British political turmoil deepens after EU referendum

[webfact]

British political turmoil deepens after EU referendum
By GREGORY KATZ

LONDON (AP) — Britain's shocking decision to remove itself from the European Union brought more political turmoil Sunday as Scotland's leader threatened to block the move and the opposition Labour Party's leader faced a coup attempt from his own legislators.

The sense of unease spread as European leaders stepped up the pressure on Britain to begin its complex exit from the 28-nation EU immediately, rather than wait several months as British Prime Minister David Cameron prefers.

The vote to leave sent the pound and global stock markets plunging. Britain's Treasury said finance minister George Osborne would make an early morning statement Monday "to provide reassurance about financial and economic stability" before the London Stock Exchange reopens.

The leaders of the successful campaign to leave the EU stayed largely out of the public eye, as opponents accused them of lacking a plan to calm the crisis the result has triggered. In his first statement since Friday morning, "leave" leader and former London Mayor Boris Johnson used his column in the Daily Telegraph newspaper to urge unity and say "the negative consequences (of the vote) are being wildly overdone."

He said Britain would forge "a new and better relationship with the EU — based on free trade and partnership, rather than a federal system."

The vote, however, risks causing a political schism in the United Kingdom. Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said she would "consider" advising the Scottish Parliament to try to use its power to prevent Britain from actually leaving the EU. She said Scottish lawmakers might be able to derail the move by withholding "legislative consent" for a British exit, or Brexit.

"If the Scottish Parliament was judging this on the basis of what's right for Scotland, then the option of saying 'We're not going to vote for something that is against Scotland's interests,' of course, that is on the table," she said of the possibility of withholding consent.

Sturgeon said she believes Scotland's approval is required for the move but conceded the British government would likely take "a very different view."

Thursday's U.K.-wide vote to leave the EU was very unpopular in Scotland, where 62 percent cast ballots to stay, and Sturgeon says she is studying ways to keep Scotland part of the EU bloc.

The Scottish question looms large because Sturgeon also has said another referendum on Scottish independence from Britain is "highly likely" as a result of Britain's EU vote. A Scottish referendum in 2014 ended with voters deciding to remain in Britain, but analysts believe Britain's withdrawal from the EU may strengthen the independence movement.

In Northern Ireland, which also is part of the U.K., Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness said his priority is forging "special arrangements" to enable Northern Ireland to maintain its EU ties. Some Brexit opponents have also talked of trying to use Northern Ireland's Assembly to try to block Britain's departure.

Northern Ireland voters also expressed a preference for keeping Britain in the EU. The unhappiness with the results in both Scotland and Northern Ireland is adding to the sense that the Brexit vote may over time lead to the breakup of the United Kingdom.

Northern Ireland Secretary Theresa Villiers, Cameron's lead official in Belfast, played down the suggestion that the Scottish Parliament or the Northern Ireland Assembly had the standing to prevent a British departure from the EU.

She said decision-making power resides solely in the British Parliament, which is expected to abide by the results of the referendum, which showed 52 percent of British voters wanted out.

"In the weeks and months ahead, we will be working with both the Scottish government and the Northern Ireland executive on all these matters," she told BBC. "But ultimately it is (the British) Parliament's decision."

Adam Tomkins, a law professor and member of the Scottish Parliament, agreed with this assessment. The Conservative Party legislator tweeted that it was "nonsense" to suggest the Scottish party could block a British departure simply by withholding consent.

The vote is already cutting short Cameron's career. He said after the results that he will resign as prime minister when the Conservative Party chooses a new leader, who will be charged with implementing the separation from the EU.

The new party leader, who will become prime minister, is expected to be in place by October. At that point, he or she may choose to call a quick election to solidify a mandate — and the prospect of an election in the near future may have spurred a revolt Sunday against Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn that has been simmering for months.

Corbyn, a longtime critic of the EU who was criticized by many for doing a weak job presenting the party's position favoring membership, for the first time faces an open rebellion from senior members of his "shadow cabinet" — the opposition party's mirror government of senior lawmakers.

Eleven "shadow cabinet"members resigned Sunday after Corbyn fired shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary Benn overnight for reportedly plotting a rebellion against him. The dissidents want Corbyn, who represents the far-left wing of the party, ousted before the next general election because many believe he cannot win.

In her resignation letter, shadow Heath Secretary Heidi Alexander bluntly told Corbyn he had to go.

"I do not believe you have the capacity to shape the answers our country is demanding and I believe that if we are to form the next government, a change of leadership is essential," she wrote.

