| No MV3 15:39 - Mar 18 with 28218 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 07:59 - Mar 19 with 2274 views | Herbivore |
| No MV3 on 07:38 - Mar 19 by ZedRodgers |
The delusion continues then.
|
She has nothing else to offer. She completely lacks the strength and talent to consider any option other than her deal, which has been comprehensively rejected twice. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 08:05 - Mar 19 with 2263 views | footers |
| No MV3 on 07:59 - Mar 19 by Herbivore |
She has nothing else to offer. She completely lacks the strength and talent to consider any option other than her deal, which has been comprehensively rejected twice. |
Which should spell the end of her leadership. But it won't. Of course it won't.
Where now? |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 08:12 - Mar 19 with 2250 views | Herbivore |
| No MV3 on 08:05 - Mar 19 by footers |
Which should spell the end of her leadership. But it won't. Of course it won't.
Where now? |
Emigrate? | |
| |
| No MV3 on 08:14 - Mar 19 with 2249 views | footers |
| No MV3 on 08:12 - Mar 19 by Herbivore |
Emigrate? |
She's been a pretty rubbish leader but no need to kick her out. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 09:11 - Mar 19 with 2201 views | footers |
| No MV3 on 09:00 - Mar 19 by StokieBlue |
Anyone else feel that MV1, MV2 and MV3 are awful like Duff, Duff Lite and Duff Dry?
SB |
"Let's just say we have a few ideas up our sleeve..."
"Like what?"
"I'd rather not get into it right now."
"Why not?"
"Ok, we've got nothing."
Pretty accurate, SB! | |
| |
| No MV3 on 09:38 - Mar 19 with 2177 views | Herbivore |
More carrying on regardless from May then: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47620235
I am curious as to what it would actually take for her to consider changing tack. Unprecedented parliamentary defeats won't do it, centuries of parliamentary convention don't seem to be making a dent either. She is utterly impervious on this. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 10:20 - Mar 19 with 2142 views | pickles110564 |
| No MV3 on 09:38 - Mar 19 by Herbivore |
More carrying on regardless from May then: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47620235
I am curious as to what it would actually take for her to consider changing tack. Unprecedented parliamentary defeats won't do it, centuries of parliamentary convention don't seem to be making a dent either. She is utterly impervious on this. |
Maybe she is honourable unlike Corbyn and wants to deliver what she stood on at the last election? |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| No MV3 on 10:28 - Mar 19 with 2132 views | Seablu |
| No MV3 on 10:20 - Mar 19 by pickles110564 |
Maybe she is honourable unlike Corbyn and wants to deliver what she stood on at the last election? |
Only if what she stood on was a steaming fresh bulldog turd.
She's certainly delivering that straight into the nation's fan. |  | | |
| No MV3 on 10:32 - Mar 19 with 2133 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 09:38 - Mar 19 by Herbivore |
More carrying on regardless from May then: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47620235
I am curious as to what it would actually take for her to consider changing tack. Unprecedented parliamentary defeats won't do it, centuries of parliamentary convention don't seem to be making a dent either. She is utterly impervious on this. |
As I said yesterday, she really has little in the way of options on this.
If she changes tack, her party - and, by extension, the government - will fall apart. At the very least she would end up in the disastrous position of a leader without a party, propped up by the opposition. But there are sufficient elements rebelling now that she cannot get her deal through. Labour are not inclined to cooperate with her plan (why should they be, unless the alternatives are worse?) and the EU have given as much ground as they are prepared to for now.
As a Conservative PM lacking a majority, propped up by the DUP, there is no conceivable deal to which the EU might agree which would also be acceptable to her party. Any replacement as leader would be in exactly the same position. I can't see a general election delivering a sufficient majority for her to defy the ERG and Tory Remainers, neither will it hand power to Labour.
It's far too late for cross-party initiatives now, even if all sides were able to swallow their partisan inclinations. We don't even know if there is enough common ground in the HoC to command a majority. And how much political damage would Labour take for cooperating with the Tories?
