Theresa May warned of risk of constitutional crisis over Brexit deal

[webfact]

Theresa May warned of risk of constitutional crisis over Brexit deal

Libby Brooks

Scotland correspondent

The Guardian

 

Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish leaders must agree terms of EU departure to avoid conflict, says Institute for Government

 

LONDON: -- Theresa May has been warned to expect a “full-blown constitutional crisis” unless agreement on the terms of Brexit can be reached between the government and the UK’s devolved administrations.

 

The stark prediction comes as the prime minister hosts talks on Monday with the leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland for the first time since the UK voted to leave the EU on 23 June.

 

In a report published on Monday, the Institute for Government said unless all four leaders agree on the “core planks” of the UK’s negotiating position before May triggers article 50, formally starting the Brexit process, the result could be “a serious breakdown in relations between the four governments and nations of the UK”.

 

Full story: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/24/theresa-may-constitutional-crisis-brexit-deal-institute-for-government

 

-- The Guardian 2016-10-24

[Rob8891]

No shit, Sherlock....

[RuamRudy]

How can an agreement be reached when the objectives are 180 degrees apart? I don't think that there is anyone who believes that the SNP won't, quite rightly, see this as an opportunity to make as much political capital as possible. Exciting times ahead...

[JAG]

I was under the impression that the devolution settlements left competence and authority in foreign affairs in the hands of the Westminster (UK) Government. There is no constitutional requirement to consult them, although as so often with our "unwritten constitution" it is pragmatic, reasonable and courteous to do so.

 

Given that the most vociferous (and largest) of the devolved administrations has already stated that it opposes leaving the EU, one must conclude that any agreement will involve rejecting the decision of the electorate, as presented in the referendum result. 

 

That I suggest would be a massive constitutional crisis.

[bangon04]

Maybe David Cameron didn't completely think things through........

[dunroaming]

Can of worms doesn't come close.  Until the new year it will all be posturing and testing the water by all parties affected.

[Bannoi]

Theresa May makes me cringe every time I see her.

 

One of the things the people voted for was to bring power back to Parliament and certainly not her she is meant to be a Prime Minister not a dictator.

 

I personally know a few people who voted leave that are now regretting it and have a feeling if there was another referendum the result would be totally different.

 

There should be a General Election.

[Bench499d]

1 hour ago, JAG said:

I was under the impression that the devolution settlements left competence and authority in foreign affairs in the hands of the Westminster (UK) Government. There is no constitutional requirement to consult them, although as so often with our "unwritten constitution" it is pragmatic, reasonable and courteous to do so.

 

Given that the most vociferous (and largest) of the devolved administrations has already stated that it opposes leaving the EU, one must conclude that any agreement will involve rejecting the decision of the electorate, as presented in the referendum result. 

 

That I suggest would be a massive constitutional crisis.

 

I agree that if Westminster decides not to Brexit this would cause a furore.  But it would not be a constitutional crisis as I believe that everyone has been told time and again that referendums (referenda?) in the UK are not binding, rather they are advisory, and that Parliament being sovereign and having the right to make such decisions was one of the central planks of the Leave campaign.

 

It is a complete shambles and the break-up of the UK may be an inevitable consequence of this vote.  Well done David Cameron for destroying your country through austerity and complete selfishness.

[JAG]

22 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

Theresa May makes me cringe every time I see her.

 

One of the things the people voted for was to bring power back to Parliament and certainly not her she is meant to be a Prime Minister not a dictator.

 

I personally know a few people who voted leave that are now regretting it and have a feeling if there was another referendum the result would be totally different.

 

There should be a General Election.

Why? She has a parliamentary majority.

 

And with the Labour Party trailing in the polls by what - 18% or so - if she did call a general election yu would likely find her in power for another 5 years with a bigger majority.

[JAG]

3 minutes ago, Bench499d said:

 

I agree that if Westminster decides not to Brexit this would cause a furore.  But it would not be a constitutional crisis as I believe that everyone has been told time and again that referendums (referenda?) in the UK are not binding, rather they are advisory, and that Parliament being sovereign and having the right to make such decisions was one of the central planks of the Leave campaign.

