| No MV3 15:39 - Mar 18 with 28122 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 18:05 - Mar 18 with 3151 views | chicoazul |
| No MV3 on 17:56 - Mar 18 by Withnail |
Zero fcuks given. We haven't left yet. |
Just so long as we're clear, you don't care about other governments intervening in our affairs long as they're on your side. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 18:11 - Mar 18 with 3136 views | ZedRodgers |
I didn’t realise Thomas ‘Erskine’ May was Phillip May’s great great grandfather.
Imagine being fcked over by your great great grandfather-in-law like this. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 18:19 - Mar 18 with 3116 views | BloomBlue |
But MPs have a session every day |  | | |
| No MV3 on 18:26 - Mar 18 with 3108 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 17:58 - Mar 18 by StokieBlue |
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 |
Is it 'bad behaviour', or the only option she has? May cannot move on her red lines, or the party rebels and the government collapses. The EU feels it has gone far enough on its red lines. There is no room for maneuver.
The precedent for political leaders who fragment their own party over what they perceive to be the national good is not great (Ramsay MacDonald, H H Asquith). |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 18:29 - Mar 18 with 3100 views | XYZ |
| No MV3 on 18:02 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
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. |
I don't think the requirement goes that far ("not including any strong possibility of it all happenning again in the near future") and agree it would be difficult domestically.
I think the EU would accept that a plan that provided for revocation of A50, a Mueller style enquiry and a second ref in the medium term was not "bad faith". It would give the EU time to consider how it's own practices and PR might be amended to avoid such events arising. |  | | |
| No MV3 on 18:29 - Mar 18 with 3100 views | ZedRodgers |
| No MV3 on 17:56 - Mar 18 by Withnail |
Zero fcuks given. We haven't left yet. |
Your optimism (pessimism?) that a state will veto is almost commendable.
However, I think you’re getting quite overexcited. One or more states will probably hold the EU to ransom over an unrelated issue in return for not vetoing, but extension is inevitable. Think DUP.
You should make peace with the fact that there is going to be an extension. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 18:34 - Mar 18 with 3089 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 18:29 - Mar 18 by XYZ |
I don't think the requirement goes that far ("not including any strong possibility of it all happenning again in the near future") and agree it would be difficult domestically.
I think the EU would accept that a plan that provided for revocation of A50, a Mueller style enquiry and a second ref in the medium term was not "bad faith". It would give the EU time to consider how it's own practices and PR might be amended to avoid such events arising. |
That would require considerable progressive thinking and introspection from some elements of the EU organisation, which I'm not sure is likely. There are people in Brussels for whom Ever Closer Union is as dear to their hearts as the opposite is to the most ardent Brexiteer. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 18:34 - Mar 18 with 3090 views | ZedRodgers |
| No MV3 on 18:26 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
Is it 'bad behaviour', or the only option she has? May cannot move on her red lines, or the party rebels and the government collapses. The EU feels it has gone far enough on its red lines. There is no room for maneuver.
The precedent for political leaders who fragment their own party over what they perceive to be the national good is not great (Ramsay MacDonald, H H Asquith). |
It both bad behaviour and the only option she has to remain in government (or as leader).
She could avoid the ‘bad behaviour’ by facing up to the consequences of her actions, admitting defeat and resigning. She has repeatedly gone too far and repeatedly not faced up to the consequences. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| No MV3 on 18:45 - Mar 18 with 3084 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 18:34 - Mar 18 by ZedRodgers |
It both bad behaviour and the only option she has to remain in government (or as leader).
She could avoid the ‘bad behaviour’ by facing up to the consequences of her actions, admitting defeat and resigning. She has repeatedly gone too far and repeatedly not faced up to the consequences. |
She resigns - then what?
A leadership contest in the Conservative Party where the winner will find themselves in exactly the same situation. Unless it's someone actively in favour of No Deal.
Outside chance of a General Election, which it's unlikely Labour will win outright (due to the loss of 41 Scottish seats since 2015), or the Conservatives with a big enough majority to ignore the hard-liners (due to their general ineptness, austerity, rebellious Brexiteers, etc.) and so another Hung Parliament with maybe not even any viable (or realitic) coalition.
Meanwhile, as things stand, we're 11 days 4 hours and about 15 minutes from leaving the EU. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 18:52 - Mar 18 with 3076 views | XYZ |
| No MV3 on 18:34 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
That would require considerable progressive thinking and introspection from some elements of the EU organisation, which I'm not sure is likely. There are people in Brussels for whom Ever Closer Union is as dear to their hearts as the opposite is to the most ardent Brexiteer. |
The EU are aware of the threat to democracy from the dark forces, indeed are fighting against them over the upcoming Euro elections.
