The EU debate - Part III

That's not guaranteed, I still have a sneeking suspicion there will be a sting in the tail at the supreme Court.

 

continued page 94

 

You could be right, but I think it would be a bad thing long term, as it would still leave a fair percentage feeling disenfranchised. Too much public unrest could well lead to a general election, which the opposition are in no position to fight. A consequence of that could be the demise of the labour party and effectively a one party state.

For what it would take, an outline of the key principles by May to the commons, with a subsequent vote would just leave the House of Lords as a potential hurdle.

 

I take your point.

However, would not a heavy defeat for Corbyn at a GE, followed by his almost inevitable resignation, at least help to restore some sanity to the Labour Party?

The problem is at the extremes. Far right breeds far left, and vice versa.

 

House of Lords wouldn't stop article 50 else that would be the end of the House of Lords.

 

Possibly, it depends how they approach a campaign. There's a risk it will split them further, if that's possible, and that would take a lot of rebuilding. As country, we need a strong opposition, so I'd prefer they got an opportunity to rebuild before an election.

 

I think if they create too many problems, they'll pay a price, I'm not convinced that will stop some of them, or that it would be a healthy consequence.

It's partly as I said before, that one consequence of the court case could be to threaten the democracy that they're claiming to be protecting and causing uncertainty on the way.

 

I just don't believe that's possible under Corbyn. He's too extreme and dogmatic to gain any general vote of approval from the electorate.

However, he's made it clear he's not going anywhere and the £20 members are backing him up. In my view, the only way they're going to shift him is by him heavily losing a GE.

 

The courts took just 30 minutes to stop Brexit in it's tracks and you think the supreme court will over turn that decision Not on your life will they and the PM knows full well that....The supreme court wont go against its principle of Sovereignty no more than the lower court. to over turn it they would have to go against the principles it has always stood for since the 1600's......Theresa is trying to buy time as she is clueless what to do as there is no way it will be over turned....

 

You've been wrong on most things about the political landscape so far...

 

I agree, I'm just not convinced that would be the right way to resolve it, either for labour, or the country.

 

Earlier today I was looking at polls elsewhere in Europe and it appears the left/centre left is on the slide everywhere. With the main opposition to centre right parties coming from the right / far right.

I suspect labour will not be a credible opposition for a very long time and an election would be more about what kind of manifesto the tories can agree on and what effect it would have on their party, potentially even causing a permanent split as the soft/no Brexit element feel unable to campaign on party lines.

 

I don't usually do this but............ no I can't.

 

House of Lords can't stop article 50, all they can do is refer it back for reconsideration, which would only delay.

 

That's sad, but not surprising. Brexit and Trump are symptoms of people being pissed of with those seen as the elite feathering their nests and manipulating them, while the left run around creating other divisions in society and playing at the thought Police.

There's a large body of people feeling unrepresented or patronised and 'alternatives' will fill the void.

 

13 October 2016 to 3 November 2016 is a little longer than 30 minutes.

 

At this moment, I don't see any other way it can be resolved.

I do believe that a heavy loss at a GE, which looks pretty much inevitable right now, is the only way for Labour to be rid of him.

He ain't going voluntarily, he's made that very clear...

 

I think the government will either change the terms of article 50 or they will use an alternative argument. The feedback is the government legal team made a pigs ear of it and the supreme Court might make a less rigid decision.

If the decision is that A50 only needs parliament to vote on a motion rather than primary legislation then it gives them a far easier ride than is currently the case.

 

I think if they need it fixing quickly, you're right.
I don't think they need to be pushing for it though.
If they sit back, they can use any issues created from the brexit process to their advantage.

They need to keep some of their better members chipping away quietly and distance themselves from the sort of labour party the likes of Abbot represent.

The likes of the lady on last nights question time will be tempting to those voters looking to fill the void.

 

I'd disagree also, Steven, I think that's feedback from Gvt lawyers who have an axe to grind.

The High Court decision was totally unequivocal. Unless something is dramatically changed, I can't see the Supreme Court overturning it.

Additionally, May is making herself look dictatorial and dogmatic in trying to pursue this.

Why, doesn't she, or won't she agree to put this in front of parliament? Afraid of something?...