 

It is a complete shambles and the break-up of the UK may be an inevitable consequence of this vote.  Well done David Cameron for destroying your country through austerity and complete selfishness.

 

I didn't much like Cameron but holding a referendum on the EU was a manifesto pledge wasn't it?  As he won the election then the referendum was inevitable.

 

I rather suspect that the remain campaign were responsible for their own defeat. The doom and gloom campaigning, together with the arrogant style so many employed sank them.

 

Admittedly I am sceptical about the EU, but I remained undecided for the larger part of the debate. One of the things which swung it for me was the sight (and sound) of "Sir""Bob Geldorf and assorted media luvvies shouting abuse at the fishermens protest convoy on the Thames!

[RuamRudy]

18 minutes ago, Bench499d said:

 

I agree that if Westminster decides not to Brexit this would cause a furore.  But it would not be a constitutional crisis as I believe that everyone has been told time and again that referendums (referenda?) in the UK are not binding, rather they are advisory, and that Parliament being sovereign and having the right to make such decisions was one of the central planks of the Leave campaign.

 

It is a complete shambles and the break-up of the UK may be an inevitable consequence of this vote.  Well done David Cameron for destroying your country through austerity and complete selfishness.

 

I think that the consitutional crisis, certainly as far as Scotland is concerned, will come from the requirement for the Scottish Government to amend the Scotland Act 1998 to remove the explicit requirement within it that all laws in Scotland be harmonised with EU law. Undoubtedly the SNP will refuse, requiring the UK government to disregard the Sewel convention and impose the change from Westminster.

Edited October 24, 2016 by RuamRudy

[Grouse]

13 minutes ago, JAG said:

Why? She has a parliamentary majority.

 

And with the Labour Party trailing in the polls by what - 18% or so - if she did call a general election yu would likely find her in power for another 5 years with a bigger majority.

 

The way things are right now I would not bet on it. I don't think she would get an outright majority and would have to try for a coalition with the SNP ?

[Bench499d]

8 minutes ago, JAG said:

 

I didn't much like Cameron but holding a referendum on the EU was a manifesto pledge wasn't it?  As he won the election then the referendum was inevitable.

 

I rather suspect that the remain campaign were responsible for their own defeat. The doom and gloom campaigning, together with the arrogant style so many employed sank them.

 

Admittedly I am sceptical about the EU, but I remained undecided for the larger part of the debate. One of the things which swung it for me was the sight (and sound) of "Sir""Bob Geldorf and assorted media luvvies shouting abuse at the fishermens protest convoy on the Thames!

 

A manifesto pledge that probably won him the General Election, but was only there to head off UKIP at the pass.

 

And yes you are 100% correct that the remain campaign was responsible for the outcome of the vote, although the doom and gloom will doubtless come to fruition, they should have concentrated on the positive aspects of being a member of the EU.  Nicola Sturgeon said as much - and that they should have learnt from the Scottish independence referendum which could quite easily have gone the other way.

[Grouse]

10 minutes ago, JAG said:

 

I didn't much like Cameron but holding a referendum on the EU was a manifesto pledge wasn't it?  As he won the election then the referendum was inevitable.

 

I rather suspect that the remain campaign were responsible for their own defeat. The doom and gloom campaigning, together with the arrogant style so many employed sank them.

 

Admittedly I am sceptical about the EU, but I remained undecided for the larger part of the debate. One of the things which swung it for me was the sight (and sound) of "Sir""Bob Geldorf and assorted media luvvies shouting abuse at the fishermens protest convoy on the Thames!

 

Delighted that your decision was based upon research and considered thought. See some of the erudite pieces on the other thread. May be interesting? 

[Bannoi]

The breakup of the UK is a distinct possibility.

 

How about a New Union with the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland (or a united Ireland ) Scotland and Wales with it's government in Stormont  staying in the EU.

