CAN BREXIT BE OVERTURNED?

Remain politicians weigh up options as panic continues after vote

HOPES were raised last night that Brexit could be blocked.

Remain campaigners yesterday ratcheted up their push to have the referendum result overturned – with Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon saying her country’s parliament could prevent the UK’s exit from the European Union.

Furthermore a petition demanding a

re-run of the referendum had received 3.5million names last night.

A petition is considered for debate by the British parliament once it passes 100,000 names.

Blocking the legislation in parliament could still be an option, though. Under the UK’s complex arrangements to devolve some powers to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, legislation generated in London to leave the EU may have to gain consent from the three devolved parliaments.

Asked whether she would consider asking the Scottish parliament to block a motion of legislative consent, Ms Sturgeon, who has also pushed for a re-staging of the Scottish independence vote, said: ‘Of course.

‘If the Scottish parliament was judging this on the basis of what’s right for Scotland, then the option of saying that we’re not going to vote for something that is against Scotland’s interest – of course that’s going to be on the table.’

However, a spokesman for Ms Sturgeon later acknowledged that there was legal debate over whether a lack of Scottish consent would be enough to hold up the withdrawal, and that the Scottish government expected its London counterparts to say it was not needed.

But further hope for the Remain camp came in the ever-increasing number of people who had signed a petition demanding a re-run of the referendum.

More than 3.4million Britons had backed the petition by 8pm last night on the UK parliament’s website – although nearly 80,000 names were struck off after they were found to be fraudulent.

A former UK Labour Party minister said it was within parliament’s powers to call a second referendum and urged that it be done.

Ex-minister David Lammy called on parliament to ‘stop the madness’ of Brexit by over-ruling the referendum result.

He was branded ‘anti-democratic’ and ‘elitist’ on Twitter for insisting that the poll, which produced a narrow win for the Leave side, was nonbinding and that the British parliament should exercise its sovereignty by voting to stay in the EU despite the result. While some on Twitter came to the MP’s defence, UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage said the intervention would push more Labour voters his party’s way.

London MP Mr Lammy said the Commons, where a majority of members backed Remain, should move quickly to kill off Brexit.

‘Wake up. We do not have to do this. We can stop this madness and bring this nightmare to an end through a vote in parliament,’ he said. ‘Our sovereign parliament needs to now vote on whether we should quit the EU.

‘The referendum was an advisory, non-binding referendum. The Leave campaign’s platform has already unravelled and some people wish they hadn’t voted to leave.

‘Parliament now needs to decide whether we should go forward with Brexit, and there should be a vote in parliament next week.

‘Let us not destroy our economy on the basis of lies and the hubris of Boris Johnson,’ Mr Lammy added.

After being accused of ignoring the will of voters by both Leave and Remain backers on social media, Mr Lammy refused to back down.

He cited comments by Mr Farage before the referendum in which he said that a 52% to 48% split in favour of Remain would ‘be unfinished business by a long way’.

Mr Farage tweeted that Mr Lammy ‘demands MPs ignore the referendum result. I’m sure that will drive more Labour voters to Ukip.’

‘Some wish they hadn’t voted Leave’

The row came as a second EU referendum was ruled out by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, although he himself is under pressure to step down as several members of his frontbench have resigned.

Mr Corbyn was accused of not campaigning strongly enough for Britain to remain in the EU. ‘The referendum has taken place, a decision has been made, I think we have got to accept that decision and work out our relationship with Europe in the future,’ the Labour leader said.

The BBC reported last night that Mr Corbyn ‘won’t be resigning’, according to his spokesman.

As the panic continues both across the water and in Irish politics over the ramifications of the Brexit result, Irish businessman Declan Ganley, said he believed suggested avenues to block a Brexit would go nowhere.

On the prospect of a second referendum, Mr Ganley, who campaigned against the Lisbon treaties in 2007 and 2009, said: ‘I do not like the result. I was pro-Remain. But there is no mandate for a second referendum. I think you have to respect the result. Like it or not, that is how people voted. ’

And he said he agreed with those European leaders who called for the UK to quickly enact Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to kickstart their departure from the EU.

‘I think in that regard the Europeans are right,’ he said. ‘Those members of the EU who are saying they should enact Article 50, that is what they should do. I agree with them.

‘That is what they should do. It’s what people voted for and that’s what they should be given.’

‘I was certainly under the impression it had been said and I think (David) Cameron said it: that they would enact Article 50.

‘Well, that’s what they should do. They should just get on with it and that’s the thing: make a decision and press on. However if there is a general election and there is a mandate that comes from a general election for another referendum, then that is a different story.’

On Nicola Sturgeon’s comment that Scotland could – in effect – veto Brexit, he said: ‘I said at the outset of this debate that if there was a Leave vote, I thought we would see another Scottish independence referendum and I think that’s what we will see.

‘In terms of them vetoing Brexit? No. Under the constitutional arrangements that they have, they don’t have the right to do that.

‘They are in the United Kingdom, they’ve got to go with the majority result and if they don’t like it, then they need to change their constitutional arrangements.’

Britain’s foremost elections expert, Professor John Curtice, also said the petition avenue to overturn Brexit was likely to come to nothing. He said: ‘It’s no good people signing the petition now, they should have done it before. Even then, these petitions don’t always mean a great deal. It has passed the 100,000 mark for it to be debated in parliament. All that means is some MPs will say, “It’s a terrible shame”, others will say, “Hallelujah”. Then that’s the end of it.’

WHEN I left university in the mid-Eighties, the country was an economic wilderness, a big sprawling black spot of unemployment and despair.

There were traditional jobs in teaching or nursing of course, the multinational sector was slowly coming to the rescue of science graduates but the creative and business industries just existed in pockets and, as is often the case in small and poor countries, a closed shop mentality held sway.

