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
I don't object to the WA personally. I'd rather remain, but if we are going to leave it gets the job started. What I do object to is the refusal to consider the customs union and singlemarket which is ruled out in the political declaration by the highlighting that the UK wont accept freedom of movement.
“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.”
Or you could have interviewers who knew what they were talking about in the first place...
Lots of talk on here about the middle ground and being sensisble so please enlighten me what do you object to in it?
Simply put: it pleases no-one. It looks on paper to be a compromise but it's not. It gains us absolutely nothing, we'll be in broadly the same place we are now (if we're lucky) only we will no longer have a seat at the table - we will be rule takers rather than rule makers. So much for "taking back control," hey? Remainers don't want it (obvs) and leavers don't want it either.
This is in part why May's deal keeps getting rejected, I suspect. Everyone looks at it and goes "what's the point?" We will at best be slightly worse off than we are now. This is the circle which cannot be squared however you look at it.
We (our government) currently has the ultimate say over trade agreements we sign up to. This Withdrawal Agreement says that we give up that say, for an indefinite amount of time. Goodbye control…
If all you care about is fewer EEA people wanting, and being able, to come here… or just want them to have second class status once they are here… it's a good Agreement for you. No gains for anyone else… it puts us in a worse position as regards absolutely anything and everything I can think of.
Out of interest what parts of the EU/UK Withdrawal Agreement to folk on here object to?
I'm a remainer which I think sums up what I object to.
Just the general lowering of living standards / economy / all round worsening of international standing.
Ireland, that has potential to go all kinds of pear shaped when the backstop expires.
Trade with EU area VAT will knacker it, everywhere else we won't be under EU trade agreements and will have to hammer out agreements with far less clout so they aren't going to be as good.
Movement, last year I was considering going contracting in europe, now I'm not, lots of others will think the same.
Farming will be, I think, hit hard by exit from CAP, we'll have less cash for subsidy and see fast rising food prices.
Probably other stuff, mainly that whatever WA we have we'll be turning over the US and going "please" and they'll say "bend over".
Some of those points may be a little naive, I accept.
Mays deal really is the worst of all worlds (for all the reasons listed above) and renders the whole exercise completely and utterly pointless
Well... theres the blue passports, I suppose....
ION, this chap has done some interesting analysis on the petition.
https://twitter.com/Richard_Ampere/status/1110319272805519360
I can't believe I'm actually defending May's deal or Brexit for that matter...
What I do object to is the refusal to consider the customs union and singlemarket which is ruled out in the political declaration by the highlighting that the UK wont accept freedom of movement.
You can have a custom's union without free movement.
Theresa May will never agree to a custom's union.... but I suspect that is what we will have in anything but name post negotiation.
We (our government) currently has the ultimate say over trade agreements we sign up to. This Withdrawal Agreement says that we give up that say, for an indefinite amount of time.
Do we? Or until an agreement is reached.
Because EVERYTHING about the withdrawal agreement affects me, people I'm close to and resolves nothing, it merely ensures that we're locked into decades of negotiation with our closest neighbours for what will invariably be a worse deal that what we have.
We cannot have different regulations, different standards to the closest trading bloc and expect an open border. That's not how international trade works.
Make no mistake, May's so called "deal" (which is merely a withdrawal agreement) is designed to give one political party breathing space to plaster over the cracks of division and to mitigate the inevitable economic pain which would otherwise consign the bastards to the electoral doldrums for a generation. Sorry, but my attitude is basically k 'em, especially those who've decided that our futures are worth throwing under their red bus with b**s printed on the side. I want the Conservative Party to end up suffering the pain they want to inflict upon the rest of us for ideological reasons, nothing less will do.
I believe the appropriate saying is "Hoist on his own petard". Couldn't happen to a nicer bloke.
Who is he? This analysis is what I would expect the govt to be doing rather than sticking its thick Brexity fingers in its ears.
We (our government) currently has the ultimate say over trade agreements we sign up to. This Withdrawal Agreement says that we give up that say, for an indefinite amount of time.
Do we? Or until an agreement is reached.
Okay, let's do "length of trade agreement negotiations" sweepstake … I'll take "9 years" please, so 2028. That's nine years without the control we currently have. To gain what? A worse deal than we have in Europe now, but with the freedom to strike deals with USA & China? In the 2030s, If we're lucky? Maybe never? Pick your own dates… but I think me saying "indefinite" is fair.
We cannot have different regulations, different standards to the closest trading bloc and expect an open border. That’s not how international trade works.
