# Brexit: UK Government loses High Court battle over triggering process **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 3, 2016, 10:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520 "2016-11-03T10:49:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2016, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/61 "2016-11-06T18:41:56Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > So the “second resignation” is the flouncing first? Yes, my fault, I did my usual trick of skimreading over too much in getting down to dealing with another point and not checking whether I was duplicating someone else’s point. Phillips was the one I meant as a second resignation, Zac Goldsmith the first one I referred to. Either way, the point remains, it won’t be obvious what their by-election results mean in relation to the general mood on Brexit or otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2016, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/62 "2016-11-07T01:05:38Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Doesn’t that assume that May can hold the Conservative parliamentary caucus together? As the rubber hits the road and the details of what Brexit means start be clearer, isn’t there some chance that the caucus will start to splinter on this point, which may lead to a free vote? No. It’s not the parliamentary party which decides whether there’ll be a free vote; it’s the whips. And they are accountable to the government, not the parliamentary party. What you _could_ have is a vote in which a number of Tory backbenchers defy the whip, and vote against the government. If enough of them do that, and if the opposition votes solidly to oppose Brexit, then Parliament in theory could veto Brexit. But, given the fact that Parliament voted to conduct the refernedum, and given the referendum outcome, I don’t see that as a realistic possibility. ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2016, 10:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/63 "2016-11-07T10:15:16Z")
Labour is already signalling they won’t vote against the government acting under Art. 50, as long as the government’s plans are clear (but they’re avoiding committing themselves to what they would do if the plans are still unclear). The SNP will vote against, of course, since Scotland voted Remaim, and so will the LibDems. One N. Irish Unionist party is for Brexit, one for Remain, and Sinn Fein don’t take their seats. So that would still be a fairly clear majority for May, unless there is a huge Tory revolt, which seems unlikely, given the swell of opinion in their constituency associations, and the traditional weight they place on loyalty to the leadership anyway. In any case, too big a revolt and May’s position becomes untenable, for which the constituency associations would really not easily forgive rebel Tory MPs. It’s not impossible that Labour will abstain, or split itself, since a fair few Labour MPs could claim they represent constituencies that clearly voted to Remain, and others will consider abstention another instance of woolly non-leadership. (For history buffs, Corbyn looks more and more like poor George Lansbury, only there’s no Bevin to lay down the law, nor an Attlee in waiting). ---
**Author:** ![Malden\_Capell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/malden_capell/32/5274_2.png) [@Malden\_Capell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malden_Capell)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2016, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/64 "2016-11-07T11:15:27Z")
I dunno, I hold out a faint hope that when the Government is forced to explain at the very least the broad aims of its negotiation ambitions (Single Market, Free Movement, special deals etc) unless that plan is at least halfway sensible, I can see public opinion swinging away against the Government, and there’ll be a few brave souls who may lead a critical mass to at least watering down the crazy. And I have zero confidence that this Government _has_ a plan beyond ‘we’ll just make everything better, okay? It’ll be yuuuuge’ ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2016, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/65 "2016-11-07T12:23:45Z")
> [@Malden\_Capell](#): > > And I have zero confidence that this Government _has_ a plan beyond ‘we’ll just make everything better, okay? It’ll be yuuuuge’ Me too. Since even if they do write down a sensible wishlist, there are 27 other parties to the negotiations who will have their own opinions. ---
**Author:** ![usedtobe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ec9cab/32.png) [@usedtobe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usedtobe)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/66 "2016-11-08T00:01:04Z")
And, I suspect, at least 20 of those 27 will wish to “make an example” of the UK, lest other countries get the idea that they, too can get all the benefits of Membership without having to take any parts which offend their delicate sensibilities. I suggest a quick review of the American Civil War as an example of what can happen when a few snots decide to leave the party… ---