 

Let Westminster and the English go it alone.

[JAG]

19 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

Delighted that your decision was based upon research and considered thought. See some of the erudite pieces on the other thread. May be interesting? 

 

My decision was based upon many things, the  arrogance  personified by the River Thames antics, and some of the other claims and statements of the remain campaign certainly coloured my reaction to them. I see that you are diligently and consistently continuing that tradition.  I know from reading your posts that you are a europhile,  that doesn't give you a monopoly on valid opinions on Europe. As a professional soldier during the latter years of the cold war and the break up of Former Yugoslavia I spent much of my professional life in Europe, working alongside and at times closely with other European Nations. I am at ease in European countries, and with  their peoples. I speak two European languages, if not to interpreter standard certainly sufficiently well to communicate. The myth that you enthusiastically propogate, that those of us who do not enthuse over the EU and its putative supranational governmental status, are bigoted ultranationalist cretins is just that, a myth, which you seem to clutch at to assuage your disappointment at the British public's rejection of the EU.

[JAG]

7 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

The breakup of the UK is a distinct possibility.

 

How about a New Union with the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland (or a united Ireland ) Scotland and Wales with it's government in Stormont  staying in the EU.

 

Let Westminster and the English go it alone.

 

 

You could call it "The Celtic Fringe"!

[Grouse]

3 minutes ago, JAG said:

 

My decision was based upon many things, the  arrogance  personified by the River Thames antics, and some of the other claims and statements of the remain campaign certainly coloured my reaction to them. I see that you are diligently and consistently continuing that tradition.  I know from reading your posts that you are a europhile,  that doesn't give you a monopoly on valid opinions on Europe. As a professional soldier during the latter years of the cold war and the break up of Former Yugoslavia I spent much of my professional life in Europe, working alongside and at times closely with other European Nations. I am at ease in European countries, and with  their peoples. I speak two European languages, if not to interpreter standard certainly sufficiently well to communicate. The myth that you enthusiastically propogate, that those of us who do not enthuse over the EU and its putative supranational governmental status, are bigoted ultranationalist cretins is just that, a myth, which you seem to clutch at to assuage your disappointment at the British public's rejection of the EU.

 

Actually, I have gone to some trouble NOT to include all the Brexiteers in the numpty camp. Clearly many decided to vote leave after considered thought. It would be interesting to know why you think leaving, with all that implies, against remaining and fixing the undoubted faults from within. Good you speak two languages - not easy to understand the culture without knowing at least some of the language. I have conversational German and Danish. I am disappointed that the majority voted to leave. However, it does not mean that the majority are correct. I feel that UK is now facing mortal danger.

[7by7]

I agree that the Remain campaign concentrated too much on the negatives of leaving and not enough on the positives of remaining.

 

That coupled with the downright lies of some on the Leave side and the ignorance of a proportion of the electorate swung the result Leave's way; just.

 

Lies like the £350 million pound a week claim.

 

Ignorance like the belief held by some Leave voters, fed by people like Farage, that EU membership was responsible for refugees and other non EEA nationals being allowed to enter the UK without any restraint or controls (another lie).

 

It is true that referendums in the UK are not legally binding; Parliament is sovereign and can choose to ignore the result if it so chooses; though it never has. But if May enforced a three line whip on her MPs to vote against Brexit then it would cause a crisis in the Tory party as many pro leave MPs would ignore it and also cause uproar in the country, well those parts which voted to leave, and possibly make the Tories unelectable for the foreseeable future.

 

Almost certainly a defeat in Parliament on such an important matter would result in the government having to resign and thus a General Election.

 

As for the status of the Northern Irish and Welsh assemblies and Scottish parliament; as Jag says, they do not have any power over foreign affairs; these are still solely within the remit of Westminster. However, for May to consult the leaders of all three is a courtesy it would be best not to ignore.

