Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

ArmaniJeanss

First (extremely minor) government Minister to come out and suggest that Revoking of A50 might not be such a terrible idea after all.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/brexit/news/102764/minister-says-he-would-be-happy-revoke-article-50-stop
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/revoke-article-50-mark-field-14182017

This is the Petition Effect in action I'd say.

Shelga

Does the WA make specific reference to ending freedom of movement? Is this on the assumption that the UK comes out of the single market and customs union?

But doesn’t that depend on the stuff that happens after the transition period, which is all that the withdrawal agreement covers?

If Brexit happens, we are just going to be hearing about it forever and ever and ever, aren’t we

josip

Water John wrote: »

Liam Fox still in La La Land.
'Liam Fox has indicated the government could ignore MPs’ views from indicative Brexit votes this week if parliament’s stated choice goes against the Conservative manifesto, insisting the real choice is still between Theresa May’s deal and no deal.' Guardian

The Conservative election manifesto trumps the opinion of Parliament.

But is he?

Both May and the Tories have constantly ignored what doesn't suit their personal/party objectives.
To the point where parliament was found in contempt.
The only thing they haven't ignored has been the non binding referendum result.

Leroy42

Water John wrote: »

Liam Fox still in La La Land.
'Liam Fox has indicated the government could ignore MPs’ views from indicative Brexit votes this week if parliament’s stated choice goes against the Conservative manifesto, insisting the real choice is still between Theresa May’s deal and no deal.' Guardian

The Conservative election manifesto trumps the opinion of Parliament.

Well, he has a point. The manifesto (which seems nowadays to be the same as a contract which it seemingly was just an aspiration before) was voted on in the last GE. Whilst the Tories didn't win a majority, it is perfectly reasonable for them to get a coalition and try to implement their manifesto as much as possible.

As with any parliament, the majority will always win out, so if another course of action is desired it is up to the others top come up with a plan that will garner the majority of the house.

Zubeneschamali

Shelga wrote: »

If Brexit happens, we are just going to be hearing about it forever and ever and ever, aren’t we

It's worse than that - whether it happens or not we are going to be hearing about it forever.

Joe_ Public

Water John wrote: »

Liam Fox still in La La Land.
'Liam Fox has indicated the government could ignore MPs’ views from indicative Brexit votes this week if parliament’s stated choice goes against the Conservative manifesto, insisting the real choice is still between Theresa May’s deal and no deal.' Guardian

The Conservative election manifesto trumps the opinion of Parliament.

On Andrew Marr show yesterday Stephen Barclay pointedly refused to rule out the same thing. Would you put it beyond the pm at this stage? Her obvious hope is indicative votes throw up nothing certain, just ignore if they must (they’ll find a way one way or the other), and she gets to bring mv back as some binary option that favours her deal.

Don’t know how that works for her but think it would more or less frame her last ditch plan right now.

Water John

The last two options standing from the indicative votes will be interesting. TMs Deal will be one, the other will either be a soft Brexit or 2nd Ref. No Deal will have been long lost at that point.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1109843870165155842

Ciarraioch Post 3101

Laois_Man

Things coming from Brussels "officials" seem to me to be designed to fucus British minds

European Union officials in Brussels have said a no deal Brexit is "becoming increasingly likely".

They said they will "intensify their discussions" with the Irish Government over the coming days about a no deal Brexit outcome.

EU officials said those talks will try to ensure any customs controls are "away from border, if at all possible".

It's still a worry nonetheless.

ShooterSF

On the inidictave votes I thought the UK favoured first past the post voting rather than preferential? Would it definitely be ran that way?

Inquitus

Water John wrote: »

The last two options standing from the indicative votes will be interesting. TMs Deal will be one, the other will either be a soft Brexit or 2nd Ref. No Deal will have been long lost at that point.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1109843870165155842

Ciarraioch Post 3101

If that's correct then May will refuse to implement it and call a GE.

Itssoeasy

So will Theresa May be prime minister when the clocks go forward on Saturday night ? It seems like she might be but it's getting far less certain. I know she wouldn't lead the conservatives in the next general election(latest is I think 2022 under fixed term parliament) so that's her out. Also, why is boris Johnson invoking the bible ?

robinph

ShooterSF wrote: »

On the inidictave votes I thought the UK favoured first past the post voting rather than preferential? Would it definitely be ran that way?

That is for the parliamentary votes by MP's, but no idea how (or even if) they would actually get to vote on it as their regular voting just consists of Yay or Nay depending on which corridor they walk down.

seamus

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So will Theresa May be prime minister when the clocks go forward on Saturday night ? It seems like she might be but it's getting far less certain. I know she wouldn't lead the conservatives in the next general election(latest is I think 2022 under fixed term parliament) so that's her out. Also, why is boris Johnson invoking the bible ?

The only way I can see May not being PM on Saturday is if the HoC fails to ratify the extension agreement and they have crashed out overnight. Or if they have decided to take part in the EU elections (i.e. revoking A50 or delaying Brexit to 2020).

