| No MV3 15:39 - Mar 18 with 28193 views | ZedRodgers |
Bercow says no.
He's making a statement now in his typical long-winded fashion. Government benches didn't seem to know he was going to do this and are in disbelief.
Remarkable stuff.
EDIT: Essentially he's said he won't allow them to bring back the same deal back for another vote. Something would need to change.
Meaningful Edit 2: Bercow clarifies to JRM that it could be brought back in a new parliamentary session. Make of that what you will. [Post edited 18 Mar 2019 15:52]
|  |
| |  |
| No MV3 on 16:55 - Mar 18 with 4193 views | ZedRodgers |
| No MV3 on 16:49 - Mar 18 by Withnail |
Reports of Italy vetoing the extension.
Hello No Deal xxxx |
What reports? There really is no need to lie. Things are ridiculous enough as it is, without more lies.
Even if they did (which they won’t), it would make revocation of Article 50 more likely than no deal. We are not leaving on March 29th. Accept it. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 16:58 - Mar 18 with 4180 views | XYZ |
| No MV3 on 16:49 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
While, personally, I would like Brexit not to happen, that does leave the question of the Referendum result and respect for the opinions of all those who voted to leave. Pandora's box is open, we can't simply pretend it didn't happen. |
Funnily enough, that's easily dealt with. They'll suddenly "discover" all the evidence that the referendum was won illegally, the Met will finally open the files the Electoral commission sent them 9 months ago and certain people will have the book thrown at them.
Leavers will lie low (pun intended) trying to avoid facing up to having being brainwashed.
Dame Carole Cadwalladr rather than Dame DUP. |  | | |
| No MV3 on 16:58 - Mar 18 with 4179 views | ZedRodgers |
Haha
Unthinkable levels of desperation on the government benches right now. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:03 - Mar 18 with 4164 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 16:48 - Mar 18 by XYZ |
Well, it has stood the test of time, having been in place since before 1700 (I believe).
If you want to argue the whole system is broken, then I'd listen, however, just wanting to change one inconvenient point seems to be the thin end of a dubious wedge. |
There are a number of things about the system which are not particularly functional (the electoral system could do with reform, for a start).
This situation is unprecedented, in being the first time an extra-Parliamentary referendum (which, of course, are a late-20th century invention) has gone against the main drive of government policy. Unlike wartime, there isn't even a DORA to call upon to help cope with the emergency. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:05 - Mar 18 with 4155 views | Lord_Lucan |
| No MV3 on 16:30 - Mar 18 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Patterson was on about leaving on 29th under GATT rule 24 (?) ....0 tarriffs between us and Europe for up to 10 years while the final trade deal is negotiated and Irish issue goes away too......but we will have left. |
I heard either Mogg or Farage talking about this - but whoever it was said it was impossible. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:07 - Mar 18 with 4135 views | SpruceMoose |
| No MV3 on 16:55 - Mar 18 by ZedRodgers |
What reports? There really is no need to lie. Things are ridiculous enough as it is, without more lies.
Even if they did (which they won’t), it would make revocation of Article 50 more likely than no deal. We are not leaving on March 29th. Accept it. |
Withnail seems to be getting more and more desperate in his posting. He should just stick it out, he may yet get his way. |  |
| Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country." | | Poll: | Selectamod |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:08 - Mar 18 with 4131 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 16:58 - Mar 18 by XYZ |
Funnily enough, that's easily dealt with. They'll suddenly "discover" all the evidence that the referendum was won illegally, the Met will finally open the files the Electoral commission sent them 9 months ago and certain people will have the book thrown at them.
Leavers will lie low (pun intended) trying to avoid facing up to having being brainwashed.
Dame Carole Cadwalladr rather than Dame DUP. |
Even if the evidence is strong enough, I'm not convinced it will be sufficient to convince many of those who favour Brexit. Ideas of "betrayal" and "selling out" are already too entrenched. Farage has been shouting that since the day the result was announced. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:10 - Mar 18 with 4124 views | XYZ |
| No MV3 on 17:03 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
There are a number of things about the system which are not particularly functional (the electoral system could do with reform, for a start).
This situation is unprecedented, in being the first time an extra-Parliamentary referendum (which, of course, are a late-20th century invention) has gone against the main drive of government policy. Unlike wartime, there isn't even a DORA to call upon to help cope with the emergency. |
The Commons can vote to have the "third" vote - i.e. suspend/ change the Erskine May standing order - Bercow may accept what May puts forward (all he's saying is "these are the rules" - he hasn't ruled on anything as yet.)
There's plenty of ways round this - Bercow's just issued a wake-up call as required by his office/ job.
p.s. Had to look up Dora. Maybe she could declare war on France, I'm sure nearly 52% would vote for that.
Edited for typos only [Post edited 18 Mar 2019 17:19]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| No MV3 on 17:16 - Mar 18 with 4098 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 16:42 - Mar 18 by Herbivore |
She should have to listen to parliament, not just continue to attempt to blindly bully and bribe her way through. |
Presently, Parliament is a burble of conflicting voices. They do not know what they (as a body) want, only what they do not. There is nothing to listen to.
