Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
She's telling it like it is because she's demob-happy. If MPs vote to No-deal the country because their feelings are upset, I suspect they'll need police protection next time they go canvassing.
They'd rather face a difficult situation later than face an unpleasant decision, which involves u-turning, right now.
So, thinking ahead, assuming May gets through the weekend when do MPs at least try to act? And if they do not and or do and fail, when would MPs, mostly Labour, need to break ranks in their dozens to prevent no deal?
It's the Tory remainers who are key to any resolution. They really will have to put country before party.
Yes. One surprise that things have been pushed this far is that party discipline, on both sides, has actually held up almost too well, in that the rhetoric of people against various options has not matched their willingness to take action to stop said thing.
Good night all - these are dark times indeed. I hope the EU have helped concentrate minds (whether that is to accept the deal or to somehow dispose of May's intentions and go for a longer extension to enable remain), but I fear that won't be the case.
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
They are utterly clueless and lacking in self awareness
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
May has created this false binary choice. She has taken us to the brink of no deal. Since she insists on making it a binary choice she must go for us to avoid it. If you support May, you support no deal.
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
She's not telling them to make *a* decision. She's telling them to make *her* decision.
She might have had more progress if she'd tried the former route at some point.
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
No Deal still leads to SM and Customs Union BINO, there is no majority in the Commons to sustain a WTO terms Brexit
<<A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.>>
All she did was import a Trumpian style of politics to the UK.
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
May has created this false binary choice. She has taken us to the brink of no deal. Since she insists on making it a binary choice she must go for us to avoid it. If you support May, you support no deal.
If I want to launch a legal challenge to Theresa May's ability to use Royal Prerogative to extend or revoke Article 50 (Gina Miller style), How do I go about it? Can anyone recommend a good QC to approach?
Looking at the Miller decision the judges said:
"the EU Treaties not only concern the international relations of the United Kingdom, they are a source of domestic law, and they are a source of domestic legal rights many of which are inextricably linked with domestic law from other sources. Accordingly, the Royal prerogative to make and unmake treaties, which operates wholly on the international plane, cannot be exercised in relation to the EU Treaties, at least in the absence of domestic sanction in appropriate statutory form."
I think this (and other parts of the judgement) clearly apply to an extension under Article 50 (3) which has profound implications for rights and UK law - for example next Saturday, UK citizens would still be subject to a European Arrest Warrant because of this exercise of prerogative.
The European Withdrawal Act provides a mechanism for the Minister to change the exit date, but does not provide the "unequivocal" authority to do so that the judges in the Miller case said was needed to notify for withdrawal under Article 50.
If the European Withdrawal (Notification) Act was needed to trigger Article 50 (2), I don't see why a similar Act isn't needed for Theresa May to notify the EU under Article 50 (3) which has similarly profound legal consequences.
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
All she did was import a Trumpian style of politics to the UK.
She really didn't. I'm no fan of Theresa May, but this is complete fantasy.
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
May has created this false binary choice. She has taken us to the brink of no deal. Since she insists on making it a binary choice she must go for us to avoid it. If you support May, you support no deal.
If I want to launch a legal challenge to Theresa May's ability to use Royal Prerogative to extend or revoke Article 50 (Gina Miller style), How do I go about it? Can anyone recommend a good QC to approach?
Looking at the Miller decision the judges said:
"the EU Treaties not only concern the international relations of the United Kingdom, they are a source of domestic law, and they are a source of domestic legal rights many of which are inextricably linked with domestic law from other sources. Accordingly, the Royal prerogative to make and unmake treaties, which operates wholly on the international plane, cannot be exercised in relation to the EU Treaties, at least in the absence of domestic sanction in appropriate statutory form."
I think this (and other parts of the judgement) clearly apply to an extension under Article 50 (3) which has profound implications for rights and UK law - for example next Saturday, UK citizens would still be subject to a European Arrest Warrant because of this exercise of prerogative.
The European Withdrawal Act provides a mechanism for the Minister to change the exit date, but does not provide the "unequivocal" authority to do so that the judges in the Miller case said was needed to notify for withdrawal under Article 50.
If the European Withdrawal (Notification) Act was needed to trigger Article 50 (2), I don't see why a similar Act isn't needed for Theresa May to notify the EU under Article 50 (3) which has similarly profound legal consequences.
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
I think her patience finally snapped tonight (or showed as having snapped, for the first time).
