Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

ToBeFrank123

I can see the EU wanting a long extension and Brexiteers wanting a short extension and this becoming the next stupid battle the brexiteers want to fight with the EU. Its like they are trolling the EU at this stage.

ArmaniJeanss

Sam Russell wrote: »

Speaker is not opposed in an election. He is normally returned unopposed.

Not really true, the election takes place but the Torys, LibDems and Labour have an agreement not to run a candidate against the speaker.

ancapailldorcha

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

I can see the EU wanting a long extension and Brexiteers wanting a short extension and this becoming the next stupid battle the brexiteers want to fight with the EU.

Contesting the European Parliament elections is an important totem in my opinion. It's only symbolic but it does represent a significant delay in Brexit.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Not in a legally binding manner though. No deal is the default legal position.

Was there any amendments put forward to change that default to revising article 50?

Joe_ Public

Enzokk wrote: »

I see some tweets on how Bercow is one of the few whose reputations has actually been enhanced in all of this madness in the UK. He has become a sensation with his, "ORDER....Ordaahhhhh!!" and his rulings today shows he is not just a partisan hack doing his parties bidding. His reward for this, not getting a peerage as almost all speakers has done before in all likelihood. This because he has been fair in his rulings and it has upset the Conservatives and they want to get back at him.

I was looking at his election wins and Labour, while never strong in his constituency, didn't run a candidate the last 2 elections. May be they respect him more than his own party members?

Fair play to him. I always felt he was hamming it up in the commons a bit to garner as many headlines as possible but if he does his job, who cares? Definitely has the respect of all sides of the house which is all you can ask.

Actually: probably fair to say he mightn’t hsve the respect of a rump of the Tory party but don’t believe that is any slight on him whatsoever.

Popeleo

Enzokk wrote: »

If she does that she loses her job. The DUP may not kick up a big fuss immediately but they would probably humiliate her with a budget that needs to pass.

In any case, I am worried about the negotiations of the likes of Banks and Farage on the continent. We are at the mercy of some despicable politicians who has very little time for the rule of law.

I agree. But she has little time left whatever happens, so she could resign on a "high" shortly after getting her beloved deal through and ensuring that the will of the people was carried out, yada yada - the resignation speech writes itself.

RickBlaine

TM is really backed into a corner now. God knows what will happen next.

Zubeneschamali

Donald Trump wrote: »

Nothing to do with impact to politics or political party. I'm talking about ultra brexiter scumbags on the street rioting.

I would much sooner see the police baton charging arsey brexiters than hungry poor people outside an empty Tesco when the food runs out after Brexit.

Infini

Brexit happens next week to be honest they dont have any more time to play these games, Bercow is doing everyone a favour as theres no guarantee of an EU extention and honestly its decision time for the HoC.

brickster69

The EU will not be happy about this ! Not being allowed to have another vote till they get the outcome they want.

Duane Dibbley

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

I can see the EU wanting a long extension and Brexiteers wanting a short extension and this becoming the next stupid battle the brexiteers want to fight with the EU. Its like they are trolling the EU at this stage.

Why do you think the EU want a long extension ?

RickBlaine

I think the best course of action for May is to put the question to the public in another ref, her deal or no Brexit. She might not like it but the list of her available options is becoming smaller and smaller.

tuxy

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

Why do you think the EU want a long extension ?

The EU do not want no deal and a short extension would just be a delay before no deal. A long extension has a chance of brexit not happening at all.

RickBlaine wrote: »

I think the best course of action for May is to put the question to the public in another ref, her deal or no Brexit. She might not like it but the list of her available options is becoming smaller and smaller.

She needs the support of parliament for this and it's still a very unpopular idea in the HOC.

Imreoir2

Bercow suggesting that the proposition would have to be fundementally changed to allow another vote on the issue. Makes the point that a change of opinion, clearly a reference to the AG's advice, would not in itself be enough to allow a further vote.

briany

brickster69 wrote: »

The EU will not be happy about this ! Not being allowed to have another vote till they get the outcome they want.

It wasn't the EU asking the HoC to hold another vote. Entirely the idea of May and her supporters.

Donald Trump

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I would much sooner see the police baton charging arsey brexiters than hungry poor people outside an empty Tesco when the food runs out after Brexit.

We're not talking individual preferences here. Neither yours nor mine. Only what we think will or will not happen. You might or might not think A50 will be revoked before 29th March. I think it won't. I think it would only be revoked after another referendum which supported the revocation



We don't have to wait too long to find out!

brickster69

briany wrote: »

It wasn't the EU asking the HoC to hold another vote. Entirely the idea of May and her supporters.

Of course, but the EU knew if they never offered anything better to be added to the WA then it would not pass. So considering the only deal the EU cannot accept is no deal they did.

Irishmale0399

Would it not be wiser to allow them crash out and then make them an offer that they could rejoin in lets say 2025 or so. Let them realise what benifits the EU offers them.

tuxy

brickster69 wrote: »

Of course, but the EU knew if they never offered anything better to be added to the WA then it would not pass. So considering the only deal the EU cannot accept is no deal they did.

The EU stated that a backstop with a time limit is not a backstop. They then repeatably asked May what she wanted to change and she had no idea. The EU should not be expected to make changes that have not been requested.

johnnyskeleton

brickster69 wrote: »

The EU will not be happy about this ! Not being allowed to have another vote till they get the outcome they want.

