Brexit slowly becoming a Farce.

[BawWatchin]

4 minutes ago, GordonS said:

the democratic history of Britain.

[GordonS]

1 minute ago, BawWatchin said:

Didn't we have a referendum in which the SNP-majority Scottish Parliament got to choose the timing, the question, the franchise, the finance limits and the arrangements for counting the votes?

There's a lot wrong with our democracy, but we do live in one.

[Donathan]

I don't often post over here in the politics sections and stuff, so I'd just like to say that I hadn't realised that at least 308 honourable members of the UK House of Commons are dribbling imbeciles who shouldn't be allowed power over anything greater than a tuck shop.
A No Deal outcome would be the worst act of governance in the democratic history of Britain.

I feel the need to point something out here, the 312-308 vote wasn’t on a no deal.

What happened was May submitted a motion that the house “rejects leaving the EU without a deal on the 29th March”

Labour’s Yvette Cooper submitted an amendment to change the wording of the motion to remove the date and rule out no deal altogether, which many MPs didn’t want to do because it’s seen to weaken our negotiating position. The amendment to revise the wording was successful by 312-308

So the motion now reads that the house “rejects leaving the EU without a deal” but the Tories are now whipping their MPs to vote against because they don’t like the new wording. It passes 321-278 due to 17 Tory rebellions and a bunch of abstentions.

May entered the house yesterday expecting it to rule out leaving without a deal on the 29th March, but it has in fact ruled out leaving without a deal completely.

[Donathan]

I don't often post over here in the politics sections and stuff, so I'd just like to say that I hadn't realised that at least 308 honourable members of the UK House of Commons are dribbling imbeciles who shouldn't be allowed power over anything greater than a tuck shop.
A No Deal outcome would be the worst act of governance in the democratic history of Britain.

I feel the need to point something out here, the 312-308 vote wasn’t on a no deal.

What happened was May submitted a motion that the house “rejects leaving the EU without a deal on the 29th March”

Labour’s Yvette Cooper submitted an amendment to change the wording of the motion to remove the date and rule out no deal altogether, which many MPs didn’t want to do because it’s seen to weaken our negotiating position. The amendment to revise the wording was successful by 312-308

So the motion now reads that the house “rejects leaving the EU without a deal” but the Tories are now whipping their MPs to vote against because they don’t like the new wording. It passes 321-278 due to 17 Tory rebellions and a bunch of abstentions.

May entered the house yesterday expecting it to rule out leaving without a deal on the 29th March, but it has in fact ruled out leaving without a deal completely.

[Granny Danger]

34 minutes ago, Donathan said:

 

 

I feel the need to point something out here, the 312-308 vote wasn’t on a no deal.

What happened was May submitted a motion that the house “rejects leaving the EU without a deal on the 29th March”

Labour’s Yvette Cooper submitted an amendment to change the wording of the motion to remove the date and rule out no deal altogether, which many MPs didn’t want to do because it’s seen to weaken our negotiating position. The amendment to revise the wording was successful by 312-308

So the motion now reads that the house “rejects leaving the EU without a deal” but the Tories are now whipping their MPs to vote against because they don’t like the new wording. It passes 321-278 due to 17 Tory rebellions and a bunch of abstentions.

May entered the house yesterday expecting it to rule out leaving without a deal on the 29th March, but it has in fact ruled out leaving without a deal completely.

 

 

Yeah there’s a lot of misinterpretation, the worst being experienced journalists talking about May ‘voting against her own motion’; she didn’t, she voted against the amended motion.  However the effect in the final vote was May going into the division lobby to vote in favour of No Deal. 

Parliament must now take control of this process and Labour must be willing support a second referendum; the EU27 would easily grant an extension to allow that to happen.

 

[dee_62]

She’s going to come back for a 3rd time with the same old, same old isn’t she? No doubt a few on both sides will shit it and cave in to support. The AG will somehow find some words to make it easier for the DUP to earn their money and support the deal and the “softer” edge of the ERG will bottle it too. Will it be enough though? Will the speaker even let the same deal be debated?

[Paco]

There needs to be a change of sorts in the deal for the speaker to allow it, technically - the legislation hasn’t been used since 1943, but it seems that’s because people know it won’t fly, or the Speaker has a quiet word in their ear, rather than anything else. Not sure May has time for any wording changes from the EU, who are quite clearly fed-up of her at this stage so I’m not sure where a change will come from. She may as well try to force it into Parliament though and give the speaker a decision to make.

Twitter noises suggest the ERG are split on the issue, and the DUP may be willing to at least listen. May is threatening a two-year extension so if it’s a direct choice between the two..

