All I can say is thank god for Gina Miller!! Imagine if Maybot could just drive through whatever she wanted without parliamentary approval....
Did the cabinet 'rebels' Rudd, Gauke, Clark etc calculate they wouldn't have to break cover against the letwin amendment given the number of backbench rebels or they just turning out to be spineless? Hmmm
My reading of mays 'no deal wont happen unless parliment vote for it' was 'no deal won't happen if parliment vote for my deal.'
Interestingly, my wife had to pop into her old work last week whcih she left shortly after the referendum. At the time most of her colleauges voted leave (despite being educated and working in a company dependant on EU supply chains), most of them have now changed their minds as they assumed at the referendum we would leave but stay in the single market and custom union. Just another illustration of how far the leave goalposts ahve shifted.
I wonder whether brexiteers would accept a second referendum where remain wasn't on the ballot but jsut a suite of the most commonly talked about (and acheivable without unicorns) leave options? I guess probably not as their desired hard brexit probably wouldnt win.
It's a limited poll, so I take this with a huge pinch of salt.
What is particularly noteworthy is the change of reported voting in the first ref. 43% to 34% in 2.5 years now report that they voted Leave.
Thats it. that is all she is interested in.
Actually, I think her main motive is egotistical. She wants to be seen as a strong leader, a titan who pushed ahead in the face of adversity. She probably admires Thatcher. She wants to leave an enduring legacy.
So I think her intransigence is just an ego-trip, it's not pragmatic towards any tangible end like party unity or whatever. Those things are incidental.
What is particularly noteworthy is the change of reported voting in the first ref. 43% to 34% in 2 years now report that they voted Leave.
Trouble is, people often deny the thing they go ahead and vote for anyhow. eg The Tories.
The privacy of the ballot booth is different from the shame of actually having to admit your leanings to a real person. All that poll finding really does is show that leave voters recognise that the issue is divisive and that they have faced criticism for their choices.
I still have no faith that the great British (sorry, English) public would resist the temptation to use a 2nd ref as a giant dirty protest.
I have seen nothing that suggests parliament can force alternatives onto a government who are willfully ignoring any and every other option.
Yes, they can. Now they have control of parliamentary business, the order of things which are considered by parliament is no longer set by the government. This means that anything can be tabled with the majority of the house. In the context of the current discussion, a simple majority would be required on an, ahem, meaningful vote on the last two options after indicative votes on the various brexit avenues, and if it passed it would head to the Lords. Assuming it also passes there, it heads for royal ascent and becomes law.
The last bit has not really changed, just in normal times the government also has a majority, so law it doesn't support never passes. However, clearly on anything brexit they do not have a majority, and thus chaos. All the "Parliament seizing control" has done is allow parliament to discuss items of its majority's choosing - normally matters to be discussed in the house are chosen by the government (which is usually an outright majority, and thus this never came up)
I still have no faith that the great British (sorry, English) public would resist the temptation to use a 2nd ref as a giant dirty protest.
I think that technically us Welsh are also to blame 🙁
All the “Parliament seizing control” has done is allow parliament to discuss items of its majority’s choosing
Well indeed (but this contradicts your first point) - they can discuss what they want, but May can ignore them. They can't force legislation through, which is what is required.
Yes, they can. Now they have control of parliamentary business, the order of things which are considered by parliament is no longer set by the government. This means that anything can be tabled with the majority of the house. In the context of the current discussion, a simple majority would be required on an, ahem, meaningful vote on the last two options after indicative votes on the various brexit avenues, and if it passed it would head to the Lords. Assuming it also passes there, it heads for royal ascent and becomes law.
pretty sure this is wrong - indicative votes don't force the government to do anything. They aren't voting on actual legislation
Indicative votes are advisory, not binding
She's already made it abundantly clear only yesterday that she has absolutely no intention of enacting anything, no matter what parliament 'recommends'.
So in reality it actually suits her agenda perfectly, as it runs down the clock still further on something that is a complete and utter waste of everyones time. It will have no impact on her pig-headed, dictatorial intransigence and what she'll end up doing in what is now a wilful defiance of everybody, save the ERG.