Indeed. And once we're out, the free-marketeers will not so much begin a race to the bottom on rights and regulations as to put them into freefall. If you want an idea of where they truly want to take us then look to the 'Export Processing Zones' of Burma. Thats what their 'Freeport' idea amounts too. Tax and regulation-free enclaves.
They want to turn us into a mix between a tax haven for the rich and a sweatshop for the rest of us. It goes without saying that that model doesn't allow for a welfare state, NHS or anything else deemed 'luxuries' for the proles
They want to turn us into a mix between a tax haven for the rich and a sweatshop for the rest of us. It goes without saying that that model doesn’t allow for a welfare state, NHS or anything else deemed ‘luxuries’ for the proles
Not read it all but I'm sure some Labour wag ,even "6th form grandad" would have picked up the abolition of the welfare state if it was mentioned in the WA.Try reigning in your usual over the top inaccurate ,hyperbole and just quote a para reference in the document.
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?
I think "remainers just want to remain" is a bit dismissive as any aspect of the deal that removes rights and freedoms is a negative.
Specifically I would rather we were at the head of the EU, with absolute veto power and lots of control within our largest trading partner, if you looking a specific failings of the 'deal' then end of freedom of movement and cross-boarder services.
I think “remainers just want to remain” is a bit dismissive
I don't want to "just remain," you're right, it's dismissive.
There's a lot of work we could do, both domestically and within the EU, to improve things and to attempt to address the concerns of the electorate which drove them to vote to leave in the first place. I don't want to "just" do anything, I want us to sort our shit out and being a prominent and influential member of the EU gives us the strongest foundations to make a start on doing that.
At the risk of repeating myself: reform, not remain.
What PJM, kelvin, binners said.
edit: and what cougar said.
We really are not better off on our own. We are better off joining forces with our nearest neighbours.
Perhaps what we have with the EU isn't right, but we won't change it from the outside, and we will still have to deal with it, but on the outside we'll have zero influence, none, squat, nada. If we're in it, we might be able to change it. As pointed out we have the third largest (?) block of MEPs.
Brexit is just beyond stupid. It is cutting off our own nose to spite europe, and europe will simply say "chumps". They won't be spited.
I confess thinking it is about time we put all the Leave voters telephone sanitisers on the B ark (after the ERG get the bathtub)
John Healey was on one of the political shows last week saying Labour were happy with the WA, just the PD which they object to, which does open the prospect of developing a realistic version of Labour's policy, voting through the WA so we leave, and then having a referendum on the two alternative exit routes.
Okay, let’s do “length of trade agreement negotiations” sweepstake … I’ll take “9 years” please, so 2028. That’s nine years without the control we currently have. To gain what? A worse deal than we have in Europe now, but with the freedom to strike deals with USA & China? In the 2030s, If we’re lucky? Maybe never? Pick your own dates… but I think me saying “indefinite” is fair
I agree bureaucracies and intransigent participants don't make for a speedy process as we can all see however alignment with current and future rules-all trading partners have to comply with the receipient's trading partners rules to export anyway.A customs union or the various other options as labour propose would also put us in the same position surely?
voting through the WA so we leave
I understand that is specifically forbidden in some legislation or other (according to someone who sounded authoritative on Twitter)
As pointed out we have the third largest (?) block of MEPs.
Joint third, with Italy (73). France has 74, Germany has 90-odd.
I confess thinking it is about time we put all the Leave voters telephone sanitisers on the B ark
And risk being wiped out by a virulent disease contracted by dirty telephones?
Yes Mefty, the Labour leadership are asking for the same as May now, but with some words added that make it look like they've saved lots of jobs.
I agree bureaucracies and intransigent participants don’t make for a speedy process
It's not just that. The thing about trade deals that most people miss is, they are insanely complicated. You don't just rock up to the US, go "fancy a trade deal? Yes? Cool. Pub, then?" The devil, as is often the case, is in the detail.
according to someone who sounded authoritative on Twitter
Please see if you can find it, would be very interested to see it. Even if it is, then if it was a way out of the impasse I am sure a way could be found to get it to work.
Nick, my point was, we currently have control of our trade policy (via EU membership), whereas the all UK Customs Area in the backstop would cede control of our trade policy to the rEU 'till it is replaced. That could be years. And years. And years. And there are some that say there is a risk that it will never happen. You can see why that brings about strong opposition from people of all positions.
I think he has a point
Tell you one thing: the next Adam Curtis documentary is going to be a ****ing doozy.
You can see why that brings about strong opposition from people of all positions.
But not from people who purport to support a permanent customs union.
<deleted, too slow>
Why? I wouldn't support us being in the EU but with no role for our government in the decisions made, either. Or without MEPs.
Please see if you can find it, would be very interested to see it.