They've seen Trump and Brexit and know that they're on the target list.
They need the UK almost as much as the UK needs them.
The failure of Cameron's "renegotiation" was very short-sighted on the EU's part IMO. Macron seems to be making noises about some modernisation; he too, of course, has the wolf at his door.
I'm trying to be optimistic here ... | | | |
| No MV3 on 18:54 - Mar 18 with 3070 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 18:19 - Mar 18 by BloomBlue |
But MPs have a session every day |
No. They have a sitting every (working) day. A session lasts approximately a year. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 19:01 - Mar 18 with 3052 views | Withnail |
| No MV3 on 18:29 - Mar 18 by ZedRodgers |
Your optimism (pessimism?) that a state will veto is almost commendable.
However, I think you’re getting quite overexcited. One or more states will probably hold the EU to ransom over an unrelated issue in return for not vetoing, but extension is inevitable. Think DUP.
You should make peace with the fact that there is going to be an extension. |
I'd rather an extention than May's deal tbh. I'm in it for the long game now.
May's deal isn't Brexit. |  | | |
| No MV3 on 19:02 - Mar 18 with 3052 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 16:26 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
Why exactly do you favour leaving the EU with no transition agreement or trade deal in place? What is the advantage of doing that? |
I was hoping for some answers from those in favour of it. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 19:02 - Mar 18 with 3051 views | SpruceMoose |
| No MV3 on 19:01 - Mar 18 by Withnail |
I'd rather an extention than May's deal tbh. I'm in it for the long game now.
May's deal isn't Brexit. |
It's nice to have something to live for I guess. |  |
| 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 19:07 - Mar 18 with 3051 views | WestStanderLaLaLa |
| No MV3 on 19:01 - Mar 18 by Withnail |
I'd rather an extention than May's deal tbh. I'm in it for the long game now.
May's deal isn't Brexit. |
It’s what you voted for, get over it. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 19:07 - Mar 18 with 3048 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 19:01 - Mar 18 by Withnail |
I'd rather an extention than May's deal tbh. I'm in it for the long game now.
May's deal isn't Brexit. |
No, it isn't meant to be. It's a transition arrangement while we negotiate the post-Brexit deals with our trading partners, to let ourselves out gently. But once it is in force, we are outside the EU.
Again I ask the question Bloom hasn't answered - what is the advantage to be gained from leaving with no deals or withdrawal process in place? Why is no deal a good thing? | |
| |
| No MV3 on 19:11 - Mar 18 with 3034 views | footers |
| No MV3 on 19:07 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
No, it isn't meant to be. It's a transition arrangement while we negotiate the post-Brexit deals with our trading partners, to let ourselves out gently. But once it is in force, we are outside the EU.
Again I ask the question Bloom hasn't answered - what is the advantage to be gained from leaving with no deals or withdrawal process in place? Why is no deal a good thing? |
It'll make houses cheaper. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 19:22 - Mar 18 with 3016 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| No MV3 on 18:34 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
That would require considerable progressive thinking and introspection from some elements of the EU organisation, which I'm not sure is likely. There are people in Brussels for whom Ever Closer Union is as dear to their hearts as the opposite is to the most ardent Brexiteer. |
There are people supposedly negotiating Brexit that agree with them! |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 19:25 - Mar 18 with 3012 views | BlueBadger |
| No MV3 on 17:56 - Mar 18 by Withnail |
Zero fcuks given. We haven't left yet. |
Imagine valuing blue passports and hating foreigners over your country's future prosperity. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 19:49 - Mar 18 with 2977 views | noggin |
| No MV3 on 19:07 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
No, it isn't meant to be. It's a transition arrangement while we negotiate the post-Brexit deals with our trading partners, to let ourselves out gently. But once it is in force, we are outside the EU.
Again I ask the question Bloom hasn't answered - what is the advantage to be gained from leaving with no deals or withdrawal process in place? Why is no deal a good thing? |
Is the answer, "We didn't need a deal when we won the war"? I've actually seen this posted on FB. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 19:59 - Mar 18 with 2967 views | BloomBlue |
| No MV3 on 19:07 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
No, it isn't meant to be. It's a transition arrangement while we negotiate the post-Brexit deals with our trading partners, to let ourselves out gently. But once it is in force, we are outside the EU.