Nobody wants to be PM of this mess, and I don't believe anyone is dumb enough to leave the UK rudderless and fighting over a General Election while they're supposed to be making preparations to leave.

Laois_Man

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So will Theresa May be prime minister when the clocks go forward on Saturday night ? It seems like she might be but it's getting far less certain.

There is nothing uncertain about Teresa May keeping her job until somebody else actually wants her job.

Therefore, until withdrawal has come into effect, her job is 100% safe.

seamus wrote: »

The only way I can see May not being PM on Saturday is if the HoC fails to ratify the extension agreement and they have crashed out overnight.

They do not crash out on Friday night no matter what happens

Sam Russell

ShooterSF wrote: »

Water John wrote: »

The last two options standing from the indicative votes will be interesting. TMs Deal will be one, the other will either be a soft Brexit or 2nd Ref. No Deal will have been long lost at that point.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1109843870165155842

Ciarraioch Post 3101

On the inidictave votes I thought the UK favoured first past the post voting rather than preferential? Would it definitely be ran that way?

They have no mechanics for that kind of voting in the HoC.

They have two lobbies - Aye and Nae. The proposition would be taken one at a time Yea or Nay.

So first - No Deal - Yea or Nay? - The noes have it.

Second the Wa - Yea or Nay? - The noes have it.

We remain in the CU - Yea or Nay? - The Ayes have it - or perhaps not.

And so it will go on until they agree something.

If the last deal on offer is Revoke Art 50 - Yea or Nay? Let us hope that the Ayes have it.

When Pandora's box was opened, all the evil in the world flew out - leaving behind only hope.

seamus

Laois_Man wrote: »

They do not crash out on Friday night no matter what happens

Are you sure?

I've been out of touch the last 3/4 days, so I had a check but as far as I can see no extension has yet gone through Parliament. Which means that Friday night is still the date, unless I've missed something?

Imreoir2

seamus wrote: »

Are you sure?

I've been out of touch the last 3/4 days, so I had a check but as far as I can see no extension has yet gone through Parliament. Which means that Friday night is still the date, unless I've missed something?

I am not sure, perhaps under UK law they will have left and under EU law they will not? Schrodinger's Brexit.

Laois_Man

seamus wrote: »

Are you sure?

I've been out of touch the last 3/4 days, so I had a check but as far as I can see no extension has yet gone through Parliament. Which means that Friday night is still the date, unless I've missed something?

It doesn't have to go thru parliament as the new date is written in EU law which supersedes UK law. I don't believe they are even going to hold a vote this week on the extension - but there could be an interesting conflict if they did, with the Brexiteers arguing EU law doesn't supersede anything in as far as the UK are concerned if the the UK are not in the EU anymore.

farmchoice

i think its a case of irrespective of what the uk do or do not do eurpoe will continue to treat them as a member until the 12th of april, so as far as we will be concerned they will still be a member.
its possible they might think differently but to all intent's and purposes they will be a a member.

10000maniacs

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So will Theresa May be prime minister when the clocks go forward on Saturday night ? It seems like she might be but it's getting far less certain. I know she wouldn't lead the conservatives in the next general election(latest is I think 2022 under fixed term parliament) so that's her out. Also, why is boris Johnson invoking the bible ?

Johnson still thinks he is an evangelist preaching the cult of Brexit advocating the moral goodness and Christian virtue of leaving the EU built on the strength of collective irrationalism with a religious essence. Johnson was one of the guys Tusk was talking about when he mentioned a special place in Hell. Those who led, promised, lied, schemed and then abdicated responsibility for the consequences of their actions. Johnson is a man-child who thinks Brexit is a big game of soldiers with which if lost, the only consequence is obscurity.

briany

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

They say that now, but that is not what they said to the public before the referendum, when Farage often pointed out that Norway and Switzerland do well outside the EU, and Hannan is on video saying "Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market."

No-one voted for a No Deal brexit, because the Leave campaign guaranteed there would be a most excellent deal: "The day after we vote to leave, we hold all the cards and can choose the path we want" - that was Michael Gove, who, let's remember, is still being talked about as a future Prime Minister.

From voteleave's flyers:

We love Europe – the problem is the EU
• There is a free trade zone from Iceland to Turkey and the Russian border and we will be part of it
• We don’t need to accept the control of the EU Court to trade with Europe
• Countries around the world trade with the EU without accepting the ultimate control of the EU court
• Taking back control is a careful change, not a sudden stop - we will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any legal process to leave

This lurch towards no deal is because their planned Cake deal was never happening, and they would rather double down on disaster than admit that they were lying.

Obviously, the people drafting the Vote Leave literature either grossly misunderstood EFTA or deliberately misrepresented it. They left a huge, huge point out - that EFTA countries are subject to the EU pillars free movement of goods, capital, cash and people. It's a good example of the complete guff Vote Leave were talking before A50 negotiations began, and their real position only emerged after the EU negotiators confronted them with reality. Their real position being that they have no real position, hence the absolute unprecedented chaos we're witnessing.

