Yes. But equally a statement that sometimes anyone can make a mistake and retracting and saying sorry is a valid option.
How many wars have been fought, lives wasted, pointless pounds spent and so on because politicians can't ever seem to admit they were wrong and backtrack.
Well leavers hate May's deal
Remainers hate May's deal
Everyone hates no deal
EU says no other deal on table...
So by that logic ...
Logic left the building some time ago
Express comments be like 'but we don't vote to be able to make our own decisions!!' lol!
A50 could only be revoked if it were the result of a second referendum. Parliament would not take that decision off its own back.
To get there, there first needs to be a second referendum and then one of the options needs to actually be ‘remain’.
In spite of the overwhelming sensibility of that outcome, from where we are today the probability of reaching it still seems very, very small. Still, Christmas is a time for miracles...
No, parliament is sovereign and could rule of its own accord. There's been lots of people making false assertions about what must happen. It may be your opinion that parliament will not do this and it is certainly not currently a popular option, but only a few weeks ago none of the supposed experts even considered the possibility of brexit not happening. Opinions change.
A50 could only be revoked if it were the result of a second referendum. Parliament would not take that decision off its own back.
They could revoke and go to an election after it, would be better in some ways than a second referendum.
A50 could only be revoked if it were the result of a second referendum. Parliament would not take that decision off its own back.
Parliament is sovereign in a parliamentary democracy. They can do what they like. They ignore us all the time anyway, apart from once every 5 years
Just because Dave was daft enough to give us plebs a say in things, to shut Farage up for a bit, don't now be getting ideas above your station, you bally oik!!! 😉
Currently watching Mark Carney explain to the MP for Dover about why the Dover port is different from other ports around the UK. Something you would have hoped the MP already knew
this will be so funny
May on BBC, Corbyn on ITV both debating with an empty chair
actually this is teh perfect opportunity for Danny Dyer to step up as elader of HM opposition
Sort of apt really isn't it? Given the performances of the two party leaders since the referendum...
May is really stuffed now failing Grayling is backing her deal.
Arguing about the layout of the deck chairs as the SS Great Britain sails headlong into the iceberg
A50 could only be revoked if it were the result of a second referendum.
What makes you say that?
Revoke A50 now.
MPs can press this government to unilaterally remove this false precipice that is forcing us into either a bad deal, or a no deal for which we are not prepared. Stop the clock. Then any government can plan for a Brexit that it can spell out to, and seek approval from, MPs & the public, with a timescale they can make work. Take back control.
SS Great Britain - how apt.
When launched in 1843, Great Britain was by far the largest vessel afloat. But her protracted construction time of six years (1839-1845) and high cost had left her owners in a difficult financial position, and they were forced out of business in 1846, having spent all their remaining funds refloating the ship after she ran aground at Dundrum Bay in County Down near Newcastle in what is now Northern Ireland, after a navigation error.
The published legal opinion is that A50 can be revoked only to CANCEL Brexit, not to postpone it in order to seek a different deal.
I think the govt. Have likely known (or got legal advice that) article 50 is probably unilaterally revocable all along. Also believe the guy who wrote a50 said so some time ago.
The published legal opinion is that A50 can be revoked only to CANCEL Brexit, not to postpone it in order to seek a different deal.
But we could cancel, then lay out exactly what Brexit will mean (flesh out exactly how the Unicorns and rainbows will be financed, etc.) and then start a fresh process all over again if there are still enough idiots who want it (sorry, if the will of the people indicates thus)?
But we could cancel, then lay out exactly what Brexit will mean (flesh out exactly how the Unicorns and rainbows will be financed, etc.) and then start a fresh process all over again if there are still enough idiots who want it (sorry, if the will of the people indicates thus)?
Your wasted here.
the 2016 referendum was advisory - dave's choice to make it easy to breeze through parliament
If the peoples vote was pre-legislative and remain was voted for then parliament would have to revoke A50
If the peoples vote was post-legislative and remain was voted for then A50 would be automatically revoked on the basis of the result.
if the peoples vote was an advisory and it came out with remain they could ignore it like they had the option to ignore the 2016 one but this would be a bit odd seeing as how TMay invoked A50 without any critical thinking
This must be done in line with a member state's "constitutional requirements" and not as part of "an abusive practice". - SkyNews
I don’t think revoking A50 then reissuing an A50 letter to give us time to prepare would go down well - probably seen as "an abusive practice".
Yes, I imagine so if it was an indecently short period between the two. But after due process and campaigning and so on.......I mean opting to stay in now would not be a binding decision to stay in Europe for ever would it?
Whereas a decision to leave is more likely to be because if we wanted to rejoin at a later date then we'd have to meet the criteria for new joiners, etc., which even the pro-EU types would I think baulk at?
“an abusive practice”
Using the threat of A50 as leverage to change membership terms, or to threaten another member state, would be abusive. As would repeatedly triggering to be in some kind of "always on the way out" status. Stopping our withdrawal, only to trigger it a second time, but with a clear mandate for what we intend to do, and for what we want to replace membership with, would simply be frustrating, rather than abusive. It would in effect be forcing a transition period on our own terms, rather than as a powerless partner. Not good for the EU… but… time to take back control.
