Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Peregrinus · 21-03-2019 06:56AM

Scoondal wrote: »

To sum up Donald Tusk's statement yesterday :
UK can get an extension to 23 May if the withdrawal agreement is passed before 29 March. Or a longer extension might be agreed if there is a referendum or a general election.
But on independant ie, they say that France, Belgium and Spain oppose any extension short or long.
Anyway the UK parliament will not agree to the UK/EU agreement.
So it must be a UK general election or referendum or a "No Deal" exit on 29 March.
What else can happen ?

The UK Parliament could change its mind. There's some evidence that some MPs voted against the deal in MV2 only because they expected to have a later opportunity to vote for it. Getting a majority for the deal might be a bit of a long shot, but I wouldn't rule it out. (May certainly hasn't!)

Other things that could happen include:

- Revocation of A50 notice before 29 March. (I doubt this will happen, but it certainly could.)

- Shift in policy by government (probably associated with ditching T May) to seek cross-party consensus for softer Brexit; request to EU for longer extension to pursue renegotiation of Pol Dec to soften it.

And no doubt we could imagine other possibilities.

Scoondal · 21-03-2019 06:57AM

dresden8 wrote: »

We're all concentrating on the commons but if it does get through there any word on which way the lords will jump?

Well, if it gets through in the next 8 days it would be surprising. The Lords need not have too much worries about having to do a few hours work.
A third vote on the same proposal has been barred in UK parliament. If allowed, 75 MPs are not going to be pushed against their will.

Scoondal · 21-03-2019 07:03AM

The UK people voted for Brexit in 2016. And they voted for their MPs in 2017. So, ordinary UK citizens are responsible for their ridiculous situation now.

Peregrinus · 21-03-2019 07:05AM

dresden8 wrote: »

We're all concentrating on the commons but if it does get through there any word on which way the lords will jump?

We're getting technical now, but these "Meaningful Votes" on the approval of the negotiated deal are held under European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 section 13, which requires the House of Commons to pass a resolution approving the deal, but only requires the House of Lords to debate a resolution noting the deal. So the Lords may not vote on the deal at all and, if they do, the outcome of the vote is (legally) unimportant.

Having said that, if the deal is approved the government will then need to introduce, and get Parliament to pass, a Bill to amend existing laws to give effect to the deal and allow it to be implemented. (That's one of the reasons they need an extension.) That Bill will have to go through all the usual stages in both houses. In theory the Lords could at least delay it. In practice, and in constitutional convention, the Lords wouldn't obstruct so significant a policy that has been approved by the Commons. They might seek to improve it, but they wouldn't seek to vote it down and trigger a no-deal crash-out. (Especially since the Lords is a pretty Remainy place these days.)

Peregrinus · 21-03-2019 07:09AM

Laois_Man wrote: »

. . . The only way there is going to be an extension for a 2nd referendum or a General Election is if Teresa May is somehow ousted within the next 8 days. So it's hard to see how that can become an issue either.

Prime Ministers can be ousted within hours if the need arises. And after last night's petulant exhibition, May must be as close to that happening as she has ever been.

Scoondal · 21-03-2019 07:09AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

The UK Parliament could change its mind. There's some evidence that some MPs voted against the deal in MV2 only because they expected to have a later opportunity to vote for it. Getting a majority for the deal might be a bit of a long shot, but I wouldn't rule it out. (May certainly hasn't!)

Other things that could happen include:

- Revocation of A50 notice before 29 March. (I doubt this will happen, but it certainly could.)

- Shift in policy by government (probably associated with ditching T May) to seek cross-party consensus for softer Brexit; request to EU for longer extension to pursue renegotiation of Pol Dec to soften it.

And no doubt we could imagine other possibilities.

Will 75 MPs change their minds if another vote is even allowed in the next 8 days ?

Peregrinus · 21-03-2019 07:17AM

Scoondal wrote: »

Will 75 MPs change their minds if another vote is even allowed in the next 8 days ?

Only one way to find out!

If MPs conclude that there is no realistic prospect of removing May, and that revoking Art 50 without a referendum is never going to secure majority support in the Commons (and I think both of those are conclusions that MPs could plausibly come to) then it's a choice between Brexit with the negotiated deal and Brexit with no deal. And if it comes to that choice then, yeah, it's certainly possible that 75 MPs who up to now have hoped for better things could conclude that the negotiated deal is less destructive than no deal.

The Labour party may be key to this. When push comes to shove are they going to whip, in effect, in favour of a no-deal Brexit? And, if they do, how many party members will rebel?

robinph · 21-03-2019 08:32AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

- Shift in policy by government (probably associated with ditching T May) to seek cross-party consensus for softer Brexit; request to EU for longer extension to pursue renegotiation of Pol Dec to soften it.

And no doubt we could imagine other possibilities.