Leroy42

10000maniacs wrote: »

Johnson still thinks he is an evangelist preaching the cult of Brexit advocating the moral goodness and Christian virtue of leaving the EU built on the strength of collective irrationalism with a religious essence. Johnson was one of the guys Tusk was talking about when he mentioned a special place in Hell. Those who led, promised, lied, schemed and then abdicated responsibility for the consequences of their actions. Johnson is a man-child who thinks Brexit is a big game of soldiers with which if lost, the only consequence is obscurity.

The very fact that in even is latest Telegraph column he is advocating for a position that isn't even available (he wants to leave now, extend the implementation period until 2021 and pay the settlement, but not agree to the backstop) shows what a charlatan he is.

That isn't leadership, that is just wishful thinking and pretending that reality is different that what it actually is.

ShooterSF

Sam Russell wrote: »

They have no mechanics for that kind of voting in the HoC.

They have two lobbies - Aye and Nae. The proposition would be taken one at a time Yea or Nay.

So first - No Deal - Yea or Nay? - The noes have it.

Second the Wa - Yea or Nay? - The noes have it.

We remain in the CU - Yea or Nay? - The Ayes have it - or perhaps not.

And so it will go on until they agree something.

If the last deal on offer is Revoke Art 50 - Yea or Nay? Let us hope that the Ayes have it.

When Pandora's box was opened, all the evil in the world flew out - leaving behind only hope.

I'm just guessing based on her form that TM would put revoke a50 as one of the first votes likely leaving hers and no deal last. She likes a good cliff edge...

jester77

Sam Russell wrote: »

They have no mechanics for that kind of voting in the HoC.

They have two lobbies - Aye and Nae. The proposition would be taken one at a time Yea or Nay.

So first - No Deal - Yea or Nay? - The noes have it.

Second the Wa - Yea or Nay? - The noes have it.

We remain in the CU - Yea or Nay? - The Ayes have it - or perhaps not.

And so it will go on until they agree something.

If the last deal on offer is Revoke Art 50 - Yea or Nay? Let us hope that the Ayes have it.

When Pandora's box was opened, all the evil in the world flew out - leaving behind only hope.

And don't forget all the amendments that will probably get attached to each one of those. Would be a very long process to get through everything and have some sort of a consensus at the end. I don't think the HOC are capable of reaching a consensus within the current time frame.

Inquitus

Sam Russell wrote: »

They have no mechanics for that kind of voting in the HoC.

They have two lobbies - Aye and Nae. The proposition would be taken one at a time Yea or Nay.

So first - No Deal - Yea or Nay? - The noes have it.

Second the Wa - Yea or Nay? - The noes have it.

We remain in the CU - Yea or Nay? - The Ayes have it - or perhaps not.

And so it will go on until they agree something.

If the last deal on offer is Revoke Art 50 - Yea or Nay? Let us hope that the Ayes have it.

When Pandora's box was opened, all the evil in the world flew out - leaving behind only hope.

They can use AV in the commons if they want to:

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/indicative-votes

Alternatively, MPs could be asked to rank the different Brexit options in order of preference – in a similar way to the election of select committee chairs. The ballots would then be counted under the Alternative Vote system. Any option receiving more than half the first preference votes would win. If no option commands such support, the option with the lowest number of first preference votes would be eliminated, and the second preference votes of those who voted for the eliminated option would be allocated among the remaining options. This process would continue until one option commands majority support. This form of indicative votes was proposed by Ken Clarke in an amendment in February

An Ciarraioch

http://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1110152210095185920

10000maniacs

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

http://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1110152210095185920

Indicative votes are not legally binding, May will ignore them if she does not like the results. She will keep hammering on with her deal until she cannot anymore.

Imreoir2

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

http://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1110152210095185920

So, do people think it will be voted down by a greater or lesser margin than MV2?
I think it will be by a greater margin, there is really nothing to be gained for any MP to support the deal, neither leave nor remain want it.

seamus

Laois_Man wrote: »

It doesn't have to go thru parliament as the new date is written in EU law which supersedes UK law.

It's not EU law until all 28 member parliaments have approved it; including the UK.
If the UK doesn't approve the extension agreement, it doesn't exist.

The UK's withdrawal bill included an amendment that allows the date to be extended by statutory instrument, which I expect would be done in parallel with approving the extension agreement.

A formality, perhaps. But until things are actually signed and done, I would taking nothing for granted from this UK parliament.

Joe_ Public

Imreoir2 wrote: »

So, do people think it will be voted down by a greater or lesser margin than MV2?
I think it will be by a greater margin, there is really nothing to be gained for any MP to support the deal, neither leave nor remain want it.

It depends how the actual vote is framed. If it comes with a people’s vote amendment then i see the sense of remain MPs voting for it. Tom Watson hinted that they might consider this option at the protest march on Saturday. Then again the pm might try and outflank them by presenting it as a different binary choice so we have to wait and see. The likes of Gove and JRM seem to be softening to the position of supporting the deal so think it does have some sort of chance.