Re: Brexit (New).
 

As i posted in the old thread. Why at this point would the EU27 grant extension?

Now that parliament can’t vote on the deal, and the EU wont change the deal.

Where is there any way to go? Tell me what you think are the possible options. Given those constraints.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The EU granting a short extension might qualify as a different deal. Allowing the government to bring it back. Even if they didn't and MPs wanted to vote on it then they themselves can vote to allow the bill to be brought back to the house.

Alternatively they could grant a longer one if there was a referendum or a general election. I think a long extension would lead to a general election anyway.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

A General Election throws everything back up as an option. It’d be loads of fun.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Sorry, John Bercow used a 415 year old precedent yesterday and the same concept cannot be voted on twice. That rules out Extending A50 for 2nd Referendum, this was Amendment H from The Independent Group that was voted heavily against.

Re: Brexit(New).
 

That's a bit "over the top"? :)

Re: Brexit (New).
 

The same deal actually, May's deal conditional on a 2nd referendum could qualify as a different deal. It's entirely up to the speaker on what qualifies as changed or even if he decides to forget the whole thing and allow it.

Or Parliament can override his decision.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

He has allowed things to be voted on twice, it’s how he defines “substantively different” that has varied. If he accepts a deal or proposal is different, then the principle should apply to putting any amendments to a new proposal.

Also only applies during a session of Parliament. The two year session ends this summer.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

How? Extending the deadline doesn’t Materially change the content of the deal. Sorry that’s a non-starter. Not sure how you reasoned that one out.

---------- Post added at 22:16 ---------- Previous post was at 22:16 ----------

No it doesn’t.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

No but it might change the politics of the deal and that's all that we're really talking about here. Parliament can force a vote on May's deal if they want it. Bercow might also lose his nerve if he thinks his ban cannot hold in which case a superficial change would likely be enough of a ladder for him to climb down. The bill becomes a vote for the extension to be short or longer for example.

In the end who knows? None of these are immutable laws of physics.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Depending on who wins, and what smaller parties may influence in a confidence and supply arrangement, of course it does.

If the arithmetic allows smaller “2nd referendum“ parties prop up old Jezza and his “jobs first Brexit” on condition he puts it to the vote vs remain then that’s what happens. That’s the sovereign power we want to wrestle from Brussels to Westminster.

Note: that’s not what I think would happen just an example.

In another hypothetical if May treats it as a referendum on her deal and returns 400 MPs then the ERG/DUP would struggle to legitimately block her.

Note: I don’t think that’ll happen either.

---------- Post added at 22:47 ---------- Previous post was at 22:35 ----------

It’s hard to know what Bercow’s precise intent was. If he’s perceiving TM as using the deadline to bully Parliament then the extension is a material change - being asked to vote on her deal in April with and end of June exit day doesn’t have the same effect.

Equally if there’s a reasonable period to a new deadline and it’s obvious that the ERG/DUP would back a deal (plus Labour leavers) he could take the view the protocols aren’t there to deny Parliament from ruling on matters it has come to an opinion on under less onerous circumstances.

As you say, without being a mind reader...

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Actually we’re not. Bercow has stated there must be a substantive change to the content of the WA. To progress it in Parliament. But the EU will not give such a change.


. Not if it isn’t before them......which bercow is preventing.

---------- Post added at 22:52 ---------- Previous post was at 22:47 ----------

Ramblings of a madman! Have some cheese.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

I’m unsure ramblings of a madman fits the respectful discussion we’ve been asked for on multiple occasions so I’ll not respond to that. Already had three holidays thanks to others.

Nobody can predict the next General Election if it happens pre-Brexit. Both main parties would be at risk of imploding from their divisions and everyone treating it as a leadership contest. The two biggest parties will still be the two biggest parties, but who is the next PM in waiting after JC/TM is disposed of, and if it requires smaller parties to cobble over the finish line could see plenty of unexpected outcomes.

Parliament can vote to waive the standing orders used by Bercow. In essence a vote to permit a vote. You seem to let your opinion of your desired outcome cloud objectivity.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

Yes they can. Parliament can vote to override the speaker’s decision. And in the end the speaker is only likely to block it so long as Parliament largely consents otherwise it erodes his strength.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

No long delay.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47636011

I think this is a play for Labour votes. The implication is that she knows the ERG won’t come around in sufficient numbers but that the genuine prospect of No Deal in June will scare enough opposition MPs into backing her.

Re: Brexit (New).
 

A long delay would be impractical. I cannot see the EU granting any delay beyond the European elections. Maybe that, at last, will focus minds. It means we have to get either deal or no deal through before then, leaving sufficient time to pass the necessary legislation.