If the government illegally doesn't ask for article 50 extension, can parliament do it instead?What happens if Parliament rejects the Brexit deal?“The Treaties” in article 50 of the Lisbon TreatyWhat's the point in holding a second Brexit referendum?Is EU Treaty Article 50 (2) paradoxical?Why is participating in the European Parliamentary elections used as a threat?Why is an extension of Article 50 needed if a deal gets accepted?What is the maximum sanction that can be placed on a UK government or PM for acting illegallyWhen does the European Scrutiny Committee get involved in the legislative process?If Parliament were prorogued for a long period, how would the government raise funds?Could the UK amend the European Withdrawal Act and revoke the Article 50 invocation?
Polarity of gas discharge tubes?
How can I store milk for long periods of time?
Using font to highlight a god's speech in dialogue
How would a disabled person earn their living in a medieval-type town?
Could these polynomials be identified?
D Scale Question
Calculate Landau's function
How to find better food in airports
Correct way of simplifying the result of an integral
Is Chuck the Evil Sandwich Making Guy's head actually a sandwich?
Given a specific computer system, is it possible to estimate the actual precise run time of a piece of Assembly code
How can I portray a character with no fear of death, without them sounding utterly bored?
The Justice Thought & System & its Morals?
Are there balance issues when allowing attack of opportunity against any creature?
Divide Numbers by 0
Cheap oscilloscope showing 16 MHz square wave
How secure are public hashed passwords (with a salt)?
Why is Mitch McConnell blocking nominees to the Federal Election Commission?
Displaying Time in HH:MM Format
Am I required to correct my opponent's assumptions about my morph creatures?
Would someone mind just getting me started with my Russian homework?
How do I get my neighbour to stop disturbing with loud music?
Could a simple hospital oxygen mask protect from aerosol poison?
Is Borg adaptation only temporary?
If the government illegally doesn't ask for article 50 extension, can parliament do it instead?
What happens if Parliament rejects the Brexit deal?“The Treaties” in article 50 of the Lisbon TreatyWhat's the point in holding a second Brexit referendum?Is EU Treaty Article 50 (2) paradoxical?Why is participating in the European Parliamentary elections used as a threat?Why is an extension of Article 50 needed if a deal gets accepted?What is the maximum sanction that can be placed on a UK government or PM for acting illegallyWhen does the European Scrutiny Committee get involved in the legislative process?If Parliament were prorogued for a long period, how would the government raise funds?Could the UK amend the European Withdrawal Act and revoke the Article 50 invocation?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
The Guardian reported under the headline "Brexit: Gove refuses to rule out ignoring any law passed to stop no deal":
Michael Gove has repeatedly refused to rule out the possibility that the government could ignore any law passed by parliament to stop a no-deal Brexit
and
Asked again whether it would be extraordinary for a government not to abide by the law, Gove said: “We will see what the legislation says when it is brought forward.
Concerning extensions, all I found out is the actual article1 reading
- The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
(emphasis mine)
doesn't specify how extensions are requested, in fact, it doesn't even say anything about a request, just "in agreement with the Member State".
So, the final question:
If the parliament were to pass legislation mandating extension and the government refuses to ask the European Council, can one of these happen:
- the EU just says: "Well, parliament said it, so the UK want to extend, we'll decide if we want to as well"
- parliament (possibly through some representative e.g. speaker) decides to ask themselves
Please don't question if practically the Council could agree internally at short notice, just assume it could happen.
If you want, I'd be happy to see information on whether such an extension without government involvement would practically work, although that is not the primary question.
1 link doesn't go to the treaty, but European Parliament research (including article 50 on page 2) because it was the top it provides context and further reading in case anyone is interested.europa.eu search result
united-kingdom european-union brexit parliament article-50
asked 8 hours ago
user24343user24343
3112 silver badges6 bronze badges
add a comment |
The Guardian reported under the headline "Brexit: Gove refuses to rule out ignoring any law passed to stop no deal":
Michael Gove has repeatedly refused to rule out the possibility that the government could ignore any law passed by parliament to stop a no-deal Brexit
and
Asked again whether it would be extraordinary for a government not to abide by the law, Gove said: “We will see what the legislation says when it is brought forward.