That said, for all the political tin-earedness of it, she is right that MPs have failed to make a decision. Now, a good deal of the reason for that is the government doing all it could to limit parliament's ability to debate Brexit with a blank page, but even when MPs could vote and debate amendments, they still never agreed anything other than that they'd like a committee-designed unicorn.
If I want to launch a legal challenge to Theresa May's ability to use Royal Prerogative to extend or revoke Article 50 (Gina Miller style), How do I go about it? Can anyone recommend a good QC to approach?
Looking at the Miller decision the judges said:
"the EU Treaties not only concern the international relations of the United Kingdom, they are a source of domestic law, and they are a source of domestic legal rights many of which are inextricably linked with domestic law from other sources. Accordingly, the Royal prerogative to make and unmake treaties, which operates wholly on the international plane, cannot be exercised in relation to the EU Treaties, at least in the absence of domestic sanction in appropriate statutory form."
I think this (and other parts of the judgement) clearly apply to an extension under Article 50 (3) which has profound implications for rights and UK law - for example next Saturday, UK citizens would still be subject to a European Arrest Warrant because of this exercise of prerogative.
The European Withdrawal Act provides a mechanism for the Minister to change the exit date, but does not provide the "unequivocal" authority to do so that the judges in the Miller case said was needed to notify for withdrawal under Article 50.
If the European Withdrawal (Notification) Act was needed to trigger Article 50 (2), I don't see why a similar Act isn't needed for Theresa May to notify the EU under Article 50 (3) which has similarly profound legal consequences.
MPs want to avoid a No-deal Brexit by... not voting for the deal?
Same story for a long time now: whether arch-remainer or ERG, they won't accept anything but 100%, and throw a major hissy fit whenever anything goes against their purist ideals (see Grieve today).
The most revealing aspect of recent months is that the most extreme remainers are just as deranged when it comes to Europe as Bone, Francois, Cash and co.
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
They've twice voted her deal down by record breaking margins. A bit of self reflection from her would go a long way, rather than turning against the people she needs.
If I want to launch a legal challenge to Theresa May's ability to use Royal Prerogative to extend or revoke Article 50 (Gina Miller style), How do I go about it? Can anyone recommend a good QC to approach?
Looking at the Miller decision the judges said:
"the EU Treaties not only concern the international relations of the United Kingdom, they are a source of domestic law, and they are a source of domestic legal rights many of which are inextricably linked with domestic law from other sources. Accordingly, the Royal prerogative to make and unmake treaties, which operates wholly on the international plane, cannot be exercised in relation to the EU Treaties, at least in the absence of domestic sanction in appropriate statutory form."
I think this (and other parts of the judgement) clearly apply to an extension under Article 50 (3) which has profound implications for rights and UK law - for example next Saturday, UK citizens would still be subject to a European Arrest Warrant because of this exercise of prerogative.
The European Withdrawal Act provides a mechanism for the Minister to change the exit date, but does not provide the "unequivocal" authority to do so that the judges in the Miller case said was needed to notify for withdrawal under Article 50.
If the European Withdrawal (Notification) Act was needed to trigger Article 50 (2), I don't see why a similar Act isn't needed for Theresa May to notify the EU under Article 50 (3) which has similarly profound legal consequences.
MPs want to avoid a No-deal Brexit by... not voting for the deal?
Seriously?
Sunil, if I started describing the stupidity, malevolence, or narcissism of our current MPs in the words I thought best expressed them, OGH would ban me. I didn't know it was possible to feel such contempt for MPs.
If I want to launch a legal challenge to Theresa May's ability to use Royal Prerogative to extend or revoke Article 50 (Gina Miller style), How do I go about it? Can anyone recommend a good QC to approach?
Looking at the Miller decision the judges said:
"the EU Treaties not only concern the international relations of the United Kingdom, they are a source of domestic law, and they are a source of domestic legal rights many of which are inextricably linked with domestic law from other sources. Accordingly, the Royal prerogative to make and unmake treaties, which operates wholly on the international plane, cannot be exercised in relation to the EU Treaties, at least in the absence of domestic sanction in appropriate statutory form."
I think this (and other parts of the judgement) clearly apply to an extension under Article 50 (3) which has profound implications for rights and UK law - for example next Saturday, UK citizens would still be subject to a European Arrest Warrant because of this exercise of prerogative.
