Petition to revoke article 50 (Brexit) exceeds 1m signatures amid site crashe

[TygrBright]

Source: The Guardian

More than a million people have signed a plea for article 50 to be revoked. The list of names grew so rapidly on Thursday that the parliamentary petition website crashed several times.

The petition began gaining signatures on Wednesday evening after Theresa May criticised MPs for not approving her Brexit deal. When the site first crashed on Thursday the petition had received almost 600,000 signatures and was growing at a rate of 1,500 a minute.

...

By 3pm the petition had its millionth signature. Ironically, the milestone was delayed as the weight of users checking for updates again forced the site briefly offline.

The petition calls on the government to revoke article 50 and keep Britain in the EU. It states: “The government repeatedly claims exiting the EU is the will of the people. We need to put a stop to this claim by proving the strength of public support now for remaining in the EU. A people’s vote may not happen, so vote now.”

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/21/petitions-site-crashes-after-thousands-back-call-to

---

It would be wonderful if Britain's future were restored to hope at the 11th hour and 59th minute.

Better, of course, if it had never been plunged into doubt by antediluvian nationalist folly in the first place...

hopefully,
Bright

[Honeycombe8]

1. I'm confused about the Brexit fight.

The majority of the public DOES want to be part of the EU, so since Brexit is a bill to leave the EU, the public is against Brexit?

Confusing. Esp as to why it's dragging on so long. They did pass Brexit (leaving the EU), but someone revived it?

[BigmanPigman]

3. I think the vote was 52% for leaving

and 48% against leaving but I could be wrong. They can thank Putin's interference for that fucked up result.

[cstanleytech]

6. But was it a binding vote? I mean does the government have to pursue it due to a law or

may they simply set it aside? If they can set it aside then perhaps they should and then later in 10 years or so revisit it but with a provision that it will be binding only on the event that the vote to leave is at least 60%.

[BigmanPigman]

2. Can they still do that?

Can they just hold another national vote and see what the public wants NOW? That would be like us holding a do-over of the 2016 election, wouldn't it.

[marylandblue]

5. Yes they can, because they don't have a written Constitution

What they call the Constitution is just a bunch of old laws and customs. So Parliament can declare another referendum, say it doesn't count, or do whatever else it wants.

[BigmanPigman]

8. I didn't realize it was that easy.

Would the EU still let them stay after all of this BS?

[Massacure]

10. My understanding is that the EU wouldn't have a choice.

From everything I heard, the United Kingdom can unilaterally revoke their Article 50 invocation until March 29. Come March 30, they would need the remaining 27 members to unanimously agree to let them back in.

[Blue_Tires]

4. Long overdue

It's been clear since day one that the Brexiteers don't know what the fuck they're doing

[LiberalLovinLug]

7. I can't understand the resistance to holding another vote.

They could use the excuse, if they need one, of Russian interference. And of false claims by the Trump-loving Brexit leaders before the last vote.

Is there any one party that has come out strongly in favor of a new vote? They all seem to be afraid to make that commitment.

[marylandblue]

9. They promised the first vote was binding. Now they look like idiots.

Of course, they actually are idiots, but who wants to admit that?

[sheepfarm]

11. The petition has now surpassed two million signatures

It'll probably do nothing on its own but to get that amount of signatures in less than 27 hours is impressive. May's live speech to the nation yesterday evening is undoubtly a big factor. Any leave supporters I've seen on the net today about the petition is bricking themselves!

As to the referendum from 2016 in question, I'll try and clear some things up. That 2016 poll was strictly speaking only an "advisory" referendum as due to Britain's unwritten constitution, Parliament is sovereign and it is not possible to have a binding referendum even if the bill passed to make it so because it can (a) be revoked by MPs the same way it was passed, and (b) a current sitting of Parliament cannot bind any future Parliament to enact something. For example a current Conservative government cannot force a future Labour government, if it won the next general election, to do something that they disagree with, and vice versa.

The result of the 2016 referendum was codified into law as a statutory instrument, which sets out the order for the UK to conduct its exit from the EU, including triggering Article 50 and when she shall leave. This means that by default if the UK & the remaining 27 EU members cannot agree on a Withdrawal Agreement, the UK will leave the EU with no agreement in place. This was going to originally be March 29 but has now been agreed to be pushed back to April 12 at the earliest and May 22 at the latest.

For the UK parliament to formally revoke the Article 50 notice for leaving the EU, neither May or her government can unilaterally do so on their own. It would be for parliament to do so either by revoking the bill or pass a new bill amending the old one. In an emergency Mrs May or whoever the Prime Minister could inform the EU that she is withdrawing Article 50s notice of withdrawal provided she got consensus from her party and other party leaders to agree to have MPs vote on retroactively apply the revocation at the earliest opportunity.

All in all, the whole thing is a mess and right now the UK is standing naked being laughed at by the rest of the world by something of its own making.

[Nitram]

12. Get on with it already. Admit it was colossal mistake, and repeal Brerxit, Now.

C'mon, enough already1