The only thing that will happen if they ditch May in the next week is a guarantee of crash out. There isn't anyone remotely looking for cross party agreement who would take her place.

lawred2 · 21-03-2019 08:33AM

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Another genius wants to invade Ireland

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/tom-swarbrick/solution-post-brexit-irish-border-problem-invade/

It is largely only ever crackpots that ring in to phone in shows

Akrasia · 21-03-2019 08:34AM

The Kyle Wilson amendment is certainly going to crop up again. This time, Labour will have no choice but to support it. (Although you never know the way corbyn has been behsving)

Kyle Wilson amendment is basically an addition that passes Mays withdrawal agreement on the condition that it is put to the people in a referendum with the option to remain. If the Amendment passes. It would be treasonous for May to try to whip the tories against her own MV3. (But again, she has form on this in the past)

murphaph · 21-03-2019 08:34AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

Only one way to find out!

If MPs conclude that there is no realistic prospect of removing May, and that revoking Art 50 without a referendum is never going to secure majority support in the Commons (and I think both of those are conclusions that MPs could plausibly come to) then it's a choice between Brexit with the negotiated deal and Brexit with no deal. And if it comes to that choice then, yeah, it's certainly possible that 75 MPs who up to now have hoped for better things could conclude that the negotiated deal is less destructive than no deal.

The Labour party may be key to this. When push comes to shove are they going to whip, in effect, in favour of a no-deal Brexit? And, if they do, how many party members will rebel?

The Labour party have been less than useless but it's not reallly fair to say they would be voting in favour of no deal. The UK still has the power to revoke A50. There is still a choice between revocation and no deal if her deal is rejected. May would ultimately be responsible for a no deal. She was always going to be with her idiotic red lines that were never on the ballot paper. She is a stubborn stupid person with no emotional intelligence to boot.

It's time for her to go.

It's time for the sensible Tories to vote her out in a motion of no confidence put forward by the leader of the so called opposition.

She is the problem.

Soulsun · 21-03-2019 08:35AM

May to be gone by Friday.
It's a complete shambles.

Nody · 21-03-2019 08:36AM

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Another genius wants to invade Ireland

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/tom-swarbrick/solution-post-brexit-irish-border-problem-invade/

Well strictly speaking he's correct; invading Ireland would solve the border problem. Of course the problem is he's not thought beyond "fixing the border problem in Ireland" and what such an invasion would do to the overall relationship with EU etc. in true fashion of most UK proposals. They find a solution to an initial problem and don't think it all the way through in terms of implementation and implications (see Vienna treaty to get out of the Brexit deal, electronical magical unicorn border solution etc.).

Peregrinus · 21-03-2019 08:37AM

robinph wrote: »

The only thing that will happen if they ditch May in the next week is a guarantee of crash out. There isn't anyone remotely looking for cross party agreement who would take her place.

The issue is not whether there are people "looking for cross party agreement", but whether there are people looking to avoid a crash-out, and willing to make hard choices in order to avoid one. And I wouldn't entirely rule out the possiblity that such people might exist.

The truth is that the Brexit (much of) the Tory party wants, as embodied in May's deal, and the Brexit that (most of) the Labour party wants are not that far apart. And, rationally, each should prefer the other's Brexit to a no-deal Brexit. So all the ingredientss for a compromise Con/Lab Brexit that could also be acceptable to the EU are present; all that's needed is leadership who don't dismiss such a compromise Brexit because, and only because, it is a compromise.

Akrasia · 21-03-2019 08:39AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

The issue is not whether there are people "looking for cross party agreement", but whether there are people looking to avoid a crash-out, and willing to make hard choices in order to avoid one. And I wouldn't entirely rule out the possiblity that such people might exist.

The truth is that the Brexit (much of) the Tory party wants, as embodied in May's deal, and the Brexit that (most of) the Labour party wants are not that far apart. And, rationally, each should prefer the other's Brexit to a no-deal Brexit. So all the ingredientss for a compromise Con/Lab Brexit that could also be acceptable to the EU are present; all that's needed is leadership who don't dismiss such a compromise Brexit because, and only because, it is a compromise.

Dominic Grieve would have to be a front runner under such a scenario

ancapailldorcha · 21-03-2019 08:47AM

recedite wrote: »

They already voted on the "Strasbourg Agreement".
If they vote on it again, Bercow will be doing a u-turn, which is quite possible (because he is an idiot).

recedite wrote: »

He wastes parliamentary time rambling on about boring personal anecdotes, he makes contradictory rulings (hence he will likely have to make a U-turn), he walks to HoC dressed like an old hobo, and worst of all he is blatantly a partisan Remainer while sitting in the office of one who should be impeccably neutral.

No more insults please.

iguana · 21-03-2019 08:47AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

This parliamentary petition to revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU was started two days ago, and has accumulated (at the time of posting this) 363,300 signatures.

Not quite as many as the 369,839 sigantures on this petition to leave the EU without a deal in March 2019, but that one has been open for signature for 5 months.

Boardies who are voters in the UK may wish to consider signing one or other petition, if they have not already done so.

That petition is zipping along very likely to pass half a million before 8am.

Nody · 21-03-2019 08:49AM

iguana wrote: »

That petition is zipping along very likely to pass half a million before 8am.