 

44 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

I think that the consitutional crisis, certainly as far as Scotland is concerned, will come from the requirement for the Scottish Government to amend the Scotland Act 1998 to remove the explicit requirement within it that all laws in Scotland be harmonised with EU law.

'O' level British constitution passed nearly 40 years ago does not, of course, make me anywhere near an expert; but having read up on this I have found many articles from those who are experts which state that there is no reason why the Northern Irish and Welsh assemblies and the Scottish Parliament should not harmonise the laws they make in the areas over which they have power with those of the EU after Brexit if they wish to do so.

 

At worst it would require a simple amendment to the relevant Acts to remove the actual requirement that they so do.

 

However, there are as many constitutional experts who disagree!

[7by7]

14 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

The breakup of the UK is a distinct possibility.

 

How about a New Union with the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland (or a united Ireland ) Scotland and Wales with it's government in Stormont  staying in the EU.

 

Let Westminster and the English go it alone.

 

Whilst Northern Ireland, like Scotland, voted to remain, Wales, like England, voted to leave.

 

I doubt that the Scots would want political union with the RoI; those that want to leave the UK want full independence within the EU; not political union with another country.

 

If you asked the Northern Irish whether they wanted to remain part of the UK outside the EU or become part of the RoI within the EU, I very much doubt that the majority would opt for becoming part of the Republic!

 

Whilst the RoI would welcome union with Northern Ireland, after all their constitution used to claim it was part of the Republic, since amended to claiming it once the majority of Northern Irish agree; I doubt that they would want political union with Scotland. Remember where the ancestors of most Northern Irish unionists came from!

[Grouse]

26 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

The breakup of the UK is a distinct possibility.

 

How about a New Union with the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland (or a united Ireland ) Scotland and Wales with it's government in Stormont  staying in the EU.

 

Let Westminster and the English go it alone.

Not a bad idea! Do we have to have Wales?

[MJP]

20 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

Actually, I have gone to some trouble NOT to include all the Brexiteers in the numpty camp. Clearly many decided to vote leave after considered thought. It would be interesting to know why you think leaving, with all that implies, against remaining and fixing the undoubted faults from within. Good you speak two languages - not easy to understand the culture without knowing at least some of the language. I have conversational German and Danish. I am disappointed that the majority voted to leave. However, it does not mean that the majority are correct. I feel that UK is now facing mortal danger.

 

UK's been in mortal danger ever since it decided to rack up a shed load of debt and run the current account and trade deficits it has/does. Last time the UK traded in the black was during the back end of the Major years.

 

I remember Digby Jones stating unequivocally "We buy something from China for a Pound and sell it in the UK for ten Pounds and that's how the UK economy works!"

 

Honestly, all this was inevitable Brexit or no-Brexit.

[JAG]

6 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

Actually, I have gone to some trouble NOT to include all the Brexiteers in the numpty camp. Clearly many decided to vote leave after considered thought. It would be interesting to know why you think leaving, with all that implies, against remaining and fixing the undoubted faults from within. Good you speak two languages - not easy to understand the culture without knowing at least some of the language. I have conversational German and Danish. I am disappointed that the majority voted to leave. However, it does not mean that the majority are correct. I feel that UK is now facing mortal danger.

 

I'm pressed for time i'm afraid but if I can summarise my main reasons for deciding that the UK will in the medium to long term be better off out of the EU.

 

1. I am firmly of the opinion that the financial union which is at the heart of the EU (the Euro) is doomed by the sheer incomparability of the economies which form it. A financial union can only work with fiscal union and that inevitably means political union. Put bluntly, sooner or later the Germans are going to have enough of bailing out the bankrupt southern and western fringes of the union.

 

2. The legal systems of most continental countries are completely different to that of the UK. The inevitable ever closer union will mean that our legal system (common law, jury trial, "habeus corpus") will be superseded by the continental pattern. I am utterly opposed to this.

 

3  I watched a state which was the enforced political union of a number of separate countries and traditions implode. It was a bloody mess. I think that a similar acrimonious falling apart (perhaps not so savage) would be the inevitable result of such a forced union.

