Around 2,400 people filled Central Hall Westminster tonight to drive home the case – made by 700,000 marching on the streets three weeks ago – for the people to have a Final Say on any Brexit deal.
In November 2018, SSTIE produced a list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) to assist campaigners wishing to explain or refute common questions and misunderstandings about Brexit and the EU.
This document will be updated as required.
At the invitation of SSTIE, Lord Adonis addressed local supporters of the UK remaining at the heart of the European Union. Continue reading “Lord Adonis speaks to Sevenoaks, 6 October 2018”
In the British system of representative democracy, sovereignty lies with parliament, which means that MPs should have the final say on important matters of politics.
This is why all friends of British democracy should welcome yesterday’s vote to amend clause 9 of the European Union Withdrawal Bill. The passing of amendment 7 was a victory for parliamentary democracy, and marks an important first step by parliament to reassert its sovereignty and retake control of the important choices that this country has to make in the coming year.
But the passed amendment does not go far enough. While it will give MPs the choice of accepting or rejecting whatever the deal that the government may be able to secure, it does not yet offer MPs a truly meaningful say.
MPs are charged with acting in the interest of the country and their constituents, and for that reason they should be allowed to evaluate all the possible options for our future relationship with the EU.
To have a truly meaningful vote, MPs must also be given the choice of voting to remain in the European Union. Help them take back control by signing this petition:
The Restoring Integrity to Democracy initiative has decided to discontinue this case on financial grounds. For more info please see the statement on the Restoring Integrity facebook page.
Restoring Integrity is a citizens initiative that seeks to ensure that the UK’s Election Laws are upheld – and that any attempt to undermine the democratic process by breaking these election laws is prosecuted to the fullest extent under the law.
They are currently raising funds for their new legal challenge – a private prosecution to investigate “undue influence” in the 2016 EU referendum and to criminally prosecute the individuals responsible of any corrupt campaign practices.
However, to make this case happen, it still requires a lot more funds than the £15,000 raised so far. So please give what you can to the crowd-justice fundraiser and encourage others to do likewise!
Disentangling the UK from over 40 years EU legislation is a huge task that will take years to complete. To overcome this problem, the government is drafting the “Great Repeal Bill”, which will try to simply convert EU laws into domestic legislation, before asking parliament to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act.
Simple as it sounds, there are some tricky legal issues that need to be taken into account. These are descried in a new briefing paper for the House of Commons, a summary of which can be found on the parliament website, as well as a link to the full report (pdf file).
Urge the EU to require a stronger mandate for Brexit from the UK Government
In contrast to the undemocratic image of the EU portrayed by referendum campaigners, it is a little known fact that every single citizen of the European Union can directly petition the European Parliament and be heard. There is no minimum signatory requirement and every petition will be responded to.
In light of Articles 10, 11 and 50 of the Treaty On European Union, and in accordance with Article 227 of the Treaty On The Functioning of The European Union, the undersigned hereby request that the Union requires the United Kingdom government to conduct a more rigorous domestic consultation, consisting of a second referendum, a parliamentary vote, or similar, before any application for withdrawal from the Union is entertained.
A very insightful new study about Brexit written for the EU Constitutional Affairs Committee has just been published, providing what appears to be the most comprehensive analysis of legal steps for the Brexit process and options for the UK’s future with the EU so far.
We want the government to explain why there was no threshold in the Referendum
TU strike ballots and countries voting on constitutional matters set a 2/3 majority for change. It’s inconceivable this didn’t have one. Was it because it was advisory, a purely consultative exercise not binding on this or any other government or was it just a careless,omission?
***THIS PETITION HAS NOW CLOSED***
To see the government’s full response, please follow the link below:
“It was agreed that the referendum on the United Kingdom’s membership of the European Union would not have a threshold, but would be a simple majority vote. Both Houses of Parliament passed the EU Referendum Act, which approved this decision, with large majorities and cross-party support.” >>> More Details