The European Withdrawal Act provides a mechanism for the Minister to change the exit date, but does not provide the "unequivocal" authority to do so that the judges in the Miller case said was needed to notify for withdrawal under Article 50.
If the European Withdrawal (Notification) Act was needed to trigger Article 50 (2), I don't see why a similar Act isn't needed for Theresa May to notify the EU under Article 50 (3) which has similarly profound legal consequences.
For extension, actually leaving means passing the Withdrawal Bill. Which hasn't happened yet.
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
May has created this false binary choice. She has taken us to the brink of no deal. Since she insists on making it a binary choice she must go for us to avoid it. If you support May, you support no deal.
No I do not
She enables it, you support her, this is on you.
Eh? We leave with no deal unless parliament supports the EU's deal (or agrees with a big majority on something else which is attainable, although really that's months too late). She has been urging MPs to support the EU's deal since November. For various reasons of their own, cynical in the case of the opposition, they've chosen not to. If there's one person on this earth who is not to blame if MPs choose not to accept the orderly exit on offer, it is her.
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
They've twice voted her deal down by record breaking margins. A bit of self reflection from her would go a long way, rather than turning against the people she needs.
The know what they don't want, not what they do want.
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
All she did was import a Trumpian style of politics to the UK.
She really didn't. I'm no fan of Theresa May, but this is complete fantasy.
In what way ? There's no modern precedent in British politics of public statements exclusively for the purpose of pitting lawmakers as a whole against the figure of leadership in this way. It's been a continual feature of Trumpian politics, though.
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
May has created this false binary choice. She has taken us to the brink of no deal. Since she insists on making it a binary choice she must go for us to avoid it. If you support May, you support no deal.
If Labour had backed the deal last week, we wouldn't be in a no-deal scenario.
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
May has created this false binary choice. She has taken us to the brink of no deal. Since she insists on making it a binary choice she must go for us to avoid it. If you support May, you support no deal.
No I do not
She enables it, you support her, this is on you.
Eh? We leave with no deal unless parliament supports the EU's deal (or agrees with a big majority on something else which is attainable, although really that's months too late). She has been urging MPs to support the EU's deal since November. For various reasons of their own, cynical in the case of the opposition, they've chosen not to. If there's one person on this earth who is not to blame if MPs choose not to accept the orderly exit on offer, it is her.
Isn't your usual line that the people are to blame for stupidly not giving her a landslide?
A new survey on Europeans’ attitudes towards technology found that a quarter of people would prefer it if policy decisions were made by artificial intelligence instead of politicians.
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
They've twice voted her deal down by record breaking margins. A bit of self reflection from her would go a long way, rather than turning against the people she needs.
Sure, she's useless at stroking their childish egos. But so what? This is about the future of the country, not the amour-propre of MPs. Or at least it should be.
Still much too low. There is a very good chance the next week looks something like this:
Thu/Fri. May goes to EU summit. EU27 agree extension to June 30, to be activated if the Commons pass the WA.
Tue. HoC votes down the WA again. By a lot. Again. TMay throws a strop. Again.
Wed. Cabinet deadlock. Unable to agree alternative proposals. Request extension activated anyway.
Wed, later. Tusk refuses to convene emergency summit. No extension. Bercow confirms no further vote on WA possible given no change in WA status.
Fri 11pm. UK leaves EU without a deal.
The main chance of avoiding no deal is that a referendum amendment to the WA motion that also asks for a long extension is passed - but I expect that a combination of loyalty to Corbyn and May will prevent this from succeeding.
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
May has created this false binary choice. She has taken us to the brink of no deal. Since she insists on making it a binary choice she must go for us to avoid it. If you support May, you support no deal.
No I do not
She enables it, you support her, this is on you.
You are now becoming personal and plainly silly. Grow up
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
May has created this false binary choice. She has taken us to the brink of no deal. Since she insists on making it a binary choice she must go for us to avoid it. If you support May, you support no deal.
No I do not
She enables it, you support her, this is on you.
Eh? We leave with no deal unless parliament supports the EU's deal (or agrees with a big majority on something else which is attainable, although really that's months too late). She has been urging MPs to support the EU's deal since November. For various reasons of their own, cynical in the case of the opposition, they've chosen not to. If there's one person on this earth who is not to blame if MPs choose not to accept the orderly exit on offer, it is her.