[O'Kelly Isley III]

There needs to be a change of sorts in the deal for the speaker to allow it, technically - the legislation hasn’t been used since 1943, but it seems that’s because people know it won’t fly, or the Speaker has a quiet word in their ear, rather than anything else. Not sure May has time for any wording changes from the EU, who are quite clearly fed-up of her at this stage so I’m not sure where a change will come from. She may as well try to force it into Parliament though and give the speaker a decision to make.

Twitter noises suggest the ERG are split on the issue, and the DUP may be willing to at least listen. May is threatening a two-year extension so if it’s a direct choice between the two..

Two years or more will be dandy.... with every week that passes the Brexit tide goes further out and only the fanatics are left.

As for May's deal, it is horrendous and should be savaged as such - ditto the whole Brexit concept. Those who voted for it will one day thank the rest of us.

[Granny Danger]

11 minutes ago, dee_62 said:

She’s going to come back for a 3rd time with the same old, same old isn’t she? No doubt a few on both sides will shit it and cave in to support. The AG will somehow find some words to make it easier for the DUP to earn their money and support the deal and the “softer” edge of the ERG will bottle it too. Will it be enough though? Will the speaker even let the same deal be debated?

I suppose it’s possible but I don’t see it.  Those who voted against May’s deal on Tuesday pinned their colours to the mast.  If they were going to cave Tuesday was the time.

A few more might switch/abstain but not enough unless a number of Labour shitebags help her out.

Also, we shouldn’t let any feelings about the ERG or DUP overshadow the fact that May’s deal is a really bad deal with a potentially huge democratic deficit.

[HTG]

Labour now rowing back on a people's vote where one option is May's deal. Also don't appear keen on a second public vote if the option is something they support. Labour fell in behind a people's vote as recently as last week but not now. In the midst of the Tory shitstorm we shouldn't lose sight of how awful Labour's leadership has been. 

 

[Granny Danger]

Extract from ‘Erskine May’ which governs parliamentary procedure and which might justify Bercow stopping May from bringing back her deal again.

“A motion or an amendment which is the same, in substance, as a question which has been decided during a session may not be brought forward again during that same session."

For me the “in substance” part is the vital bit of text.

[harry94]

Labour now rowing back on a people's vote where one option is May's deal. Also don't appear keen on a second public vote if the option is something they support. Labour fell in behind a people's vote as recently as last week but not now. In the midst of the Tory shitstorm we shouldn't lose sight of how awful Labour's leadership has been. 
 

If Brexit happens in an organised way, it's pretty much going to be May's WA used. I think it's just convenient for them to hide behind.

[vikingTON]

Didn't we have a referendum in which the SNP-majority Scottish Parliament got to choose the timing, the question, the franchise, the finance limits and the arrangements for counting the votes?
There's a lot wrong with our democracy, but we do live in one.

The Scottish Parliament didn’t choose the question(s) for the referendum.

[Granny Danger]

Sturgeon spot on again.  Everything else aside, it’s ridiculous trying to force MPs to vote for something they fundamentally disagree with.

[GordonS]

5 hours ago, Donathan said:

 

 

I feel the need to point something out here, the 312-308 vote wasn’t on a no deal.

What happened was May submitted a motion that the house “rejects leaving the EU without a deal on the 29th March”

Labour’s Yvette Cooper submitted an amendment to change the wording of the motion to remove the date and rule out no deal altogether, which many MPs didn’t want to do because it’s seen to weaken our negotiating position. The amendment to revise the wording was successful by 312-308

So the motion now reads that the house “rejects leaving the EU without a deal” but the Tories are now whipping their MPs to vote against because they don’t like the new wording. It passes 321-278 due to 17 Tory rebellions and a bunch of abstentions.

May entered the house yesterday expecting it to rule out leaving without a deal on the 29th March, but it has in fact ruled out leaving without a deal completely.

 

 

It doesn't make any difference, that 308 MPs would countenance a No Deal exit is insane. No Deal isn't a negotiating position, it's a suicide vest. 

[Brother Blades]

May now going to have a 3rd attempt. Can the speaker disallow it if there’s not a change in wording?

[Granny Danger]

4 minutes ago, Brother Blades said:

May now going to have a 3rd attempt. Can the speaker disallow it if there’s not a change in wording?

Look back about 7 posts.  HTH.

[Ira Gaines]

I'd like to know at which point this turn of events was "unlikely", given that it's completely typical of the total shitshow in No.10.

[Spain]

One of today's proposed amendments specifically relates to (and references) the Erskine May point above, proposing that May can't take her deal back again.

[Spain]