Dublin was the capital but its bleak opportunities were reflected in a provincial atmosphere and a grim insularity that was hardly inviting for young people .

Faced with such stultifying conformity and the prospect of joblessness, thousands of eager youngsters did as generations of Irish people before and since did when tested by calamities like Famine or crushing poverty, dispossession, defeat or a global economic collapse.

They left and for reasons of cost or convenience usually struck out for their nearest neighbour, the UK.

In the Eighties London may have lost its swing but compared to Ireland it buzzed with opportunity and vitality.

Another point in its favour was that the Irish could claim dole on the same basis as an English person so they had a safety valve against starvation if their luck ran out.

Over the years many came home again but just as many remained in their adopted cities.

They became part of Britain’s large pool of Irish communities, helping to turn a city like Liverpool into a vast stronghold of Irish identity, and putting down roots so strong that there are more people of Irish descent in England than in Ireland today.

Cheap air fares and free movement within the EU have brought the citizens of the continent closer to us but we still have a closer kinship with the English.

Our proximity to one another, the rich web of family and social connections criss-crossing the Irish Sea and our brutal and bitter shared history has made it so.

Until the birth of the Irish Free State in 1922, all persons born in Ireland were British citizens.

The Ireland Act of 1949 brought about the end to our Commonwealth status but anyone born before that date in Ireland could still claim to be a British subject. They had an automatic entitlement to a UK passport and to be treated on a par with any citizen from a commonwealth country.

No wonder our naval-gazing writers spent millions of words pondering the meaning of national identity, on burning questions of Irishness and Britishness and on why nothing is ever clear cut.

There are many Irish people whose outlook, loosely and rather unfairly described as West Briton, means that they identify more with English culture and sport, rather than the traditional emblems of Irishness like the GAA or the Irish language.

The tangle of our intertwined history means that it is impossible to imagine Ireland without England.

On one side there is our ancient tribal enmity, our antagonism towards British imperialism and the intractable problem of the North.

Queen Elizabeth acknowledged it on her historical State visit to Ireland in 2011 when she came close to apologising for British actions, referring to our history of ‘heartbreak and loss’.

But there is another side to the close and complex relationship between the two countries.

England, or Wales rather, gave us our patron saint St Patrick; our legal system and system of local and central government came from the British, as does our best architecture, our handsome Georgian buildings and squares. The legacy can also be seen in our townlands and villages whose names were translated into Hiberno-English from Irish by the colonial powers.

Censored

Some of our most gifted sons and daughters, either in business or in the arts would never have come to prominence without British patronage and influence.

Edna O’Brien, censored in Ireland fled to England for the freedom to explore her talents and the solace of literary society.

WB Yeats architects of the Celtic Revival which ultimately propelled the events of 1916 may not have become a giant of literature without the education and melting pot of thrilling new ideas that he found in England.

But this rich relationship spanning families, society, history and economics that has endured for centuries is set to change dramatically .

Thanks to Brexit, an Iron Curtain hovers over the UK, if not cutting it off completely from us and the rest of Europe, then certainly radically reorganising the dynamic between us.

Brexit does not nullify the past or dilute the ties of blood and business that joins Ireland to England but it may spell the end of Britain’s place as an economic safety net, if not a home from home for Irish citizens.

Despite what Nigel Farage says about business continuing as usual between our two nations, from now on he, or indeed we, have precious little say in the matter.

As from last Friday, the future of our special relationship has been placed into the hands of EU, where it will remain for as long as one of our two countries is in the EU and the other is not.

Up to now the economic repercussion of our new and unequal relationship have dominated the agenda.

Bertie Ahern, writing in the Irish Mail on Sunday yesterday, reminds us that we have lost the power to deal with the British on our own terms.

‘I heard an economist on the radio this week saying we’d have to get on the phone and start negotiating with Britain. Let’s be very clear about this, no Irish Government can do this. I learned this over 18 years as labour minister, finance minister and then Taoiseach.

‘We have to set out to the EU what policies we need in place to protect us. The EU in turn will hopefully take on board these policies and then they can talk to Britain. But it doesn’t happen easily. There now needs to be a concerted campaign by the Taoiseach and his ministers to get our point of view across to Brussels.’

Ahern is worried about how Brexit will rebound on our economy, rather than issues of citizenship or free movement which could mean that for the first time ever there may be checks on Irish people coming into England and the automatic benefits of our being part of the British Isles are lost forever.

If the EU decides to get tough with Britain, it may easily take the view that the integrity of the European project is of such urgency and import, that there can be no allowances made for Irish concerns.

In turn the British could retaliate by instituting visa controls on all immigrants including the Irish and apply a quota system like the US. This would usher in the awful vista whereby Irish people become aliens for the first time ever while stepping on British soil.

The tide of Irish emigration to the States stemmed to a trickle when the Americans introduced strict lists of nationalities to be permitted.

We could see that pattern played out with our closest neighbours.

It could also mean that for the first time insecurity and fear of the future will dog the lives of Irish people who are happily resident in Britain.

Just as British expats in Spain and France are worried today about how their residency rights will be affected at the loss of their EU citizenship, the future of Irish people in Britan might also be uncertain.

It is up to our leaders to impress on the EU, the importance of our social and cultural ties with Britain, not just our economic reliance on it as a major trading partner.

If the EU ignores our case and perseveres with its aim of ruthlessly punishing Britain it will place us in a difficult situation.

Brussels did us no favours during the banking crisis – in fact Britain was far more generous friend, donating £7billion towards the bailout.

A second blow will prove that we can no longer depend on EU goodwill or consideration.

Faced with the choice between EU membership and our longstanding friendship with our nearest neighbour, we may very well have to choose the latter.