Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Fr Tod Umptious

Peregrinus wrote: »

A politics professor from the University of Leiden (in the Netherlands) has mapped the votes of each MP on the indicative vote options, like this:
https://twitter.com/alexandreafonso/status/1111042565107826690

As you can see, Parliament divides into

- a smaller group (about 25%) who vote for either or both of the "very hard brexit" options, shown in purple, and

- a larger group (about 75%) who vote either for second referendum/revocation (in pink) or something softer than the negotiated deal (in yellow).

Significantly, those who support softer brexit are very open also to supporting a second referendum, indicating perhaps that they think their favoured approach can command public support, while the very hard brexiters are not, indicating the opposite.

The purpose of the indicative votes is to get a sense of which options the Commons might be able to build a consensus for, and the answer is clear; a softer Brexit, possibly with the endorsement of a second referendum. Significantly, permanent customs union and second referendum both secured higher "Yes" votes than the negotiated deal has managed on either of its outings. To my mind the only thing that would prevent the Commons arriving at a consensus along these lines would be opposition from the leadership of one or both parties.

I'm surprised that 75% went for something softer than the WA.

The Hardline ERG/DUP besides, I thought the reason many disliked the WA was because it was too soft.

gmisk

Purgative wrote: »

Saw a similar one of a fruit and veg dealer in Southern England. How he'd hoped to pass the business on to his kids and would soon be totally screwed. I was feeling really sorry for him and his family, until he said he'd voted leave.


It is madness that I just can't get.

I saw an interview with a guy who owned a flower shop in UK a few weeks back, had been going for 15+ years I think. He voted leave previously. To take back the borders etc..
He was really worried his place would have to shut down etc etc.
How would he vote again...leave.

Honestly what can you say to people like this?

FWIW I think if there is another ref or people vote I think it will be a remain but not a landslide by any means possible 55/45 max.

Peregrinus

robinph wrote: »

Whoever it was that ticked Aye to both the no deal and 2nd referendum options probably needs some supervision.

Mm. Could be somebody who thinks:

(a) no deal is the only option that satisifies the referendum mandate, but

(b) it's a shockingly bad idea, and therefore

(c) the referendum mandate ugently needs to be superseded by a new mandate, which

(d) can only be done by a second referendum.

Here in the real world, the MP concerned is Huw Merriman, who has only been in Parliament since 2015 and who sits for the absurdly safe Tory seat of Bexhill and Battle. He was a remainer during the referendum campaign, and has I think kept a low profile on this issue since then. Whether his thinking is as outlined above, I cannot say.

Peregrinus

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I'm surprised that 75% went for something softer than the WA.

The Hardline ERG/DUP besides, I thought the reason many disliked the WA was because it was too soft.

I think a lot of people dislike the negotiated deal because of the backstop, on which a great deal of discontent has focussed.

But of course the backstop is only as intrusive as it is because May is targetting a hard Brexit. If you dislike the backstop then targetting a softer Brexit makes much sense. (Plus of course there are economic reasons for favouring a softer Brexit.)

prawnsambo

mazwell wrote: »

I've been a lurker in this (these) thread(s) for a while but I find that if I don't have a few hours to myself I get lost because Brexit is so fast moving I.e. a ****show. Can somebody explain to me why there isn't another vote on the WM until Monday? Apologies if I've got that wrong I skipped the last 10 pages because it was hurting my brain to read!

Sorry, what's the WM? On Monday they are going to vote again on the most popular motions that went through the indicative vote process yesterday. I assume there'll be a process for this, but not sure what it is or when it will be carried out. As far as I know, the house is not sitting on Friday.

RobMc59

It seems to me that the MP's seem unwilling to disregard the referendum leave result and are hoping events conspire to put the decision into the hands of the people-which is preferable to the current total confusion.

Igotadose

prawnsambo wrote: »

Sorry, what's the WM? On Monday they are going to vote again on the most popular motions that went through the indicative vote process yesterday. I assume there'll be a process for this, but not sure what it is or when it will be carried out. As far as I know, the house is not sitting on Friday.

Why are they waiting till Monday? Don't days matter? (I know, these are rhetorical questions.) MP's looking bad nation- and world-wide isn't a thing anymore, they couldn't look worse.

I mean, if they've voted *all* the motions down, is the thinking that reducing the number of motions will change the verdicts? Or will they institute some sort of proportional vote, so MP's choose their most favorite, 2d, 3rd, 4th, etc.

Just a farce. They could've been crashing out tomorrow had the PM's self-imposed deadline of 29 March held, instead, still waffling about just what they want to do.

Joe_ Public

As i understand it the WA has to pass this week or it’s game over, as per eu conditions for the extensions. So pm would have to move MV3 either today or tomorrow assuming an emergency house sitting. From Monday, assuming her deal is finally out of the picture, they have 12 days to either crash out or find a means of negotiating a longer extension to pursue an alternative path.

54and56

Joe_ Public wrote: »

As i understand it the WA has to pass this week or it’s game over, as per eu conditions for the extensions. So pm would have to move MV3 either today or tomorrow assuming an emergency house sitting. From Monday, assuming her deal is finally out of the picture, they have 12 days to either crash out or find a means of negotiating a longer extension to pursue an alternative path.

As I understand it the Letwin motion returns on Monday to focus minds and boil down the 8 options voted on (and rejected) yesterday into one which commands a majority but this will only happen if TM's WA hasn't been passed via MV3 before then.

Have I the right end of the stick?

FrancieBrady

Igotadose wrote: »

Why are they waiting till Monday? Don't days matter? (I know, these are rhetorical questions.) MP's looking bad nation- and world-wide isn't a thing anymore, they couldn't look worse.

I mean, if they've voted *all* the motions down, is the thinking that reducing the number of motions will change the verdicts? Or will they institute some sort of proportional vote, so MP's choose their most favorite, 2d, 3rd, 4th, etc.

Just a farce. They could've been crashing out tomorrow had the PM's self-imposed deadline of 29 March held, instead, still waffling about just what they want to do.

Yes. There was a lot of 'negative voting going on' because MP's knew this was a two day process, i.e. that the best of the motions would be back again.

woohoo!!!

Peregrinus wrote: »

robinph wrote: »

Whoever it was that ticked Aye to both the no deal and 2nd referendum options probably needs some supervision.

Mm. Could be somebody who thinks:

(a) no deal is the only option that satisifies the referendum mandate, but

(b) it's a shockingly bad idea, and therefore

(c) the referendum mandate ugently needs to be superseded by a new mandate, which

(d) can only be done by a second referendum.

Here in the real world, the MP concerned is Huw Merriman, who has only been in Parliament since 2015 and who sits for the absurdly safe Tory seat of Bexhill and Battle. He was a remainer during the referendum campaign, and has I think kept a low profile on this issue since then. Whether his thinking is as outlined above, I cannot say.

More likely that someone ticked the wrong box by mistake because they did not pay attention. A lot of these guys also just go with one herd or another without actually working things out for themselves.

Russman

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes. There was a lot of 'negative voting going on' because MP's knew this was a two day process, i.e. that the best of the motions would be back again.

It could be that, but I reckon there's a fair proportion who just don't get that any deal, no matter what it is, is going to be a downgrade on their current arrangement (i.e. full membership with some opt outs and special conditions). They'd really like Brexit to be all the good bits with no obligations.

Some of them realise that a Norway type deal or some form of SM/CU wouldn't be too bad (relatively speaking), but then they think about it some more and just can't get past the idea of abiding by rules they would have no part in creating (a bit like what the media have portrayed the EU to be currently), so they don't want that either. The notion that the current status is by far the best just doesn't cut it with them.

I've no idea how this all plays out now, its really gone beyond a farce at this stage. There's just about enough sane ones in the HoC to stop a crash out, yet there's enough crazies to stop any sane ideas gaining traction. Would a GE help ? Not sure tbh. Maybe give them a long extension & ignore them until they come up with a plan or until all inward investment in their country has stopped.

nc6000

Roanmore wrote:

I thought Arlene Foster's interview was very telling. Twice I think she mentioned the benefits of Brexit (no specifics of course) to NI and on both occasions she gave a nervous laugh as if she didn't believe what she was saying. Similar to the way Therese May's mouth goes crooked when she says something that's not true or she doesn't believe. They've got themselves in right mess.

It's crazy really that she's getting so much coverage considering she isn't even an MP.

Shelga

What would they even put on the ballot paper in a second referendum?

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

Shelga wrote: »

What would they even put on the ballot paper in a second referendum?

As it stands at the moment, nothing as the amendment didn't pass, but if it were to pass at some stage the general consensus is a choice between May's deal or no Brexit.

lawred2

nc6000 wrote: »

It's crazy really that she's getting so much coverage considering she isn't even an MP.

Well she's the leader of the DUP - just like Nicola Sturgeon is leader of the SNP. She doesn't have a seat in Westminster either as her seat is in Holyrood.

Mary Lou McDonald is leader of SF - her seat is in Dail Eireann.

