Social media rush as lawyers debate hung parliament’s impact
Lawyers of Twitter are head in hands this morning, as they mull over what a hung parliament means for the Brexit process.
Article 50 was triggered in March, signalling the formal beginning of our withdrawal from the European Union. Weeks later, Prime Minister Theresa May called a snap general election, hoping to strengthen her hand in our Brexit negotiations. It didn’t really go to plan.
#GE2017 ends in a hung parliament. If you slept through it, here's what you need to know https://t.co/9To6Lwodo1 #BBCElection pic.twitter.com/lUUg1Q7GHX
— BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) June 9, 2017
Now, lawyers have flocked to social media to explain what this result means for the United Kingdom’s Brexit negotiations — and it’s not good.
To summarise an informative Twitter thread by legal journalist and solicitor David Allen Green, Article 50 is a “formal legal step” which sets off a two-year Brexit countdown. This window of negotiations can be extended if all other EU Member States agree, but this is “not easy”. He continued:
5. Put simply: May has taken a weak UK negotiating position and somehow managed to make it potentially far worse with this election.
— David Allen Green (@davidallengreen) June 9, 2017
7. Madness to trigger Article 50 two-year period and then call a needless general election. A hung parliament always a possibility.
— David Allen Green (@davidallengreen) June 9, 2017
8. May doing that is perhaps most irresponsible political decision. At least Cameron's referendum was (at law) non-binding. A50 is binding.
— David Allen Green (@davidallengreen) June 9, 2017
Other lawyers agreed with Green that the whole thing is “a mess”. Garden Court Chambers’ Colin Yeo commented:
It was Theresa May who delayed Article 50 and then delayed negotiations by triggering Article 50 and calling this election. https://t.co/4eP3UhZlNU
— Colin Yeo (@ColinYeo1) June 9, 2017
The head of Durham Law School went for:
Brexit talks cannot start with the UK so divided without a majority government. PM failed utterly to shore up her position. In tatters.
— Thom Brooks (@thom_brooks) June 9, 2017
Like Green, Cambridge professor Kenneth Armstrong reminded tweeters that the Brexit clock is ticking. He commented:
Delaying start of Brexit negotiations doesn't give U.K. more time to do withdrawal deal. Clock is ticking #bexittime
— K A Armstrong (@ProfKAArmstrong) June 9, 2017
While one barrister from Manchester set 9 St John Street said:
By her own logic the national interest in Brexit negotiations has been damaged by May calling an election. How can she be Prime Minister?
— ViewFromTheNorth ? (@jaimerh354) June 9, 2017
May's political radar has been proved to be totally defective. Her judgement is poor. She has gambled and lost. This signals a bad Brexit.
— ViewFromTheNorth ? (@jaimerh354) June 9, 2017
With all this Brexit confusion floating around, the profession is in a bit of a muddle. We wouldn’t be surprised if others echoed barrister Adam Wagner’s thoughts:
Can we have a second referendum please
Can we have a second referendum please
Can we have a second referendum please
Can we have a seco..— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) June 8, 2017
For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek’s careers events, sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub here.
