Brexit - the next steps

[ProfessorDavey]

Did anyone hear the interview of John Major this morning, on the Today programme?

He made some very cogent points - particularly about the 48% who voted to stay in the EU and the 63% of the electorate who did not vote for "leave".

It should be available on iPlayer (or "Sounds").

I agree - he seemed eminently sensible.

However I have to take issue that having a series of free votes in parliament would resolve anything. Deciding what parliament is prepared to accept is meaningless unless that is something also acceptable and deliverable by the EU too.

So putting forward Norway++-+ or Canada--+- simply raises further false expectations, as some of these options are clearly unacceptable to the EU.

So in reality all we should be looking for parliament to do is to vote on the deliverable brexit options (they've already voted on May's deal, but not on a free vote plus no deal) plus remain and also vote on a mechanism to resolve the deadlock if (as seems likely) none of the 3 options receives a majority in parliament. That would then be to vote on a referendum and also on whether brexit needs to be delayed to allow the agreed process to work its course.

[Udayana]

Major did make some sensible comments, however I don't see that there is any impossibly difficult question to resolve.

The only thing holding up a successful conclusion to this stage of brexit is the block-headedness of our MPs. A series of indicative votes may help them see things more clearly.

[ProfessorDavey]

A series of indicative votes may help them see things more clearly.

Indicative votes on what?

Remember there is no value in MPs voting in favour of something in an indicative vote that the EU wont accept.

[ad_orientem]

Did anyone hear the interview of John Major this morning, on the Today programme?

He made some very cogent points - particularly about the 48% who voted to stay in the EU and the 63% of the electorate who did not vote for "leave".

It should be available on iPlayer (or "Sounds").

 

Those who didn't vote are irrelevavt.

[Udayana]

Indicative votes on what?

Remember there is no value in MPs voting in favour of something in an indicative vote that the EU wont accept.

As a "remainer" I'm not inclined to provide a spoiler list of options. However, once the "remain" and "no deal with the backstop" camps are discounted it is not hard to see how a deal could be agreed.

I think the withdrawal arrangements are pretty much unchangeable, with the backstop essential. However the future economic relations are very much open.
     

[ProfessorDavey]

However, once the "remain" and "no deal with the backstop" camps are discounted it is not hard to see how a deal could be agreed.

Sorry I'm confused.

The deal has already been rejected - if (as you are suggesting) 'remain' and 'no deal' are also rejected where does this leave us. All deliverable options will have been rejected. How then would it be 'not hard to see how a deal could be agreed'.

And even if there were a majority in parliament for a deal (free unicorns for all) - that would be worth diddly squat if it isn't acceptable to the EU. And here is the problem - the only likely way to secure a majority in parliament is a cut and shut of all the 'best bits' wanted by the various factions - so we are back in 'cake and eat it' territory of fantasy brexits that are totally undeliverable as the UK isn't the only party that needs to agree.

[Udayana]

Sorry I'm confused.

The deal has already been rejected - if (as you are suggesting) 'remain' and 'no deal' are also rejected where does this leave us. All deliverable options will have been rejected. How then would it be 'not hard to see how a deal could be agreed'.
...

As I suggested, the "deal" with the EU is ready and waiting for ratification, it can be put forward any number of times until accepted or times runs out and we leave without a deal or legislation is passed to cancel article 50. 

For anyone that wants to leave with a deal, the deal that needs to happen is between May and Corbyn.

[Roses]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46959671

I see the proxy voting scheme is going to be trialled for MPs who are on maternity leave, or new parents. About time too. It was shocking that an MP had to put off having a caesarean for two days in order to take part in the no confidence vote in the Government.

[ProfessorDavey]

For anyone that wants to leave with a deal, the deal that needs to happen is between May and Corbyn.

But they are on the same 'side' of the negotiation so to speak - in other words both representing the UK side. It is completely irrelevant if May and Corbyn cobble together some compromise in the modern equivalent of a smoke filled room that is able to get parliamentary support if that deal isn't acceptable to the EU.

[Udayana]

But they are on the same 'side' of the negotiation so to speak - in other words both representing the UK side. It is completely irrelevant if May and Corbyn cobble together some compromise in the modern equivalent of a smoke filled room that is able to get parliamentary support if that deal isn't acceptable to the EU.

Quite likely that I have missed something - but what changes do Corbyn/Labour want to the current withdrawal agreement being proposed by May & the EU?
 

[ProfessorDavey]

Quite likely that I have missed something - but what changes do Corbyn/Labour want to the current withdrawal agreement being proposed by May & the EU?
 

A permanent customs union as a start, which appears to fail one of May's red lines.

But that isn't really the point - the only compromise that May and Corbyn can come up with that is of any value is a compromise that is acceptable to the EU. Otherwise we will just have a reverse situation - a hypothetical deal agreed by the UK parliament but rejected by the EU. Back to stalemate.

And there is the fundamental problem with the kind of series of indicative votes suggested. What if the most popular option (likely to be the case) is a cut and shut 'cake and eat it' promise that simply doesn't work as far as the EU is concerned. That gets us no-where.

[Udayana]

A permanent customs union as a start, which appears to fail one of May's red lines.

It may not meet one of May's criteria for brexit but there is nothing in the Withdrawal Agreement preventing negotiation of a customs union for the longer term.   

