Just when I thought it was all over, it's not! The Deal would pass - I'm pretty sure of that - but it looks like Letwin will stop it. So it's another extension and Remain fight on. Good news. I can't stand Boris Johnson and I do not have 'Brexit fatigue'.
From here? -
Letwin IMO just delays the inevitable. I'm not tired of the debate but the country is. The momentum is to leave by 31 Jan at the latest, with this Deal and under PM Johnson. GE to follow in 2020, which the Cons win.
Maybe. Perhaps even probably. But I'm not sure. The last few days have been a classic momentum play, or timeshare sales trick. Get everyone anxious, then use the euphoria of a deal to get it cemented in place. (In fact, I do wonder if all the noise of the prorogation and the Boris deal that wasn't was all a decoy, and something like this deal was the plan all along.) With more time, details will emerge, and people will notice them. That might not counteract Just Get It Done (which is a massive con any way- we have about nine months to decide what to do about the end-of-transition cliff edge), but you never know.
Bottom line is the No 10 is desperate to get this signed off suspiciously quickly. Given the current occupant, that's a good reason to say "not today, thank you".
If there is no trade deal by the end of the transisition period the we leave the EU with no deal on WTO terms. That is the big change from May, and barely discussed. In very short time we will be back to “they need us more than we need them”. Etc etc
It means no business investment for 18months until the future trading position with the EU is established.
Well at least they are onboard with the idea that Letwin is intended to give a chance to still fuck things up.....
Letwin has probably sunk Johnson's deal IMO.
Letwin's Deal actually is Johnson's Deal if you read it in full, it just wants the legislation for the Deal passes in full before the meaningful vote
That is its intention. Boris and his supporters should accept that he has to do the detail in order to get his win.
Thats not the intention of those backing it. I can believe it is letwin's, but in that case he has drafted it very poorly indeed and doesnt understand what he has written.
It passing unamended isn't even my first choice, I'd like it amended to need a referendum, but it's the delay that bugs me - if this is down to the justified lack of trust then surya theres better wording or a better way to make sure the detail comes than pretending the amendment expresses support?
He understands perfectly well what he has written.
Want to approve regardless =approx 300 Want to approve subject to scrutiny =approx 20 Want to reject =approx 300
Letwin is in the middle group. He cannot get the govt to agree to it, and wouldnt trust them regardless. To achieve his outcome he can use the reject votes, who are willing to back it mostly because it gives Boris an uncomfortable time having to write the letter, to achieve his objective.
It is sensible clever politics based on counting, if our party leaders did more of this we would be in less of a mess.
And Macron will then veto further extension meaning No Deal
No he won’t.
He will absolutely if the Commons refuse to vote for the Deal or for EUref2 or a GE Macron will veto further extension, no question
You cannot possibly know that and a bit of caution or IMHO would be wise
I do, if the Commons has not voted for the Boris Deal, EUref2 or a GE by the end of the week the French government have rightly made clear they will veto further extension and No Deal Brexit it is which Boris can blame on the opposition
The government will send mps home if Letwin passes and will bring it back on monday
Hopefully everyone will be happy then.
EU Ambassadors sitting tomorrow so by monday the question of an extension may well be answered by the EU
It appears any extension has to be given by EU leaders sitting together and it is unlikely to happen before 27th just 4 days before exit day
I think we know they could do it by phone if necessary. But it would make most sense for them to acknowledge the request but monitor further developments in parliament before giving an answer.
No. The procedure was explained just now and the Ambassadors meet tomorrow and if it is a formal request a special meeting of leaders has to be convened and they discuss it face to face with each having a veto
Yes - obviously they all have a veto, however it's discussed. As I remember, when this was discussed before, the consensus was that in an emergency it could be done by conference call. But who knows, if you've heard something different on Sky?
And Macron will then veto further extension meaning No Deal
No he won’t.
He will absolutely if the Commons refuse to vote for the Deal or for EUref2 or a GE Macron will veto further extension, no question
You cannot possibly know that and a bit of caution or IMHO would be wise
I do, if the Commons has not voted for the Boris Deal, EUref2 or a GE by the end of the week the French government have rightly made clear they will veto further extension and No Deal Brexit it is which Boris can blame on the opposition
Well at least they are onboard with the idea that Letwin is intended to give a chance to still fuck things up.....
Letwin has probably sunk Johnson's deal IMO.
