It wasn't a mere consultation exercise

I have faith in our Prime Minister's judgement and whatever Master Plan has been formulated under her leadership behind closed doors. Which is perhaps rather irrational of me.

But I do see Mrs May as a lady of good sense, and absolutely not a taker of stupid risks, nor one to casually or flippantly play ducks and drakes with the country's future. There is (possibly) the danger of her doing nothing at all, and on that score the obstacles now being placed in the way of a rapid invocation of Article 50, and therefore the beginning of our formal withdrawal from the EU, might secretly suit her. But I get the feeling that all along she has favoured Britain getting back complete control, and is not now going to be thwarted.

And the Supreme Court may help her. There is surely an overwhelming argument for letting matters proceed unhindered: that the electorate were made to understand - before the referendum - that their collective vote would determine what should happen. And not the eventual decision of Parliament.

I have in front of me the leaflet produced by David Cameron's government and distributed to every front door. It's the pro-remain leaflet titled Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK. It says things like:

On Thursday, 23rd June there will be a referendum. It's your opportunity to decide if the UK remains in the European Union (EU). It's a big decision. One that will affect you, your family and your children for decades to come.

and

This is your chance to decide your own future and the future of the United Kingdom. It is important that you vote.

and

The referendum on Thursday, 23rd June is your chance to decide if we should remain in or leave the European Union.

and

This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide.

and

If you're aged 18 or over on 23rd June and are entitled to vote, this is your chance to decide.

and

The EU referendum is a big decision for you and your family's future.

Nothing in these words about the Referendum merely testing the waters, so that the Government would learn what the collective mood of the people might be. Anyone reading that leaflet would understand that voting was to be terribly important, and that it would settle the future of the country, with far-reaching effects. That's certainly how I saw it.

There are now many voices saying that the Referendum was somehow not binding. Or that if the Government are bound, then Parliament as a whole is not - and by extension not the Devolved Parliaments either. So that Mrs May and her team may well feel obliged to steam ahead - being 'the Government' - but those who are not directly in charge of the country's affairs have a constitutional right to debate the outcome.

The Supreme Court will have to consider what the Referendum promised. I think it will find it difficult to ignore the pre-election passion and hype, which was highly appropriate for a procedure that might transform Britain, but inappropriate for a non-binding consultation exercise. We were urged to vote, not just register an opinion.

Personally I think that Parliament are, like the Government, stuck with the result, and would do better to support the Government in carrying out the will of the majority, and not introduce endless delay.