Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Franz Von Peppercorn

Itssoeasy wrote: »

It's an indicative vote.

That’s not really an explanation. Just another way of saying it.

Anyway the real question is whether a proper binding vote can be held on the top two performing votes today. I think so but it’s not totally clear.

As for no deal if the WA is rejected or even not debated the exit date is 12 April, unless it is accepted then it’s May 22. All moot if the commons asks for another extension.

FrancieBrady

Enzokk wrote: »

Yes, MPs may vote against no-deal itself time and again but they will need to vote for a deal or to revoke to ensure it happens. I mean I could vote to save money every month but it will not happen, unless I physically start saving money (yeah, I know a crap analogy).

This is true. There is Deal or No Deal...everything else is internal British politics and is really of no consequence outside Britain, entertaining as it is.

Water John

SNP and Lib Dems did not vote for it, this time for strategic reasons. I think their votes can be added in the calculation if there own favourite option falls.

FrancieBrady

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

That’s not really an explanation. Just another way of saying it.

Anyway the real question is whether a proper binding vote can be held on the top two performing votes today. I think so but it’s not totally clear.

As for no deal if the WA is rejected or even not debated the exit date is 12 April, unless it is accepted then it’s May 22. All moot if the commons asks for another extension.

The government doesn't have to act on them. There is the possibility of the 2 parts of the executive facing off here, i.e. utter utter chaos.

Laois_Man

joe40 wrote: »

It was no big surprise that all 8 votes were rejected tonight, this is after all a process.
The fact that the customs union one only lost by 8 votes, and the confirmatory vote also received good support is encouraging.
It is still impossible to know what the govt will do in the event of mv3 failing. Surely a long extension with a general election is the only other option at this stage.

I'm not encouraged by it. Teresa May will not entertain either the Customs Union or the confirmatory vote options. The entire process is pointless, unless May is replaced without her WA getting thru.

Itssoeasy

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

That’s not really an explanation. Just another way of saying it.

Anyway the real question is whether a proper binding vote can be held on the top two performing votes today. I think so but it’s not totally clear.

As for no deal if the WA is rejected or even not debated the exit date is 12 April, unless it is accepted then it’s May 22. All moot if the commons asks for another extension.

It's not another way of saying it, that's literally what those votes are called. I think a motion carries more weight against the government but honestly I'm not sure and over the past few years I've learnt far more about the inner workings of the HoC than I ever thought or wished I would.

Water John

TM has been against a lot of things but has had to shift her position.
If a preferred option is arrived at on Monday, Letwin & Co may then start putting it into Law and thus forcing, whoever is PM to act.

Roger_007

woohoo!!! wrote: »

So what's the way forward? No deal and the WA are dead, finito. All leads to an extension request and a GE, perhaps at same time as European elections.

An election can be called by a two thirds majority or the PM losing a vote of confidence and 2 weeks later, confirmation that an alternative government/PM cannot be formed and therefore GE automatically called.

A long extension request, if granted, will have a shorter and a longer deadline (both over a longer period than the existing deadlines), on the same principle as the existing deadlines. EU whilst staying they prefer remain, will accept a softer Brexit but that depends on who/What party or parties are in power.

Labour have been calling for a GE all along. But I think they could get a rude awakening. They will never win a majority as long as Corbyn is leader. He is the most inept leader since Michael Foot. The vast majority of Brits are conservative, (some with a small c and some with a big C). Labour only wins when the leader is a moderate.
The most optimistic outcome of a GE for Labour would be another hung parliament with the possibility of forming a coalition with the SNP to make up a small majority. Even this would be an outside bet.

A Dub in Glasgo

The SNP position is to move for revocation first and if that fails to explore the least worse option

https://twitter.com/tomfrench85/status/1111031440031006720

Kh1993

Mogg now saying on Peston that he will have to vote with the DUP

seamus

HoC has voted a couple of times now against No Deal so I'd be surprised if they really did allow it to go there.

My money now is on May telling the EU that the UK will participate in the EU elections and accepting an extension until early 2020. Once that's done she'll call a General Election.

ninebeanrows

It is time the UK were cut loose. The whole thing is a farce.

Cut them adrift and we will survive.

This crap cant go on any longer.

Theyve surely robbed society of at least 2 years of progress.

A Dub in Glasgo

Roger_007 wrote: »

The most optimistic outcome of a GE for Labour would be another hung parliament with the possibility of forming a coalition with the SNP to make up a small majority. Even this would be an outside bet.

Unlikely when Labour in Scotland advocated tactical voting to deny SNP seats which then result in Tory seats!

Roger_007

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Unlikely when Labour in Scotland advocated tactical voting to deny SNP seats which then result in Tory seats!

Politicians have very short memories when the prospect of power presents itself.

Water John

LB may not get a majority but could be the senior partner of a coalition with the SNP.
It's all about the numbers.

Professor Moriarty

Kh1993 wrote: »

Mogg now saying on Peston that he will have to vote with the DUP

He'll have a different opinion by lunchtime. Jacob's noble stance reminds me of a quote from Groucho Marx: "These are my principles and if you don't like them....well I have others."

Infini

Water John wrote: »

LB may not get a majority but could be the senior partner of a coalition with the SNP.
It's all about the numbers.

And the price of the SNP will be a 2nd indyref of course.

Professor Moriarty

Water John wrote: »

LB may not get a majority but could be the senior partner of a coalition with the SNP.
It's all about the numbers.

Plus the Lib Dems, Tigs, Plaid Cymru - if necessary.

Roger_007

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Plus the Lib Dems, Tigs, Plaid Cymru - if necessary.

A British 'rainbow'?

Water John

SNP won't move to a Indy Ref unless they have a good chance of winning. Far more cautious than the first time. I think they would want to show their reliability as Govn't partners.

20silkcut

Dont be at yourself wrote: »

So;

May vows to resign, if her deal passes. But, the speaker just today said he may not even hear a vote on her deal, and even if he does, it’s unlikely to pass due to no support from DUP and half of ERG.

Meanwhile, parliament don’t have a majority for any one of 8 options, running the entire gamut from no-deal to EFTA+EEA.

Charitably, the EU could offer an extension allowing for a general election, but at this stage I’d be inclined to pull the plug on April 12th and move on. I don’t see the UK any closer to agreeing with itself than before.

That would go against the spirit of what Donald tusk said today.

Betraying the growing public opinion in Britain away from a hard brexit.

20silkcut

Sleety_Rain wrote: »

It is time the UK were cut loose. The whole thing is a farce.

Cut them adrift and we will survive.

This crap cant go on any longer.

Theyve surely robbed society of at least 2 years of progress.

This crap going on is still better than no deal.


Maybe if we disengaged from it a bit and let the brits sort themselves out we might be better off.

FrancieBrady

20silkcut wrote: »

That would go against the spirit of what Donald tusk said today.

Betraying the growing public opinion in Britain away from a hard brexit.

I think Tusk was just saying that to let it be known if they come back for a longer extension there will have to be a 2nd ref proposal.

maebee

Can someone please explain to me the difference between an "honourable member" and a "right honourable member,".

FrancieBrady

maebee wrote: »

Can someone please explain to me the difference between an "honourable member" and a "right honourable member,".

Opposition and fellow party member I think.

trashcan

20silkcut wrote: »

That would go against the spirit of what Donald tusk said today.

Betraying the growing public opinion in Britain away from a hard brexit.

I think the EU will be inclined to give a long extension if they can. The further down the road it's kicked the less likely it is to happen at all. I think stage one of that has already happened (assuming they can't crash out on Friday now and 12 April in the new date ?)

Roger_007

maebee wrote: »

Can someone please explain to me the difference between an "honourable member" and a "right honourable member,".

It's the same as the difference between a bollix and a right bollix.:)

devnull

Whips are now defying the things they are whipping others to do.

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1111046459124789249?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1111046459124789249&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Flive-mps-to-vote-on-brexit-alternatives-as-theresa-may-battles-to-save-her-deal-11676313
Just when you thought it couldn't turn into more of a farce.

FrancieBrady

trashcan wrote: »

I think the EU will be inclined to give a long extension if they can. The further down the road it's kicked the less likely it is to happen at all. I think stage one of that has already happened (assuming they can't crash out on Friday now and 12 April in the new date ?)

They have to propose something or it's No Deal. If there is no consensus the only way to avoid crash out is to revoke the whole thing.

20silkcut

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think Tusk was just saying that to let it be known if they come back for a longer extension there will have to be a 2nd ref proposal.

He was reaching out to the people who marched in London at the weekend and those who signed the petition.
Better that than the rhetoric of verhopstadt, Elmer Brock and macron etc.