Another vote t'other side of the Border.

Again the distinction between convention and law.

You stated that it was likely to be unconstitutional and I have pointed out that there is nothing in the constitution that makes this unconstitutional.

You stated that it was likely to be unconstitutional and I have pointed out that there is nothing in the constitution that makes this unconstitutional.

Apart from the Sewel Convention.

Apart from the Sewel Convention.

See post 239. The Sewel convention only deals with devolved powers in Scotland so the triggering of A50 therefore cannot be unconstitutional as Scotland have no say in the matter.

See post 239. The Sewel convention only deals with devolved powers in Scotland so the triggering of A50 therefore cannot be unconstitutional as Scotland have no say in the matter.

And you think that leaving the EU will have no effect on any of the devolved powers?!

And you think that leaving the EU will have no effect on any of the devolved powers?!

I assume you do, but what devolved powers do you think will be affected?

I assume you do, but what devolved powers do you think will be affected?

That is not the relevant question, but in the absence of evidence to the contrary, I am going to assume that Lord Wolfe is not incompetent and the arguments he made to that end are sound.

If its not built into Scotland's constitutional rights under its devolution powers then its unlikely to be unconstitutional otherwise Sturgeon could and would be challenging it. The constitutional requirements have been met as its the UK and only the UK that has the power to trigger A50 because it was the UK that joined the EEC/EU. The UK has complete control over all foreign policy and that is clearly set out.

Rather than the Article 50 triggering context (which was decided to lie outside the scope of Sewel), I think you need to consider the relevance of Sewel to the forthcoming Great Repeal Bill legislative process, which lies fully within the Sewel scope, and of far greater relevance (practically).

Except that the Great Repeal Bill won't have any actual effect in itself, it simply enables changes to be made. Those changes may fall under Sewel, but word is that many, if not most will be changed through Statutory Instruments, so won't even get the scrutiny of Parliament...

And you think that leaving the EU will have no effect on any of the devolved powers?!

No I don't think that.

---------- Post added 30-03-2017 at 19:20 ----------

Except that the Great Repeal Bill won't have any actual effect in itself, it simply enables changes to be made. Those changes may fall under Sewel, but word is that many, if not most will be changed through Statutory Instruments, so won't even get the scrutiny of Parliament...

This is probably right as the bill may contain delegated powers to enable ministers to make changes.

More about that here:

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7793

 

This is probably right as the bill may contain delegated powers to enable ministers to make changes.

 

but wasn't brexit supposed to make parliament sovereign again, not give almost unlimited power to the executive?

but wasn't brexit supposed to make parliament sovereign again, not give almost unlimited power to the executive?

But that is OK, because our Executive is selected on the basis of cronyism to the Prime Minister, without any form of veto or checks by anyone else, whereas the executive of the EU is selected, presumably on the basis of ability and approved by the democratically elected parliament.

Thank goodness we have taken back control and are out of that undemocratic mess.

but wasn't brexit supposed to make parliament sovereign again, not give almost unlimited power to the executive?

But it does not give unlimited powers to the executive. I think it was in Thatchers reign that a bill was passed in parliament that gave the executive powers to amend acts without them having to go back to parliament for approval, but I'm not 100% sure. For instance the recent so called "Bedroom Tax" had to be amended as the way it was originally written allowed for some who had been in the property for a certain length of time to be exempt, and that amendment if memory serves correct never went back to Parliament.