Brexit (Old)

[Gavin78]

Ah yes it was a close vote lets have a 2nd vote next week 5 of them might have died in that time and we might have some more leave MP's on our side.

Originally Posted by Chris

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.

Although Steve Baker says they won't: https://twitter.com/MattChorley/stat...32099670994946

Steve Baker tells Leadsom that "unanimously" Brexiteers have agreed to keep voting against the PM's "rotten" deal.
When meaningful vote three comes back he will personally make sure it gets voted down "come what may"

And Mark Francois, who wants you to know he was in the army and wasn't trained to lose, also won't back it: https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/sta...989952/video/1
(I'm not entirely sure Francois isn't an elaborate parody)

Originally Posted by Gavin78

Ah yes it was a close vote lets have a 2nd vote next week 5 of them might have died in that time and we might have some more leave MP's on our side.

There was already a 2nd vote, this would be the third.

[Angua]

Originally Posted by Gavin78

Ah yes it was a close vote lets have a 2nd vote next week 5 of them might have died in that time and we might have some more leave MP's on our side.

The majortiy for the motion as amended was 43.

No doubt May will bring her deal back to parliament for a third go.

Seems odd that the same thing can be repeatedly put to parliament for a vote and called democratic, but offering people a vote on the deal or other options is seen as undemocratic.

Originally Posted by Angua

The majortiy for the motion as amended was 43.

No doubt May will bring her deal back to parliament for a third go.

Seems odd that the same thing can be repeatedly put to parliament for a vote and called democratic, but offering people a vote on the deal or other options is seen as undemocratic.

The difference is obvious.

The referendum asked a basic question; the government stated that parliament would enact the outcome.

There is no reason to revisit the fundamental outcome of the referendum just because parliament has yet to make good on its end of the process.

[Gavin78]

I'm getting sick to the back teeth with it all I'm sure the EU is as well

[1andrew1]

Looks like the speaker theoretically has the power to reject meaningless - sorry meaningful - vote No. 3.

On paper, the principle is actually quite clear. According to the Commons' rule book "Erskine May", there is a clear precedent that a matter, once decided upon by MPs, cannot be considered again in the same session of parliament (which usually lasts a year - this current session has gone on for longer and will expire in the summer).
Buried deep within on page 397, there lies: "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."

https://news.sky.com/story/an-ancien...rexit-11664555

Given that Bercow is not a personal fan of Brexit at all, certainly isn’t a fan of no deal Brexit, and has been playing fast and loose with procedure for weeks now, the chances of him actually stopping MV3 are slim. As tomorrow’s motion notes, in the absence of the deal being accepted, what reason do the EU27 have to grant an extension?

[Dave42]

Kate McCann
‏
Verified account

@KateEMcCann
3h
3 hours ago


More
What we know tonight: PM now accepting whatever happens the UK will NOT leave the EU on March 29. It will either be an extension to June 30 or much longer than that - perhaps two years.

Extend it two years. Sort out the full agreement in that time. Then no need for backstop. Sorted.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Damien

Extend it two years. Sort out the full agreement in that time. Then no need for backstop. Sorted.

Would the EU accept this and would two years be long enough? I suspect a no to both.

[Mr K]

What's interesting about last night, that even with the DUP/Erg backing her on one of the votes, she still.lost. Even if they change their mind on another meaningless vote, it may not be enough.

---------- Post added at 07:20 ---------- Previous post was at 07:17 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

Extend it two years. Sort out the full agreement in that time. Then no need for backstop. Sorted.

That actually sounds like a reasonable plan, which is why it won't happen !

[DocDutch]

Would think the EU would only say yes to extension are either a 2nd ref or change of gov.

[Angua]

Originally Posted by DocDutch

Would think the EU would only say yes to extension are either a 2nd ref or change of gov.

Yes, the EU would want a definite solution to the current impasse to extend the deadline. Not just more years of changing a couple of words on the WA.

---------- Post added at 09:12 ---------- Previous post was at 09:11 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

The difference is obvious.

The referendum asked a basic question; the government stated that parliament would enact the outcome.

There is no reason to revisit the fundamental outcome of the referendum just because parliament has yet to make good on its end of the process.

Yet the question was so basic, no one knew what all 17.4 wanted leave to mean.

The 16.1 meanwhile all wanted broadly the same thing.

Originally Posted by Mr K

What's interesting about last night, that even with the DUP/Erg backing her on one of the votes, she still.lost. Even if they change their mind on another meaningless vote, it may not be enough.

Could be. Now Remainers have the prospect of a long extension in which they could get a referendum, better a Norway+ deal or whatever they may want to go for that. A small amount of them backed May's deal out of fear of no deal.

Originally Posted by Gavin78

Ah yes it was a close vote lets have a 2nd vote next week 5 of them might have died in that time and we might have some more leave MP's on our side.

Sounds like the Government’s plan for Brexit - let’s hope that something very unlikely happens and we don’t actually have to do anything to change peoples’ minds...

(Except that by-elections don’t happen overnight, so it would be impossible to elect new MPs in the time before March 29, so it wouldn’t actually help the Government, So in fact it is exactly like the Government’s plan - not based on reality...).