It's either a very clever amendment or a very dumb one, because I think you are right. I just cannot get past how Letwin, who is not a remainer fanatic, can claim this is about getting the deal done (but in the right way) when it is overwhelmingly to be backed by those who want the deal dead.
They Dont regard the amendment as supporting the deal, so how can he say it is?
If Letwin wants scrutiny of the deal before voting for it, as he almost certainly will, what are his alternative options?
It is hardly the first time a politician will have tried getting support of people he disagrees with to leverage his own view. I really dont understand the fuss or surprise.
The frustration is we and the EU will have no real idea if the WA will pass after today because the amended motion will include people who wont back the legislation.
It keeps us in limbo. Which is fine, but Letwin is pretending that it doesnt.
Mr. Glenn, a legitimate argument, but Grieve's proposal is for a three-option referendum.
Of course, if presented together that would split the Leave vote. And if multi-stage, there'll be arguments about how that works too.
Grieve’s argument was that you can’t leave off an option that has substantial support, but that’s no longer the case.
So you’re saying we should leave off Remain, then?
Remain has substantial support.
But you cannot say no deal has no support.
Recent polls have put it at 40% and of course TBP sole purpose is a clean no deal break
Indeed if a referendum without no deal was proposed I would expect TBP to mount a legal challenge
The referendum version that is best for the government, and "respects" the original vote the most is one that is actually confirmatory. So govt deal or extend for a further 6/12 months to go back to square one.
No idea why it never gets a mention, it would pass as people want Brexit over, and is hard to argue against given parliament has failed to reach a consensus.
Now that we have two deals, Johnson's and May's, that have substantial differences in how they treat the Union with Northern Ireland and in how much divergence from the EU economy is envisaged, it would be perfectly logical to hold a referendum between those two deals.
I dont think they have substantial enough differences to justify a referendum personally, but wouldnt have a problem with it.
So it looks like this whole thing will be abandoned later in the day?
Have I followed this correctly? They will spend hours arguing and making interventions with each other and then the Gov pulls its MPs out and sends them home?
BBC reporting that if the Letwin amendment passes the Government will pull the vote putting no deal very much in play
This is Letwin being too clever by half
How would that make No Deal any more likely? The Benn Act would still be triggered. The government could still go ahead with the WAIB. The only consequence would be that they'd rob themselves of an indicative vote on the deal.
The Benn Act doesn't gain us an extension, it is far too arrogant in assuming the NI will be content to see us dicking around. I sincerely hope the EU responds "enough is enough, the door is over there".
Then Letwin makes even less difference!
It just wastes a few very valuable days that we need Parliament to not be wasting.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
I agree. It is a wreaking amendment that defeats the purpose of this sitting. It should be ruled out of order. If people wish to oppose the deal they should oppose the principal motion. We have had more than enough prevarication.
I'm sorry, but you are using the phrase "wrecking amendment" too casually. It has a specific Parliamentary meaning:
The purported purpose of this sitting is not relevant. What is in the Bill is relevant. Does the Letwin amendment make it "useless, contradictory or unworkable"? No, it slows it up.
I don't agree with David's conclusion, though. I think that the "Get it done" mood will see the Government through every Bill needed, no doubt with some irritating conditions, but the politics of the matter have swung decisively.
I think it does meet that test and it appears that the government does to according to the latest reports that they will simply pull the amended resolution.
I think the mood outside the Commons has definitely changed in favour of get this done but I am a lot less confident about inside it.
Thing is Boris had momentum. Amended motion or pulled motion he loses it.
So it looks like this whole thing will be abandoned later in the day?
Have I followed this correctly? They will spend hours arguing and making interventions with each other and then the Gov pulls its MPs out and sends them home?
Yes. That's about the long and short of it.
Once again Parliament makes the whole country look ridiculous.
The government will send mps home if Letwin passes and will bring it back on monday
Hopefully everyone will be happy then.
EU Ambassadors sitting tomorrow so by monday the question of an extension may well be answered by the EU
It appears any extension has to be given by EU leaders sitting together and it is unlikely to happen before 27th just 4 days before exit day
I think we know they could do it by phone if necessary. But it would make most sense for them to acknowledge the request but monitor further developments in parliament before giving an answer.
