Brexit (Old)

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

No it doesn't.

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.

RECALLING that, pursuant to Article 50 TEU, in conjunction with Article 106a of the Euratom
Treaty, and subject to the arrangements laid down in this Agreement, the law of the Union and of
Euratom in its entirety ceases to apply to the United Kingdom from the date of entry into force of
this Agreement,
...
RECOGNISING that, even if Union law will be applicable to and in the United Kingdom during the
transition period, the specificities of the United Kingdom as a State having withdrawn from the
Union mean that it will be important for the United Kingdom to be able to take steps to prepare and
establish new international arrangements of its own, including in areas of Union exclusive
competence, provided such agreements do not enter into force or apply during that period, unless so
authorised by the Union,

Originally Posted by nomadking

There is NO negotiated deal. The vote says that the WITHDRAWAL AGREEMENT is NULL AND VOID, and that we remain in the EU until a deal is reached, which is going to be sometime never.

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 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

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.

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

Originally Posted by nomadking

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.

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.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Chris

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.

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).

But before MPs voted on the government motion, they backed an amendment tabled by Labour's Yvette Cooper rejecting a no-deal Brexit under any circumstances - by just four votes.

Originally Posted by nomadking

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).

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.

Originally Posted by nomadking

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).

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....

[DocDutch]

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

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.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Damien

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

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"

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Chris

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.

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

Originally Posted by DocDutch

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

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.

[DocDutch]

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.

BBC 21:51

A motion has been laid before Parliament to debate and vote on tomorrow regarding an extension to Article 50 – the legal mechanism which sees the UK leave the EU on 29 March.

The motion says that if Parliament agrees a deal by 20 March – next Wednesday – the government will ask the EU for a “one-off extension” until 30 June to pass the necessary legislation.

It also asks MPs to note that if it fails to agree a deal in the Commons by 20 March, it is “highly likely” that the EU “would require a clear purpose for any extension, not least to determine its length”, and if an extension ended after 30 June, the UK would have to take part in this year’s European elections.

The PM did say in the Commons she would be seeking MPs’ backing again “in the coming days”.

So that means a third “meaningful vote” on Mrs May’s deal next week.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

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....

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.

Originally Posted by nomadking

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

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.

George Parker
✔
@GeorgeWParker
Each humiliating disaster for @theresa_may in the Commons this week brings forward the moment of reckoning for the ERG and DUP; I get the sense many will fold next week, especially after tonight's No Deal vote. Is May losing her way to victory?

196
20:53 - 13 Mar 2019

(Via Twatter)