Concerning extensions, all I found out is the actual article1 reading
- The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
(emphasis mine)
doesn't specify how extensions are requested, in fact, it doesn't even say anything about a request, just "in agreement with the Member State".
So, the final question:
If the parliament were to pass legislation mandating extension and the government refuses to ask the European Council, can one of these happen:
- the EU just says: "Well, parliament said it, so the UK want to extend, we'll decide if we want to as well"
- parliament (possibly through some representative e.g. speaker) decides to ask themselves
Please don't question if practically the Council could agree internally at short notice, just assume it could happen.
If you want, I'd be happy to see information on whether such an extension without government involvement would practically work, although that is not the primary question.
1 link doesn't go to the treaty, but European Parliament research (including article 50 on page 2) because it was the top it provides context and further reading in case anyone is interested.europa.eu search result
united-kingdom european-union brexit parliament article-50
asked 8 hours ago
user24343user24343
3112 silver badges6 bronze badges
1
The Supreme Court is increasingly being asked to rule on issues of this kind - such as the action being brought by Gina Miller and Sir John Major next week. As British politicians begin to shun convention, which has historically governed our country, I foresee a new body of competence building with the SC to deal with such matters as this.
– WS2
6 hours ago
add a comment |
The Guardian reported under the headline "Brexit: Gove refuses to rule out ignoring any law passed to stop no deal":
Michael Gove has repeatedly refused to rule out the possibility that the government could ignore any law passed by parliament to stop a no-deal Brexit
and
Asked again whether it would be extraordinary for a government not to abide by the law, Gove said: “We will see what the legislation says when it is brought forward.
Concerning extensions, all I found out is the actual article1 reading
- The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
(emphasis mine)
doesn't specify how extensions are requested, in fact, it doesn't even say anything about a request, just "in agreement with the Member State".
So, the final question:
If the parliament were to pass legislation mandating extension and the government refuses to ask the European Council, can one of these happen:
- the EU just says: "Well, parliament said it, so the UK want to extend, we'll decide if we want to as well"
- parliament (possibly through some representative e.g. speaker) decides to ask themselves
Please don't question if practically the Council could agree internally at short notice, just assume it could happen.
If you want, I'd be happy to see information on whether such an extension without government involvement would practically work, although that is not the primary question.
1 link doesn't go to the treaty, but European Parliament research (including article 50 on page 2) because it was the top it provides context and further reading in case anyone is interested.europa.eu search result
united-kingdom european-union brexit parliament article-50
asked 8 hours ago
user24343user24343
3112 silver badges6 bronze badges
The Guardian reported under the headline "Brexit: Gove refuses to rule out ignoring any law passed to stop no deal":
Michael Gove has repeatedly refused to rule out the possibility that the government could ignore any law passed by parliament to stop a no-deal Brexit
and
Asked again whether it would be extraordinary for a government not to abide by the law, Gove said: “We will see what the legislation says when it is brought forward.
Concerning extensions, all I found out is the actual article1 reading
- The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
(emphasis mine)
doesn't specify how extensions are requested, in fact, it doesn't even say anything about a request, just "in agreement with the Member State".
So, the final question:
If the parliament were to pass legislation mandating extension and the government refuses to ask the European Council, can one of these happen:
- the EU just says: "Well, parliament said it, so the UK want to extend, we'll decide if we want to as well"
- parliament (possibly through some representative e.g. speaker) decides to ask themselves
Please don't question if practically the Council could agree internally at short notice, just assume it could happen.
If you want, I'd be happy to see information on whether such an extension without government involvement would practically work, although that is not the primary question.