In a statement released late Sunday, Corbyn said he would not resign and would run in any new leadership contest. Senior allies said he still has strong support among the party's rank-and-file members, who chose him as leader last year.

"I regret there have been resignations today from my shadow cabinet," Corbyn said. "But I am not going to betray the trust of those who voted for me — or the millions of supporters across the country who need Labour to represent them."

Concerns about last week's EU referendum ranged far beyond U.K. politics.

In Rome, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry urged Britain and the EU to manage their divorce responsibly for the sake of global markets and citizens. On Monday, he will be the first senior U.S. official to visit London and Brussels since the referendum, and he said he would bring a message of U.S. support to both capitals.

Pope Francis urged the EU to come up with creative ways to stay together following Britain's vote, saying it's clear "something isn't working in this unwieldy union."

"The European Union must rediscover the strength at its roots, a creativity and a healthy disunity, of giving more independence and more freedom to the countries of the union," the pontiff told reporters as he flew home from Armenia.

The key, he said, is to rekindle the will to stay together with "creativity and new life."

___

Associated Press writers Bradley Klapper in Rome, Jill Lawless in London and Nicole Winfield aboard the papal plane contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2016-06-27

[FourAces]

[Krataiboy]

Tsar Nicola is clearly delusional, as well as power-drunk. She can't throw a tartan spanner in the works of the British referendum result any more than she was able to overturn the Scottish referendum result in September 2014 which produced a small majority in favour of staying in the UK.

The Scots are stuck with being part of the UK at least until the lengthy process of terminating our membership of the European superstate is complete - which could take two years.

Only then could a Scottish referendum be held on UK membership - and even if Scotland's first minister got the "Out" vote she clearly wishes for, achieving re-entry into the EU would be a long and arduous process.

Nicola Sturgeon's stated goal is to achieve Scottish independence. But just how much independence is there in being shackled to the Euro and sacrificing national sovereignty to the unelected commissars of the European Commission?

[pitrevie]

Tsar Nicola is clearly delusional, as well as power-drunk. She can't throw a tartan spanner in the works of the British referendum result any more than she was able to overturn the Scottish referendum result in September 2014 which produced a small majority in favour of staying in the UK.

The Scots are stuck with being part of the UK at least until the lengthy process of terminating our membership of the European superstate is complete - which could take two years.

Only then could a Scottish referendum be held on UK membership - and even if Scotland's first minister got the "Out" vote she clearly wishes for, achieving re-entry into the EU would be a long and arduous process.

Nicola Sturgeon's stated goal is to achieve Scottish independence. But just how much independence is there in being shackled to the Euro and sacrificing national sovereignty to the unelected commissars of the European Commission?

Well it does appear that the Scottish people voted by a substantial majority in favour of remaining in Europe. I take it you are not one of those that wants to ignore the results of a referendum.

[Thaidream]

JUst a thought- if the Scottish parliament and Northern Ireland contingent refuse to go along with the separation from the UK and get enough support from England and Wales could not the next British PM refuse to invoke Article 50 which is what triggers the exit. In addition the EU itself provides more enticements to the Uk to remain in the Union. The British PM then states that for national unity and market stability- he cannot in good conscience trigger the exit. I wonder what the result of such an action would br?

[JHolmesJr]

Sturgeon…she thinks she's caviar, doesn't she?

[MissAndry]

Hard to see how the LEAVE campaign leaders can do anything at the moment.

They aren't MPs, they aren't part of the government, they don't have any power to make plans.

All the MPs wanted to stay with their heads in the EU trough.

The government wants to stay, the people want to leave.

All the makings of a revolution IMHO.

What Cameron should do is call a general election.

Our party don't want to leave, we can't carry out this decision, elect someone who can.

But that would take balls that none of the weak MPs that currently run the country have.

Edited June 27, 2016 by MissAndry

[Thaidream]

Calling an election makes perfect sense in that this is a huge decision for the UK and there is obvious huge divisions within regions of the UK wanting to leave and remain. If Cameron would say - I can't trigger Article 50- let's have a vote and see what the electorate decides. As an American, I am not up to date on law in the UK. Is the referendum legally binding or would a vote be more proper to decide the issue?

[ddavidovsky]

Calling an election makes perfect sense in that this is a huge decision for the UK and there is obvious huge divisions within regions of the UK wanting to leave and remain. If Cameron would say - I can't trigger Article 50- let's have a vote and see what the electorate decides. As an American, I am not up to date on law in the UK. Is the referendum legally binding or would a vote be more proper to decide the issue?