Isn't your usual line that the people are to blame for stupidly not giving her a landslide?
If I want to launch a legal challenge to Theresa May's ability to use Royal Prerogative to extend or revoke Article 50 (Gina Miller style), How do I go about it? Can anyone recommend a good QC to approach?
Looking at the Miller decision the judges said:
"the EU Treaties not only concern the international relations of the United Kingdom, they are a source of domestic law, and they are a source of domestic legal rights many of which are inextricably linked with domestic law from other sources. Accordingly, the Royal prerogative to make and unmake treaties, which operates wholly on the international plane, cannot be exercised in relation to the EU Treaties, at least in the absence of domestic sanction in appropriate statutory form."
I think this (and other parts of the judgement) clearly apply to an extension under Article 50 (3) which has profound implications for rights and UK law - for example next Saturday, UK citizens would still be subject to a European Arrest Warrant because of this exercise of prerogative.
The European Withdrawal Act provides a mechanism for the Minister to change the exit date, but does not provide the "unequivocal" authority to do so that the judges in the Miller case said was needed to notify for withdrawal under Article 50.
If the European Withdrawal (Notification) Act was needed to trigger Article 50 (2), I don't see why a similar Act isn't needed for Theresa May to notify the EU under Article 50 (3) which has similarly profound legal consequences.
Some of have been saying for months that May's strategy of running down the clock was utterly reckless and doomed to fail. After spending that time making excuse after excuse for her, making smug comments about how MPs are bound to give into her blackmail (usually described as "minds being focussed"), her cheerleaders have now decided not to show a moment's humility or reflection, and instead immediately pivoted to "it's all the MPs' fault!" Incredible.
Still much too low. There is a very good chance the next week looks something like this:
Thu/Fri. May goes to EU summit. EU27 agree extension to June 30, to be activated if the Commons pass the WA.
Tue. HoC votes down the WA again. By a lot. Again. TMay throws a strop. Again.
Wed. Cabinet deadlock. Unable to agree alternative proposals. Request extension activated anyway.
Wed, later. Tusk refuses to convene emergency summit. No extension. Bercow confirms no further vote on WA possible given no change in WA status.
Fri 11pm. UK leaves EU without a deal.
Plausible. However, wouldn't Thursday see half the government quit and a VONC?
If the PM gets VONC’ed, she stays in office for 2 more weeks, unless someone else can form a government that will command the confidence of the Commons before time is up. If that doesn’t happen, we have an election.
The only realistic alternate leader of a government in the House of Commons today is Jeremy Corbyn. For this reason, May will not be moved, and we shall leave with her deal or no deal.
Some of have been saying for months that May's strategy of running down the clock was utterly reckless and doomed to fail. After spending that time making excuse after excuse for her, making smug comments about how MPs are bound to give into her blackmail (usually described as "minds being focussed"), her cheerleaders have now decided not to show a moment's humility or reflection, and instead immediately pivoted to "it's all the MPs' fault!" Incredible.
Well it was the MPs wot voted against the deal - the only realistic deal attainable ATM - not once, but twice!
Still much too low. There is a very good chance the next week looks something like this:
Thu/Fri. May goes to EU summit. EU27 agree extension to June 30, to be activated if the Commons pass the WA.
Tue. HoC votes down the WA again. By a lot. Again. TMay throws a strop. Again.
Wed. Cabinet deadlock. Unable to agree alternative proposals. Request extension activated anyway.
Wed, later. Tusk refuses to convene emergency summit. No extension. Bercow confirms no further vote on WA possible given no change in WA status.
Fri 11pm. UK leaves EU without a deal.
The main chance of avoiding no deal is that a referendum amendment to the WA motion that also asks for a long extension is passed - but I expect that a combination of loyalty to Corbyn and May will prevent this from succeeding.
How does WA get voted on? Everyone seems to have forgotten that Bercow has said it can't come back this session unless substantially different.
Some of have been saying for months that May's strategy of running down the clock was utterly reckless and doomed to fail. After spending that time making excuse after excuse for her, making smug comments about how MPs are bound to give into her blackmail (usually described as "minds being focussed"), her cheerleaders have now decided not to show a moment's humility or reflection, and instead immediately pivoted to "it's all the MPs' fault!" Incredible.
Except that it's not her that has been running down the clock. She wanted the EU's deal (often wrong called her deal) signed off in November or December, which would have given plenty of time.