Mod note:

Serious discussion only please. Suggesting the EU have anything to do with a Parliamentary rule from the 17th century is not serious discussion

hmmm

Brexit is eating itself due to its own inbuilt contradictions. The EU I think will offer both a sort term or long term option, with the UK government asked to make the choice. I could see Labour supporting TM with whatever deal she wants, as long as it is put to a public vote.

briany

brickster69 wrote: »

Of course, but the EU knew if they never offered anything better to be added to the WA then it would not pass. So considering the only deal the EU cannot accept is no deal they did.

This sounds like the EU was acting in bad faith, instead of arriving at a deal with May's negotiating team that respected both sets of red lines.

The fact that it cannot get through the HoC isn't really the EU's problem. A deal would have been signed, sealed and delivered at this stage if the UK's internal politics wasn't so screwed up, with the HoC split down the middle, a regional party being the balance holder thanks to an ill-timed GE, trying to uphold (or be seen to uphold) a peace agreement, and having to contend with a very rabid partisan media. None of these are problems the EU created, but the UK seems to think it's up to the EU to solve.

CelticRambler

Donald Trump wrote: »

At the risk of dragging off topic, do you not know how STV works?

If there were three candidates left with only 0.5% between second and third, under STV, assuming first has not reached quota, third would be eliminated anyway and his votes redistributed

Yes, I do know how it works and no, STV doesn't work by eliminating 13 of the 15 candidates straight away and not redistributing their votes.

volchitsa wrote: »

unless they abstained in the second round, then they did of course vote for the second choice, just as much as someone votes for the second or third fourth choice in STV.

You do not get to vote for your second choice; you get to pick one of two candidates chosen by others, or you abstain (which hit record levels in R2 of the 2017 presidential election). In STV, you decide who your second choice is (or 3rd, 4th, 5th ...) .

With due regard to Calina , the point is that French and UK politics were on very similar trajectories due to an electoral process rigged in favour of the two major parties, one Left, one Right. The French managed to pull themselves back towards normality because, despite their many faults :rolleyes:, they do at least energetically debate every potential outcome and cast their (one ) vote with a degree of intelligent motivation.

The relevance to Brexit (and this thread): last weekend in France saw the conclusion of a massive consultative process in France arising from the gilets jaunes protests. Last weekend in the UK saw Theresa May in secret discussions with her own cabal in a desperate attempt to bulldoze her deal through the House of Commons. Westminster should be looking across the Channel, seeing how Macron has defused his situation ... but of course talking to the other side wouldn't be the British way.

Zubeneschamali

Donald Trump wrote: »

We're not talking individual preferences here. Neither yours nor mine. Only what we think will or will not happen.

Yes, and you are saying that they cannot revoke A50 because the Brexiters would riot.


But if they crash out, the riots will be much larger, since the percentage of the population who want to eat food is rather larger than the percentage who want a hard Brexit.


So giving in to threats of Brexiter violence is a stupid move.

Dyr

Laois_Man wrote: »

He has said MV3 can only occur if it is not substantially the same as the one already rejected on March 12th

And in the process, he got a few digs in against Teresa May's using of the house to play her games!

That's the end of that!

Extension to the end of 2020 is the only path forward I can see

Assuming an extension is forthcoming from the EU27, if not its a crash out by accident rather than design.

CelticRambler

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Fair play on that call, absolutely nailed it on first base. Quick question on indicative voting and where it might fit into your estimated timeline? Would it hsve much impact on the process do you think?

I don't see that there's either the time or the rationale for "indicative voting". At this stage, the only sensible course of action would be for Theresa May to call all the party leaders & deputy leaders together (and if she had any sense, she'd call Sinn Féin in too) and hammer out a single proposal that would achieve a majority in the HoC. By that, I don't mean anything along the lines of "lets go back to the EU and renegotiate ..." but a proper plan of action with defined steps.

Assuming the majority of parties in the HoC want either a soft Brexit or to Remain, that reduces the options to passing the current WA subject to public confirmation (so second ref); or for her to revoke Art.50 and resign immediately (a reverse David Cameron, if you like). But in the dystopian world of Westminster, some irrational alternative will surely emerge before the weekend.

Kermit.de.frog

Gas.

Brexit is the gift that keeps on giving.

What a shambles.

Dyr

Water John wrote: »

A Govn't lad taking great umbrage at the audacity of the Speaker;
Solicitor general says UK is in 'major constitutional crisis'
This is from Robert Buckland, the solicitor general, on Bercow saying he might not allow a repeat vote on the Brexit deal. Buckland told BBC News:

We are in a major constitutional crisis here.

There are ways around this - a prorogation of parliament and a new session. We are talking about hours to March 29. Frankly we could have done without this.

Now we have this ruling to deal with, it is clearly going to require a lot of very fast but very deep thought in the hours ahead. Guradian.

I saw a tweet saying one MP reckoned even a new session is a risk as the govt might not even manage to win the vote on the queens speech! :eek:

Inquitus

PP Odds on a 3rd MV, odds of it passing, if it takes place, have come in a lot in the past few days.

Withdrawal Agreement 3rd Meaningful Vote to pass (Void if no vote before 30-03-19)
No 4/7
Yes 13/10

brickster69

An Claidheamh wrote: »

Is that all you have to say?
Your joke of a country are having vote after vote after vote for.... another vote, and an extension they will have to beg for?


Humiliated much?

Incorrect, Parliament are having vote after vote, not the joke of a whole Country as you say.