Brexit - the next steps

[jeremyp]

How realistic is it to say that there should have been three options on the ballot paper: hard Brexit, soft Brexit or Remain?

Remain would probably have got about the same as it did get I.e. 48%, maybe a bit less. The leave vote would probably have been split enough so that Remain would have had the highest number of votes

[Nearly Sane]

The original referendum was also non-binding ...

But in this case the non binding aspect has legal implications, as opposed to the referendum which effectively had only political.implications.

[jeremyp]

It can't be in these votes even with an extension.

why not? It would leave the government with no option except to withdraw article 50 but they can do that unilaterally.

[jeremyp]

Forgive me, but Brexit  will show the loyal and disloyal.  No company provides work for the benefit of the worker.  It is all about making money.
If companies cared about their work force they would not be any job losses. We work to live not live to work.

The problem is that tariffs put a company at a competitive disadvantage compared to those that do not pay tariffs. The company can care about their workers till the cows come home but if they’ve gone bust everybody loses their job.

[Nearly Sane]

why not? It would leave the government with no option except to withdraw article 50 but they can do that unilaterally.

Because in and of itself it didn't include any revocation. And the possibility is still there to ask for an extension. Or indeed  vote for May's deal.

[jeremyp]

Because in and of itself it didn't include any revocation. And the possibility is still there to ask for an extension. Or indeed  vote for May's deal.

They’ve already voted against May’s deal twice. How many more times do they need to vote against it before you concede it’s a no?

Yes, they can ask for an extension, but the EU might say no.

 If tonight’s vote had been binding and the EU had said no to an extension, the only way out is to withdraw article 50 because just letting no deal happen would be against the law. Unfortunately (from my perspective) no deal is still allowed because the vote was advisory.

[Nearly Sane]

They’ve already voted against May’s deal twice. How many more times do they need to vote against it before you concede it’s a no?

Yes, they can ask for an extension, but the EU might say no.

 If tonight’s vote had been binding and the EU had said no to an extension, the only way out is to withdraw article 50 because just letting no deal happen would be against the law. Unfortunately (from my perspective) no deal is still allowed because the vote was advisory.

Except it can't be binding because the EU have to accept the extension, and there was nothing in the amendment about an extensuon. Therefore it couldn't be binding.

[jeremyp]

Except it can't be binding because the EU have to accept the extension, and there was nothing in the amendment about an extensuon. Therefore it couldn't be binding.

What?

The EU doesn’t have to accept an extension. But it does have to accept us withdrawing article 50. So there is a way out if the vote were binding.

[Nearly Sane]

What?

The EU doesn’t have to accept an extension. But it does have to accept us withdrawing article 50. So there is a way out if the vote were binding.

I didn't say it had to accept an extension. The point is that it precisely doesn't  and anything that is about rejecting no deal in itself cannot be binding.

[Nearly Sane]

What?

The EU doesn’t have to accept an extension. But it does have to accept us withdrawing article 50. So there is a way out if the vote were binding.

So my second use of extension was wrong, and I meant revocation. But the point remains, just saying no deal does nothing. And no deal isn't about a revocation.

[Nearly Sane]

If as seems to have happened, the govt changed from a free vote to a whipped vote, and members of the govt voted against it, then that is extraordinary.


Overall I think another vote on May's Deal is likely and will succeed.

[Nearly Sane]

Quite bizarre


https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/03/fear-and-loathing-in-the-lobbies-how-the-government-whipped-against-its-own-motion/

[wigginhall]

Signs that the DUP are crumbling, and the ERG will probably follow.   You could see it coming with all the malarkey about the Vienna convention, just legal wriggle room.    May is smiling.

[Nearly Sane]

Now that parliament has voted for asking for an extension, seeing rumours that the EU might offer a 4 YEAR extension!

[jeremyp]

Now that parliament has voted for asking for an extension, seeing rumours that the EU might offer a 4 YEAR extension!

From the EU’s point of view, the longer the extension, the better. The demographics of the UK are on their side.

May is going to have yet another vote. It occurs to me that she might win that if the DUP is faced with her deal or stay in the EU.

[Nearly Sane]

From the EU’s point of view, the longer the extension, the better. The demographics of the UK are on their side.

May is going to have yet another vote. It occurs to me that she might win that if the DUP is faced with her deal or stay in the EU.

I agree, it looks to me, that her deal will go through at some time. The idea that they floated of the honesty box border was a n attempt to flag to the DUP that things could be worse.


Of course, there is the question of Farage and thanks have managed to persuade Salvani to veto any extensio n. (Taking Back Control)

[jeremyp]

I agree, it looks to me, that her deal will go through at some time. The idea that they floated of the honesty box border was a n attempt to flag to the DUP that things could be worse.

It seems somewhat ironic that she is allowed as many votes on her deal as she likes until she gets the answer she wants but even one more referendum would be a “betrayal of democracy”.

[Nearly Sane]

So May voted for the extension along with 111 other Tories, but 188 Tories voted against with a number of her cabinet including her Brex it and Trade Secretaries.

[Gordon]

Be interested to see if Bercow steps in preventing her presenting the same deal for a third time, especially if this Vienna Convention issue turns out not to be an issue at all.

[Nearly Sane]

It seems somewhat ironic that she is allowed as many votes on her deal as she likes until she gets the answer she wants but even one more referendum would be a “betrayal of democracy”.

I think it was Caroline Lucas that pointed that out to May but got the Brexit, will of people, democracy answer in some form. As I have said before on here I think we are past irony, and even coppery, and are now onto zincy

[Nearly Sane]

And it would seem that the Brexit Secretary proposed the motion then voted against it.

[jakswan]

MP's have boxed themselves into a corner, they vote against another referendum, vote against no deal.

The EU are going to say take or leave it, knowing that MPs will have to take it.

[Udayana]

MP's have boxed themselves into a corner, they vote against another referendum, vote against no deal.

The EU are going to say take or leave it, knowing that MPs will have to take it.

Take or leave what exactly?

Do you mean the Withdrawal Agreement - if so what is the problem with that?
 

[Nearly Sane]

This seems incredibly dangerous. Accept the deal on the basis that you know you are going to break it if it all gets a bit violentbin Ireland!

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-legal-idUSKCN1QV38C

[wigginhall]

Also just the idea that you can abrogate a treaty because there are difficulties.   It's one way to be seen as reliable. But they are looking for wriggle room.