Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Shelga

SimonTemplar wrote: »

To be fair to Labour, People's Vote are advising against that amendment saying today is just about getting an extension and not specifically for a 2nd ref.

But the EU is just going to tell parliament that they have to decide what they want an extension for. They may as well decide now, and vote for the motion that extends article 50 specifically to have a second referendum.

robinph

Shelga wrote: »

But the EU is just going to tell parliament that they have to decide what they want an extension for. They may as well decide now, and vote for the motion that extends article 50 specifically to have a second referendum.

Sssshhhh.

Don't tell anyone that just yet, it needs to be a surprise or not enough will vote for the extension. Needs a few of them to think they are voting for the extension for the purposes of renegotiating the deal in some form or other.

BluePlanet

robinph wrote: »

Sssshhhh.

Don't tell anyone that just yet, it needs to be a surprise or not enough will vote for the extension. Needs a few of them to think they are voting for the extension for the purposes of renegotiating the deal in some form or other.

That is exactly what the Tories believe an extension is for.
To buy more time to pressure EU 27 to make changes to the backstop and WA.

Shelga

robinph wrote: »

Sssshhhh.

Don't tell anyone that just yet, it needs to be a surprise or not enough will vote for the extension. Needs a few of them to think they are voting for the extension for the purposes of renegotiating the deal in some form or other.

Then parliament should vote on two things: do they agree in principle to a softer Brexit than May’s, or do they want a second referendum. They are the only options.

A softer Brexit starts to seem pointless and pleases no one, so they should just go straight for a referendum.

BonnieSituation

I was fuming at Labour's approach but yet again this forum comes up trumps.

Solid work guys.

Inquitus

Seems the DUP are looking for a ladder to climb down and will take some weaker guarantees to back a 3rd WA vote.

The DUP leader, Arlene Foster, has signalled her party is ready to do a deal to end the Brexit impasse, saying that the prime minister must prove only that the constitutional integrity of the UK would be preserved, my colleague Jessica Elgot reports.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/14/dup-leader-arlene-foster-ready-to-strike-deal-with-may-to-end-brexit-impasse

Sardonicat

And back in your box you go, Ms Foster.

demfad

robinph wrote: »

But would at least be a toss of the coin with a decision at the end of it, assuming they don't have one of the options being lets go back to Brussels and re-negotiate.



It's a disaster either way as far as I'm concerned if it's no deal or Mays deal, but if the country knowingly opts for one of those over remain then so be it and I'll just have to prepare the escape pods. Can you inherit nationality from your children?

Even though none of the electoral issues that had a massive influence on the first vote have been addressed I think remain would win by 60:40 at least.

There was no 'on the ground' knowledge of the harm Brexit will do.
Now Business, farming, haulage, catering etc. etc. have all looked into it and all understand.

The Remain vote will increase in NI and Scotland and Wales will vote remain this time. So will England I feel.

No poll as far as I know has put leave ahead of remain since 2017.
The constant leave mantra that 'public sentiment hasn't shifted' is evidence enough that it has.

joe40

It seems like Brexit is slipping away from them.

If May's WA agreement is put a 3rd time the ERG and DUP might be onboard this time if they feel there is a significant risk of no Brexit. This might provide the 75 or so votes needed to overturn the last vote.

I would nearly take that myself at this stage.

Another referendum is not guaranteed, and the result is not guaranteed even if there were to be another vote

joe40

joe40 wrote: »

It seems like Brexit is slipping away from them.

If May's WA agreement is put a 3rd time the ERG and DUP might be onboard this time if they feel there is a significant risk of no Brexit. This might provide the 75 or so votes needed to overturn the last vote.

I would nearly take that myself at this stage.

Another referendum is not guaranteed, and the result is not guaranteed even if there were to be another vote

It will be interesting if they run the amendment that says public vote on MDV3 or Remain before the parliament gets to vote on MDV3.

I think it has to happen in that order, because if parliament do approve of MDV3, the 2nd referendum won't have a leg to stand on as parliament has approved

ancapailldorcha

joe40 wrote: »

It seems like Brexit is slipping away from them.

If May's WA agreement is put a 3rd time the ERG and DUP might be onboard this time if they feel there is a significant risk of no Brexit. This might provide the 75 or so votes needed to overturn the last vote.

I would nearly take that myself at this stage.

Another referendum is not guaranteed, and the result is not guaranteed even if there were to be another vote

They lost by 149 last time though. The ERG and DUP between them don't command nearly enough votes.

Leroy42

joe40 wrote: »

It seems like Brexit is slipping away from them.

If May's WA agreement is put a 3rd time the ERG and DUP might be onboard this time if they feel there is a significant risk of no Brexit. This might provide the 75 or so votes needed to overturn the last vote.

I would nearly take that myself at this stage.

Another referendum is not guaranteed, and the result is not guaranteed even if there were to be another vote

But the default is No Deal on 29th. No matter how many votes TM's loses this remains the case. The vote yesterday is not binding, and even if it where there needs to be legislation passed and I see little hope of that.

murphaph

joe40 wrote: »

It seems like Brexit is slipping away from them.

If May's WA agreement is put a 3rd time the ERG and DUP might be onboard this time if they feel there is a significant risk of no Brexit. This might provide the 75 or so votes needed to overturn the last vote.

I would nearly take that myself at this stage.

Another referendum is not guaranteed, and the result is not guaranteed even if there were to be another vote

I'd take it to get them out of the decision making processes of the EU while they fix their internal political structures and just grow up a bit. They will blame us on their (mis)fortunes either way. The EU does have other things to concern itself with. Some sub-committee can be established to deal with the UK once they are a non-member, perhaps Ms Weyand could chair it. Perhaps in a generation or so they might be ready to genuinely cooperate as a normal member state.

charlie14

Inquitus wrote: »

Seems the DUP are looking for a ladder to climb down and will take some weaker guarantees to back a 3rd WA vote.



https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/14/dup-leader-arlene-foster-ready-to-strike-deal-with-may-to-end-brexit-impasse

If there was a 2nd referendum NI would be 70% remain imo, so bad news for the DUP.
As I said earlier, after both the DUP & ERG`s weakness being exposed last night, I would not be overly surprised at the ERG looking too same ladder.

SimonTemplar

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

joe40 wrote: »

It seems like Brexit is slipping away from them.

If May's WA agreement is put a 3rd time the ERG and DUP might be onboard this time if they feel there is a significant risk of no Brexit. This might provide the 75 or so votes needed to overturn the last vote.

I would nearly take that myself at this stage.

Another referendum is not guaranteed, and the result is not guaranteed even if there were to be another vote

They lost by 149 last time though. The ERG and DUP between them don't command nearly enough votes.

This is why I don't understand why the DUP and ERG are considered so important for the WA vote. Even if they both vote for the WA, it'll still fail by a lot.

joe40

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They lost by 149 last time though. The ERG and DUP between them don't command nearly enough votes.

I thought they would have those numbers, along with DUP 80 would do it.

I could be wrong though I haven't been that close to the actual arithmetic here

charlie14

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They lost by 149 last time though. The ERG and DUP between them don't command nearly enough votes.

If both the DUP and ERG both back it then it would be difficult for any others in the Tory party to vote against I would imagine ?

For it to pass would only require 75 changing their vote. DUP vote for and that leaves 65 of which, and I may be wrong, would be well within the range if the ERG also backed it.

Inquitus

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They lost by 149 last time though. The ERG and DUP between them don't command nearly enough votes.

Well it was roughly 70-72 ERG who voted against the 2nd WA vote and 10 DUP, so there is likely enough to swing it, if they are unanimous.

ancapailldorcha

Inquitus wrote: »

Well it was roughly 70-72 ERG who voted against the 2nd WA vote and 10 DUP, so there is likely enough to swing it, if they are unanimous.

Just realised the error in my maths.

Wouldn't they insist on changing the WA anyway though?

Duane Dibbley

I think she needs 320 votes for it to pass. Which would mean she needs an extra 78 votes

demfad

Inquitus wrote: »

Well it was roughly 70-72 ERG who voted against the 2nd WA vote and 10 DUP, so there is likely enough to swing it, if they are unanimous.

The DUP would prefer a Soft Brexit to the backstop IMO.

That was why Corbyn tried to court them before.

Leroy42

If the DUP and the ERG signal they will vote for the deal it will pass as some MP's are voting against it on the basis that it would not pass anyway so essentially there is no risk.

If the numbers look to be close, which MP will want to be the one(s) remembered for causing the UK to crash out?

Inquitus

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Just realised the error in my maths.

Wouldn't they insist on changing the WA anyway though?

I think its finally dawning on them it's this Brexit or No/Much Softer Brexit.

An Ciarraioch

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

I think she needs 326 votes for it to pass. Which would mean she needs an extra 84 votes

650-7(SF) = 643, also Speaker doesn't vote unless there's a tie, so 322, I think.

Duane Dibbley

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

650-7(SF) = 643, also Speaker doesn't vote unless there's a tie, so 322, I think.

I edited my post and got 320 based on this from the Guardian in Nov 2018

How much support does May need to get her plan through parliament?
She needs the support of 320 MPs to be guaranteed a win. While the Commons has 650 MPs, 11 do not take part in voting – the Speaker, John Bercow and his three deputies; and the seven Sinn Féin MPs. That leaves 639, meaning 320 will get her over the line

.

gooch2k9

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

650-7(SF) = 643, also Speaker doesn't vote unless there's a tie, so 322, I think.

The grand finale at the end of Brexit; Bercow getting the final call. You'd know this was all just a grand "social experiment" at that point!

According to the Tory whips, they will vote against any amended motion. Does this mean they won't go for any extension unless it's their one? What then?

Water John

The Govn't in effect have at this point accepted yesterday's vote and will not a Crash out Brexit happen. For us in Ireland that is the main problem off the table.

BluePlanet

Water John wrote: »

The Govn't in effect have at this point accepted yesterday's vote and will not a Crash out Brexit happen. For us in Ireland that is the main problem off the table.

It's not off the table as the clock is still ticking and only the UK can stop it.

dresden8

Water John wrote: »

The Govn't in effect have at this point accepted yesterday's vote and will not a Crash out Brexit happen. For us in Ireland that is the main problem off the table.

It is very much still on the table.

tuxy

As said, leaving with no deal in the case of no agreement is written into UK law, there is nothing in UK law about avoiding no deal.
The non binding votes are just to advise parliament on what direction it should try to take, it does not mean they will achieve it.