But a comprise isn't in offer. The EU have made it is clear, it's this deal or nothing. Jezza is as bad as may for just repeating the same crap over and over again.
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
May has created this false binary choice. She has taken us to the brink of no deal. Since she insists on making it a binary choice she must go for us to avoid it. If you support May, you support no deal.
No I do not
She enables it, you support her, this is on you.
You are now becoming personal and plainly silly. Grow up
No. There is a moment when a line is crossed and that was today. Your continued support for this uniquely damaging leader needs to be challenged. Her brinkmanship and blindness to ideas other than hers is at the heart of the problem. She has engineered a situation where no deal is possible just to force her narrow view of Brexit. No deal would not be possible without her. You support her.
Still much too low. There is a very good chance the next week looks something like this:
Thu/Fri. May goes to EU summit. EU27 agree extension to June 30, to be activated if the Commons pass the WA.
Tue. HoC votes down the WA again. By a lot. Again. TMay throws a strop. Again.
Wed. Cabinet deadlock. Unable to agree alternative proposals. Request extension activated anyway.
Wed, later. Tusk refuses to convene emergency summit. No extension. Bercow confirms no further vote on WA possible given no change in WA status.
Fri 11pm. UK leaves EU without a deal.
The main chance of avoiding no deal is that a referendum amendment to the WA motion that also asks for a long extension is passed - but I expect that a combination of loyalty to Corbyn and May will prevent this from succeeding.
How does WA get voted on? Everyone seems to have forgotten that Bercow has said it can't come back this session unless substantially different.
If she has the votes for the WA then it will get heard.
Still much too low. There is a very good chance the next week looks something like this:
Thu/Fri. May goes to EU summit. EU27 agree extension to June 30, to be activated if the Commons pass the WA.
Tue. HoC votes down the WA again. By a lot. Again. TMay throws a strop. Again.
Wed. Cabinet deadlock. Unable to agree alternative proposals. Request extension activated anyway.
Wed, later. Tusk refuses to convene emergency summit. No extension. Bercow confirms no further vote on WA possible given no change in WA status.
Fri 11pm. UK leaves EU without a deal.
The main chance of avoiding no deal is that a referendum amendment to the WA motion that also asks for a long extension is passed - but I expect that a combination of loyalty to Corbyn and May will prevent this from succeeding.
How does WA get voted on? Everyone seems to have forgotten that Bercow has said it can't come back this session unless substantially different.
Still much too low. There is a very good chance the next week looks something like this:
Thu/Fri. May goes to EU summit. EU27 agree extension to June 30, to be activated if the Commons pass the WA.
Tue. HoC votes down the WA again. By a lot. Again. TMay throws a strop. Again.
Wed. Cabinet deadlock. Unable to agree alternative proposals. Request extension activated anyway.
Wed, later. Tusk refuses to convene emergency summit. No extension. Bercow confirms no further vote on WA possible given no change in WA status.
Fri 11pm. UK leaves EU without a deal.
The main chance of avoiding no deal is that a referendum amendment to the WA motion that also asks for a long extension is passed - but I expect that a combination of loyalty to Corbyn and May will prevent this from succeeding.
How does WA get voted on? Everyone seems to have forgotten that Bercow has said it can't come back this session unless substantially different.
He is not going to stop something as big as this and be directly responsible for no deal 2 days later
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
They've twice voted her deal down by record breaking margins. A bit of self reflection from her would go a long way, rather than turning against the people she needs.
Sure, she's useless at stroking their childish egos. But so what? This is about the future of the country, not the amour-propre of MPs. Or at least it should be.
To be honest I think this is a pretty basic leadership skills here. Charm people, create a few power blocks of your own, make it possible for your opponents to climb down at the last minute. A last minute Dead vs No Deal vote should be an easy win for May, apart from the ERG & DUP, everyone is going to be looking for a reason to vote for her deal. She's made that impossible for a lot of people, probably too many.
Lisa Nandy: "There is absolutely no chance that Theresa May is going to win over MPs after that statement. It was an attack on liberal democracy itself."
Still much too low. There is a very good chance the next week looks something like this:
Thu/Fri. May goes to EU summit. EU27 agree extension to June 30, to be activated if the Commons pass the WA.
Tue. HoC votes down the WA again. By a lot. Again. TMay throws a strop. Again.
Wed. Cabinet deadlock. Unable to agree alternative proposals. Request extension activated anyway.