I understand the desperation from MP's but the bottom line is that we've an executive doing the bidding of a minority of nutters and literally doesn't give a toss what anyone else thinks
Her behaviour at the moment is bordering on psychopathic
Wonder if it'll end up as a 650 way fist fight like you see in the far east parliaments. That would at least be amusing.
That would at least be amusing.
Apparently they still have hangers for swords in the cloakroom. Perhaps someone needs to pop by and hang a few up to encourage some duelling.
That mace looks rather tasty as well.
The moggster has said he believes it is either mays deal or a lot softer brexit now.
Indicative votes are advisory, not binding
Yes, but presumably it wouldn't take much more of a tweak to make one meaningfulbinding? And if there's a majority for such an amendment, presumably it would then pass?
I appreciate it's not of the same gravitas, but may's approach to brexit draws parallels with Hitler's Nero Decree at the end of the second world war. Basically if he couldn't win he was going to take the German people down with him...
May appears to think it's acceptable that it's either her way or everyone goes down in flames with her..
yes, in theory they could use the same process to start passing legislation.
MPs now have proof of concept: they are prepared to remove government control over the timetable. First they will see if they can support a given option. Then, if they find they can, there is another option available to them. They can remove government control over the timetable again, but this time with the intention of passing legislation, rather than just holding votes. And this really would force the government to do what it was told.
from https://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2019/03/26/mps-take-control-of-brexit-what-the-hell-happens-now
I'm really pleased the indicative votes, vote passed.
Firstly, it seems a genuine way forward, it gives MPs from all parties an opportunity to form a consensus without May's utterly stubborn and mindless red lines, and Corbyn's gamesmanship. I think they just might be able to come up with a tolerable solution for most.
Equally, it's a chip out of the 2 party system that's caused so many problems and made people like JRM disproportionately powerful, a terrifying prospect. Hopefully they'll remember this post-brexit instead of just playing for their team all the time.
We're definitely moving towards a damage limitation exercise.
The realisation is dawning that a minority fringe economists with a radical theory have been sponsored by vast sums of money to lobby politicians. It's no surprise that the snake-oil salesmen have sold a bullshit project to career bullshitters, who've been more focused on their prize than the detail as to how to get there. At every stage, ingrained incompetence has scuppered the project, it required populism to sell meaningless arguments that do not stand up to close scrutiny.
There's also an excellent chance that there will be a formal investigation, probably a public inquiry into the referendum and the strength of public resistance to project Brexit, I believe that Keir Starmer is quietly gathering evidence for such an eventuality. The wording of the calls for another Chilcot is intentional - remember that no-one was actually sanctioned as a result, the purpose was catharsis without throwing anyone under a bus.
I also think that many politicians were genuinely surprised by the intractability of Remainers who are still making their feelings known nearly three years after the referendum. The fact that the number of signatories of the Revoke petition exceeds the size of Boris's constituency majority has not been lost, a post Brexit election would likely eviscerate formerly staunch Tory strongholds if enough of the core voter base suffer the fallout from a no deal Brexit.
Rumours TM will address the 1922 committee. Will it be the big announcement, or just another bollocking?
Has anyone else seen the musical “Hamilton”?
Some of the similarities are freaky.
Lyrics include:
“You need congressional approval, but you don’t have the votes”
“He wasn’t in the room when it happened” (Aaron Burr being sidelined from decision making, like TM sat outside the EUCO)
Rumours TM will address the 1922 committee. Will it be the big announcement, or just another bollocking?
Either. Who knows? Who cares? It doesn't really matter, does it? Surely to god there can't be anyone left in the country who believes a word she says any more? Or trusts her to do anything more noble or inclusive than continue to shore up her ridiculous 'deal'. She certainly won't resign, and she'll ignore or actively obstruct any indicative votes, and everything else. Head in the sand.
Jeremy Hunt has been on the radio this morning hinting that she's going to try and bring it back again on April 10th. so "nothing has changed". She'll sit in her bunker, ignore everyone (ERG Excepted), then just try and employ the same reckless brinkmanship that has got us to where we are.
Hope everyones getting ready for the now seemingly inevitable No Deal crash out in a couple of weeks
All I can say is thank god for Gina Miller!!