Thus trying to force her deal through is, for May, the only alternative to an economically damaging No Deal or a politically disastrous No Brexit. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 10:36 - Mar 19 with 2119 views | wkj |
| No MV3 on 10:32 - Mar 19 by Guthrum |
As I said yesterday, she really has little in the way of options on this.
If she changes tack, her party - and, by extension, the government - will fall apart. At the very least she would end up in the disastrous position of a leader without a party, propped up by the opposition. But there are sufficient elements rebelling now that she cannot get her deal through. Labour are not inclined to cooperate with her plan (why should they be, unless the alternatives are worse?) and the EU have given as much ground as they are prepared to for now.
As a Conservative PM lacking a majority, propped up by the DUP, there is no conceivable deal to which the EU might agree which would also be acceptable to her party. Any replacement as leader would be in exactly the same position. I can't see a general election delivering a sufficient majority for her to defy the ERG and Tory Remainers, neither will it hand power to Labour.
It's far too late for cross-party initiatives now, even if all sides were able to swallow their partisan inclinations. We don't even know if there is enough common ground in the HoC to command a majority. And how much political damage would Labour take for cooperating with the Tories?
Thus trying to force her deal through is, for May, the only alternative to an economically damaging No Deal or a politically disastrous No Brexit. |
Complacently calling a general election was the biggest spanner in the works for this process- May bit her own hand by doing that as she was sure she would get a favourable majority to breeze it all through.
Compare this to David Cameron who complacently staged an EU referendum with the belief that remain would win by a majority.
Not saying Labour are any better but the Torries have ballsed so much up regarding all this, I can't see why anyone would be considered honourable for doing what's best for the UK. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 10:59 - Mar 19 with 2098 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 10:36 - Mar 19 by wkj |
Complacently calling a general election was the biggest spanner in the works for this process- May bit her own hand by doing that as she was sure she would get a favourable majority to breeze it all through.
Compare this to David Cameron who complacently staged an EU referendum with the belief that remain would win by a majority.
Not saying Labour are any better but the Torries have ballsed so much up regarding all this, I can't see why anyone would be considered honourable for doing what's best for the UK. |
It wasted both time and her HoC majority. With the latter, not enough to discount the ERG entirely, but certainly not having the DUP.
One thing which really gets me about the Irish border issue is the DUP crying about any separation of customs arrangements from the rest of the UK, when they already have their own devolved Assembly (when it's working), power sharing arrangements, political parties, a distinct legal system, policing arrangements, etc. They aren't campaigning for those to be centralised in London, are they? | |
| |
| No MV3 on 11:06 - Mar 19 with 2091 views | Herbivore |
| No MV3 on 10:32 - Mar 19 by Guthrum |
As I said yesterday, she really has little in the way of options on this.
If she changes tack, her party - and, by extension, the government - will fall apart. At the very least she would end up in the disastrous position of a leader without a party, propped up by the opposition. But there are sufficient elements rebelling now that she cannot get her deal through. Labour are not inclined to cooperate with her plan (why should they be, unless the alternatives are worse?) and the EU have given as much ground as they are prepared to for now.
As a Conservative PM lacking a majority, propped up by the DUP, there is no conceivable deal to which the EU might agree which would also be acceptable to her party. Any replacement as leader would be in exactly the same position. I can't see a general election delivering a sufficient majority for her to defy the ERG and Tory Remainers, neither will it hand power to Labour.
It's far too late for cross-party initiatives now, even if all sides were able to swallow their partisan inclinations. We don't even know if there is enough common ground in the HoC to command a majority. And how much political damage would Labour take for cooperating with the Tories?