But that isn't really the point - the only compromise that May and Corbyn can come up with that is of any value is a compromise that is acceptable to the EU. Otherwise we will just have a reverse situation - a hypothetical deal agreed by the UK parliament but rejected by the EU. Back to stalemate.

Of-course. But the Withdrawal Agreement is already approved by the EU and covers everything required in the event of the UK leaving the EU, no matter what the long term economic and political relationship.

And there is the fundamental problem with the kind of series of indicative votes suggested. What if the most popular option (likely to be the case) is a cut and shut 'cake and eat it' promise that simply doesn't work as far as the EU is concerned. That gets us no-where.

Yes, if the most popular option doesn't work for the EU, eg no backstop, then we are back to: leave without a deal, cancel brexit or vote again on May's deal.

[ProfessorDavey]

It may not meet one of May's criteria for brexit but there is nothing in the Withdrawal Agreement preventing negotiation of a customs union for the longer term.

True - but presumably Labour would need to see guarantees that negotiation of a customs union is an aspiration by the Government - May isn't likely to concede this point as she is only planning on being in a customs union for the period of the WA and not beyond.   

Of-course. But the Withdrawal Agreement is already approved by the EU and covers everything required in the event of the UK leaving the EU, no matter what the long term economic and political relationship.

Indeed - so the time for internal (i.e. UK) consensus building had long since passed - it should have happened before negotiating a deal with the EU.

Yes, if the most popular option doesn't work for the EU, eg no backstop, then we are back to: leave without a deal, cancel brexit or vote again on May's deal.

Not sure that May's deal can continually be voted on - I think there are both constitutional rules against repeatedly voting on the same proposal in parliament, but also political pressures - how many times, for example, could a PM bring forward a proposal and have it defeated before it is the PM that is the casualty.

[Spud]

Here is an idea which might solve the current problem: include a clause in the backstop which promises Northern Ireland a referendum in which they will be given the option of leaving the UK and remaining in the EU as an independent country. The alternative would have to be a hard border with the south. At the same time the rest of the UK could vote on whether we want to remain in the EU or lose Northern Ireland.
Probably a non-starter but thought I would table it..

[Gordon]

Here is an idea which might solve the current problem: include a clause in the backstop which promises Northern Ireland a referendum in which they will be given the option of leaving the UK and remaining in the EU as an independent country. The alternative would have to be a hard border with the south. At the same time the rest of the UK could vote on whether we want to remain in the EU or lose Northern Ireland.

Sounds like a winner, Spud.

[Spud]

Sounds like a winner, Spud.

Actually, it's not much different to the backstop becoming permanent, I guess.

[jeremyp]

At the same time the rest of the UK could vote on whether we want to remain in the EU or lose Northern Ireland.
Probably a non-starter but thought I would table it..

Might as well throw Scotland in as well.

[Spud]

After the results of the voting on Tuesday evening Boris Johnson was interviewed by the BBC in the lobby area of the Commons. He said something that I didn't quite catch, did anyone see it? Something about there will have to be zero tariffs on goods between the EU and UK until a free trade deal is eventually made years down the line. He also said the UK would have to keep paying into the EU budget until that time, but that it would be a small price to pay. He looked very pleased.

[Gordon]

Isn't it going well: absolutely nothing to worry about!

[Roses]

Isn't it going well: absolutely nothing to worry about!

It couldn't be better!

[jeremyp]

I’m resigned to No Deal now. The combined stupidity of Brexiteers and intransigence of the government has brought disaster. I’m also pretty disgusted at the cowardice of the MPs who are privately supporters of Remain but publicly support the will of a quarter of the people.

[Gordon]

Then there is is irony of TM voting against her own 'deal', having changed her mind and acted accordingly, whereas the Brexit enthusiasts would prefer that the electorate isn't allowed the same privilege. 

Of course Brexit is fucking wonderful, and issues such as the one noted below are all part of the wonderful plan!

Schools should be “flexible” in what dinners they serve children in England if there are food shortages because of Brexit, the government has said as it warns local authorities to step up their no-deal planning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/31/progress-on-school-dinners-could-be-rewound-after-brexit

[SteveH]

Then there is is irony of TM voting against her own 'deal', having changed her mind and acted accordingly, whereas the Brexit enthusiasts would prefer that the electorate isn't allowed the same privilege. 

Of course Brexit is fucking wonderful, and issues such as the one noted below are all part of the wonderful plan!
 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/31/progress-on-school-dinners-could-be-rewound-after-brexit

We'll al be on salt meat and hard tack, like the soldiers in the Crimea I've just been reading about, who went down like flies with scurvy and the shits.

[Udayana]

Then there is is irony of TM voting against her own 'deal', having changed her mind and acted accordingly, whereas the Brexit enthusiasts would prefer that the electorate isn't allowed the same privilege. 
...

She is trying to keep the Tories together ... but the extremists are sending her on a pointless errand to waste more time ... even if an alternative backstop could be agreed, they would still kill any deal. 

[ProfessorDavey]

She is trying to keep the Tories together ... but the extremists are sending her on a pointless errand to waste more time ... even if an alternative backstop could be agreed, they would still kill any deal.

Indeed - which is why she needs to reach out to other parties. Or rather why she should have been reaching out to other parties months ago.

There are perhaps 30 ERG-type tory brexiteers, who frankly want no deal and will pay lip service to removing a back stop only to find it unacceptable when a vote comes. There is no point in pandering to them. There are several hundred MPs across the floor who she could (or could have been) reaching out to.