May's Deal is, as things stand, the only viable (agreed by the EU) alternative to leaving with nothing in place on 29th March. Everything else which has been proposed (Malthouse et al) is simply pie in the sky, requiring the EU to give more ground. Even withdrawing Article 50 would require a change in the law and thus a vote - which would by no means be certain to pass. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:17 - Mar 18 with 4095 views | XYZ |
| No MV3 on 17:08 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
Even if the evidence is strong enough, I'm not convinced it will be sufficient to convince many of those who favour Brexit. Ideas of "betrayal" and "selling out" are already too entrenched. Farage has been shouting that since the day the result was announced. |
Farage may be one of those locked up, assuming the Americans (Mueller) don't get him first.
The ideas of "betrayal" etc are more pumped up threats put about by the dark money rather than a grassroots feeling IMO.
Who is paying for all the current Facebook ads threatening Remain MPs? They won't tell you.
There were around 70 people (including journalists) on Farage's "March" from Sunderland. I say "Farage's" March, but, of course, he was only there for the cameras on day 1 like his attendance at the Euro Parl.
I suspect the overall feeling would be "thank god" can we get back to normal now?
Then we can discuss austerity and the enormous rate the wealth of the top 1% seems to be increasing at over the last 5 years. | | | |
| No MV3 on 17:19 - Mar 18 with 4078 views | Herbivore |
| No MV3 on 17:16 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
Presently, Parliament is a burble of conflicting voices. They do not know what they (as a body) want, only what they do not. There is nothing to listen to.
May's Deal is, as things stand, the only viable (agreed by the EU) alternative to leaving with nothing in place on 29th March. Everything else which has been proposed (Malthouse et al) is simply pie in the sky, requiring the EU to give more ground. Even withdrawing Article 50 would require a change in the law and thus a vote - which would by no means be certain to pass. |
They could have had a series of indicative votes to see what parliament might be in favour of. That's been mooted for months now. Instead she's ploughed on in such a way that her deal is the only one in town. That in itself should not be a basis for voting through the deal. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:22 - Mar 18 with 4072 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 17:17 - Mar 18 by XYZ |
Farage may be one of those locked up, assuming the Americans (Mueller) don't get him first.
The ideas of "betrayal" etc are more pumped up threats put about by the dark money rather than a grassroots feeling IMO.
Who is paying for all the current Facebook ads threatening Remain MPs? They won't tell you.
There were around 70 people (including journalists) on Farage's "March" from Sunderland. I say "Farage's" March, but, of course, he was only there for the cameras on day 1 like his attendance at the Euro Parl.
I suspect the overall feeling would be "thank god" can we get back to normal now?
Then we can discuss austerity and the enormous rate the wealth of the top 1% seems to be increasing at over the last 5 years. |
It would be nice to get back to some proper (running the country) politics again!
I don't think we'd see serious unrest (let alone armed rebellion), but there'd be considerable political upheaval. Put up threats and sloganeering it may be, but they have their subscribers. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:26 - Mar 18 with 4064 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 17:19 - Mar 18 by Herbivore |
They could have had a series of indicative votes to see what parliament might be in favour of. That's been mooted for months now. Instead she's ploughed on in such a way that her deal is the only one in town. That in itself should not be a basis for voting through the deal. |
They've had several rounds of amendable motions, most of which have been rejected (often along party lines).
In any case, all of that ought to have been done two years ago, not in the last two weeks. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:30 - Mar 18 with 4048 views | Herbivore |
| No MV3 on 17:26 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
They've had several rounds of amendable motions, most of which have been rejected (often along party lines).
In any case, all of that ought to have been done two years ago, not in the last two weeks. |
Amendments aren't the same thing though really. And the votes should be free votes, it's a national issue that crosses party lines. I agree it should have happened ages ago, but I don't buy that May's deal should be given further chances purely because her ineptitude has made it the only option in town. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:31 - Mar 18 with 4051 views | XYZ |
| No MV3 on 17:22 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
It would be nice to get back to some proper (running the country) politics again!
I don't think we'd see serious unrest (let alone armed rebellion), but there'd be considerable political upheaval. Put up threats and sloganeering it may be, but they have their subscribers. |
Amen to the first sentence!
Maybe we could have another referendum in three or four years. That would take the heat out of the situation and allow everyone to breathe.
In that time the Facebook/ Russia/ US alt-right interference could be properly looked into and everyone would be more aware of the facts.
I see even Andrew Neil has come out supporting a "Mueller style" enquiry for the UK on this. I suspect he's repositioning himself for the inevitable. | | | |
| No MV3 on 17:31 - Mar 18 with 4053 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 16:49 - Mar 18 by Withnail |
Reports of Italy vetoing the extension.
Hello No Deal xxxx |
Farage was trying to persuade Salvini to get Italy to veto an extension. But that is considered unlikely, given it would be a distraction from their other battles with the EU (same with Hungary and Poland).
