Topic: Brexit In Parliament Discussion Thread

[BlodwynPig]

It's also silly that there isn't enough space for all 650 MPs to sit down.

We should move the Parliament to a large building in Leicester and make the Parliament in London a museum. Also have monitors in the Leicester Parliament attached to each seat so MPs can take part by conference call, reducing the need to travel and thereby MPs expenses.

Why not "Parliament in the Park" on those long summer days. With Dimbleby doing the audience warm-up.

[greencalx]

Trying not to get distracted by Brexit today.

But am I right in thinking tomorrow's meaningful vote, if it happens, won't be meaningful, or a vote?

[BlodwynPig]

Trying not to get distracted by Brexit today.

But am I right in thinking tomorrow's meaningful vote, if it happens, won't be meaningful, or a vote?

Fascinating that you have offered more insight into the proceedings than the BBC, which seem to stick with the same headline for most of the day, although their live stream does have nuggets of information as it updates

Labour MP Chris Bryant says the Leader of the House Andrea Leadsom cannot say what is going to happen tomorrow as she does not know.

He asks for an update later this afternoon so that MPs can vote on whether the Commons should sit tomorrow or not.

The government has tabled a motion seeking approval from MPs to sit tomorrow, which will be debated on at 17:00 GMT.

MPs will vote on the motion after the debate.

[buttgammon]

Trying not to get distracted by Brexit today.

But am I right in thinking tomorrow's meaningful vote, if it happens, won't be meaningful, or a vote?

It seems like they will be voting, but only on the withdrawal agreement; for Britain to formalise the process of leaving, they must pass the withdrawal agreement and political declaration. This is just a bit of a loophole, as the EU's criteria for allowing Britain to leave with a deal in May were dependent on the withdrawal agreement - but not the political declaration - being passed by tomorrow. It also seems substantially different enough to previous votes that the Speaker will allow it. It still seems like a very desperate thing to do, and they have very little chance of passing it, as this is the part of the deal that most MPs object to.

[greencalx]

I thought the whole point of the PD was to make the WA more palatable?

[Alberon]

Well yeah, PD isn’t the problem. Most of the objectionable shit is in the WA.

It seems Bercow has been working behind the scenes to help craft a bill with the government that he can allow a vote on. It’s hard to think it’s not deliberate that he’s helped come up with something even less likely to be passed.

[Bryan Cocks]

They are bringing the deal back for debate tomorrow, but there will not be a meaningful vote.

It took me a while to get my head around that, but as I understand it, they're bringing back the absolute minimum they have to in order to satisfy the EU (i.e. only the WA), but in order to satisfy UK law as it stands, they have to get approval of the PD as well, and until they do, the vote isn't 'meaningful'. Except, the PD is very open to amendment and even dismissal, so the WA vote really is a meaningful vote in all but name.

What's mind-numbing though is that everything that people hate is in the WA itself, so it's unthinkable they'd succeed in getting that through, no matter what is or isn't attached to it. I guess they have to try, though. With all the talk about the deadline being shifted to April 12th, I forgot that only relates to no deal. The deal itself is dead if it doesn't get through tomorrow, unless the EU make further concessions.

Am I right or have I missed something?

[Satchmo Distel]

Yes the May 27 exit date was conditional on May getting her win this week. if she fails the only bet left is some Soft Brexit option agreed before April 12 or crash out on April 12.

Calling a General Election could also get an A50 extension from the EU, I suppose, but would be pointless if it returned the same mix of MPs.

[Fambo Number Mive]

St Austell and Newquay MP @stevedouble - who previously likened Mrs May's Brexit deal to a "turd" and said she couldn't depend on his support at the next vote - now says he will back it if it returns to the Commons for a third time

https://twitter.com/bbcmartynoates/status/1111300364739985411

[greencalx]

Right so the WA is coming in by itself. What a load of reckless, last-ditch shite!

Sounds like the plan is to try and get the WA voted through, and then if passed, put the whole thing through so that then we can leave as per the EU's terms and without MEP elections.

With DUP opposition, I can't see it going through - it's the WA that contains the backstop after all. So where does that leave us? Monday's IVs won't by themselves solve anything, but I guess if a majority does come out of it, and the government refuses to move anything in response to it, the only place left to go is no confidence vote.

[Alberon]

Which May will perversely win and where does that leave us?

[greencalx]

I dunno. Can we just turn the whole thing off and back on again?

[Huxleys Babkins]

No deal. All roads lead to no deal.

[DrGreggles]

MV3 loss = NC vote = GE

I hope.

[Uncle TechTip]

No deal. All roads lead to no deal.

Therefore all roads lead to revocation which hurts legacies less than taking us out with no deal.

[jamiefairlie]

Therefore all roads lead to revocation which hurts legacies less than taking us out with no deal.