 

4. I don't think that the construct that is the EU is capable of meaningful reform. It is run by a self perpetuating group drawn from the professional political classes of the member states. They have transferred their allegiance to this supranational government and will not consider any outside intervention. 

 

These are my reasons for considering that the UK is better off out. For these same reasons I think that the future of the EU is far from rosy. That's why I asked my brother to cast my proxy vote to leave.

 

Mind you, I did rather relish sticking two fingers up to Geldorf and his crew!

 

Got to go.

[Grouse]

7 minutes ago, MJP said:

 

UK's been in mortal danger ever since it decided to rack up a shed load of debt and run the current account and trade deficits it has/does. Last time the UK traded in the black was during the back end of the Major years.

 

I remember Digby Jones stating unequivocally "We buy something from China for a Pound and sell it in the UK for ten Pounds and that's how the UK economy works!"

 

Honestly, all this was inevitable Brexit or no-Brexit.

 

You're not wrong, but I think Brexit exacerbates the situation.

 

Anyway, I've cheered up now because TV is back in colour ?

[MJP]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

 

You're not wrong, but I think Brexit exacerbates the situation.

 

Anyway, I've cheered up now because TV is back in colour ?

 

I think the monochrome was easier on the eye.

 

I agree. But sooner rather than later, that can has been kicked down the end of the QE cul-de-sac now. The banks leaving and taking all their dodginess with them will turn out to be a blessing. Can always start new banks, maybe even with a gold backed currency if Brown hadn't given it all away. 

 

UK has to rebuild, but there again it was always going to have to.

 

Considering kids are coming out of "university" to few job opportunities and in an untrained condition with enormous debts and no chance of affording a home, the place is already shot to bits for the younger generations. When I say affordable homes, I mean reasonable capital debt at a reasonable interest rate. It's a mess.

[Grouse]

11 minutes ago, JAG said:

 

I'm pressed for time i'm afraid but if I can summarise my main reasons for deciding that the UK will in the medium to long term be better off out of the EU.

 

1. I am firmly of the opinion that the financial union which is at the heart of the EU (the Euro) is doomed by the sheer incomparability of the economies which form it. A financial union can only work with fiscal union and that inevitably means political union. Put bluntly, sooner or later the Germans are going to have enough of bailing out the bankrupt southern and western fringes of the union.

 

2. The legal systems of most continental countries are completely different to that of the UK. The inevitable ever closer union will mean that our legal system (common law, jury trial, "habeus corpus") will be superseded by the continental pattern. I am utterly opposed to this.

 

3  I watched a state which was the enforced political union of a number of separate countries and traditions implode. It was a bloody mess. I think that a similar acrimonious falling apart (perhaps not so savage) would be the inevitable result of such a forced union.

 

4. I don't think that the construct that is the EU is capable of meaningful reform. It is run by a self perpetuating group drawn from the professional political classes of the member states. They have transferred their allegiance to this supranational government and will not consider any outside intervention. 

 

These are my reasons for considering that the UK is better off out. For these same reasons I think that the future of the EU is far from rosy. That's why I asked my brother to cast my proxy vote to leave.

 

Mind you, I did rather relish sticking two fingers up to Geldorf and his crew!

 

Got to go.

 

And that, one and all, is exactly why I have been asking for intelligent debate on the issue. Thank you for taking the time!

 

1) I fully agree about the Euro. You would have to have much closer union of economies which is unlikely. It has of course been great for Germany. They have benefitted massively.

 

2) You are correct that we have very different legal systems which could never merge.

 

3) I don't really know the specific reason why Yugoslavia blew apart. I'll read up on it.....

 

4) Now I do think Brussels could, and indeed still can, be strong armed by the grown ups Germany, UK, Netherlands, Denmark, Finland, and others. Right from the start there were major differences about the degree of integration that was possible or desirable.

 

I still hope we can find a sensible solution to all this ?

