Supreme Court -

[observer]

Not unexpectedly, the Supreme Court has ruled against the Executive's use of the Royal Perogative in moving Article 50, and ruled that it is a decision for Parliament.  So: it's now for the Gov to place a simple resolution before Parliament, triggering Article 50, and to take the vote as one of confidence in the Gov; which means, if lost, it will trigger a General Election; allowing the election of a Parliament committed to Brexit. But what this case has exposed, is the utter antiquity of our constitution and governance. The three arms of any democratic constitution, the Judicery, Legislature and Executive, are not distinct entities in the UK (unlike the US for example), with the Executive being merged with the Legislature in Parliament; plus the added anachronism of a House of Lords, from which unelected Peers can be co-opted into Gov. So, perhaps the election of a new Brexit Parliament, could provide the opportunity to bring our constitution into the 21st century, with some Trump style cleaning out of the stables, starting with an elected executive chamber to replace the 800 geriatrics in the Lords ?

[Davy51]

I don't seem to remember the 1975(?) referendum to "stay in or leave" necessitating a Parliamentary vote to approve the popular decision.

[Freeborn John]

I don't seem to remember the 1975(?) referendum to "stay in or leave" necessitating a Parliamentary vote to approve the popular decision.

I don't expect this latest one would have either, if the decision had gone the other way!

[observer]

One bonus from this decision: it's put MZZZ Krankie firmly in her place !