No. The procedure was explained just now and the Ambassadors meet tomorrow and if it is a formal request a special meeting of leaders has to be convened and they discuss it face to face with each having a veto
Yes - obviously they all have a veto, however it's discussed. As I remember, when this was discussed before, the consensus was that in an emergency it could be done by conference call. But who knows, if you've heard something different on Sky?
Yes - the BBC reported the question of an extension has to go to the EU leaders and suggested the 27th would be the earliest but no doubt could be brought forward
Well at least they are onboard with the idea that Letwin is intended to give a chance to still fuck things up.....
Letwin has probably sunk Johnson's deal IMO.
It's either a very clever amendment or a very dumb one, because I think you are right. I just cannot get past how Letwin, who is not a remainer fanatic, can claim this is about getting the deal done (but in the right way) when it is overwhelmingly to be backed by those who want the deal dead.
They Dont regard the amendment as supporting the deal, so how can he say it is?
If Letwin wants scrutiny of the deal before voting for it, as he almost certainly will, what are his alternative options?
It is hardly the first time a politician will have tried getting support of people he disagrees with to leverage his own view. I really dont understand the fuss or surprise.
The frustration is we and the EU will have no real idea if the WA will pass after today because the amended motion will include people who wont back the legislation.
It keeps us in limbo. Which is fine, but Letwin is pretending that it doesnt.
The numbers look like they are there for the govt, so expect it to pass but sounds like next week as govt throwing toys out of pram today.
Not sure how long the yes vote coalition will last so it would be a tactical mistake to not hold the vote today imo.
However it plays out, we are not going to no deal from here which is a big relief.
Mr. Glenn, a legitimate argument, but Grieve's proposal is for a three-option referendum.
Of course, if presented together that would split the Leave vote. And if multi-stage, there'll be arguments about how that works too.
Grieve’s argument was that you can’t leave off an option that has substantial support, but that’s no longer the case.
So you’re saying we should leave off Remain, then?
Remain has substantial support.
But you cannot say no deal has no support.
Recent polls have put it at 40% and of course TBP sole purpose is a clean no deal break
Indeed if a referendum without no deal was proposed I would expect TBP to mount a legal challenge
The referendum version that is best for the government, and "respects" the original vote the most is one that is actually confirmatory. So govt deal or extend for a further 6/12 months to go back to square one.
No idea why it never gets a mention, it would pass as people want Brexit over, and is hard to argue against given parliament has failed to reach a consensus.
Now that we have two deals, Johnson's and May's, that have substantial differences in how they treat the Union with Northern Ireland and in how much divergence from the EU economy is envisaged, it would be perfectly logical to hold a referendum between those two deals.
I dont think they have substantial enough differences to justify a referendum personally, but wouldnt have a problem with it.
Isn’t there meant to be a PV march today in London?
Mr. Glenn, a legitimate argument, but Grieve's proposal is for a three-option referendum.
Of course, if presented together that would split the Leave vote. And if multi-stage, there'll be arguments about how that works too.
Grieve’s argument was that you can’t leave off an option that has substantial support, but that’s no longer the case.
So you’re saying we should leave off Remain, then?
Remain has substantial support.
But you cannot say no deal has no support.
Recent polls have put it at 40% and of course TBP sole purpose is a clean no deal break
Indeed if a referendum without no deal was proposed I would expect TBP to mount a legal challenge
The referendum version that is best for the government, and "respects" the original vote the most is one that is actually confirmatory. So govt deal or extend for a further 6/12 months to go back to square one.
No idea why it never gets a mention, it would pass as people want Brexit over, and is hard to argue against given parliament has failed to reach a consensus.
Now that we have two deals, Johnson's and May's, that have substantial differences in how they treat the Union with Northern Ireland and in how much divergence from the EU economy is envisaged, it would be perfectly logical to hold a referendum between those two deals.
I dont think they have substantial enough differences to justify a referendum personally, but wouldnt have a problem with it.
Isn’t there meant to be a PV march today in London?
So it looks like this whole thing will be abandoned later in the day?
Have I followed this correctly? They will spend hours arguing and making interventions with each other and then the Gov pulls its MPs out and sends them home?
They might still have the vote on the No Deal motion. It will be a chance for the Commons to give a second referendum another defeat.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Anyone using language like that is completely unfit to hold office.
One point worth remembering which might help Govt.