Again I ask the question Bloom hasn't answered - what is the advantage to be gained from leaving with no deals or withdrawal process in place? Why is no deal a good thing? |
Sorry Guthrum I didn't see your question. Because it's taken us 2 years to reach this point and we still haven't got to the main details of the agreement. Leaving with no deal will force the EU to work quicker and agree with what we want rather than what they want
Plus we immediately start working on frictionless trade deals with China and the US. | | | |
| No MV3 on 20:01 - Mar 18 with 2962 views | ZedRodgers |
| No MV3 on 18:45 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
She resigns - then what?
A leadership contest in the Conservative Party where the winner will find themselves in exactly the same situation. Unless it's someone actively in favour of No Deal.
Outside chance of a General Election, which it's unlikely Labour will win outright (due to the loss of 41 Scottish seats since 2015), or the Conservatives with a big enough majority to ignore the hard-liners (due to their general ineptness, austerity, rebellious Brexiteers, etc.) and so another Hung Parliament with maybe not even any viable (or realitic) coalition.
Meanwhile, as things stand, we're 11 days 4 hours and about 15 minutes from leaving the EU. |
A general election is obviously my preferred way forward. A longer extension seems the most feasible and realistic request to put to the EU. Would they not be sceptical of a short term extension which promises the immediate return of the same type of deal which has left us in this mess?
The election outcome should then provide a mandate for a confirmatory Brexit decision. Whether the Conservatives have a new leader with a softer or harder approach is down to them. Labour will put forward their soft deal + people’s vote. There may be a return of UKIP / Farage’s new mob, but seems unlikely given UKIP’s polling being down 20%ish for prospective EU elections. I think the tide is finally turning from those types of reckless lunatics without a plan.
I admit that a hung parliament would be difficult situation, especially if Conservatives have gone harder and Labour even softer than 2017. Would that situation not force the cross-party compromise which has been missing for the last two years? It would take a very naive new Tory leader to continue May’s blinkered approach and Corbyn and other leaders have attempted to reach out for cross-party talks from the beginning.
What are May’s options apart from that?
Go back to the EU abandoning red lines? - A fairly honourable option at one stage but not now. She wouldn’t be able to face her party.
Try to do away with the Erskine May convention? - Surely that wouldn’t pass.
Prorogue parliament? - Seems even riskier than a GE to me.
Chuck Olly Robbins under a bus and hope for the best? - Embarrassing.
Call a press conference outside Downing St. and pretend things are fine, spewing out meaningless sound bites about the national interest and the will of the people? - Probably.
The madness has to stop. [Post edited 18 Mar 2019 20:05]
| |
| |
| No MV3 on 20:05 - Mar 18 with 2947 views | TractorWood |
| No MV3 on 16:04 - Mar 18 by J2BLUE |
Bercow won't have done this without some sort of remain plan in place. I'm not saying it's some giant conspiracy but he's a remainer and i'm sure discussions have taken place for what the next step is. |
It was introduced in 1604 to stop the same legislation being continually paraded in front of parliament having already been voted on in its exact form in the same parliamentary session. It's escapism to even imply Bercow has any culpability to enforce the rules that govern our legislature.
May was proposing a vote on the exact same legislation that was rejected by 149 votes last week. It's a farce. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 20:17 - Mar 18 with 2932 views | footers |
| No MV3 on 20:05 - Mar 18 by TractorWood |
It was introduced in 1604 to stop the same legislation being continually paraded in front of parliament having already been voted on in its exact form in the same parliamentary session. It's escapism to even imply Bercow has any culpability to enforce the rules that govern our legislature.
May was proposing a vote on the exact same legislation that was rejected by 149 votes last week. It's a farce. |
Although you're right, and I disagree with J2, Bercow has ruled against precedent on a number of occasions when he felt it appropriate. However, these rulings were mainly progressive ones which went against some archaic precedents.
Here I think his ruling is right, and there is some irony in presenting the same vote again and again in an Ireland-style EU ref. You really can't ask the same question without being materially different in a parliamentary session- it makes a mockery of the House. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 20:30 - Mar 18 with 2907 views | BloomBlue |
| No MV3 on 20:17 - Mar 18 by footers |
Although you're right, and I disagree with J2, Bercow has ruled against precedent on a number of occasions when he felt it appropriate. However, these rulings were mainly progressive ones which went against some archaic precedents.
Here I think his ruling is right, and there is some irony in presenting the same vote again and again in an Ireland-style EU ref. You really can't ask the same question without being materially different in a parliamentary session- it makes a mockery of the House. |
But the irony is people asking for a 2nd referendum are doing the same, we've already had a vote to leave or remain, and now they want the same vote again. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