Wed, later. Tusk refuses to convene emergency summit. No extension. Bercow confirms no further vote on WA possible given no change in WA status.
Fri 11pm. UK leaves EU without a deal.
The main chance of avoiding no deal is that a referendum amendment to the WA motion that also asks for a long extension is passed - but I expect that a combination of loyalty to Corbyn and May will prevent this from succeeding.
How does WA get voted on? Everyone seems to have forgotten that Bercow has said it can't come back this session unless substantially different.
The date will change to June
And I don't think Bercow will want to be held responsible for 'no deal', which is what happens if the deal isn't voted on.
The EU have made it is clear, it's this deal or nothing.
Yep, been obvious for months that was the case. Deal or no-deal, make a decision.
MPs have refused to make that decision, voting down both, pretending there was some magical unicorn just around the corner. Guess what? We're in the end game now, still no unicorns in sight.
A hell of a stretch to blame Theresa May for that. All she did tonight was tell them to make an effing decision. In the circumstances, tin-eared though she is, one can't but admire her patience.
They've twice voted her deal down by record breaking margins. A bit of self reflection from her would go a long way, rather than turning against the people she needs.
Sure, she's useless at stroking their childish egos. But so what? This is about the future of the country, not the amour-propre of MPs. Or at least it should be.
To be honest I think this is a pretty basic leadership skills here. Charm people, create a few power blocks of your own, make it possible for your opponents to climb down at the last minute. A last minute Dead vs No Deal vote should be an easy win for May, apart from the ERG & DUP, everyone is going to be looking for a reason to vote for her deal. She's made that impossible for a lot of people, probably too many.
Ha ; Dead vs No Deal - another of the best typos ever.
I have genuinely no idea what happens over the next week. None. Literally anything is possible including the 1922 firing May from a Cannon into the Sun.
What remains a constant is this. Unless MPs manage to find something they can all back then we leave with no deal. I remain absolutely confident that May's deal would be voted down again should somehow it be dragged back to the Commons. I also remain confident that the EU know this, and aren't going to fuck around any longer.
So no deal it is. An Extinction Level Event for the Conservative Party. Lets just hope that it doesn't last very long before the national government which will come into being a couple of days into April is able to beg a reversal from the EU in exchange for the Euro and Schengen
Still much too low. There is a very good chance the next week looks something like this:
Thu/Fri. May goes to EU summit. EU27 agree extension to June 30, to be activated if the Commons pass the WA.
Tue. HoC votes down the WA again. By a lot. Again. TMay throws a strop. Again.
Wed. Cabinet deadlock. Unable to agree alternative proposals. Request extension activated anyway.
Wed, later. Tusk refuses to convene emergency summit. No extension. Bercow confirms no further vote on WA possible given no change in WA status.
Fri 11pm. UK leaves EU without a deal.
Plausible. However, wouldn't Thursday see half the government quit and a VONC?
If the PM gets VONC’ed, she stays in office for 2 more weeks, unless someone else can form a government that will command the confidence of the Commons before time is up. If that doesn’t happen, we have an election.
The only realistic alternate leader of a government in the House of Commons today is Jeremy Corbyn. For this reason, May will not be moved, and we shall leave with her deal or no deal.
I think it’s increasingly likely to be no deal.
Which leads to SM and Customs Union BINO, there is no majority in the Commons to sustain a WTO terms No Deal Brexit, nor will the country be able to sustain the economic damage and threat to the Union of No Deal as well as the chaos in Northern Ireland
Lisa Nandy: "There is absolutely no chance that Theresa May is going to win over MPs after that statement. It was an attack on liberal democracy itself."
Sigh, the chance is higher than that. When MPs are too busy being offended to even address if they accept the basic premise that it is no deal or deal (or take some positive action for a chance to take control), the chance of accidental no deal is definitely higher than that. Every day the no dealers get stronger.
May has created this false binary choice. She has taken us to the brink of no deal. Since she insists on making it a binary choice she must go for us to avoid it. If you support May, you support no deal.
No I do not
She enables it, you support her, this is on you.
You are now becoming personal and plainly silly. Grow up
No. There is a moment when a line is crossed and that was today. Your continued support for this uniquely damaging leader needs to be challenged. Her brinkmanship and blindness to ideas other than hers is at the heart of the problem. She has engineered a situation where no deal is possible just to force her narrow view of Brexit. No deal would not be possible without her. You support her.