The Meaningful Vote doesn't have anything to do with Gina Miller, all that case did was impose a duty on the government to get parliamentary authority to trigger Article 50. Parliamentary approval would always be required to enter into a treaty, hence there is a long history of tussles over EU treaties - see Maastricht.
there is some hilarious baklash against Mogg, Fabricant etc who are now saying they should take May's deal
the hard leave public that have been parroting their no deal spiel for the last 6 months are suddenly very confused
suella braverman on newsnight yesterday came out with some absolutely barking cliaims 9Unchallenged) about the backstop, which is only feeding into the backlash the switchers are getting
the self-immolation of the Tories over Brexit is truly epic
remember when cameron said this?
Mefty - sorry , you are quite right. Wasn’t there an amendment to the Article 50 legislation requiring the govt to come back to parliament for approval?
Not for approval but for the nature of the approval, the alternative to voting down the deal would have been no deal as originally drafted.
Part of the issue is that news programmes continue to give airtime to guests with controversial views that are portrayed as fact. I know that this may upset Mefty (genuinely no offence intended BTW) but we need to look at our media carefully and put measures in place to ensure that at the very least assertions are fact-checked and challenged.
Remember the days when people talking utter rot would be challenged by journalists? Can we get Paxo out of cryogenic storage?
Simpler times.
Part of the problem with bravermans interview yesterday was that it was by video link right at the end of the show, there wasnt time to challenge her BS & she knew it
-So she was free to spout whatever lies she liked
Its not good for the country
Sounds like the ERG are going to be largely irrelevant with respect to getting May's deal through, if sky news are to be believed. On twitter Tamara Cohen saying her sources in DUP is that there position is now they would rather a long brexit delay and a new Tory leader to May's deal so will still vote aginst.
That bung was money well spent then wasn't it Theresa??!
I’ve been genuinely shocked at how little can be done to stop an intransigent and autocratic PM just doing what the hell they like
Yes I've been quite shocked by that. At least this in one area where I agree with the leavers - parliament needs sovereignty!
It's labour (and Tory) rebels who hold the balance of power if DUP won't shift though
Remember when no deal was better than a bad deal
Changed days, eh?
Why do people keep repeating the idea that people voted for "parliamentary sovereignty"…?
There were 8 Lab voting with the govt last night. 2 ex-con now TIGers, plus Grieve/Boles, without the DUP, the ERG are irrelevant now.
Kelvin - “take back control” “Our Sovereignty “
The natural conclusion of this is the three pillars of Judiciary, Legislature & Executive. They are also known as Parliamentary sovereignty.
Leavers bang on about it all the time, but don’t like when those pillars actually do their job, especially if it doesn’t meet their agenda.
The broken pillar is the Executive, not the Legislature.
“take back control” “Our Sovereignty “
For many, those nebulous slogans were about taking control away from politicians, by voting against the wishes of the MPs in parliament in a plebiscite.
No, they were taglines of the Leave campaign, about not being controlled by the EU.
Think about why emotive vague slogans were used. Think back to how the referendum was pushed as chance to send a signal to British politicians.
She’ll sit in her bunker, ignore everyone
the self-immolation of the Tories over Brexit is truly epic
No further comment required.
EDIT: @kelvin
That's true - but for me the "control" they wanted to take back was from Europe, not from our politicians. But yeah, as you say, nebulous slogans - one thing to one person, another thing to another.
I can imagine the slogans if there was a Peoples Vote. Jeez!
According to a survey 5% of remain voters and 10% of leave voters think the UK government have handled Brexit well. WTF?
Just goes to show deluded people on both sides.
The 10% of remain and 9% of leave who think they have done "neither well or badly" are almost as odd.
I guess they might be thinking its all some cunning masterplan which will emerge at the last minute.
we need to look at our media carefully and put measures in place to ensure that at the very least assertions are fact-checked and challenged
Yes.
"Thank you Mr MP, please stay in the studio whilst we fact check everything you've said - we'll come back to you after this next piece on puppies."
Out of interest what parts of the EU/UK Withdrawal Agreement to folk on here object to?
Clearly those who wish to remain object to leaving full stop.The Hard Line Brexiteers want to exit on WTO terms and the DUP (and others) don't like the backstop.A quick Google doesn't throw up anything specicifically that Labour object to though I recall they want to maintain worker's and environmental rights.Lots of talk on here about the middle ground and being sensisble so please enlighten me what do you object to in it?
https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8453#fullreport
