# Parliament must vote on Brexit: So Saith the Supreme Court of the UK **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 24, 2017, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034 "2017-01-24T15:11:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2017, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/101 "2017-02-18T17:49:04Z")
> [@Stanislaus](#): > > … it’s kind of sad that the only person who can give a full-throated argument against the current unchecked march towards Brexit is apparently persona non grata. Blair did that to himself when he volunteered to be Mr Bush’s poodle. Going to war over non-existent WMDs when his master whistled is his legacy, and will taint everything he does in the public arena until he dies. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2017, 9:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/102 "2017-02-20T09:57:24Z")
It \*was \*a good speech. The question is why nobody else in the half-assed Remain campaign was able to make such a speech either before or after the referendum. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2017, 10:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/103 "2017-02-20T10:12:39Z")
The Supreme Court verdict turned out not to have earthshaking consequences given that there’s such a huge majority in the Commons for Brexit. The Lords could prove an irritant but they can easily be ignored as they have only delaying power. I still think the legal challenge was worthwhile though as it established an important precedent. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/104 "2017-03-01T20:44:31Z")
And the Lords have turfed it back to the Commons! [Government’s Brexit bill defeated in the House of Lords](http://news.sky.com/story/governments-brexit-bill-defeated-in-the-house-of-lords-10786634) > [@](#): > > **Peers back an amendment which aims to unilaterally protect the rights of EU citizens in the UK, forcing it back to the Commons.** > > The Government has been defeated over its Brexit bill in the House of Lords, with peers demanding protection for EU citizens in the UK. > > A total of 358 voted for a Labour amendment to the bill to trigger Article 50, with 256 voting against. > > It called on ministers to, within three months of Article 50 being triggered, unilaterally bring forward guarantees for the 3.5 million people from the bloc living in Britain. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/105 "2017-03-01T20:48:56Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > …The Lords could prove an irritant but they can easily be ignored as they have only delaying power. > … Delaying power for a year. As a former Prime Minister observed, “A week is a long time in politics.” From the article: > [@](#): > > Theresa May is understood to be planning to trigger Article 50 around 15 March and has long had a deadline of the end of March. This may put a spanner in the works. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/106 "2017-03-01T20:49:31Z")
Well, wow. So much for only having delaying power. ---
**Author:** ![nightshadea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7ba0ec/32.png) [@nightshadea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nightshadea)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/107 "2017-03-01T21:16:53Z")
heres what they need to do 1 have a binding yes or no public vote 2 go by each districts vote say the Sherwood forest district says yes then that would be the sherwoods rep vote if Nottingham said no thats what nottinghams rep would vote… that way parliaments vote is satisfied I know that solution would be too easy but it would end it once and for all … ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/108 "2017-03-01T21:22:08Z")
They can’t have a binding public vote. Parliament is always free to do as it decides. They already had as binding a referendum as they are going to get. ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/109 "2017-03-01T21:50:13Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > They can’t have a binding public vote. Parliament is always free to do as it decides. They already had as binding a referendum as they are going to get. That’s only mostly true. The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011 allowed for a public vote to decide whether some parts of the Act - about moving to a slightly more proportional voting system - would be implemented or not. The legislation was passed by parliament, and the yes/no decision was handed over to a public vote. No doubt parliament could have passed another Act to negate the previous one, but that referendum was more binding than the Brexit one. Obviously a very much simpler issue, but still. ---
**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:** [March 1, 2017, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/110 "2017-03-01T22:17:06Z")
I was in the Chamber today watching this debate. It’s rare to see the Chamber so spirited and, well, raring for a scrap. I’m proud of the House of Lords tonight, whatever the end result. ---
**Author:** ![Lyonessite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecccb3/32.png) [@Lyonessite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lyonessite)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 10:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/111 "2017-03-10T10:40:34Z")
> [@Baron\_Greenback](#): > > That’s only mostly true. > > The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011 allowed for a public vote to decide whether some parts of the Act - about moving to a slightly more proportional voting system - would be implemented or not. The legislation was passed by parliament, and the yes/no decision was handed over to a public vote. > > No doubt parliament could have passed another Act to negate the previous one, but that referendum was more binding than the Brexit one. Obviously a very much simpler issue, but still. Referenda have no binding effect in the UK. They are merely political and advisory. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 11:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/112 "2017-03-10T11:01:50Z")
> [@Lyonessite](#): > > Referenda have no binding effect in the UK. They are merely political and advisory. It doesn’t really matter. What matters is whether it’s politically feasible to ignore the results of a referendum, and I would guess that most of the time it isn’t. You can’t tell people for one year : “you’re going to decide” and then just ignore the result of the vote. ---
