Dave gambled with the future of our country twice and could end up losing both in the long term. Or maybe against all the odds we stay in the EU or rejoin the EU and keep Scotland as part of Great Britain.William Joseph wrote:As I have said in the past, we elect our MPs to do a job (Yes I know they are useless at it) Let them get on with it. We should not have had the first referendum, never mind a second. it was all about Cameron trying to appease the right wingers in the conservative party and failed miserably.blythburgh wrote:I agree this has to be thoroughly debated in Parliament. But could they really go against the referendum result?Chadwick wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36700350
A legal firm is claiming that Britain can't trigger Article 50 without the consent of Parliament. ie. A Prime Minister cannot do it alone - they have to get it agreed by Parliament first.
I'm surprised this is even open to debate. Parliament is our sovereign law-making body, not the vox pop of a referendum, nor the whims of a single Prime Minister. We decide much lesser matters in Parliament, surely the repeal of a law of this magnitude has to go through Parliament?
Personally I would like a second referendum when we know what the Brexit negotiations result in. Or should we leave the final decision to MPS after all the negotiations?
And those give the vote to those most affected by the result who are currently voiceless. Namely those ex pats who have lived in the EU for more than 5 years and the 16/17 year olds. After all the ex pats were promised a vote (well if makes sense to the Govt, because they will mostly vote Tory) and 16/17 year olds got the vote for the Scottish Referendum
How long we keep NI in the UK is totally different story of course.