Quit the finagling. The UK has voted to leave the EU and any attempt to nullify or circumvent that vote will subvert the entire democratic system.

It might be argued that the vote could have been handled differently, but that should have been argued before, not later. The result has to be accepted, on principle.

In any case, the media-driven hysteria will die down soon and people will begin to realise the actual advantages of the situation - not least the potential to reinvent Europe on more operable terms. To cling to the old, floundering EU is to obstruct the natural evolution in these things.

[brewsterbudgen]

Calling an election makes perfect sense in that this is a huge decision for the UK and there is obvious huge divisions within regions of the UK wanting to leave and remain. If Cameron would say - I can't trigger Article 50- let's have a vote and see what the electorate decides. As an American, I am not up to date on law in the UK. Is the referendum legally binding or would a vote be more proper to decide the issue?

The referendum result is not legally binding. To leave the EU will require a parliamentary majority in both Houses of Parliament.

A General Election is likely and expect a large number of candidates standing on a Remain manifesto pledge. If they can achieve a majority, the UK will remain in the UK.

[Thaidream]

As an American - I can see both sides of this issue. The EU is making decisions on behalf of its members that many in the Uk are not happy with at all and there is the issue of how much sovereignty can a Nation give up before its own interests and culture are forever changed. Then there is the Immigration issue which to me is somewhat separate in that the UK leadership could have pressed the EU on this matter and opted out for complete movement of people for 7 years but chose not to this.

On the other hand- the Uk is a part of Europe and their economies are linked simply because of proximity in the same way America, Mexico and Canada are linked. In addition, the UK is the bridge between America and Europe and also the economic center of the World. Those who are retired remember a Britain that was more homogenous and non globalised while those below the age of 35 want a more integrated and interdependent Britain with the Continent.

As an outsider looking in it appears that both sides of this argument whether they be politicians or other stake holders have misrepresented their side of the argument. The so called 'facts' that were presented simply do not hold true. No one really presented the cold hard issues of what a Leave really means and what a Remain really means.

To me- if the final exit has to be voted upon by both house of Parliament- then there must be a new election so all UK citizens can choose representatives that will actually represent their wishes and a new PM selected.These campaigning representatives would have to answer some very hard, fact based questions regarding the remain or leave issue and then citizens would make their choice. In my mind that would stop the Scots from attempting another separation vote and Northern Ireland trying the same thing. The issue is not only an exit from the EU but a breakup of the United Kingdom.

[ddavidovsky]

Is nobody thinking this through? Britain hasn't floated off the continental shelf. It is still part of Europe and trade will still take place. The Remain side are presumably still quite happy not to be part of the single currency and therefore have no consistent position on the issue.

This is an opportunity for Britain to redesign that whole system - free of the unnecessary and dysfunctional "European Parliament".

Cameron was a fool to resign - he could have played a big part in setting this up.

Edited June 27, 2016 by ddavidovsky

[MJP]

Take a look at the FTSE 100 and the FTSE 250. The headline fall isn't the real story. It hides much deeper implications. Look at the top winners and losers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/market_data/stockmarket/3/default.stm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/market_data/stockmarket/4/default.stm

Shares in Barclays and RBS reportedly suspended.

[bkkcanuck8]

Calling an election makes perfect sense in that this is a huge decision for the UK and there is obvious huge divisions within regions of the UK wanting to leave and remain. If Cameron would say - I can't trigger Article 50- let's have a vote and see what the electorate decides. As an American, I am not up to date on law in the UK. Is the referendum legally binding or would a vote be more proper to decide the issue?

Calling an election would definitely make it more interesting, but I believe the law has changed and only after no-one being able to form a government can the election be scheduled at will. Of course holding an election would only work if the Conservatives hold power, if another party ran on a platform of keeping the UK in the EU and won a majority - then it would take precedence over the referendum which is non-binding anyway.... since that party now has a more recent mandate to keep the UK in. I doubt those that really want out and are not crying wolf want to take the chance of a party being able to monopolize all the voters who want to stay in.... whereas the Conservatives could easily lose in that case if they cannot carry the socialist out vote.

[MJP]

Calling an election makes perfect sense in that this is a huge decision for the UK and there is obvious huge divisions within regions of the UK wanting to leave and remain. If Cameron would say - I can't trigger Article 50- let's have a vote and see what the electorate decides. As an American, I am not up to date on law in the UK. Is the referendum legally binding or would a vote be more proper to decide the issue?