Does not matter if it does not reach 17.2 million; and if it surpasses that expect the Brexiteers to find and gripe about a few duplicates/fake signatures (i.e. Donald Duck, Mrs Thatcher etc.). Remember votes and democracy only matters as long as they are used to push forward with Brexit; if it's against Brexit it's clearly undemocratic and should be ignored.

Panrich · 21-03-2019 09:02AM

The contenders to replace May are all Brexiteers so there will be no softening of the UK position brought about by s change of PM.

The ERG are in dreamland now and will not vote for Mays deal as the ultimate no deal prize is within their grasp. Look for them ditching the DUP even if they are persuaded to vote for the deal.

Joe_ Public · 21-03-2019 09:10AM

The contest to replace May when it happens will be....quite something.

Akrasia · 21-03-2019 09:11AM

Listening to remaniacs this morning and they're saying that even if May's WA is accepted and there is an extension to A50, this doesn't mean that No Deal is off the table. The ERG could still block the acts of parliament required to enact the WA and there could be another cliff edge in May or June, except the acts of parliament will be much much more complex than the WA and could include some very unpalatable measures that would almost certainly be challenged in the house or in lords, and if the UK don't take part in the EU elections, they probably won't be allowed to extend again past June

If the WA is ratified, then the UK will lose the right to unilaterally revoke A50, so passing May's deal may make No deal even more likely than 'no brexit'

Its a total Sh1tshow

Peregrinus · 21-03-2019 09:12AM

iguana wrote: »

That petition is zipping along very likely to pass half a million before 8am.

Am I alone in thinking that - to my lasting regret - this overnight performance may be a bit too zippy to be entirely legit? I mean, about 150,000 Brits are supposed to have signed this in the wee small hours. Are there really that many insomniac Remainers?

lawred2 · 21-03-2019 09:17AM

iguana wrote: »

That petition is zipping along very likely to pass half a million before 8am.

Could reach 30m and it would still be ignored.

Enzokk · 21-03-2019 09:23AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

The UK Parliament could change its mind. There's some evidence that some MPs voted against the deal in MV2 only because they expected to have a later opportunity to vote for it. Getting a majority for the deal might be a bit of a long shot, but I wouldn't rule it out. (May certainly hasn't!)

Other things that could happen include:

- Revocation of A50 notice before 29 March. (I doubt this will happen, but it certainly could.)

- Shift in policy by government (probably associated with ditching T May) to seek cross-party consensus for softer Brexit; request to EU for longer extension to pursue renegotiation of Pol Dec to soften it.

And no doubt we could imagine other possibilities.

I don't understand this even though a lot of MPs made this comment. Why would you vote against something twice if you were going to vote for it at the end? What is the purpose? There wasn't going to be any further changes to the agreement and this isn't a game. The problem I think is most MPs are in it not to better the lives of their voters, otherwise they would not be complaining about not being able to take the UK and Ireland to the cliff edge of disaster.

lawred2 wrote: »

It is largely only ever crackpots that ring in to phone in shows

You know it gets bad when your suggestion gets rubbished by another caller on the call in. You could expect the presenter to do that, he did laugh at the suggestion of Ireland joining the UK, but when the caller that agrees with the principle thinks you are wrong about the implementation then you should pause to think whether you are on the right side here.

Soulsun wrote: »

May to be gone by Friday.
It's a complete shambles.

I have given up trying to predict when she will be gone. I must admit it is starting to pile up against her but I still think she will not be moved. She said it herself I believe, she is a stubborn woman.

VinLieger · 21-03-2019 09:27AM

Just put some money on no deal, a hard border some point in 2019 and euro and sterling to hit parity at some point in 2019.

jester77 · 21-03-2019 09:35AM

It's probably for the better if her short extension request is rejected. It gives them a week to come to sense and request a longer extension with a new government in place. The current circus is going nowhere but defaulting out.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta · 21-03-2019 09:39AM

Am I missing something or what exactly is the point of extending the Art 50 period if the WA deal is approved?

intellectual dosser · 21-03-2019 09:44AM

I don't think I've ever been this concerned about Brexit. With several EU countries murmuring that they will veto an extension it looks like its going to be WA on the third count, or a hard Brexit, with the latter the most likely.

The main concern is that it would be the hardest of Brexits, I understand some protocols have been put in place for such an event but I think everyone has been zombie-ing towards an extension. There is now no further time to flesh these protocols out further, I'm fearing chaos on March 30th.

L1011 · 21-03-2019 09:45AM

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Am I missing something or what exactly is the point of extending the Art 50 period if the WA deal is approved?

Because the UK hasn't even vaguely got around to implementing the legislative changes needed to leave

prawnsambo · 21-03-2019 09:47AM

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Am I missing something or what exactly is the point of extending the Art 50 period if the WA deal is approved?

The WA being approved is just the start of the process for Westminster. There's a raft of legislation needed to put it into effect as well as all the SIs that have still to be passed to try and replicate or replace the laws and treaties that membership of the EU built up.

Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments