Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

RickBlaine · 18-03-2019 06:37PM

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

Zubeneschamali · 18-03-2019 06:38PM

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 · 18-03-2019 06:53PM

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 · 18-03-2019 06:54PM

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

Duane Dibbley · 18-03-2019 06:56PM

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 · 18-03-2019 06:58PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:00PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:02PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:02PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:20PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:31PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:32PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:41PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:43PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:45PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:46PM

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 · 18-03-2019 07:53PM

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 · 18-03-2019 08:03PM

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 · 18-03-2019 08:03PM

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 · 18-03-2019 08:06PM

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 · 18-03-2019 08:07PM

Gas.

Brexit is the gift that keeps on giving.

What a shambles.

Dyr · 18-03-2019 08:12PM

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 · 18-03-2019 08:17PM

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 · 18-03-2019 08:21PM

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.

bilston · 18-03-2019 08:21PM

The following may be unlikely, but maybe it could work for May. Maybe this move by Bercow could force the EU into some sort of new conversation with May which could lead to most subtle of subtle changes to the wording. If that happens it may make it easier for the DUP and ERG waiverers to back her deal. Some MPs may be reluctant to back exactly the same deal they rejected 7 days earlier. If there is the slightest of the changes then maybe they can back it.

It's unlikely, but part of me thinks that May does actually have a game plan here, now this may have blindsided her, but it may not be completely lost yet.

tuxy · 18-03-2019 08:24PM

bilston wrote: »

The following may be unlikely, but maybe it could work for May. Maybe this move by Bercow could force the EU into some sort of new conversation with May which could lead to most subtle of subtle changes to the wording. If that happens it may make it easier for the DUP and ERG waiverers to back her deal. .

My understanding of what Bercow said would required substantial changes to hold another vote on the WA.

Inquitus · 18-03-2019 08:27PM

tuxy wrote: »

My understanding of what Bercow said would required substantial changes to hold another vote on the WA.

It seems a majority in the HoC is enough to set aside the ruling Bercow has made, I assume if they have majority for the Deal, then they have a majority to set aside the rules for a vote on the deal. Whether they have a majority for this is another thing altogether.

Enzokk · 18-03-2019 08:42PM

And the prize for craziest theory for today goes to...Daniel Hannan.

https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1107687206045536258

Some of the replies to his tweet is very good. Like how the EU forced a minority government on the UK in 2017. Or how they put in a rule about 400 years ago and inserted this rule to frustrate Brexit in 2017.

10000maniacs · 18-03-2019 08:42PM

[HTML][/HTML]

Infini wrote: »

The last info for this was she was planming on delaying the 3rd vote. Bercow could've just decided to call time on these games by removing the decision from her hands until she either 1) Comes up with a realistic new plan or 2) abandons this farce.

Or 3) End the current Parliamentary session and fast track a new Parliamentary session. It was last done and took a few days in 1948.

tuxy · 18-03-2019 08:54PM

10000maniacs wrote: »

[HTML][/HTML]

Or 3) End the current Parliamentary session and fast track a new Parliamentary session. It was last done and took a few days in 1948.

The Queen would have nothing to gain nor any interest in getting involved in this mess.

Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments