Brexit

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Parliament resoundingly rejected “no deal”, it’s by far the least popular option. No point in wrecking the country because they can’t agree.

Except that it won't wreck the country.

Theresa is in a bind and she has convinced herself that she will not let the people down in respect of the referendum decision. If parliament won't agree on anything, no deal will just happen with no further action required.

And the sky really won't fall in. That's a promise!

---------- Post added at 12:16 ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

There’s a misunderstanding of what is (and isn’t) in the control of Parliament. At all costs Parliament can prevent no deal with a vote of no confidence, put a unity candidate up for her Maj to appoint (to entend) then vote themselves out again for a general election.

Parliament holds all the cards. The legal default position didn’t last on March 29th and will not on April 12th.

It is up to the EU, but they’ve nothing to lose and everything to gain by extending.

Parliament does not hold all the cards. You seem to forget that the Government will win a no confidence vote as there is an agreement on that with the DUP.

---------- Post added at 12:22 ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

My view is that May's deal does not commit us to a specific future relationship. So pass her deal, everyone take a breather and calm down then call an election with party's explaining their version of the next deal.

Except that it does, perversely, commit us to a backstop, which is the main reason the deal isn't going through.

It is crazy that a transitional arrangement can commit parties to a permanent arrangement, isn't it?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Except that it won't wreck the country.

Theresa is in a bind and she has convinced herself that she will not let the people down in respect of the referendum decision. If parliament won't agree on anything, no deal will just happen with no further action required.

And the sky really won't fall in. That's a promise!

Yet there’s not a credible economic forecast to suggest it will not be bad. Even such ideologically opposes bodies as the TUC and the CBI agree on this. Bad for workers, bad for business. Good for disaster capitalists and the USA.

Parliament does not hold all the cards. You seem to forget that the Government will win a no confidence vote as there is an agreement on that with the DUP.

400 MPs are against no deal. You are assuming we exist in normal circumstances. We don’t. This isn’t another policy area shuffling deckchairs around on the Titanic. This is having sight of the iceberg and choosing to avoid it.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Damien

Wouldn't the method be the current government is brought down in a vote of no confidence and a new government, built of a coalition in Parliament, can pass a Queens Speech?

If I was the Queen I’d dissolve the whole of parliament due to no confidence.

Given the choice, Parliament would indeed continue to vote against No Deal. There is however the very real possibility that the choice is about to be taken off them. A long extension was always contingent on there being a credible strategy that required a long extension to implement. There is no credible strategy, and that isn’t all Teresa May’s fault; Parliament has made a complete exhibition of itself over the last week. There is no strategy and no sign of one emerging. As things stand right now, the EU has the power to watch us sail over the edge on 12 April, and it may just have grown tired enough of the process to allow it to happen.

This I suspect is the ERG’s strategy. The British political establishment won’t ever choose No Deal, but, once they’re as prepared as they can be, the European one just might.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Chris

Given the choice, Parliament would indeed continue to vote against No Deal. There is however the very real possibility that the choice is about to be taken off them. . .

As things stand right now, the EU has the power to watch us sail over the edge on 12 April, and it may just have grown tired enough of the process to allow it to happen.

oh please let this be the outcome. Extension after extension does nobody any favours (apart from the obvious).

If the EU decide to 'let us go' it may even look like we were 'kicked out' to some, so let's all hold hands and jump before being pushed

[jfman]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...rticle-50-bill

Here we go!

A bill that forces the PM to propose an extension to A50 is a waste of time. There’s little doubt she would do so anyway. The question now is at what point the EU decides to cash in and choose No Deal over an extension without a strategy, which is the precondition Barnier has repeatedly stated over the last couple of weeks.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by jfman

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...rticle-50-bill

Here we go!

Quotes from Oliver Letwin.

This is a last-ditch attempt to prevent our country being exposed to the risks inherent in a no deal exit. We realise this is difficult. But it is definitely worth trying.

Why is Letwin saying passing the bill will be difficult? Because this move is unprecedented, and it could easily flounder in the House of Lords.

[jfman]

£39bn remember. The EU budget is approved til 2021. Can easily keep us in limbo to pay the bills.

---------- Post added at 13:43 ---------- Previous post was at 13:32 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

Quotes from Oliver Letwin.

If it flounders in the Lords it deepens the constitutional crisis. That’s all a “win” at this stage.

The Lords rejecting a bill does not precipitate a constitutional crisis. Even their sending it back with unhelpful amendments would not do so. They are constitutionally entitled to do so and their mode of operation is set down in statute. If they are repeatedly obstructive the Parliament Act is used to bypass them.

Cooper’s bill will most likely founder for lack of time, which is a precious commodity for non-Government bills.

[jfman]

Oh 100% if it’s rejected quickly that’s good and proper. If a minority attempt to delay it for the purposes of facilitating no deal and deny the will of the Commons that’s the kind of thing the Parliament Act was designed to avoid (legislatively it does not due to timeframes). The fact we’ve the ticking time bomb of Brexit would essentially force a constitutional crisis if the Government acted in a way other than extending to allow the processes to complete.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Pierre

If I was the Queen I’d dissolve the whole of parliament due to no confidence.

If you were the Queen, I'd be buying tickets!

[denphone]

This is from ITV’s Paul Brand.

Here we go again... hearing rumours of TV statement from PM. Just treat with care for now, this is unconfirmed.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by denphone

This is from ITV’s Paul Brand.

Another unhinged rant, she's picking up tips from Trump, if true.

[jfman]

“2nd referendum. My deal vs Remain. I’m sick of the BS. It’s time to deliver to the people a deal that delivers x, y, z. Gives our businesses stability in a transitional period to 31 December 202X.”