Thus trying to force her deal through is, for May, the only alternative to an economically damaging No Deal or a politically disastrous No Brexit. |
Although she is entirely culpable for being in a position where her options are so limited. And she does have options, they just necessitate some courage and a willingness to put country ahead of party. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 11:16 - Mar 19 with 2079 views | noggin |
| No MV3 on 10:20 - Mar 19 by pickles110564 |
Maybe she is honourable unlike Corbyn and wants to deliver what she stood on at the last election? |
Poor old Pickles is in a proper pickle. |  |
| |
| No MV3 on 11:20 - Mar 19 with 2070 views | blueislander |
| No MV3 on 11:06 - Mar 19 by Herbivore |
Although she is entirely culpable for being in a position where her options are so limited. And she does have options, they just necessitate some courage and a willingness to put country ahead of party. |
I am intrigued to know what are her options now? |  | | |
| No MV3 on 11:22 - Mar 19 with 2070 views | Herbivore |
| No MV3 on 11:20 - Mar 19 by blueislander |
I am intrigued to know what are her options now? |
Withdraw Article 50 or back a longer extension so other options (second ref, GE, different Brexit deal) can be explored. These are two of her options. Her reasons for for not pursuing them are down to the politics of her party. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 11:46 - Mar 19 with 2044 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 11:22 - Mar 19 by Herbivore |
Withdraw Article 50 or back a longer extension so other options (second ref, GE, different Brexit deal) can be explored. These are two of her options. Her reasons for for not pursuing them are down to the politics of her party. |
Both of those options risk a serious backlash form people who would see that as ditching Brexit by the back door. Voters (not necessarily just Conservative ones), may migrate to more hardline parties (e.g. Farage's nw Brexit mob). The issue is unlikely to go away any time soon.
If the boot was on the other foot, Corbyn would be suffering the same problems. The Labour Party is by no means unified on the issues around Brexit, or even whether they want it at all. I very much doubt he would be any more likely to deliberately throw away a narrow grip on power.
It's not unreasonable. If you believe passionately that your party is the best possible government for the UK and the other lot would be damaging (however spurious and arbitrary that thought might be), then why would you risk that over one issue - on which, too, you believe you are the most correct. Self doubt on adopted positions is not a marked attribute of successful politicians. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 11:49 - Mar 19 with 2037 views | Herbivore |
| No MV3 on 11:46 - Mar 19 by Guthrum |
Both of those options risk a serious backlash form people who would see that as ditching Brexit by the back door. Voters (not necessarily just Conservative ones), may migrate to more hardline parties (e.g. Farage's nw Brexit mob). The issue is unlikely to go away any time soon.
If the boot was on the other foot, Corbyn would be suffering the same problems. The Labour Party is by no means unified on the issues around Brexit, or even whether they want it at all. I very much doubt he would be any more likely to deliberately throw away a narrow grip on power.
It's not unreasonable. If you believe passionately that your party is the best possible government for the UK and the other lot would be damaging (however spurious and arbitrary that thought might be), then why would you risk that over one issue - on which, too, you believe you are the most correct. Self doubt on adopted positions is not a marked attribute of successful politicians. |
When your deal has been rejected by unprecedented margins on two occasions my view is you should be seeking to do something else. Other options really ought to have been explored months ago as it was clear her deal had little support. You disagree. We're going round in circles now to be honest. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 11:52 - Mar 19 with 2035 views | ZedRodgers |
| No MV3 on 22:56 - Mar 18 by Guthrum |
GE would need a reasonable-length extension, probably at least six months (which gets us into the issue of EU Parliament elections in May).
Another thing about a GE is that it will not just be on Brexit, but a host of other social and economic policies as well. Thus, say, people may vote Conservative on economics, while being distinctly cool on Brexit. Or Labour on social stuff, but be a No Dealer. Under the FTPA, we'd be electing a government for (theoretically) the next five years, not just for Brexit.
On a side note, Farage isn't UKIP any more, after they wandered off into rightwing loopiness. He's now associated with some new organisation (complete with overblown membership claims and shadowy backers).
A Hung Parliament is the most likely option, IMO, unless Corbyn seriously fouls up (which would be unlike him, in an electoral situation). Neither he nor May (or any likely successor to the latter) is willing to sacrifice their party to the national good. With tribalism on the increase in recent years, cross-party work is highly risky in that area.