Do your own research, LMGIFY, etc.
Oh, OK then - I think think this is the relevant bit 🙂
Implementing the Withdrawal Agreement
12. Section 13 of the EU (Withdrawal) Act 2018 provides that the House of
Commons must vote to approve the Withdrawal Agreement and Political
Declaration on the future relationship before the Withdrawal Agreement can be
ratified and then enter into force. They must also be subject to a ‘take note’ motion
in the Lords.
So on that basis they could approve a PD that contemplates two distinct future paths.
God knows him many ukip meps will be elected if we remain. Might be better off without.
Dunno but I think the key bit is that the PD has to be agreed and signed along with the WA - we can't agree the WA and say "trust us, we'll come up with something for the PD later".
IANAL so may be totally wrong!
God knows him many ukip meps will be elected if we remain. Might be better off without.
A big fat 0.
Firstly the UK actually knows the EU parliament exists now and will vote for it.
Secondly and more importantly, if we remain it can only happen via revoking A50, which means we're in for a decade or more, no one is going to continue to fund UKIP, whatever happens in the weeks and months ahead.
The PD is nonsense though… it's just there to reassure the UK that the rEU won't screw it, as long as it looks after citizens, Ireland and existing financial commitments.
God knows him many ukip meps will be elected if we remain. Might be better off without
I'll take it they are lazy gobshites who simply take money in exchange for nothing but at least that doing nothing mean they can't get in the way of my straight bananas.
I do love these come on remainers let's just leave cause you can have a free squirrel.
free squirrel?
Can we get Paxo out of cryogenic storage?
I wonder how many leave votes were a result of his documentary ?
The petition has received a response.
This response was given on 26 March 2019
This Government will not revoke Article 50. We will honour the result of the 2016 referendum and work with Parliament to deliver a deal that ensures we leave the European Union.
The full reply from DexEU is on the front page of the petition.
Can't say as I'm totally shocked, but FFS.
Ostrich approach.
Still, I have a feeling that eventually they will have to discuss it in parliament, like it or not.
Oh the full text is all there
British people cast their votes once again in the 2017 General Election where over 80% of those who voted, voted for parties, including the Opposition, who committed in their manifestos to upholding the result of the referendum.
This Government stands by this commitment.
Revoking Article 50 would break the promises made by Government to the British people, disrespect the clear instruction from a democratic vote, and in turn, reduce confidence in our democracy. As the Prime Minister has said, failing to deliver Brexit would cause “potentially irreparable damage to public trust”, and it is imperative that people can trust their Government to respect their votes and deliver the best outcome for them.
Department for Exiting the European Union.
Bingo Tastic!! It's a full house there of WILL OF THE PEOPLE!!
We don't care so long as we can pin some red white and blue ribbons on it
And for added LOL's I bet they really loved putting it on the schedule!!
Parliament will debate this petition
Parliament will debate this petition on 1 April 2019.
The thing is, the petitions are not supposed to be enacted by government, they are supposed to result in a parliamentary debate. To resist a debate says far more than just sticking to your policy.
1 April 2019.
So there will be a debate?
That Paxman vid - kinell
There has to be if it's hit the 100k limit, although as Mrs May likes to say she is listening to people, well not all people, and certainly not any who disagree with her.
Parliament will debate this petition on 1 April 2019.
Oh, I totally missed that. Nice catch.
There has to be if it’s hit the 100k limit,
And yet,
The Commons Petitions Committee said the petition, which passed 5.75 million signatures on Tuesday evening, was “the most signed petition ever received on the House of Commons and Government petitions site”.
MPs will also debate petitions calling for a second EU referendum, which has received more than 120,000 signatures, and another signed by more than 140,000 demanding the UK leave with or without a deal on 29 March.
The committee said it had decided to have a single debate on the three petitions “because it wanted to ensure they were debated as soon as possible, so they would be less likely to be overtaken by events”.
... I have a bad feeling about this.
Yep erg devouring itself as they face May's deal or watch Brexit skip away.
Aron banks attacking them I Twitter, might being called a traitor & Norris getting booed at Bruges meeting for saying he'd back May's deal if she resigns (was always about power for him)
The lies were bound to catch up with them eventually 😃
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/26/brexit-indicative-votes-grand-wizards-ultras
Some brilliant lines in here...
Take the ERG vice-chair, Mark Francois, a sort of inflatable idiot who has spent the past few months bobbing around the broadcast studios
That's a class article, "The Fellowship of the Ringpieces"...
Strange thing pissing off a lot of the electorate!!
Thanks, zippy - email sent.
Tomorrow will be a shitfest of two faced back stabbers showing in epic proportions their true colours...can't wait