**Author:** ![T.M](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ad7895/32.png) [@T.M](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/T.M)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/67 "2016-11-08T02:22:06Z")
People keep on about the slender majority to leave the EU. What must be remembered is that England the largest partner of the UK voted by a large majority to leave the EU, my own ward was 62% leave 32% stay in some wards 72% leave 28% stay. The outcome could be the formation of an English Parliament who will negotiate a deal for England to leave the EU a deal that could incorporate Wales as they have voted to leave ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/68 "2016-11-08T03:14:13Z")
> [@T.M](#): > > People keep on about the slender majority to leave the EU. What must be remembered is that England the largest partner of the UK voted by a large majority to leave the EU, my own ward was 62% leave 32% stay in some wards 72% leave 28% stay. The overall English result was 53.4% to Leave, 46.6% to remain. A bigger majority in favour of leaving than the UK-wide majority, but still not as decisive as the Scottish majority in favour of remaining (62:38) or the NI majority for remaining (55.8:44.2). > [@T.M](#): > > The outcome could be the formation of an English Parliament who will negotiate a deal for England to leave the EU a deal that could incorporate Wales as they have voted to leave That would mirror the Greenland exit in 1984. Greenland _could_ leave while the rest of the Kingdom of Denmark remained because Greenland has self-government with a high degree of autonomy. England is the only country within the UK which _doesn’t_ have any degree of self-government, the English having always taken it for granted (correctly) that on account of their size and weight they can always procure the UK to act in England’s interests on any important issue. How unfair this is to other countries within the UK now becomes apparent; because England wants to leave Scotland and NI must also leave, even though their desire to stay is (on the numbers) stronger than the English desire to leave. It’s probably a bit late to think of autonomy for England so that the possibility of England and Wales leaving, while the rest of the UK remains, can be explored. The debate so far has proceeded on the basis that the entire UK will stay or go, and the UK government is now committed to going. I think it’s too late to change horse and restructure the UK constitution to make it possible to explore whether the English could do this without imposing on the Scots and the Irish. Overall, though, it must tend to strengthen the demand for Scottish independence. It’s not just that the UK will, in the end, attend to the interests and wishes of England; it’s that the English implicitly assume that this is how it should be. Even now, there don’t seem to be many voices in England asking whether it is fair or necessary that Scotland should have to leave the EU because England wishes to. ---
**Author:** ![nicky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f0a364/32.png) [@nicky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nicky)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/69 "2016-11-08T07:53:12Z")
Whats so special about “England”? London voted overwhelmingly to stay. Let the other english provinces leave the uk if they want. ---
**Author:** ![T.M](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ad7895/32.png) [@T.M](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/T.M)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 8:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/70 "2016-11-08T08:42:50Z")
> [@nicky](#): > > Whats so special about “England”? London voted overwhelmingly to stay. Let the other english provinces leave the uk if they want. London is just another city that England could survive without. Could London stand alone without England??? ---
**Author:** ![dominic65](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7bcc69/32.png) [@dominic65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dominic65)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/71 "2016-11-08T11:27:57Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > The overall English result was 53.4% to Leave, 46.6% to remain. A bigger majority in favour of leaving than the UK-wide majority, but still not as decisive as the Scottish majority in favour of remaining (62:38) or the NI majority for remaining (55.8:44.2). > That would mirror the Greenland exit in 1984. Greenland _could_ leave while the rest of the Kingdom of Denmark remained because Greenland has self-government with a high degree of autonomy. England is the only country within the UK which _doesn’t_ have any degree of self-government, the English having always taken it for granted (correctly) that on account of their size and weight they can always procure the UK to act in England’s interests on any important issue. How unfair this is to other countries within the UK now becomes apparent; because England wants to leave Scotland and NI must also leave, even though their desire to stay is (on the numbers) stronger than the English desire to leave. > > It’s probably a bit late to think of autonomy for England so that the possibility of England and Wales leaving, while the rest of the UK remains, can be explored. The debate so far has proceeded on the basis that the entire UK will stay or go, and the UK government is now committed to going. I think it’s too late to change horse and restructure the UK constitution to make it possible to explore whether the English could do this without imposing on the Scots and the Irish. > > Overall, though, it must tend to strengthen the demand for Scottish independence. It’s not just that the UK will, in the end, attend to the interests and wishes of England; it’s that the English implicitly assume that this is how it should be. Even now, there don’t seem to be many voices in England asking whether it is fair or necessary that Scotland should have to leave the EU because England wishes to. You can paint it in those very “the English vs. the rest” terms, but it seems a bit arbitrary. You could also say “metropolitan vs. rural” or “prosperous vs. disadvantaged”. The big Leave votes were in northern England and the midlands. Southern England voted Remain by a clear margin. Where’s the sympathy for them? ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/72 "2016-11-08T12:11:36Z")
> [@T.M](#): > > London is just another city that England could survive without. Could London stand alone without England??? \*\*Much \*\*more easily than England could survive without London, yes. If it was set up as a city state similar to Hong Kong or Singapore, and assuming that the point of this process was to maintain full membership of the EU, London would thrive much as it does now. By contrast, without the [net fiscal transfer](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11376569/If-London-treated-Britain-like-Germany-treats-the-eurozone-Londoners-would-pay-no-income-tax.html) from London, the rest of England would be considerably worse off than it is now - the level of “austerity” needed to square the circle of reduced tax base, [lower productivity](http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossvalueaddedgva/bulletins/regionalgrossvalueaddedincomeapproach/2012-12-12)and higher demand for services would be eye-watering. This piece by Larry Elliot puts it very clearly: > [@](#): > > Manufacturing’s share of the economy has almost halved since Labour came to power in 1997. Since the mid-1990s, the north-west has shed 212,000 manufacturing jobs – almost two-fifths of the total. Productivity in London is 30% above the national average; in all the other big cities of the UK – including Manchester, Glasgow, Liverpool and Sheffield – it is well below the national average. What’s more, the gap between London and other UK cities has got bigger over the last decade despite the impact of the financial crisis on the City. > > As manufacturing declined, so the financial sector grew more powerful. Financial liberalisation was going on apace when the factories were closing in the name of market forces in the early 1980s; within 18 months of the miners’ strike ending the City was being transformed and expanded by Big Bang. > [@](#): > > The deleterious consequences of this profound change in the economy were kept hidden for a surprisingly long time. First, the windfall from North Sea oil disguised a growing manufacturing trade deficit and allowed governments to massage the jobless figures by shifting people off unemployment benefit and into long-term sickness. > > Labour had a different approach between 1997 and 2010. It took the tax receipts from asset-price booms in the south and recycled them into higher public spending in the north. Then the bubbles went pop, the money ran out and the cuts began. > > A new report by[Christina Beatty and Steve Fothergill from Sheffield Hallam University](http://www4.shu.ac.uk/research/cresr/sites/shu.ac.uk/files/cresr30th-jobs-welfare-austerity.pdf)brings the story up to date. They show how the destruction of industrial jobs has fuelled spending on welfare benefits and in turn intensified the budgetary problems of successive governments. London is not just another city. London is a global city and financial powerhouse moored to a fading ex-industrial northern European economy. That this situation has been allowed to develop is a disgrace, mind, but it is the situation. ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/73 "2016-11-08T14:58:02Z")
GDP of ‘inner London’ and ‘Greater London’ as compared with the rest of the world: > **[List of OECD regions by GDP (PPP) per capita](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_OECD_regions_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita)** > > This is a list of OECD regions by GDP (PPP) per capita, a ranking of subnational entities from members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) by gross domestic product at purchasing power parity prices per capita. > The 381 areas shown below are "territorial level 2" (TL2) regions. > Data are in current 2016 international dollars. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/74 "2016-11-08T15:38:49Z")
Interesting stats. Do we know how much of the inner London effect is a consequence of it being essentially an commercial area where very few people reside though many work to create GDP there? That would greatly flatter the per capita numbers. I once lived a few miles from an area like that. It was a “town”\* with 4 oil refineries and one falling down apartment complex full of very poor people. The town’s per capita GDP was off-the-charts high. The poor people’s income was off-the-charts low. I’m not suggesting Inner London is full of poor people. Merely that per capita numbers can be misleading when an area has a commercial/residential mix quite different from what an uninformed observer might assume. The southern tip of Manhattan would be similar. ========= - The “town” had very low property taxes, a very well-paid “city council” and “mayor”, and essentially no city services. Odd that. Again no direct comparison to Inner London is expressed or implied. ---
**Author:** ![amarone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e0b2c6/32.png) [@amarone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarone)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/75 "2016-11-08T15:45:04Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > Interesting stats. Do we know how much of the inner London effect is a consequence of it being essentially an commercial area where very few people reside though many work to create GDP there? That would greatly flatter the per capita numbers. That was my initial reaction, but on researching it, the definition of Inner London covers much more than Central London. You can click on Inner London in the table and it takes you to the definition. It includes where I used to live (Borough of Islington), and had a population of 3.23 million in 2011. ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/76 "2016-11-08T15:58:41Z")
No doubt those GDP numbers are flattered by the City (e.g. financial district), which works hard to produce wealth in line with, if not actually beyond, the dreams of avarice. (It turns out avarice can dream pretty big). But Inner London covers more than just the City and Canary Wharf, so it’s not just wealthy businesses and poor residents. London is home to (or one of the homes of, more accurately) the super-rich, especially Russians, Chinese and Arabs, as well as the merely very rich (e.g senior lawyers, accountants etc.) In fact, the current complaint amongst the latter is that they can’t afford to buy new homes in central London because the real money has priced them out. ---
**Author:** ![T.M](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ad7895/32.png) [@T.M](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/T.M)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/77 "2016-11-08T16:48:58Z")
For London to become a city state remaining in the EU they would have to create and police a border around London. As government would relocate to a central area most likely the midlands (Birmingham) many civil service jobs would relocate as well. As London would no longer be England’s premier city there would be a loss of prestige value, this in turn would reduce the value of having a London office making outer London offices attractive, then there would be the added bonus of not having to pay London wages ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/78 "2016-11-08T17:06:20Z")
> [@T.M](#): > > For London to become a city state remaining in the EU they would have to create and police a border around London. As government would relocate to a central area most likely the midlands (Birmingham) many civil service jobs would relocate as well. As London would no longer be England’s premier city there would be a loss of prestige value, this in turn would reduce the value of having a London office making outer London offices attractive, then there would be the added bonus of not having to pay London wages London doesn’t get prestige from being in England. England gets prestige from having London. Without it, England is basically Belgium with a couple of famous universities. England is _financially dependent_ on London. The NHS in South Shields, schools in Warrington, pensions in Bournemouth - they’re all paid for by London. The rest of England does not raise enough taxes to pay for its public services and benefits. However tricky it might be for London (and it is at root a silly hypothetical), there is no question that if England didn’t have access to London’s fiscal surplus it would be in a massive black hole. ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/79 "2016-11-08T20:44:33Z")
> [@Stanislaus](#): > > London doesn’t get prestige from being in England. England gets prestige from having London. Without it, England is basically Belgium with a couple of famous universities. > > England is _financially dependent_ on London. The NHS in South Shields, schools in Warrington, pensions in Bournemouth - they’re all paid for by London. The rest of England does not raise enough taxes to pay for its public services and benefits. However tricky it might be for London (and it is at root a silly hypothetical), there is no question that if England didn’t have access to London’s fiscal surplus it would be in a massive black hole. Harsh but fair. The whole point of Crossrail, Crossril 2, the third runway, £10’s billions in public infrastructure projects is to maintain London’s position as one of the world two embryonic ‘super cities’. It’s nice to have village greens, morris dancing, etc, but it’s all subsidised by the monster on the Thames. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2016, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520/80 "2016-11-09T01:09:07Z")
> [@Stanislaus](#): > > London doesn’t get prestige from being in England. England gets prestige from having London. Without it, England is basically Belgium with a couple of famous universities. . . Worth pointing out that the cities which contain the “couple of famous universities” were also strong remain voters. So when England is carved up like medieval Italy, which is the policy we appear to be edging towards in this thread, the Most Serene Republic of London will be joined in the EU by the Grand Duchy of Oxford and the Principality of Cambridge. (Hey, don’t knock it! Carved-up Italy gave us the Rennaissance. What could carved-up England give us?) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brexit-uk-government-loses-high-court-battle-over-triggering-process/770520.md?page=3)