Eod100

So looks like there won't be a MV3 this week, but the indicative votes may be voted on again on Monday,

Brexit currently delayed to 12th April. Does the 22nd May extension only apply if MV3 was passed this week? Or is there a bit of leeway if passed before 12th April?

And still question marks over MV3 being able to be voted on and whether May has support to pass it.

Joe_ Public

Shelga wrote: »

What would they even put on the ballot paper in a second referendum?

That’s one battle that has yet to be fought - and that’s exactly what it will be.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

Eod100 wrote: »

So looks like there won't be a MV3 this week, but the indicative votes may be voted on again on Monday,

Brexit currently delayed to 12th April. Does the 22nd May extension only apply if MV3 was passed this week? Or is there a bit of leeway if passed before 12th April?

And still question marks over MV3 being able to be voted on and whether May has support to pass it.

12 April is the extension regardless of whether MV3 is passed, MV3 must be passed before 12 April to seek 22 May extension.

It is, however, insane that they're only having these conversations the week of the original Brexit date.

Shelga

Joe_ Public wrote: »

That’s one battle that has yet to be fought - and that’s exactly what it will be.

There will be howling from the usual suspects if No Deal isn’t included- but how in god’s name could that be given legitimacy by being put on a ballot paper.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

Shelga wrote: »

There will be howling from the usual suspects if No Deal isn’t included- but how in god’s name could that be given legitimacy by being put on a ballot paper.

I'm not sure, only the ERG really pushed for no deal, but it looks now that was just to get rid of May. It was a bluff.

Joe_ Public

Shelga wrote: »

There will be howling from the usual suspects if No Deal isn’t included- but how in god’s name could that be given legitimacy by being put on a ballot paper.

It’s well and truly impossible to know. One side could well argue that no deal, being consistently voted down, should conclusively be off the table but the other side will counter argue that the people should get a say on it if that’s the route you’re going.

One thing for certain for those clinging onto the second referendum position, they’d better be already preparing for those debates because they are going to be long and bloody like everything else.

LeinsterDub

Eod100 wrote: »

So looks like there won't be a MV3 this week, but the indicative votes may be voted on again on Monday,

Brexit currently delayed to 12th April. Does the 22nd May extension only apply if MV3 was passed this week? Or is there a bit of leeway if passed before 12th April?

And still question marks over MV3 being able to be voted on and whether May has support to pass it.

Brexitcast are saying they can have MV 3, 4, 5 right up to the 11th but I'm not sure how much faith I put in them now.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Brexitcast are saying they can have MV 3, 4, 5 right up to the 11th but I'm not sure how much faith I put in them now.

Are we even clear that Bercow will allow MV3 on foot of May's agreement to resign?

Enzokk

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Brexitcast are saying they can have MV 3, 4, 5 right up to the 11th but I'm not sure how much faith I put in them now.

Did they also say that the EU will compromise or give ground at the last minute?

prawnsambo

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Are we even clear that Bercow will allow MV3 on foot of May's agreement to resign?

I wouldn't have thought so. May resigning doesn't change the agreement in any way.

Eod100

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

12 April is the extension regardless of whether MV3 is passed, MV3 must be passed before 12 April to seek 22 May extension.

It is, however, insane that they're only having these conversations the week of the original Brexit date.

Yeah understood first bit to be the case but thought extension to 22 May was conditional on MV3 being passed this week but maybe there's some flexibility

Eod100

Oof.

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1111196735613874176

joe40

Roanmore wrote: »

I thought Arlene Foster's interview was very telling. Twice I think she mentioned the benefits of Brexit (no specifics of course) to NI and on both occasions she gave a nervous laugh as if she didn't believe what she was saying. Similar to the way Therese May's mouth goes crooked when she says something that's not true or she doesn't believe.
They've got themselves in right mess.

I think the DUP could take or leave Brexit. They supported leave in a cynical attempt to dilute the GFA and distance themselves from the south. But didn't take into account the very real economic damage Brexit will do to the North.

Unbelievable negligent and frankly bigoted in my opinion but that's the DUP for you.

The Backstop then was a shock for them, their precious union being undermined in their view. So preventing the backstop is now more important for the DUP than Brexit.
They would rather see "no deal" or "remain" or "soft Brexit" sooner than the Backstop. In short their own narrow idealogical point of view trumps all other considerations, economic, social, GFA etc

lawred2

Eod100 wrote: »

Oof.

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1111196735613874176

he's some fool taking her on - giving her an open goal like that - she'd buy and sell the lot of them