1 link doesn't go to the treaty, but European Parliament research (including article 50 on page 2) because it was the top it provides context and further reading in case anyone is interested.europa.eu search result
united-kingdom european-union brexit parliament article-50
united-kingdom european-union brexit parliament article-50
asked 8 hours ago
user24343user24343
3112 silver badges6 bronze badges
asked 8 hours ago
user24343user24343
3112 silver badges6 bronze badges
edited 8 hours ago
user24343
asked 8 hours ago
user24343user24343
3112 silver badges6 bronze badges
asked 8 hours ago
user24343user24343
3112 silver badges6 bronze badges
asked 8 hours ago
user24343user24343
3112 silver badges6 bronze badges
3112 silver badges6 bronze badges
1
The Supreme Court is increasingly being asked to rule on issues of this kind - such as the action being brought by Gina Miller and Sir John Major next week. As British politicians begin to shun convention, which has historically governed our country, I foresee a new body of competence building with the SC to deal with such matters as this.
– WS2
6 hours ago
add a comment |
1
The Supreme Court is increasingly being asked to rule on issues of this kind - such as the action being brought by Gina Miller and Sir John Major next week. As British politicians begin to shun convention, which has historically governed our country, I foresee a new body of competence building with the SC to deal with such matters as this.
– WS2
6 hours ago
1
1
The Supreme Court is increasingly being asked to rule on issues of this kind - such as the action being brought by Gina Miller and Sir John Major next week. As British politicians begin to shun convention, which has historically governed our country, I foresee a new body of competence building with the SC to deal with such matters as this.
– WS2
6 hours ago
The Supreme Court is increasingly being asked to rule on issues of this kind - such as the action being brought by Gina Miller and Sir John Major next week. As British politicians begin to shun convention, which has historically governed our country, I foresee a new body of competence building with the SC to deal with such matters as this.
– WS2
6 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Probably not.
Article 10 of the Treaty of the European Union states that:
Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government
It follows, therefore, that any notification made to the European Council must come from either the relevant country's Head of State or Head of Government. In the case of the United Kingdom, it would have to come from either Boris Johnson (as head of government) or HM The Queen (as head of state).
answered 8 hours ago
Joe CJoe C
6,66913 silver badges44 bronze badges
Thank you for your answer. I'll wait a bit before accepting, just in case something can be added, although this seems quite final.
– user24343
7 hours ago
Surely it cannot be Article 10, can it? Article 10 is the one dealing with freedom of the press.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@user24343 Perhaps I'm thinking of Article 10 of the Human Rights Convention. Apologies.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@WS2 That is indeed Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights that you're thinking of.
– Joe C
5 hours ago
1
(+1) It's also a general principle of international law and diplomacy. Countries are represented by their executive and diplomatic service, with other countries deliberately avoiding meddling with internal constitutional processes (responsibilities within the cabinet, negotiation mandates, ratification procedures for treaties, etc.) unless there is a complete breakdown of the constitutional order (think rival governments, government in exile and the like).
– Relaxed
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
The correct thing to do in such a case is to call a vote of no confidence, and topple the government. Parliment can then give it's confidence to someone who will make that request
However, given that parliament taken as a whole has shown an aversion so far to actually voting for anything definitive, rather choosing to just put spokes in the wheels of other plans, it is debatable if they would go down the correct route or just panic at an even later stage.
answered 3 hours ago
OrangesandlemonsOrangesandlemons
2,7726 silver badges22 bronze badges
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "475"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f44159%2fif-the-government-illegally-doesnt-ask-for-article-50-extension-can-parliament%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Probably not.
Article 10 of the Treaty of the European Union states that:
Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government
It follows, therefore, that any notification made to the European Council must come from either the relevant country's Head of State or Head of Government. In the case of the United Kingdom, it would have to come from either Boris Johnson (as head of government) or HM The Queen (as head of state).
answered 8 hours ago
Joe CJoe C
6,66913 silver badges44 bronze badges
Thank you for your answer. I'll wait a bit before accepting, just in case something can be added, although this seems quite final.
– user24343
7 hours ago
Surely it cannot be Article 10, can it? Article 10 is the one dealing with freedom of the press.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@user24343 Perhaps I'm thinking of Article 10 of the Human Rights Convention. Apologies.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@WS2 That is indeed Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights that you're thinking of.