Calling an election would definitely make it more interesting, but I believe the law has changed and only after no-one being able to form a government can the election be scheduled at will. Of course holding an election would only work if the Conservatives hold power, if another party ran on a platform of keeping the UK in the EU and won a majority - then it would take precedence over the referendum which is non-binding anyway.... since that party now has a more recent mandate to keep the UK in. I doubt those that really want out and are not crying wolf want to take the chance of a party being able to monopolize all the voters who want to stay in.... whereas the Conservatives could easily lose in that case if they cannot carry the socialist out vote.

A Lib Dem government?

[stag4]

Tsar Nicola is clearly delusional, as well as power-drunk. She can't throw a tartan spanner in the works of the British referendum result any more than she was able to overturn the Scottish referendum result in September 2014 which produced a small majority in favour of staying in the UK.

The Scots are stuck with being part of the UK at least until the lengthy process of terminating our membership of the European superstate is complete - which could take two years.

Only then could a Scottish referendum be held on UK membership - and even if Scotland's first minister got the "Out" vote she clearly wishes for, achieving re-entry into the EU would be a long and arduous process.

Nicola Sturgeon's stated goal is to achieve Scottish independence. But just how much independence is there in being shackled to the Euro and sacrificing national sovereignty to the unelected commissars of the European Commission?

Well it does appear that the Scottish people voted by a substantial majority in favour of remaining

in Europe. I take it you are not one of those that wants to ignore the results of a referendum.

Yes the majority of Scots voted to Remain part of the EU but the majority of the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU.

The referendum was to decide if The UK wanted to remain or leave the EU. Sturgeon is just playing political games which will get her nowhere.

[bkkcanuck8]

Calling an election makes perfect sense in that this is a huge decision for the UK and there is obvious huge divisions within regions of the UK wanting to leave and remain. If Cameron would say - I can't trigger Article 50- let's have a vote and see what the electorate decides. As an American, I am not up to date on law in the UK. Is the referendum legally binding or would a vote be more proper to decide the issue?

Calling an election would definitely make it more interesting, but I believe the law has changed and only after no-one being able to form a government can the election be scheduled at will. Of course holding an election would only work if the Conservatives hold power, if another party ran on a platform of keeping the UK in the EU and won a majority - then it would take precedence over the referendum which is non-binding anyway.... since that party now has a more recent mandate to keep the UK in. I doubt those that really want out and are not crying wolf want to take the chance of a party being able to monopolize all the voters who want to stay in.... whereas the Conservatives could easily lose in that case if they cannot carry the socialist out vote.

A Lib Dem government?

Any party that the Remain vote could coalesce behind.

There are many on here that are talking of delaying article 50 to give a chance to negotiate beforehand.... Germany has ruled out any informal negotiations, they will only take place after invoking article 50... no reason to wait now.

[MJP]

Should keep the robots in check . . .

http://qz.com/716955/english-robots-will-miss-their-big-shot-for-a-bill-of-rights-when-brexit-takes-hold/

The United Kingdom’s decision in a referendum to withdraw from the European Union will transform the legal rights of its citizens and Europeans hoping to live and work in the UK. But there’s one other demographic that could be legally affected by Brexit: Robots.

Last month, the European Parliament’s legal affairs committee published a draft report calling for the EU to vote on whether robots should be legally considered “electronic persons with specific rights and obligations.”

[gerry1011]

I am from continental Europe.

I am a pro EU

However, I think that, in a while, the UK will be better off outside the EU.

I also strongly believe that the EU is better off without the UK.

I have a tendency to think that the EU has become too big. Too many members. With less countries the EU would be more manageable. The problem is, in my opinion, that the EU has become detached and too vague for most British people and most Europeans. The people don't see anymore what opportunities the EU brings to them.

The UK should see this divorce as a new beginning.

Soon it will be business as usual. Just need to redefine a bit the business.

But now that it is done, I hope that the UK gets out as fast as possible. It's better for both sides.

Edited June 27, 2016 by gerry1011

[Thaidream]

Just check the exchange rates- the pound has slipped in Thailand to 46.40 to the Baht which is a 3% drop again. It has also slipped against the Dollar. This is a shock for British expats abroad- and if one is on a fixed income ones purchasing power has declined. I certainly feel for them. I really thought the Pound would recover today as nothing has really changed. The UK will not be out of the EU at the earliest 2 years from the date Article 50 is invoked. The markets are overreacting. The UK still has a huge economy . When will the markets come back?

