The key word there is PARLIAMENT. Parliament pass laws and the courts uphold them.

The court is saying that the GOVERNMENT (May & her ministers) can't do it alone and must let Parliament have their say on Brexit, similar to the process for passing laws. It's got nothing to do with the courts telling Parliament what to do.

I fully agree with the ruling too. There's no change to what's ultimately going to happen, which is the UK leaving the EU, but surely going through Parliament is the more democratic way to do it?

Whilst I might agree that Parliament is the appropriate democratic tool, what happens if a pro remain Parliament filibusters the life out of the democratic process so that we end up with nothing, or a Brexit Lite solution overturning the sprit of Brexit that was contained within the referendum?

I understand that arguments will be and have been had regarding the 'great unwashed' not knowing what was on the table and what is good for them but I just don't buy it sounds like a stitch to me. After all if they say that we didn't have the information to make an informed choice who's fault is that?

What the eff is that?

Yep, it's fallen by 0.05% as I type, as opposed to it dropping by 10% straight after the Brexit vote.

Parliament as I understand it is there to represent the electorate? The referendum represented Parliament delegating the decision up to the electorate. The electorate voted out and so Parliament has no reason to debate the issue in my view. That said, if they try to overturn it there will no doubt be serious civil unrest and Parliament may cease to be in its present form.

I dont think there is anything whatsoever to worry about.
Brexit will go through parliament no problem and at least there may be some debate about how this change may affect the country, which is absolutely right.
The alternative was for an unelected prime minister, with HER cabinet, doing whatever they wanted, which was just wrong.
There is no way that Brexit will not happen and after all, the "style" of Brexit was never talked about or agreed by anyone, just that we would exit the EU.
And IF that fails, people can get rid of their local MP, who has an obligation to carry out their constituents' wishes.

No point getting excited, it's part of the British democracy, the thing that everyone voted for.

Just keep your fingers crossed that their cant be an appeal later on to the European court ??

As you asked so 'nicely' I will try and respond, before you stop wetting yourself for no good reason.

I understand that there is no such thing as the 'spirit' of Brexit, and it would probably be easier to explain if we were having a chat over a beer, although I'm not so sure that I could be bothered given your response, but, it was an attempt to establish that there must have been some shared understanding of what the leave voters were trying to achieve at a fundamental level?

There isn't, or shouldn't be 17 plus million versions, or ideas of leaving and what I was trying to say was a pro remain Parliamentary group should deliver what is in the national interest, but, in the frame of reference that we as a nation had voted out and not dilute it so much that it rendered the referendum a waste of time.

I used the term "spirit" because I wouldn't be so arrogant to assume that my idea of Brexit was the same as yours, or anyone else's. Those fundamentals might be sovereignty, the control of borders, ever closer steps towards a federal Europe.

I think that as we voted out we should get out in a Mickey Flanagan sense....Out, Out. The government should negotiate the best terms possible and not go half cock for example because their idea of national interest says access to the free market is the fundamental that dictates that we can never really leave.

Just my opinion rightly, or wrongly

You do realise that the referendum was advisory, as opposed to the referendum in 2011 regarding a change to the electoral system.



Yeah, but thankfully, that's just your view.




No doubt if the other half of the Country threatened civil unrest you would be outraged, remember, less than half of U.K. citizens voted to leave the E.U.

Well the people have advised and so Parliament must follow. No real difference is there?

Yes, my view but all the debating in the world is pointless as the only way to leave is leave and EU won't allow us equivalent terms to now. The stupidity surrounding this issue is astonishing. How can anybody lay out the clear oath than certain vexatious politicians suggest when in reality the government must negotiate hard with 27 other parties or whatever the number is this week?

As to the other half of the country, that could apply to any election / vote. They need to grin and bear it or go and live in a different democracy, dictatorship or theocracy of their choosing? I would suggest Iran.

and even less voted to remain.

Regarding your first point, Wikipedia states that the government issued a leaflet saying that "This is your decision the government will implement what you decide"