– Joe C
5 hours ago
1
(+1) It's also a general principle of international law and diplomacy. Countries are represented by their executive and diplomatic service, with other countries deliberately avoiding meddling with internal constitutional processes (responsibilities within the cabinet, negotiation mandates, ratification procedures for treaties, etc.) unless there is a complete breakdown of the constitutional order (think rival governments, government in exile and the like).
– Relaxed
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Probably not.
Article 10 of the Treaty of the European Union states that:
Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government
It follows, therefore, that any notification made to the European Council must come from either the relevant country's Head of State or Head of Government. In the case of the United Kingdom, it would have to come from either Boris Johnson (as head of government) or HM The Queen (as head of state).
answered 8 hours ago
Joe CJoe C
6,66913 silver badges44 bronze badges
Thank you for your answer. I'll wait a bit before accepting, just in case something can be added, although this seems quite final.
– user24343
7 hours ago
Surely it cannot be Article 10, can it? Article 10 is the one dealing with freedom of the press.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@user24343 Perhaps I'm thinking of Article 10 of the Human Rights Convention. Apologies.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@WS2 That is indeed Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights that you're thinking of.
– Joe C
5 hours ago
1
(+1) It's also a general principle of international law and diplomacy. Countries are represented by their executive and diplomatic service, with other countries deliberately avoiding meddling with internal constitutional processes (responsibilities within the cabinet, negotiation mandates, ratification procedures for treaties, etc.) unless there is a complete breakdown of the constitutional order (think rival governments, government in exile and the like).
– Relaxed
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Probably not.
Article 10 of the Treaty of the European Union states that:
Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government
It follows, therefore, that any notification made to the European Council must come from either the relevant country's Head of State or Head of Government. In the case of the United Kingdom, it would have to come from either Boris Johnson (as head of government) or HM The Queen (as head of state).
answered 8 hours ago
Joe CJoe C
6,66913 silver badges44 bronze badges
Probably not.
Article 10 of the Treaty of the European Union states that:
Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government
It follows, therefore, that any notification made to the European Council must come from either the relevant country's Head of State or Head of Government. In the case of the United Kingdom, it would have to come from either Boris Johnson (as head of government) or HM The Queen (as head of state).
answered 8 hours ago
Joe CJoe C
6,66913 silver badges44 bronze badges
answered 8 hours ago
Joe CJoe C
6,66913 silver badges44 bronze badges
answered 8 hours ago
Joe CJoe C
6,66913 silver badges44 bronze badges
answered 8 hours ago
Joe CJoe C
6,66913 silver badges44 bronze badges
6,66913 silver badges44 bronze badges
Thank you for your answer. I'll wait a bit before accepting, just in case something can be added, although this seems quite final.
– user24343
7 hours ago
Surely it cannot be Article 10, can it? Article 10 is the one dealing with freedom of the press.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@user24343 Perhaps I'm thinking of Article 10 of the Human Rights Convention. Apologies.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@WS2 That is indeed Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights that you're thinking of.
– Joe C
5 hours ago
1
(+1) It's also a general principle of international law and diplomacy. Countries are represented by their executive and diplomatic service, with other countries deliberately avoiding meddling with internal constitutional processes (responsibilities within the cabinet, negotiation mandates, ratification procedures for treaties, etc.) unless there is a complete breakdown of the constitutional order (think rival governments, government in exile and the like).
– Relaxed
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Thank you for your answer. I'll wait a bit before accepting, just in case something can be added, although this seems quite final.
– user24343
7 hours ago
Surely it cannot be Article 10, can it? Article 10 is the one dealing with freedom of the press.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@user24343 Perhaps I'm thinking of Article 10 of the Human Rights Convention. Apologies.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@WS2 That is indeed Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights that you're thinking of.
– Joe C
5 hours ago
1
(+1) It's also a general principle of international law and diplomacy. Countries are represented by their executive and diplomatic service, with other countries deliberately avoiding meddling with internal constitutional processes (responsibilities within the cabinet, negotiation mandates, ratification procedures for treaties, etc.) unless there is a complete breakdown of the constitutional order (think rival governments, government in exile and the like).
– Relaxed
5 hours ago
Thank you for your answer. I'll wait a bit before accepting, just in case something can be added, although this seems quite final.
