I am sure we have all heard the news: Prospect of early general election increases after High Court rules Government cannot trigger Article 50 without parliamentary approvalProspect of early general election increases after High Court rules Government cannot trigger Article 50 without parliamentary approval.
Betrayal is the first word that passed my lips in the office as I read this at lunchtime, a little bit behind the curve of events.

Brendan Chilton of Labour Leave said:
“The British people voted by a clear majority to leave the European Union. Labour Leave stands with the 17.4 million leave voters. We will fight for your democratic rights and to safeguard the outcome of the June 23rd vote. We voted to leave the European Union and Labour Leave will do everything it can to ensure that we do indeed leave.”
Not often I agree with something a Labourite says.

Nigel Farage’s on it comment was:
“I worry that a betrayal may be near at hand. Last night at the Spectator Parliamentary Awards I had a distinct feeling that our political class, who were out in force, do not accept the 23rd of June Referendum result. I now fear that every attempt will be made to block or delay the triggering of Article 50. If this is so, they have no idea of the level of public anger they will provoke.”

Nigel used the same word I did. But, who is the main betrayer in all this? Let’s start with that woman in the video on the Telegraph live feed, Gina Miller, the anti-Brexit campaigner who is leading the campaign against the government, is most definitely a traitor to the British people.
“It appears this woman is a George Soros sock puppet.The True and Fair Foundation run by Gina Miller has a trusteeship. That trusteeship is with the ‘Philanthropy impact’, it says ‘Inspiring philanthropy and social investment across borders, sectors and causes’. Guess who runs ‘Philanthropy impact’?Yes, you got it: George Soros. True and Fair Ms Miller, this clearly shows the connection to Philanthropy impact.”

We all know that George Soros is a traitor to the whole civilized human race with his anti-nationalistic desires, campaigns and subversions.

And the Judges, what about them? The Express has dug into their background and found that Baron Thomas of Cwmgiedd – the UK’s Lord Chief Justice was a founding member of the European Law Institute, which says it works towards the “enhancement of European legal integration”. There’s a smoking gun if ever I saw one.

What about Theresa May and her government? In announcing the Referendum, this government said in its £9 million taxpayer-funded leaflet:
“The government will implement your decision.”

So, this at the very least gives the lie to that statement, although it was Cameron who made that declaration, not her.
What about the Court? There are many who will argue that they are the betrayers, ignoring the wishes of a majority of the people, ignoring the separation of the executive, judiciary and executive.

However, there is a counter argument that says it is a matter of law, and not of politics. Article 50 sets out that the withdrawal from the EU has to be consistent with the individual member state’s constitution. The UK does not have a written constitution, and so this had to be determined by the Courts, who are absolutely right to conclude that our Parliamentary democracy trumps executive control and this is consistent with the 2010 Constitutional Reform and Governance Act. You could also argue that it was a Parliamentary vote that ratified the referendum and so it is only right and proper that a parliamentary vote should ratify the second step.

But, the counter-counter-argument goes, is not that Supreme Court itself subordinate to the European Court, and is this a case of the EU effectively influencing an internal discussion? We could go round and round in circles on the nefarious British constitution, and one must never forgot the role of the monarch herself who holds powers she does not use, except to dissolve Parliament when requested by the PM. (With one exception: Queen Victoria changed the Homosexuality Act to exclude women from it). Mind you, the government appeal might succeed, but if the decision is based solely on a point of law, then it seems unlikely.

Potentially, the real traitors are in Parliament, the MPs who will vote against a Brexit Bill, who we know are mostly Remainiacs, both sides of the house, and the House of Lords too in their amending role. It is heart-warming that Angela Smith, Labour Leader in the Lords, (a lady who I have met and did indeed appear to be a sincere person) has said:
“We will scrutinise. We will examine. But my Lords – we will not block. But neither will we be bullied into abdicating our responsibilities.We have to be adult about this. We can’t have the most enthusiastic Brexiters crying foul every time Parliament asks for more details or seeks to scrutinise.This can’t be the only issue on which the Government is allowed a blank cheque without any accountability. It’s complex, it’s difficult. And the Government should see this House as an asset and not try to avoid helpful scrutiny.”

Could all be weasel words, of course. However, the numbers do not stack up well, with only a slim Tory Majority, and providing not too many Tory MPs rebel against a 3-line whip. This has (de facto) increased the odds of an election sometime in 2017 between late Spring and early Autumn: Paddy Power is quoting 6/4.

The other fear is that if UKIP collapses, a fate that Arron Banks has predicted, there will be no party to hold Theresa May’s feet to the fire.  He has even suggested Nigel needs to return to leading the party, although Nigel himself has only suggested 2019, after the timescale for Article 50 has expired.

And it is there is that each and every one of us has a part to play in ensuring UKIP’s survival. We do not exactly have a sparkling array of candidates to choose from, and I am not going to try to influence your vote, but it is interesting to note Banks’ dismissal off all of them.  The bookies are dismissing 2 of the candidates with odds of around 50:1 and I do not think many of us will want to vote for the one who would work with Douglas Carswell to completely change the focus of the party. So, we are left with a hard-talking Liverpudlian (but is he hard-acting too?) who wants to lead a charge on Labour in the North. If a 2017 General Election did materialize, wouldn’t it great if we could wins some seats in the North, and possibly in the South too, in places like Lincolnshire, Essex and Kent?

At the end of the day, what is important is that UKIP survives, that the internal squabbling at the top is effectively dealt with (we don’t squabble like the experts down at the Grass Roots, do we?) and that UKIP can be a force to monitor and call out every deviance of the government and the establishment from the clear will of the British people.

 

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email