The UK’s Supreme Court put at least a delay on Brexit, ruling Tuesday Parliament must agree. It “may” change nothing. But “Bregret” has been strong since the Brexit vote. We’ll see how smart Theresa May is – this COULD lead to a reversal, if handled properly.
As we have noted, the British referendum vote for the UK to leave the EU has been massively de-stabilizing ever since it passed in June.
In our view, the ruling Tuesday by the UK Supreme Court that any such move must be agreed by Parliament
offers a chance to pull back from a very bad decision.
It remains unclear exactly what is going to happen — British PM Theresa May’s promise of a “hard Brexit” notwithstanding.
But a new act has now been opened in the Brexit [melo] drama,
and we can only hope May and colleagues can devise a politically palatable way to reverse this unnecessary and self-destructive action.
Let’s hope they will and can — it’s nice to have some good news amidst the blizzard of Trump insanity …
“British Prime Minister Theresa May may be poised to make a “hard Brexit” —
but if she doesn’t get Parliament’s backing, she won’t be making a Brexit at all.
On Tuesday, the British Supreme Court ruled May’s government must seek parliamentary approval before triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty,
the mechanism that begins the Brexit negotiation process with the European Union.
The 8-3 decision said “The UK’s constitutional arrangements require such changes to be clearly authorized by Parliament.”
In one sense, this is a blow to May, who argued that Article 50 could be triggered without consulting Parliament
by virtue of the Royal Prerogative, the powers the British crown bestows upon the government …
In another way, this doesn’t change much at all:
In the same January 17 speech in which May said leaving the European Union means leaving its single market,
she also said she would go to Parliament regardless of the Supreme Court decision.
The notion that Parliament could have a say on Brexit after all pushed the British pound to its best day in almost a decade.
And the Supreme Court was clear that only the U.K. Parliament, and not its Scottish or Welsh counterparts,
needed to approve the bill — Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU.
Brexit Secretary (a real job) David Davis promised on Tuesday to put a bill before Parliament “within days.”
The government wants to trigger Article 50 before the end of March …
“It’s not about whether the UK should leave the European Union. That decision has already been made by people in the United Kingdom,”
Davis said, referring to last summer’s referendum, which passed by a 52-48 margin.
Despite that defiance, and despite UKIP leader Paul Nuttall’s very dramatic warning –
”woe betide those politicians or parties that attempt to block, delay, or in any other way subvert that will”–
it might not be so clear cut.
“What does it mean to leave the EU?” spiked on Google trends after polls closed.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said that, while he won’t subvert the will of the people,
he will add amendments to it “to prevent the Conservatives using Brexit to turn Britain into a bargain basement tax haven off the coast of Europe.”
And Liberal Democrat chief Tim Farron said his members of Parliament would vote against the bill unless the public as a whole could vote anew on a final deal.
All of this to say that Brexit may still go forward …
but the government now must travel a harder road for Ms. May’s “hard Brexit”.”