D Little wrote:
This is from February
Prime Minister David Cameron yesterday set out the details of the UK-EU deal in the House of Commons. He argued that the referendum would be “a straight democratic decision… Having a second renegotiation followed by a second referendum is not on the ballot paper.” He went on to say that “If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away.”
This has nothing to do with media misrepresentation, our Prime Minister assured us we would begin the process immediately, it hasn't happened.
It has everything to do with misrepresentation. The court descision yesterday had nothing to do with stopping brexit. It's purpose was to ensure brexit was carried out in accordance with the law. Those newspaper headlines, however, give a very different angle, one which is entirely untrue.
With regards to Cameron's promises, (and those more recently of May), I guess they both believed, or were advised, that they had the authority under the Royal Perogative to initiate article 50. The judges have decided otherwise. This issue could, and probably should have been sorted out before the referendum. For example, parliament could have made the referendum legally binding, which would have provided the authority for the PM to start brexit. Parliament
chose not to do so. That is where the fault lies, along with PM's claiming they could do something they were not legally entitled to do.
It really doesn't matter how much people whinge about this now, the law is the law, and the government must operate within that.