Isn't it wonderful that Farage is seeking foreign aid (in the EU) to thwart UK government policy. Taking back control and all that ... [Post edited 18 Mar 2019 17:34]
| |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:37 - Mar 18 with 4037 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 17:31 - Mar 18 by XYZ |
Amen to the first sentence!
Maybe we could have another referendum in three or four years. That would take the heat out of the situation and allow everyone to breathe.
In that time the Facebook/ Russia/ US alt-right interference could be properly looked into and everyone would be more aware of the facts.
I see even Andrew Neil has come out supporting a "Mueller style" enquiry for the UK on this. I suspect he's repositioning himself for the inevitable. |
The problem is, if we withdraw A50 it has to be in good faith, i.e. not just as an extended delay before trying again in a couple of years or so. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:39 - Mar 18 with 4034 views | chicoazul |
| No MV3 on 16:49 - Mar 18 by Withnail |
Reports of Italy vetoing the extension.
Hello No Deal xxxx |
I guess foreign governments intervening in our affairs is ok sometimes in that case. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:42 - Mar 18 with 4021 views | Herbivore |
| No MV3 on 17:37 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
The problem is, if we withdraw A50 it has to be in good faith, i.e. not just as an extended delay before trying again in a couple of years or so. |
That's fine. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:49 - Mar 18 with 4013 views | jas0999 |
You can’t have a situation where May can bring the same deal back time and time again until she gets the result she wants. It’s been voted down not once but twice. You also can’t have a situation where stout critics of the deal will now support it just because they fear Brexit won’t happen. They either supported the deal or they didn’t. If the latter, they need to stick by that decision unless the deal is significantly changed, but in this case it’s the same deal. | | | |
| No MV3 on 17:51 - Mar 18 with 4007 views | XYZ |
| No MV3 on 17:37 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
The problem is, if we withdraw A50 it has to be in good faith, i.e. not just as an extended delay before trying again in a couple of years or so. |
I'm sure that would pass the "good faith" test.
The decision in the A50 case brought by Jo Maugham QC has been lied about by the likes of Esther McVey. You can't revoke as a tactic to eventually re-invoking - the revocation could be challenged as ineffective.
Once the revocation is accepted/ unchallenged a country would have the same right to exercise A50 as all others. It's to stop a country abusing the process rather than tying you in for any fixed period.
It's a "project fear" tactic to con wavering leavers - same as the stories that if we revoke then we lose the rebate etc. etc.
If we revoke then as far as our relationship with the EU is concerned, nothing would have changed since 22 June 2016.
Edit - typos again [Post edited 18 Mar 2019 17:53]
| | | |
| No MV3 on 17:54 - Mar 18 with 3997 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 17:30 - Mar 18 by Herbivore |
Amendments aren't the same thing though really. And the votes should be free votes, it's a national issue that crosses party lines. I agree it should have happened ages ago, but I don't buy that May's deal should be given further chances purely because her ineptitude has made it the only option in town. |
They pretty much are the same thing. People's ideas are debated and put to the House. There are still too many people playing party political games and so unwilling to allow free votes (tho there is increasingly a healthy appetite for rebellion). | |
| |
| No MV3 on 17:56 - Mar 18 with 3995 views | Withnail |
| No MV3 on 17:39 - Mar 18 by chicoazul |
I guess foreign governments intervening in our affairs is ok sometimes in that case. |
Zero fcuks given. We haven't left yet. |  | | |
| No MV3 on 17:58 - Mar 18 with 3992 views | StokieBlue |
| No MV3 on 16:38 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
Pragmatism. Do we sacrifice the best chance for a way out of this impasse for the sake of Parliamentary procedure, for the foolishness of a Prime Minister who put the question twice before things were anywhere near ready? |
But then you are essentially saying that by ignoring the house, running down the clock and ignoring procedure you get what you want.
It's rewarding bad behaviour and sets a dangerous prescedence.
Sure it's pragmatic but if you let it go then there is no going back.
SB |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| No MV3 on 18:02 - Mar 18 with 3970 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 17:51 - Mar 18 by XYZ |
I'm sure that would pass the "good faith" test.
The decision in the A50 case brought by Jo Maugham QC has been lied about by the likes of Esther McVey. You can't revoke as a tactic to eventually re-invoking - the revocation could be challenged as ineffective.
Once the revocation is accepted/ unchallenged a country would have the same right to exercise A50 as all others. It's to stop a country abusing the process rather than tying you in for any fixed period.
It's a "project fear" tactic to con wavering leavers - same as the stories that if we revoke then we lose the rebate etc. etc.
If we revoke then as far as our relationship with the EU is concerned, nothing would have changed since 22 June 2016.
Edit - typos again [Post edited 18 Mar 2019 17:53]
|
Indeed. If we revoke now (or within any A50 extension) things return to the status quo ante.
The difficulty would be in presenting a revocation of A50 as not including any strong possibility of it all happenning again in the near future. An open declaration of such would be politically difficult in the UK, against a backdrop of thwarted, angry Brexiteers in the Conservative Party, the media and the country - possibly sufficient to bring down a desperately fragile government. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
