Re: Brexit
 

The withdrawal agreement comes AFTER leaving the EU, which according to the votes can't happen. That is why 29th March 2019 is a deadline.

Re: Brexit
 

Not correct, and using caps lock doesn’t change any facts.

The house yesterday declined to support May’s negotiated withdrawal agreement, but the text of it still exists as an agreed document between the British government and the EU which Parliament can ratify at any time.

Today the house declined to support a No Deal scenario but the vote did not have the effect of amending or repealing the EU withdrawal act, which Parliament debated and passed thanks to Gina Miller and the Supreme Court. The legislation still sits on the statute book and as things stand right now, we will still leave on 29 March, whether or not the deal is accepted by parliament.

Tomorrow the house will be asked to debate a motion that proposes the only viable reason to ask for an extension to the A50 deadline is to give Parliament time to pass the withdrawal deal and any other measures needed to ensure the UK leaves the EU smoothly. It also asks the house to recognise that in the absence of any viable strategy, there is no reason for the EU to grant an extension.

Parliament is being lined up for a third go at Teresa May’s deal.

---------- Post added at 21:29 ---------- Previous post was at 21:27 ----------

You don’t understand the operation of statute law or parliamentary procedure and are just embarrassing yourself. Please desist. ;)

Re: Brexit
 

What? Yes the withdrawal agreement is what happens after leaving but that means we're leaving with it.

---------- Post added at 21:30 ---------- Previous post was at 21:30 ----------

I am so sick of Brexit. It's never, ever, gonna end.

Re: Brexit
 

The original sequence of events was,
1) we leave the EU,
2) the withdrawal agreement comes into effect.
3) we might be allowed to reach a deal with the EU.

The votes say we cannot implement stage 1, therefore stage 2 cannot be reached at all. The withdrawal agreement is not a deal of any kind. It just fills the gap between leaving the EU, and reaching a deal or end of Dec 2020(whichever comes first).

Re: Brexit
 

Nothing voted on by Parliament this week is binding. None of it has the effect of amending or repealing the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. The Act legislated for the UK’s withdrawal to come into effect at 11pm on 29 March 2019. Nothing has happened that changes this - not even tonight’s vote in which parliament declined to give its support to the idea of us leaving without a deal.

Changing the withdrawal date involves bringing a bill to the Commons that amends the EU (withdrawal) Act. This would need to pass through all the stages of both the Commons and the lords in order to become an Act and have any effect. That cannot be achieved by the procedure that took place this evening.

Re: Brexit
 

The vote says they don't want us to Leave with no deal. They didn't say the deal had to last forever. Leaving the EU with a two year transition period is a deal, albeit temporary. Not only does it meet the requirements of not leaving without a deal it's explicitly stated as an option in tomorrow's motion.

Basically: The Withdrawal Agreement will allow us to leave the EU.

Anyway. Lots of interesting stuff about how the Government found itself in this position tonight: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/0...its-own-motion

Also speculation from Labour MPs that the Government didn't know co-signers of a amendement can still push it a vote hence they were caught by surprise. They spent the day getting Spelman to drop it only for Cooper to push it a vote. It makes sense since it's clear Tory MPs were confused as to if it was still a free vote and a Tory backbencher blew up at the speaker saying the motion had been dropped....

Re: Brexit
 

yeah that was quite messy as I was 100% sure that I heard TM say yesterday that today would have been a free vote and then all of a sudden hear that there is a line of whips waiting for them.



I wonder how that has gone down with the MP's

Re: Brexit
 

Nomadking, your quote about Yvette Cooper’s amendment is irrelevant. The stronger wording is designed to make it politically awkward for the government but it still does not have the effect of amending the EU Withdrawal Act, which is the only way the leaving date can be changed.

Re: Brexit
 

I think most of us are, it's all so very dull and meanwhile the country is literally going down the toilet, I remember saying years ago nothing will be done whilst brexit is in progress, this farce goes on much longer and there won't be much of a country left for us to "take back" or "control"

Re: Brexit
 

Then what was supposed to be the purpose of the votes?

Re: Brexit
 

It changed because the first amendment passed which was too strong for the government and opens up a whole other can of worms. But only did they not think it would pass, they didn't think it would be voted on.

Re: Brexit
 

it was a close call really...


but yeah it is such a lovely mess now and to be honest I would rather have it now be all done and dusted or sunk away in a dark place never to be seen again.

Re: Brexit
 

BBC 21:51

Re: Brexit
 

We can leave the EU without a withdrawal agreement. As I've pointed out, we have to leave the EU in order for any withdrawal agreement to start. We then have to agree to whatever the EU tells us to. A no-deal scenario was the ultimate bargaining chip which has been totally thrown away. A bit like a trade union going into negotiations, setting out from the outset that no matter what they are not going to take any sort of industrial action.

Re: Brexit
 

May is going through a series of indicative votes to try to find out where a possible way forward is.

Given the rejection of No Deal, and the strong wording of the motion as eventually passed, she has something of a mandate to hold Meaningful Vote 3 on the withdrawal agreement she has made with the EU.

That mandate should be further strengthened tomorrow if she can get support for her Article 50 extension motion, which asks the house to acknowledge that the EU will have to be offered a compelling reason to agree an extension, and the only truly compelling reason to hand is the time required to pass the withdrawal agreement into British law.

Now the DUP and the ERG have seen that there is no majority for No Deal in the Commons, there is a greater likelihood of them voting for the withdrawal agreement if it is put before the Commons next week. Don’t take my word for it though, that’s the view of the FT’s political editor, George Parker.

(Via Twatter)