**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:** [March 10, 2017, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/113 "2017-03-10T11:18:44Z")
It’s the same as offering a ref on a change in the law - it means nothing. Parliament is sovereign, etc. It’s why the whole idea of a negotiated exit without Parliamentary approval was a nonsense. However, to deny the expressed will of the people when they have been expressly asked … Well, if it’s Scotland it seems you keep asking until you get the answer you want. ---
**Author:** ![Lyonessite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecccb3/32.png) [@Lyonessite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lyonessite)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/114 "2017-03-10T12:15:24Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > It doesn’t really matter. What matters is whether it’s politically feasible to ignore the results of a referendum, and I would guess that most of the time it isn’t. You can’t tell people for one year : “you’re going to decide” and then just ignore the result of the vote. It does matter becase if the negotiated exit plan is as bad as I suspect it will be, public opinion will change and Parliament can simply overrule the referendum result and then the government can fall or go to the country voluntarily. ---
**Author:** ![Lyonessite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecccb3/32.png) [@Lyonessite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lyonessite)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/115 "2017-03-10T12:18:12Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > It’s the same as offering a ref on a change in the law - it means nothing. Parliament is sovereign, etc. It’s why the whole idea of a negotiated exit without Parliamentary approval was a nonsense. > > However, to deny the expressed will of the people when they have been expressly asked … > > Well, if it’s Scotland it seems you keep asking until you get the answer you want. Both the Scottish referendum and the Brexit referendum illustrate what hapoens when there is a material change of circumstances. With Scotland the understanding was tgat we would remain in he EU; that changed. With Brexit, the claims of the Brexiteers in the campaign may be shiwn to be false. ---
**Author:** ![blindboyard](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blindboyard/32/2833_2.png) [@blindboyard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blindboyard)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/116 "2017-03-10T13:47:47Z")
The approach of the lords seems to be to give the EU everything that it wants, and then negotiate for what we want afterwards. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/117 "2017-03-10T14:04:23Z")
> [@Lyonessite](#): > > It does matter becase if the negotiated exit plan is as bad as I suspect it will be, public opinion will change and Parliament can simply overrule the referendum result and then the government can fall or go to the country voluntarily. Except there’s no mulligan: once notification is given under article 50 of the treaty, Britain is on the way out after two years. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/118 "2017-03-10T15:20:46Z")
> [@Lyonessite](#): > > Both the Scottish referendum and the Brexit referendum illustrate what hapoens when there is a material change of circumstances. With Scotland the understanding was tgat we would remain in he EU; that changed. With Brexit, the claims of the Brexiteers in the campaign may be shiwn to be false. There’s a Dawkins video going around at the moment that makes a point I’ve been pondering since the Scottish referendum, which is: why are these major, irrevocable decisions based on simple majority results in public votes? If 49.9% want one thing and 50.1% want another, can we really say the people have spoken? Hell, that’s within the margin of error. Ideally there ought to be a two-thirds approval requirement to change the status quo, and certainly nothing under 60%. A candidate or government that wins by a single vote will be up for a vote again within five years, but Brexit and devolution are forever (or as “forever” as anything in politics is). > [@blindboyard](#): > > The approach of the lords seems to be to give the EU everything that it wants, and then negotiate for what we want afterwards. Ironically that’s going to be the actual approach for the Commons and Government as well. The EU holds all the leverage here. We will be begging for an even halfway decent deal. > [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Except there’s no mulligan: once notification is given under article 50 of the treaty, Britain is on the way out after two years. And that’s why the EU holds all the leverage: it doesn’t have to give any concessions at all unless it wants to, and it has an active incentive to hit the UK as hard as possible in order to send a message to any other countries thinking of leaving. Meanwhile, the UK will face a ticking clock to negotiate the best possible deal, a clock the EU can easily run down on any terms it doesn’t like, and the UK can’t decide to cancel the exit just because it doesn’t like the deal. (In theory, of course, the EU could decide to let the UK stay in should the UK change its mind…but be prepared for a re-renegotiation of the current terms. Say goodbye to the rebate, for starters…) ---
**Author:** ![Lyonessite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecccb3/32.png) [@Lyonessite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lyonessite)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/119 "2017-03-10T15:34:24Z")
> [@blindboyard](#): > > The approach of the lords seems to be to give the EU everything that it wants, and then negotiate for what we want afterwards. I assume you mean the Commons. The Lords want residence for EU citizens reconfirmed, and a final meaningful vote for Parliament on the deal. ---
**Author:** ![Lyonessite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecccb3/32.png) [@Lyonessite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lyonessite)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034/120 "2017-03-10T15:37:04Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Except there’s no mulligan: once notification is given under article 50 of the treaty, Britain is on the way out after two years. There is no evidence that Article 50 cannot be withdrawn with or without EU agreement. It may need to be decided by the ECJ, but if the UK did withdraw, a political fudge would be organised. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/parliament-must-vote-on-brexit-so-saith-the-supreme-court-of-the-uk/778034.md?page=7)