The biggest problem is that there is no obvious exit route from this situation. Parliament will not agree on any approach, being too scared to transgress the party system in order to do so. Any politician bold enough to try will probably fall, with many knives in their backs.
May's best hope was to force her deal through, but that's been done so badly it's sinking faster than she can bail. Soon we will be left with No Deal or Remain. Which comes into collision with The Will Of The People (copyright 2016). |
I don't mean to be argumentative but there are a number of points in your response that seem to infer that I wasn't aware of various things and implications of other things. I do agree that what I was suggesting would lead to a number of further complications. However, they are complications that I see as justifiable to move on from the current impasse.
I know it would require a longer extension and involvement in the EU elections in May. A longer extension still seems more practical, appropriate and attractive to the EU to me than a short extension in the hope of forcing through a deal which has been so comprehensively rejected by the HoC. No.10 briefed their own party's MEPs weeks ago and the Electoral Commission have budgeted for May EU elections.
I know Farage isn't UKIP anymore. I referred to the return of "UKIP / Farage's new mob". Some posters on here seem quite excited his new foray into damaging the country, but ultimately it will be as much of a failure as his parliamentary political career and his embarrassing march.
You are absolutely entitled to the opinion that a new (and potentially hung) parliament would approach things with the same stubbornness and refusal to compromise, given how things stand at the moment. I would hope hindsight and a desire for whichever hypothetical government is leading things to avoid a repeat of the downfall of the last government would be enough to bring HoC together though.
I appreciate that your pessimism is probably more realistic than my optimism. The central question appears to be whether May's morally reprehensible defiance is the 'right thing for her to do'. I simply can't agree. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 12:08 - Mar 19 with 2013 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 11:49 - Mar 19 by Herbivore |
When your deal has been rejected by unprecedented margins on two occasions my view is you should be seeking to do something else. Other options really ought to have been explored months ago as it was clear her deal had little support. You disagree. We're going round in circles now to be honest. |
On the contrary, I thoroughly agree that other options ought to have been explored months, if not a year or more, ago. Indeed, it ought to have been a cross-party matter (perhaps conducted like an inquiry, with an independent Chair and expert opinion) from the very start.
May ought to have known from the reaction to Chequers that it was going to be virtually impossible to carry the party with her. That was the time to explore other options. I'm not by any means absolving her from culpability.
My issue is that now (i.e. since the vote in January) she is in a very tight place, with no obvious way out short of cancelling the whole thing and starting again. Two months ago was not the time to start seriously reconsidering positions.
I'm very concerned this will result in a dealless, underprepared crash exit. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 12:12 - Mar 19 with 2001 views | Herbivore |
| No MV3 on 12:08 - Mar 19 by Guthrum |
On the contrary, I thoroughly agree that other options ought to have been explored months, if not a year or more, ago. Indeed, it ought to have been a cross-party matter (perhaps conducted like an inquiry, with an independent Chair and expert opinion) from the very start.
May ought to have known from the reaction to Chequers that it was going to be virtually impossible to carry the party with her. That was the time to explore other options. I'm not by any means absolving her from culpability.
My issue is that now (i.e. since the vote in January) she is in a very tight place, with no obvious way out short of cancelling the whole thing and starting again. Two months ago was not the time to start seriously reconsidering positions.
I'm very concerned this will result in a dealless, underprepared crash exit. |
For all the government's incompetence I just can't see that being allowed to happen. If it does I see the consequences, bott economic and social, being a lot more dire than even revoking Article 50 altogether. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 12:14 - Mar 19 with 1998 views | ZedRodgers |
| No MV3 on 10:20 - Mar 19 by pickles110564 |
Maybe she is honourable unlike Corbyn and wants to deliver what she stood on at the last election? |
As somebody who both thinks we should leave with no deal and that May has a secret remain agenda which is why she's handling this so badly, how can you possibly suggest her current actions are "honourable"?.
You're falling over your own nonsense Pickles. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 12:26 - Mar 19 with 1990 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 12:12 - Mar 19 by Herbivore |
For all the government's incompetence I just can't see that being allowed to happen. If it does I see the consequences, bott economic and social, being a lot more dire than even revoking Article 50 altogether. |
I sincerely hope not. And yes.