Your opinion is as valid as mine - that is democracy but best not to make things personal
Lisa Nandy: "There is absolutely no chance that Theresa May is going to win over MPs after that statement. It was an attack on liberal democracy itself."
Let's see how they feel after doorstep conversations this weekend
Comments
Good night all - these are dark times indeed. I hope the EU have helped concentrate minds (whether that is to accept the deal or to somehow dispose of May's intentions and go for a longer extension to enable remain), but I fear that won't be the case.
The phrases
"Enough. Put cock in arse"
and
"Crixus, show me to wine"
Have entered my personal lexicon. They give me solace when life weighs heavy. You are in for a treat.
Seriously?
I really do think HMQ needs to step in and prorogue Parliament to let them all have a rest until 1st April.
She might have had more progress if she'd tried the former route at some point.
All she did was import a Trumpian style of politics to the UK.
Thu/Fri. May goes to EU summit. EU27 agree extension to June 30, to be activated if the Commons pass the WA.
Tue. HoC votes down the WA again. By a lot. Again. TMay throws a strop. Again.
Wed. Cabinet deadlock. Unable to agree alternative proposals. Request extension activated anyway.
Wed, later. Tusk refuses to convene emergency summit. No extension. Bercow confirms no further vote on WA possible given no change in WA status.
Fri 11pm. UK leaves EU without a deal.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
Looking at the Miller decision the judges said:
"the EU Treaties not only concern the international relations of the United Kingdom, they are a source of domestic law, and they are a source of domestic legal rights many of which are inextricably linked with domestic law from other sources. Accordingly, the Royal prerogative to make and unmake treaties, which operates wholly on the international plane, cannot be exercised in relation to the EU Treaties, at least in the absence of domestic sanction in appropriate statutory form."
I think this (and other parts of the judgement) clearly apply to an extension under Article 50 (3) which has profound implications for rights and UK law - for example next Saturday, UK citizens would still be subject to a European Arrest Warrant because of this exercise of prerogative.
The European Withdrawal Act provides a mechanism for the Minister to change the exit date, but does not provide the "unequivocal" authority to do so that the judges in the Miller case said was needed to notify for withdrawal under Article 50.
If the European Withdrawal (Notification) Act was needed to trigger Article 50 (2), I don't see why a similar Act isn't needed for Theresa May to notify the EU under Article 50 (3) which has similarly profound legal consequences.
No deal or revoke is the choice; I think May has made it clear today what side of the fence she'll come down on.
Exciting.
That said, for all the political tin-earedness of it, she is right that MPs have failed to make a decision. Now, a good deal of the reason for that is the government doing all it could to limit parliament's ability to debate Brexit with a blank page, but even when MPs could vote and debate amendments, they still never agreed anything other than that they'd like a committee-designed unicorn.
The most revealing aspect of recent months is that the most extreme remainers are just as deranged when it comes to Europe as Bone, Francois, Cash and co.
They'll insist on 22nd May and they'll be a huge blow up between Theresa May and the nasty old men who run the EU.
Other than that your view looks probable to me.
https://qz.com/1576057/could-ai-make-better-policy-than-politicians/
"I can't possibly vote for May's Deal, because she has told me some home truths and hurt my feelings...."
What twats.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/competition/10393583
I'm sure he is righting hard against the left wing hate mobs too.
The only realistic alternate leader of a government in the House of Commons today is Jeremy Corbyn. For this reason, May will not be moved, and we shall leave with her deal or no deal.
I think it’s increasingly likely to be no deal.
I signed the revoke petition too.
I repeat - MPs!
I'm guessing someone with a lot of Twitter followers is responsible for such a high rate.
https://petition.parliament.uk
MPs have refused to make that decision, voting down both, pretending there was some magical unicorn just around the corner. Guess what? We're in the end game now, still no unicorns in sight.
What remains a constant is this. Unless MPs manage to find something they can all back then we leave with no deal. I remain absolutely confident that May's deal would be voted down again should somehow it be dragged back to the Commons. I also remain confident that the EU know this, and aren't going to fuck around any longer.
So no deal it is. An Extinction Level Event for the Conservative Party. Lets just hope that it doesn't last very long before the national government which will come into being a couple of days into April is able to beg a reversal from the EU in exchange for the Euro and Schengen