Baroness Wheatcroft has suggested that the House of Lords could delay any legislation to enact Article 50.
“If it comes to a Bill, I think the Lords might actually delay things. I think there's a majority in the Lords for remaining,” - Baroness Wheatcroft
Needless to say this has lead to the usual screaming about an unelected body seeking to overturn the democratic process.
Fury as unelected peers plot to force a second referendum - Daily Express 02/08/2016
Points to think about:
- In a democratic system with two houses, it is the duty of the second house to act as a monitor, and if necessary as a check and a brake, on the actions of the first house, especially if they think those actions are not in the best interest of the country. If the Lords did not question one of the most momentous decisions of the century to affect Britain and its future they would be failing in their duty. So in fact to question their actions in this case is to be undemocratic and to be actively seeking to undermine the democratic process.
- There is nothing to say that you can not hold a second referendum on a subject to check that the will of the peoole has not changed. We do exactly this every 4 years when we have a general election.
- The results of this referendum were not binding, they were advisory. Parliment is not legally bound by them.
Personally I think the reaction from the Leave campaigners, namely to scream "undemocratic" every time someone appears to question the result, or suggest a second referendum, is driven by insecurity. Even they don't believe they'd win second time around. So they have to make sure the country isn't given a second chance even if it means ruining it in the process.
Source - The Independent: House of Lords could derail or delay Brexit Article 50, Tory peer says