[dunroaming]

Reassuring words from Boris this morning when he finally broke his silence. He said that project fear was now over and the pound had stabilised as had the stock market. Good news indeed..... until less than an hour later when the pound had fallen to it's lowest rate for over thirty years and Barclays and RBS had suspended trading to try to slow down the crash. Still it's early days even if Boris thinks everything is fine.

Anyway we are where we are and you can't turn back the clock. Yes it is true that the £350,000,000 turned out to be £160,000,000 and the money won't be going into the NHS and it is true that immigration will carry on but hey! Boris won and he will get his wish to be PM. On the other hand there will be no emergency budget as George Osborne claimed would happen.. Plenty of lies from both sides.

[ilostmypassword]

Is nobody thinking this through? Britain hasn't floated off the continental shelf. It is still part of Europe and trade will still take place. The Remain side are presumably still quite happy not to be part of the single currency and therefore have no consistent position on the issue.

This is an opportunity for Britain to redesign that whole system - free of the unnecessary and dysfunctional "European Parliament".

Cameron was a fool to resign - he could have played a big part in setting this up.

Why is it inconsistent not to want to be part of the Eurozone? Before there was the Euro there was the EU. That's what the UK joined, Nothing inconsistent about it at all. Unless you equate sensible with inconsistent.

[MissAndry]

When will the markets come back?

When the bankers have made enough money.

[mcfish]

Last global meltdown was because of greedy Americans

The upcoming one will be because of Stupid British

In the end we will all pay

[gerry1011]

Just check the exchange rates- the pound has slipped in Thailand to 46.40 to the Baht which is a 3% drop again. It has also slipped against the Dollar. This is a shock for British expats abroad- and if one is on a fixed income ones purchasing power has declined. I certainly feel for them. I really thought the Pound would recover today as nothing has really changed. The UK will not be out of the EU at the earliest 2 years from the date Article 50 is invoked. The markets are overreacting. The UK still has a huge economy . When will the markets come back?

I am not a specialist.

However, I also think that the UK still has a huge and strong economy.

In my very own opinion, the fall of the Pound is more related to some kind of panic.

Soon things will stabilize. The UK will find its way, as well as the EU, and the Pound will go up.

Only my opinion, of course.

But, since this is what I believe, yesterday I bought some Pounds.

[ilostmypassword]

Last global meltdown was because of greedy Americans

The upcoming one will be because of Stupid British

In the end we will all pay

So. you're blaming the crash in Europe on America? Actually it was the greedy banks in mainly the UK, France, and Germany that brought the European disaster on. European banks didn't need the USA's help at all when it came to reckless lending.

[MaxYakov]

When will the markets come back?

When the bankers have made enough money.

It appears as though a lot of folks with skin in the game don't agree with you:

Barclays and RBS shares suspended from trading after tanking more than 8% - UK Independent - Current

Do you suppose the bankers are shorting their own stock?

[dunroaming]

Britain may well get smaller but it will survive. It will be tough for a time and things will get more expensive with a weaker pound. My big gripe is the way that the poiticians have let everyone down with all the lies and political posturing for their own ends. As usual the people are the pawns in the politicians games and they will be the ones who suffer the most.

Johnson obviously wants the divorce to take longer and he will drag it out as long as possible. It seems odd to bang the drum about taking our country back and then wanting to go slow on actioning it. All the time that happens there will be uncertainty which the markets find unsettling and confidence cannot be built. Obviously we want to try to negotiate a free trade deal but that comes with freedom of movement unless the EU changes the rules.

It's hard to predict where we will be in a year from now. We will still be in the EU as it takes an absolute minimum of two years before there can be a vote. I would think it will be nearer to three years before we are out. In the meantime it will be business as usual except we will be out of the loop when it comes to any decision making within the EU.

On home soil we will have a new PM and a new leader of the opposition and no doubt a general election. Interesting times to come

[JHolmesJr]

This referendum started off by representing opposing views between uk voters....now that an unexpected winner has been decided (a winner not favored by either political party), its starting to reflect opposing views between the winning LEAVE side and the politicians.

The government needs to be careful it is not seen as opposed to executing the will of the electorate. Already they look like they are dragging their heels. Cameron the slimy coward has resigned and shrugged instead of doing his job....a real turd in the footnotes of history.

My fear is that both political parties will now conspire and collude to find some way to rob the voters of their historic and brave decision.

Edited June 27, 2016 by JHolmesJr

[MJP]

Tories just announced a 10 week deadline to elect a new leader.

10 weeks!