If it comes down to that, no deal will win.

[Cursus]

[Cursus]

And not to be outdone in the idiotic headline stakes:

[Replies From View]

ONE LAST CHANCE WE ARE WARNING YOU!!

[Replies From View]

Actual humans have the gall to type out that shit and present it to people who will read it.

Chilling, isn't it.

[DrGreggles]

And not to be outdone in the idiotic headline stakes:

I get the feeling that we're among the very few who ever see the Express' front page.

[Captain Z]

Isn't Big Bell still covered in scaffolding right now?

[Blinder Data]

People seem to be catching general election fever

BUT let's not get ahead of ourselves. Long extension needs to be agreed with EU first to avoid no deal on 12 April. That is far from certain

[BlodwynPig]

[Alberon]

People seem to be catching general election fever

BUT let's not get ahead of ourselves. Long extension needs to be agreed with EU first to avoid no deal on 12 April. That is far from certain

Then May would have to win a vote to hold a General Election early.

Given her track record she’d probably lose it.

[Bryan Cocks]

I hope it is the last chance for the deal, though. In many ways, despite the way the government is pitching it, it's the most meaningful vote yet. It surely can't be changed again, which means Bercow won't allow it back, and given it's vote number 3, you'd think if it falls now, that's it.

I suppose the most likely outcome is simply another round of indicative votes on Monday, where Ken Clarke's motion is the most likely to win, but is CU2.0 even an option in terms of negotiation? It's not something that's been neatly prepared and waiting in the wings, so presumably whatever happens next, it's no deal or a long extension, probably for the best part of a year, at least.

I would hope that MV3 failing would result in May's resignation. I honestly can't see a GE happening outside of a vote of no confidence, but I can see the Tories completely implode later today, and huge pressure put on May to go.

[greencalx]

I thank that's a reasonable analysis.

Regarding the EU - I think they will be more generous towards the UK (or at least more patient) than is generally assumed, perhaps more than we deserve. From their perspective, they will want to waste as little time, money and energy on Brexit as possible, and this is achieved by the UK transferring to one of the trading relationships that already exists (e.g., Norway, Switzerland, etc). They will want to avoid creating a completely new trading model just for us - and this includes No Deal, since no-one who currently does as much trade with the union does so on WTO terms. The UK government knows this, which is why they feel that keeping No Deal on the table helps us get a better deal. Unfortunately, the EU27, whose GDP is 5x that of the UKs, knows that the latter will ultimately come out worse from such a scenario. So if there's a realistic prospect of moving towards a Customs Union solution, I think the EU would be minded to allow it.

However, that does leave the very relevant question of how it would be achieved in practice. The first step would be a majority for this option in an IV on Monday. Then the country will need a new management to deliver it. Problem is that most contenders for replacing May are likely to be further to the right than May and less likely to be inclined towards a pro-European view. A point that is often missed about a VonC is that it doesn't guarantee an election: there is a 14-day period for the house to approve a different government formed out of the same stock of MPs. We could end up in a bizarre situation where the house votes in favour of a different Brexit plan, but then also votes in favour of a PM who is opposed to it.

The easiest thing to pass, I think, would be a 2nd ref amendment. I've not yet seen any discussion of whether today's motion is amendable - I suppose it must be. This could be an opportunity to slip in a 2nd ref amendment - but this could be risky as there wasn't quite enough support for it on Wednesday for it to pass. Better strategically I think to simply oppose the vote today, hold the IVs on Monday, and then worry about how to get any majorities translated into action.

Hopefully on Monday the confusing array of options will be whittled down to a small and understandable number. Personally I think all the Soft Brexit people should club together with a single cross-party CU-based option (or maybe two, so the relative merits can be debated) to try and take some of the party politics out of it. But we will see.

[pancreas]

Sturgeon was apparently making noises about why she didn't support the CU deal in First Minister's Questions and it sounded like there could be movement from the SNP to support it. I think they all need one final push at confirmatory vote plus CU. And this also includes Labour remainers like Lammy. It's now or never.

[Dr Trouser]

I keep reading that a lot of MPs will abstain, and the fact it is a Friday means a lot of MPs won't be in the House (really?!) and the feeling is she will get it through this time (although no one is really sure what 'it' is).

Still, Bercow seems happy enough at being bribed by a peerage to let it be voted on.

[greencalx]

Sturgeon was apparently making noises about why she didn't support the CU deal in First Minister's Questions and it sounded like there could be movement from the SNP to support it. I think they all need one final push at confirmatory vote plus CU. And this also includes Labour remainers like Lammy. It's now or never.

Another question is whether the TINGErs can get behind a Soft Brexit compromise, or if they are just going to be Revoke extremists. I'm sure we can trust them to be grown-up about it.