There is a growing noise from some in power that they believe they know better about what the referendum result in June actually meant. Most (all) of it seems to be from those that believe we should not leave at all and since Mrs May has made it clear that she will invoke Article 50 before the end of March 2017 they all seem to have gotten even more excited.
To me this is all quite simple. The question asked of us all was “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?” Now there is no ambiguity there in my book. The answer they got was that we should leave the EU. All the talk of remaining in the single market is mute, we leave, simple. There was never a question of remaining in some parts of the EU and denying ourselves the ability to make sovereign decisions.
The news is now full of stories of Hard or Soft Brexit. In the words of Mrs May “Brexit means Brexit”. And it seems bizarre to me that the media have been hounding for and answer of exactly what Brexit means. Brexit means we are leaving the EU. There you go, that was not so difficult. There really is no Hard or Soft about it. What comes after is still open for debate but the mandate given was to leave the EU and then it is up to parliament to secure the best trading position possible, but this position must be from outside of the EU. Why are they all in denial? Leave the EU means leaving the EU. I am no scholar and I do not profess to literary genius but these are not complicated words.
Mr Miliband and Clegg (and plenty of others) seem particularly vocal and believe they have a right to manipulate the result to suit their own interests. All very laughable. They have both proved hugely unpopular amongst the populace and somehow still seem to think that they represent someone. Let me put it in clear words “Nobody that matters cares what you think”.
This week (13 October ’16) there is a court hearing that is trying to prevent Theresa May invoking Article 50 without a vote in the house of commons. At first sight this seemed plausible as invoking it will lead to the overturning of other parliamentary acts and this should not be possible without a subsequent act. Then it occurred to me that there has already been one. The 2015 EU Referendum act went through the commons with a considerable majority and the Conservative manifesto was always that the result would be abided by. It all seems pretty implicit to me. Unless, of course, they all want to admit that they were misled and didn’t realise what they were voting for. In fact, I’m surprised they have not asked for the commons vote to be rerun to overturn the act of running the referendum in the first place. You heard it here first…
I just hope the Judge sees it the same way. Whatever the result it is almost certain to end up in the highest court in the land upon appeal. More red tape that one hopes will not result in delay but must accept that it is the logical conclusion.
If the judge insists that this goes through parliament then we are going to be in for a long waiting game. With the current conservative majority of only 12 seats it will be bumpy to say the least. And the house of Lords is not exactly in favour of exit either. The way I see it is that the only logical conclusion will be a general election, despite promises this will not happen. If we were to vote now the Conservatives would likely end up with a very much larger majority that would make parliamentary accession considerably easier. This is assuming, of course, that the Conservative manifesto pledged to take us out of Europe and there is no absolute guarantee of this. As I said in a previous post, the jury is still out on Mrs May for now. She certainly seems to be making the right noises but in a general election may feel that she has more room to maneuver her policies to gain support.