders, and routine interference in British affairs unless Parliament specifically acts to block them. (Having the power to assert sovereignty has limited value if you don't actually do it, and even if you are willing to, there's a big difference between an 'opt out' system compared to an 'opt in' system), but it's not totally worthless.

[naturalman1975]

European courts trumping British ones

Note - even a hard Brexit doesn't solve this problem completely. The European Court of Justice is an EU court, but the European Court of Human Rights isn't. It is under the control of the Council of Europe, and Britain will remain part of the Council of Europe and will be subject to ECHR rulings.

I'd like to see the UK leave the Council of Europe as well, but that is far less urgent - the ECHR is far less interventionist that the ECJ, has far more limited jurisdiction, and in most cases, it's rulings are actually fairly reasonable. Also, critically, while British courts do generally take notice of ECHR rulings, final authority remains with the British Courts - the ECHR can ask a British Judge to take its rulings into consideration but the Judge can still ignore them - and is supposed to if they are inconsistent with British law.