Brexit: Vote for The Bill to trigger Article 50

February 2, 2017 OPINION/NEWS




Hazel Speed

It is a bit rich that the members of the British public who voted to leave Europe, and who were referred to as not understanding what they had voted for (despite months of media bombardment on the subject prior thereto), suffered such a verbal indignity when, in comparison, Parliament sat until beyond midnight on and devoted many hours the next day regurgitating the issues all over again prior to the vote on the Bill to trigger Article 50, the formal notice of intention of the UK to leave Europe.

On the first day of debate The Speaker of the House of Commons announced that 99 people had expressed a wish to participate in the debate.

Kenneth Clarke, on the first day of the debate on The Bill to trigger Article 50, inferred he would be voting against the same as his conscience was clear in that he did not agree with giving the British people the Referendum in the first place. He then lost the plot a bit. Judge for yourself.

Considering his role in Mrs Thatcher’s regime many would have thought he did not have a conscience to begin with!

As a Conservative back bencher said on day one of the debate, how many laws over the last 20-30 years were imposed ‘by’ Europe upon the United Kingdom without similar debate, not to mention putting relevant issues to the people? Conscience?!

Mr Corbyn‘s three line Whip, confirming that he expected his Labour MPs to support the vote in Parliament on Wednesday 1st February 2017, (and not go against the majority democratic will of the electorate, or they will lose their positions, etc), will have quite a list of self-confessed and visible defectors, so it will be intriguing what he does then, given in his time as an MP he himself defied Whips on a number of occasions. Do as I do or do as I say? This causes many to refer to the Labour Party and benches in Parliament as being a hopeless Opposition on so many levels.

The UK is still the UK unless or until the Constituent Countries therein are totally devolved as separate entities. The UK joined Europe, the Referendum Vote was to all the people of the UK and to secure a majority vote. It has always been thus.

All that Ms Miller‘s endeavours via the Supreme Court has achieved is that Parliament spends an inordinate amount of time and money as a type of mass psychological therapy group session to facilitate the disgruntled to get their sarcastic voices heard when other issues are thereby delayed.

At the end of the day, Mrs May is well aware that all she has to do is let others have their special vocal moment, but remain secure in the knowledge that even if she takes a shopping list to Europe (so she can later say that she did), Mrs May merely has to rely on what she already knows in that Europe will inevitably reject the wish lists of the discontented MPs.

Hard Brexit is what she will get in favour of global trading and the return of full legal Sovereignty to the British Parliament.


Whilst watching the debates (as far as I could cope listening to what was being spouted), it was intriguing to note, however, the young MPs and how they presented themselves. Some were most impressive, and spoke in calm measured tones with interesting meritable anecdotes. Sadly, that could not be said of many Labour Remainers nor the Scottish Members of Parliament who spoke in anger and thereby with overly fast pace – if they had spoken in quiet controlled terms their argument ‘may’ have been more digestible in broader terms. Nerves, inexperience of rhetoric and pure political rage combine to provide an unattractive stance in Parliamentary debate.

Passion, yes of course, but it should be wrapped up within subtlety like a political Beef Wellington – well seasoned.

A point was well made in general presentations how the British public are entrusted to participate in Jury Service. This was a good point, e.g. we cannot trust them for one thing of importance but not another.

Although some will be voting for this Bill they added a caveat that they are not giving a blank cheque. But surely, if it has to be a hard Brexit then aren’t we just leaving as all that is required surely is just notice that the UK is leaving.

As one would expect of the SNP the comment was made that Mrs May was impacting the coup de gras which Mrs Thatcher had begun against Scotland many years ago, a point regarding which many would agree about Mrs Thatcher but not Mrs May. Harikari is the term regarding Scotland as they know only too well that the whole of the UK has to leave collectively (Constituent Countries therein), after which, it would be up to Scotland as a separate entity (and only then if it leaves the UK), to apply to rejoin Europe if their people so vote as a majority and by then such a hoped-for majority of Scottish people may not wish to pursue that course of action.

Mrs May, during her time in Parliament has listened stoically and ‘suffered the slings and arrows’ as Shakespeare refers thereof with a classic unruffled expression which would be classic at any poker table.

She infers the resolute aim of (Baroness) Mrs Thatcher politically but with the warmer heart of the Late (Baroness) Barbara Castle – (Labour and the woman who really should have been the first Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Baroness Castle did not want the UK to join Europe yet despite that she fought our corner in Europe because the people wanted to join. How many people could do that? Honourable.

Wednesday evening 1 February, 2017 – with a ‘Full House’ as it were, last statements were made by Conservative MP John Baron (representing Basildon and Billericay) who referred to the Lisbon Treaty in 2008. He said that a large chunk of UK Sovereignty was lost that day and Labour, so called Guardians of Democracy, were pretty thin on the ground and he thought even the then Prime Minister may not have been present! Mr Baron made an excellent contribution.

Jenny Chapman, Labour Shadow Exiting the European Union Minister, started off with a few basic outlines which represented her political corner, as it were, but then floundered into a lengthy speech for the sake of historic record one sensed and considering her comparative youth to that of Mrs May who was sitting opposite, it floundered more into the sense of ‘teaching her Grandmother to suck eggs’.

Earlier during the day Mrs May was reported to have referred to Mr Corbyn’s jibes by replying that he was Leading a Protest whereas she was Leading a Country! Royal flush – works for me any time. Nice one.

Prior to the Division to enable MPs to vote, a summary of the Bill and Government’s stance, with already known objectives, was ably presented by David Jones, Minister for Exiting the European Union.

He brilliantly outlined what we already knew though nearly tripped up when he was about to give the advantages of leaving the UK but recovered to correct himself quickly (half smiling) to say the advantages of the UK leaving Europe.

The result of the vote gives The Prime Minister the right to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and it is the Notification of Withdrawal Bill (from the European Union) at Second Reading.


The vote was as follows

The Ayes to right 498

The Nos to the left 114

Majority 384






Hazel Speed

Photo (c) Hazel Speed – used by kind permision to Tuck Magazine

Hazel Speed is a Philosopher, Writer, and Artist with various creative projects at differing stages of development. Her flaship project is an animation which has produced a film short: She has also written an E-novel, ‘Just Suppose…!‘ which is available via the attached link.

Art sites:


No Comments Yet!

You can be first to comment this post!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.