One of the biggest dangers may be public alarm, with panic-buying emptying the shelves at a time when the import and supply chain is under extra strain due to new paperwork and imposition of tariffs. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 13:02 - Mar 19 with 1965 views | Guthrum |
| No MV3 on 11:52 - Mar 19 by ZedRodgers |
I don't mean to be argumentative but there are a number of points in your response that seem to infer that I wasn't aware of various things and implications of other things. I do agree that what I was suggesting would lead to a number of further complications. However, they are complications that I see as justifiable to move on from the current impasse.
I know it would require a longer extension and involvement in the EU elections in May. A longer extension still seems more practical, appropriate and attractive to the EU to me than a short extension in the hope of forcing through a deal which has been so comprehensively rejected by the HoC. No.10 briefed their own party's MEPs weeks ago and the Electoral Commission have budgeted for May EU elections.
I know Farage isn't UKIP anymore. I referred to the return of "UKIP / Farage's new mob". Some posters on here seem quite excited his new foray into damaging the country, but ultimately it will be as much of a failure as his parliamentary political career and his embarrassing march.
You are absolutely entitled to the opinion that a new (and potentially hung) parliament would approach things with the same stubbornness and refusal to compromise, given how things stand at the moment. I would hope hindsight and a desire for whichever hypothetical government is leading things to avoid a repeat of the downfall of the last government would be enough to bring HoC together though.
I appreciate that your pessimism is probably more realistic than my optimism. The central question appears to be whether May's morally reprehensible defiance is the 'right thing for her to do'. I simply can't agree. |
Sorry, not meaning to impute ignorance, just outlining the rationale for my position (and bearing in mind this discussion is for a wider audience).
I agree that a short extension would be meaningless. In reality, we need about two years to completely reset and start again. The complications are probably entirely justified, but rational responses cannot necessarily be expected on this highly emotive issue (where the language used is, at times, alarmingly close to the Terrors which followed the French and Russian revolutions).
As I said to Herbivore, the approach should have been non-partisan and cross-party from the very beginning.
I don't think it's the right thing for May to do, so much as the only thing she can do, under present circumstances. She is not bold or brave enough to defy her party and go for a lengthy postponement. | |
| |
| No MV3 on 16:27 - Mar 19 with 1928 views | ZedRodgers |
| No MV3 on 13:02 - Mar 19 by Guthrum |
Sorry, not meaning to impute ignorance, just outlining the rationale for my position (and bearing in mind this discussion is for a wider audience).
I agree that a short extension would be meaningless. In reality, we need about two years to completely reset and start again. The complications are probably entirely justified, but rational responses cannot necessarily be expected on this highly emotive issue (where the language used is, at times, alarmingly close to the Terrors which followed the French and Russian revolutions).
As I said to Herbivore, the approach should have been non-partisan and cross-party from the very beginning.
I don't think it's the right thing for May to do, so much as the only thing she can do, under present circumstances. She is not bold or brave enough to defy her party and go for a lengthy postponement. |
That's fair enough and thanks for responding pragmatically, as always.
It sounds to me like Mr. Barnier agrees with us here and is trying to suggest a short term extension to bring her deal back wouldn't be favourable with them.
This morning's cabinet meeting was debating whether they should seek a short or long term extension by all accounts. Leadsom, Grayling, Fox and other illustrious names reported to have threatened resigning if an extension is requested and we don't leave with 'no deal'. Maniacs.
It really is anybody's guess what she'll do next. She is certainly limited in her options. Calling a GE to strengthen her HoC numbers wouldn't even be the most delusional one for her to choose and she has form for that kind of self-confidence.
Looks like the DUP are refusing to back the deal until she can get more numbers behind it from within her own party, so that looks to be dead in the water (for now at least):
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/exclusive-dup-will-not-back-mays-brexit-d
All adding up to a longer extension and something radical to break the deadlock. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