– user24343
7 hours ago
Thank you for your answer. I'll wait a bit before accepting, just in case something can be added, although this seems quite final.
– user24343
7 hours ago
Surely it cannot be Article 10, can it? Article 10 is the one dealing with freedom of the press.
– WS2
6 hours ago
Surely it cannot be Article 10, can it? Article 10 is the one dealing with freedom of the press.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@user24343 Perhaps I'm thinking of Article 10 of the Human Rights Convention. Apologies.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@user24343 Perhaps I'm thinking of Article 10 of the Human Rights Convention. Apologies.
– WS2
6 hours ago
@WS2 That is indeed Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights that you're thinking of.
– Joe C
5 hours ago
@WS2 That is indeed Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights that you're thinking of.
– Joe C
5 hours ago
1
1
(+1) It's also a general principle of international law and diplomacy. Countries are represented by their executive and diplomatic service, with other countries deliberately avoiding meddling with internal constitutional processes (responsibilities within the cabinet, negotiation mandates, ratification procedures for treaties, etc.) unless there is a complete breakdown of the constitutional order (think rival governments, government in exile and the like).
– Relaxed
5 hours ago
(+1) It's also a general principle of international law and diplomacy. Countries are represented by their executive and diplomatic service, with other countries deliberately avoiding meddling with internal constitutional processes (responsibilities within the cabinet, negotiation mandates, ratification procedures for treaties, etc.) unless there is a complete breakdown of the constitutional order (think rival governments, government in exile and the like).
– Relaxed
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
The correct thing to do in such a case is to call a vote of no confidence, and topple the government. Parliment can then give it's confidence to someone who will make that request
However, given that parliament taken as a whole has shown an aversion so far to actually voting for anything definitive, rather choosing to just put spokes in the wheels of other plans, it is debatable if they would go down the correct route or just panic at an even later stage.
answered 3 hours ago
OrangesandlemonsOrangesandlemons
2,7726 silver badges22 bronze badges
add a comment |
The correct thing to do in such a case is to call a vote of no confidence, and topple the government. Parliment can then give it's confidence to someone who will make that request
However, given that parliament taken as a whole has shown an aversion so far to actually voting for anything definitive, rather choosing to just put spokes in the wheels of other plans, it is debatable if they would go down the correct route or just panic at an even later stage.
answered 3 hours ago
OrangesandlemonsOrangesandlemons
2,7726 silver badges22 bronze badges
add a comment |
The correct thing to do in such a case is to call a vote of no confidence, and topple the government. Parliment can then give it's confidence to someone who will make that request
However, given that parliament taken as a whole has shown an aversion so far to actually voting for anything definitive, rather choosing to just put spokes in the wheels of other plans, it is debatable if they would go down the correct route or just panic at an even later stage.
answered 3 hours ago
OrangesandlemonsOrangesandlemons
2,7726 silver badges22 bronze badges
The correct thing to do in such a case is to call a vote of no confidence, and topple the government. Parliment can then give it's confidence to someone who will make that request
However, given that parliament taken as a whole has shown an aversion so far to actually voting for anything definitive, rather choosing to just put spokes in the wheels of other plans, it is debatable if they would go down the correct route or just panic at an even later stage.
answered 3 hours ago
OrangesandlemonsOrangesandlemons
2,7726 silver badges22 bronze badges
answered 3 hours ago
OrangesandlemonsOrangesandlemons
2,7726 silver badges22 bronze badges
answered 3 hours ago
OrangesandlemonsOrangesandlemons
2,7726 silver badges22 bronze badges
answered 3 hours ago
OrangesandlemonsOrangesandlemons
2,7726 silver badges22 bronze badges
2,7726 silver badges22 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f44159%2fif-the-government-illegally-doesnt-ask-for-article-50-extension-can-parliament%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
The Supreme Court is increasingly being asked to rule on issues of this kind - such as the action being brought by Gina Miller and Sir John Major next week. As British politicians begin to shun convention, which has historically governed our country, I foresee a new body of competence building with the SC to deal with such matters as this.
– WS2
6 hours ago