The events of last week in the high courts has certainly created a stir with regard Brexit. At stake is the government’s ability to act on the issue of leaving the EU without the consent of parliament, or whether a vote in the House needs to take place. With nearly 500 MPs having declared they voted in the referendum to remain, the 170 or so Brexiteers are fearful that parliament may vote to stop triggering article 50, the process of EU withdrawal. The government will appeal.

One of the questions behind this is: why is this so complicated? In essence, the problem is twofold.

Article 50 is solely the process of exiting the EU. Our future trading relationship with the EU is determined on a separate basis, but clearly the two process run parallel and are linked in any practical sense. A simple, and relevant, example could be health care. Many Wyre Forest residents go on holiday to the EU every year. Whilst there, if they fall ill or are injured, they can enjoy free health care in the EU that is repaid by the NHS. The same works for EU nationals in the UK. I am sure that British holiday makers will want to continue to enjoy holidays in Europe in the future and will hope that they can continue to have medical protection as they do now. Securing that will be part of the Article 50 negotiations.

However, our trade relationship with the EU post Brexit is much more complicated and this is where the majority of the issues lie. The referendum never decided what Brexit would look like. The choice is complex: Do we go for Brexit that includes membership of the single market (the so called Norwegian model)? Or do we seek membership of the European Economic Area (the EEA)? or the European Free Trade Zone? Or the Customs Union? Or do we have a relationship based on World Trade Organisation rules? How long would it take to achieve a UK / EU bilateral deal? All of these are options and all of them viable and all have their own merits and disadvantages. For example, membership of the single market requires agreement to free movement of people – a big issue in the referendum. Yet without a bilateral free trade agreement with the EU, the WTO option will result in tariffs paid on imported goods (and exported as well).

The reason the government wants to do what it does – to get on with triggering Article 50 – is because we want to deliver the wishes of the electorate in the referendum in June. That’s democracy.