 

I will I'll happily join you in a two finger salute to Geldof any time. Way past his sell by date.

[MJP]

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

And that, one and all, is exactly why I have been asking for intelligent debate on the issue. Thank you for taking the time!

 

1) I fully agree about the Euro. You would have to have much closer union of economies which is unlikely. It has of course been great for Germany. They have benefitted massively.

 

2) You are correct that we have very different legal systems which could never merge.

 

3) I don't really know the specific reason why Yugoslavia blew apart. I'll read up on it.....

 

4) Now I do think Brussels could, and indeed still can, be strong armed by the grown ups Germany, UK, Netherlands, Denmark, Finland, and others. Right from the start there were major differences about the degree of integration that was possible or desirable.

 

I still hope we can find a sensible solution to all this ?

 

I will I'll happily join you in a two finger salute to Geldof any time. Way past his sell by date.

 

Someone described the Euro to me the other day as "the Deutsche Mark in drag".

Edited October 24, 2016 by MJP

[CharlieK]

So the EU will accept 3 countries that will be net receiver's of EU funds after the UK have left? I don't think so. Though I am sure they will use it a lever against the UK!  Still England wouldn't need to fund Wales Scotland or N ireland if they were out of the UK. It's not going to happen 

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, JAG said:

I was under the impression that the devolution settlements left competence and authority in foreign affairs in the hands of the Westminster (UK) Government. There is no constitutional requirement to consult them, although as so often with our "unwritten constitution" it is pragmatic, reasonable and courteous to do so.

 

Given that the most vociferous (and largest) of the devolved administrations has already stated that it opposes leaving the EU, one must conclude that any agreement will involve rejecting the decision of the electorate, as presented in the referendum result. 

 

That I suggest would be a massive constitutional crisis.

 

You are right. It's actually somewhere between being courteous and seen to be reasonable and pandering to the self important egos of some leaders. Sturgeon rants, demands, threatens and claims things like she could veto Brexit (even suggesting May told her so), that Scotland would be welcome to stay in the EU (even though Tusk and other EU leaders made it clear that isn't the case) and ignores the fact more Scots voted to remain part of the UK than remain in EU. But that's her one agenda, and she she won't give up being as divisive as possible to try and further her one goal which is Scottish independence at any cost. 

 

The real issue is May's continued assertion she can simply use the Royal, really government, Prerogative rather than subject the referendum result to parliament for debating and approval or rejection.

 

She knows parliament are likely to over turn the referendum result, which would bring her short lived government down as there would be massive calls for a general election. An election fought on EU membership would split the Tories beyond repair. She will do anything to try to avoid either.

 

Most law experts commentating on the on-going trial challenging the government's right to by pass parliament see it as a serious threat to the UK's parliamentary process and further erosion of parliamentary powers. 

 

This is already a constitutional crisis whatever happens now. All brought about by the arrogant Cameron and his cronies who never dreamed they'd loose. Badly thought out process left to simple majority winner takes all and no plan what so ever for implementing a leave decision. Now those same Tories, plus or minus one or two, are trying to circumvent parliament to protect their own political party and their governments life span. 

 

Sturgeon isn't interested in the UK - she wants to destroy it and can't be trusted. The Welsh and Northern Irish leaders seem less self important and media seeking.  The Tories simply want to rule and now aren't even bothered about parliamentary process.

 

It really is a shambles with the lunatics running the asylum. 

 

 

[MJP]

Dear Fellows!

 

Tis' gonna be a long hard road to re-balancing the economy, but it can and shall and must be done. Admittedly this is before we've actually had the Brexit, but fingers crossed, eh?

 

Manufacturing exports boosted by pound

 

Quote

Manufacturing exports have received a significant boost from the weakness of sterling, according to the the latest report from the CBI.
The Industrial Trends Survey showed that export volumes grew that their fastest pace for two and a half years in the three months to October.
The pound has fallen by nearly a fifth against the dollar since the EU referendum at the end of June.
Export orders are expected to rise further over the next three months.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37748667