Tag Archives: Article 50

Britain, Government, Politics, Scotland

Scotland: Formal request to hold second independence referendum

SCOTLAND: BREXIT

A letter from Nicola Sturgeon formally requesting transfer of powers to hold a second Scottish independence referendum has been delivered to Downing Street.

The Section 30 letter penned by Scotland’s First Minister was dispatched to Prime Minister Theresa May on Friday morning.

MSPs voted by 69 to 59 this week in favour of seeking permission for an independence referendum to take place between autumn 2018 and spring 2019.

The letter said: “In these very changed circumstances, the people of Scotland must have the right to choose our own future – in short, to exercise our right of self determination.”

The UK Government has said it will decline the request, with Mrs May repeatedly stating “now is not the time” for another vote on the issue.

However, Ms Sturgeon has said her mandate for another vote is ”beyond question” and is pressing ahead with a formal approach for a Section 30 order – the mechanism for the powers to hold a referendum.

Ms Sturgeon said leaving the EU and the single market would have “enormous implications” for schools, hospitals, jobs and investment in Scotland.

In a video message posted by the Scottish Government on Twitter, she said: “The next two years are hugely important for Scotland because they will determine the kind of country we’ll become.

“That’s why I have today written to the UK Government to ensure that we can make that choice when the time is right to accept Brexit or instead become an independent country.

“I don’t take for granted how people would vote when that choice comes but I hope we can all agree that the future of our country is our choice.”

She added: “The Prime Minister has indicated that she intends to ignore the will of the Scottish Parliament and seek to prevent people in Scotland having that choice.

“If the Westminster government continues to hold that line, it will go against the very foundations of devolution.

“So, I hope the Prime Minister changes her mind and acknowledges that the people of Scotland are entitled to a choice at a time and in a way that is right for Scotland.

“However, if she doesn’t, as I expect she won’t, at least not yet, I will come back to the Scottish Parliament in a few weeks’ time with an update on how we’re going to move forward to ensure that the people of Scotland are able to choose our future when we have the information we need both about Brexit and about independence, and while there is still time to take a different path.”

In the letter to Mrs May, Ms Sturgeon said there appeared to be “no rational reason” for the UK Government to “stand in the way of the will of the Scottish Parliament”, adding: “I hope you will not do so.”

She continued: “However, in anticipation of your refusal to enter into discussions at this stage, it is important for me to be clear about my position.

“It is my firm view that the mandate of the Scottish Parliament must be respected and progressed. The question is not if, but how.

“I hope that will be by constructive discussion between our Governments. However, if that is not yet possible, I will set out to the Scottish Parliament the steps I intend to take to ensure that progress is made towards a referendum.”

Around 62% of Scottish voters backed the UK remaining part of the EU in June 2016 and the SNP manifesto for last year’s Holyrood elections said another ballot on independence should take place if there were a ”material change in circumstances” from the previous ballot in 2014.

The example cited was for Scotland to be removed from the EU against its wishes.

Scottish Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat politicians oppose another referendum.

Standard
Britain, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

The sinister tone for Brexit has been set with security warning

BREXIT

Most people would have expected Prime Minister Theresa May to strike a conciliatory tone following the invoking of Article 50. Despite being one of the most significant junctures in British political history, the record indicates that she took the opposite stance.

On a day when Mrs May should have reached out to Europe, she instead issued a thinly veiled threat by raising the spectre of weakened security relations post Brexit.

Any failure to reach agreement between the UK and EU, she said, ‘would mean our co-operation in the fight against crime and terrorism would be weakened.’

In her letter to Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, which contained no fewer than 11 references to security issues, she added: ‘In this kind of scenario, both the United Kingdom and the European Union would of course cope with the change, but it is not the outcome that either side should seek.’

While there can be little doubt that Britain’s security and military apparatus – coupled with its close ties with U.S. intelligence agencies – is the envy of Europe, such remarks were felt as being ill-judged. In some EU countries, such as Belgium and France, who have a reasonably friendly relationship with the UK, and who have borne the brunt of terror attacks in recent years, Mrs May’s remarks risk being seen as crass and insensitive.

If, as seems to be the case, she sincerely believes trading security for prosperity is an acceptable opening salvo in what will be long and torturous negotiations, her reading of the situation is clumsy and damaging. There will be many across Europe, as well as here in the UK, who will clearly see it that way.

Terrorism, as the west well knows, does not respect borders or constitutions, and whatever form the UK’s future relationship with the EU takes, working closely with our European neighbours will be fundamental to tackling a global problem.

As Tim Farron, leader of the Liberal Democrats, pointed out: ‘Security is too important to be used as a bargaining chip and this will backfire in any negotiations, which rather than building up alliances will leave Britain even more isolated.’

After widespread criticism of Ms May’s letter, Downing Street attempted to backtrack, insisting it referred only to security arrangements agreed via the EU, such as the European Arrest Warrant and Europol.

But by then, the damage had been done. Less than 24 hours after Article 50 was triggered, the UK finds itself on the back foot and a needlessly aggressive tone has been set.

Given the hostile contents of Ms May’s letter, the frosty reception on the continent was entirely predictable. A sombre-looking Mr Tusk delivered his own farewell message to the UK. ‘We already miss you,’ he said. ‘Thank you and goodbye.’ If nothing else, it was a remark which ought to impress upon British negotiators that Mr Tusk’s considerable armoury includes sarcasm.

The next two years will shape Britain’s future standing in the world. This week’s developments may be symbolic in more ways than one.

Standard
Britain, Government, Politics, Scotland

The Great Repeal Bill

UNITED KINGDOM

GRB

The Great Repeal Bill will mean the UK is no longer bound by the European Court of Justice

Following the triggering of Article 50 by Theresa May, another Brexit battle is looming in the form of the government’s Great Repeal Bill. This will involve converting all EU legislation into UK law and will be proposed in a white paper.

Research, however, has shown as many as 52,741 separate relevant pieces have been passed since 1990.

The huge scale of unravelling the legal mountain – including more than 6,700 new laws applying in the UK since 2010 alone – has prompted warnings that any “bonfire of these regulations” will be a tortuous and complex process.

The Great Repeal Bill is not appropriately named and really should be titled the great repatriation bill, because, initially at least, the legislation will repeal very little.

The bill’s initial purpose is to place the entire body of existing EU law on to the UK statute books, giving parliament the power to amend and repeal them in the future, once the UK formally leaves the EU.

The bill will be introduced in the next Queen’s Speech, and will then have to pass through parliament for ratification. The plan is for it to be passed ahead of the UK’s exit from the EU but to become law only on the date of departure.

The devolved administrations in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales could yet scupper the timetable. The government has suggested their consent will be required, as the bill will have implications in areas for which they are responsible.

Scotland’s Brexit minister has warned that Holyrood could take action if its interests are not represented in the negotiations.

The UK government says this could have “very significant consequences”, leaving “a hole in our law”.

A minimum of seven new bills will need to pass through parliament in order to deliver Brexit, although the final number could be as high as 15, according to the Institute for Government. That will leave “precious little space” for other business, the institute’s director of research has said.

To give a sense of the task at hand, about 20 new pieces of government legislation are normally unveiled during the Queen’s speech.

Standard