Of course, it might be that no government can form a plan that both MPs and the public will back, so A50 may never be triggered again. But, like all other member countries, we would keep that power to use anytime there really is majority support for a real plan to Leave.
I mean opting to stay in now would not be a binding decision to stay in Europe for ever would it?
I think anyone would struggle to want to put the country through such a shitshow again, public or MPs.
Now that the deadline for Brexit is drawing near and so far no one at all is satisfied with the outcome, everyone is waiting for Vote Leave to activate the plan which they surely must have had for this scenario.
I don’t think revoking A50 then reissuing an A50 letter to give us time to prepare would go down well – probably seen as “an abusive practice”.
Dunno you could get to a point arguing that every 4 years having an election was similar .
I have had a cunning idea
If we built a wall and had remainers on one side and leavers on the other.
I think anyone would struggle to want to put the country through such a shitshow again, public or MPs.
I give you, exhibit one
What makes you say that?
I don't believe there's a Parliamentary majority with the minerals to revoke A50 without the direct 'will of the people'.
There doesn't seem to be a parliamentary majority for anything involving brexit
Tallpaul, you could be right but consider this quite plausible scenario: there is now no time for a ref, no parliamentary authority for the May deal, and let's say we run out of time for the entire EU27 to agree an extension if we asked for it (or perhaps we go through that procedure only to find some pesky country oppose it at the last minute).
So parliament is faced with no deal exit or a unilateral withdrawal of A50, and a week to make the decision. Are you still so sure they wouldn't vote to withdraw A50? All against a backdrop of panic buying and perhaps even rioting?
Given that such a large majority are intrinsically on the remain side, I think it's quite probable that they would.
But we could cancel, then lay out exactly what Brexit will mean (flesh out exactly how the Unicorns and rainbows will be financed, etc.) and then start a fresh process all over again if there are still enough idiots who want it (sorry, if the will of the people indicates thus)?
I thought one issue was the EU can't/won't negotiate exit terms until a50 is invoked?
As for the whole Brexit mess, I'm starting to worry it's got enough momentum it won't be stopped now, even though probably the majority of the public and politicians don't want it based on any terms that are achievable in reality.
Labour/Corbyn need to grow some balls, they keep hiding from stating they would have a second referendum if elected (presumably as they aren't sure if that's really what the majority of their base support wants). The only reason I think a general election would be valid is if Labour campaigned on either scrapping Brexit or a second referendum, their current position of wanting a general election based on the fact they reckon they can negotiate a better deal (but providing no evidence to support it) is just bollocks.
Thing is can a50 be paused to allow enough time for a general election + referendum anyway? I can't see there's enough time left to do it under the current timeline
consider this quite plausible scenario
I actually think the scenario of no deal, no extension, no 2nd referendum has an uncomfortably high probability. We set on that trajectory some months ago.
Im not certain that this would result in civil unrest. I still think there’s too much ‘meh’ or ‘it’ll be alright’ prevelant in public opinion.
At that point, the Government need not take any action and we would simply fall out of the EU.
The problem I see with revoking A50 is that it would require near unanimous support within Parliament to get through fast enough. I don’t think that has a high probability.
It's times like this that I wish there was a requirement for a 2/3 majority for a decision to be made in parliament. That would have made a very tough subject easier to arbitrate on. Making something this important happen with only a small percentage majority was always going to cause trouble.
Making something this important happen with only a small percentage majority was always going to cause trouble.
Which was the stupidity in making it nonbinding. If it had been binding (or at least as binding as you can get) then the referendum bill would have almost certainly included in a 60-75% majority.
Instead to make it easier to pass Cameron went for the nonbinding but then somehow its magically morphed.
If we built a wall and had remainers on one side and leavers on the other.
Where do I sign. Living on the remain side would be much better than living in the UK today.
I thought one issue was the EU can’t/won’t negotiate exit terms until a50 is invoked?
Absolutely true. In which case, you wouldn't trigger A50 unless you had:
- plans in place to be ready to operate without an agreed withdrawal agreement (without which the EU holds nearly all the cards)
- plans in place to be ready to operate without current trade deals while we renegotiated them all (without which the EU holds all the other cards)
- an approach agreed within the UK about what we wanted to replace EU membership with (without which there is no possibility to negotiate an exit that the majority of the UK is happy with)
So, cancel A50 now, and then get on with all that. No point pretending any of that can be sorted before our current exit date.
Where do I sign. Living on the remain side would be much better than living in the UK today.
Gretna?
Gretna?
Soctland doesn't have a rEU country standing up for its inhabitants on its behalf, unfortunately. So the real answer is probably Belfast.
Paging @zippykona
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/business-46427494/brexit-how-will-it-affect-chocolate-supplies
ooops:
<h2 class="block-title">Opposition parties win vote on government being in contempt of parliament by 4 votes</h2>
<div class="block-elements block-elements--no-byline">The opposition parties have won the first vote on the government being in contempt of parliament by 311 votes to 307.
</div>
So does that mean full publication or just more shouting? You can only speculate why May wouldn't want to publish something that supports her position so much...... 🤔
That vote was to block it going to committee...
Real vote shortly...
Paging @zippykona
Well, that was depressing … until the BBC put a meaningless line from the PM's office at the end to encourage us to get behind the… er… >sigh<