Bercow resigning on 31 Oct (unless he changes mind) - so Govt may have more neutral Speaker less likely to allow derailing tactics if legislation being pushed through in Nov.
Well at least they are onboard with the idea that Letwin is intended to give a chance to still fuck things up.....
Letwin has probably sunk Johnson's deal IMO.
It's either a very clever amendment or a very dumb one, because I think you are right. I just cannot get past how Letwin, who is not a remainer fanatic, can claim this is about getting the deal done (but in the right way) when it is overwhelmingly to be backed by those who want the deal dead.
They Dont regard the amendment as supporting the deal, so how can he say it is?
If Letwin wants scrutiny of the deal before voting for it, as he almost certainly will, what are his alternative options?
It is hardly the first time a politician will have tried getting support of people he disagrees with to leverage his own view. I really dont understand the fuss or surprise.
The frustration is we and the EU will have no real idea if the WA will pass after today because the amended motion will include people who wont back the legislation.
It keeps us in limbo. Which is fine, but Letwin is pretending that it doesnt.
The numbers look like they are there for the govt, so expect it to pass but sounds like next week as govt throwing toys out of pram today.
Not sure how long the yes vote coalition will last so it would be a tactical mistake to not hold the vote today imo.
However it plays out, we are not going to no deal from here which is a big relief.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Not a Boris fan at all but thought he gave it a good old go to sound vaguely measured and statesman-like. Corbyn just dived straight into angry man rant mode.
Well at least they are onboard with the idea that Letwin is intended to give a chance to still fuck things up.....
Letwin has probably sunk Johnson's deal IMO.
It's either a very clever amendment or a very dumb one, because I think you are right. I just cannot get past how Letwin, who is not a remainer fanatic, can claim this is about getting the deal done (but in the right way) when it is overwhelmingly to be backed by those who want the deal dead.
They Dont regard the amendment as supporting the deal, so how can he say it is?
You're still confusing the amendment with the motion.
The amendment isn't meant to support the deal - it's meant to insure against no deal, by ensuring the Benn Act is triggered.
But Letwin's stated intention is that the amended motion would serve as an "indicative" vote in favour of the deal (but one which wouldn't prevent the Benn Act from being triggered).
I'm not confusing it. You are confusing the amendment in isolation with the substantive motion. His stated intention is irrelevant, it would be about what the motion now actually says, and it wint say what you claim it will, nor what he claims it will.
Go on, tell me the 300 opposition mos backing the amendment are so stupid that they are voting for something which means the amended motion is indicative support for a deal? Even with them voting against the motion that would make passing the amendment pointless from their side.
If you were right theyd not back the amendment as it does not deliver what they want from it.
The government will send mps home if Letwin passes and will bring it back on monday
Hopefully everyone will be happy then.
EU Ambassadors sitting tomorrow so by monday the question of an extension may well be answered by the EU
It appears any extension has to be given by EU leaders sitting together and it is unlikely to happen before 27th just 4 days before exit day
I think we know they could do it by phone if necessary. But it would make most sense for them to acknowledge the request but monitor further developments in parliament before giving an answer.
No. The procedure was explained just now and the Ambassadors meet tomorrow and if it is a formal request a special meeting of leaders has to be convened and they discuss it face to face with each having a veto
Yes - obviously they all have a veto, however it's discussed. As I remember, when this was discussed before, the consensus was that in an emergency it could be done by conference call. But who knows, if you've heard something different on Sky?
Yes - the BBC reported the question of an extension has to go to the EU leaders and suggested the 27th would be the earliest but no doubt could be brought forward
Well anyway, apart from the question of whether it's face-to-face or telephone conference, what I'm suggesting is that it would suit the EU better to respond later rather than sooner, and 27th would fit the bill perfectly. If it's true the WAIB can be passed in a week, the UK may have ratified the agreement by then anyway.
Well at least they are onboard with the idea that Letwin is intended to give a chance to still fuck things up.....
Letwin has probably sunk Johnson's deal IMO.
It's either a very clever amendment or a very dumb one, because I think you are right. I just cannot get past how Letwin, who is not a remainer fanatic, can claim this is about getting the deal done (but in the right way) when it is overwhelmingly to be backed by those who want the deal dead.
They Dont regard the amendment as supporting the deal, so how can he say it is?
If Letwin wants scrutiny of the deal before voting for it, as he almost certainly will, what are his alternative options?
It is hardly the first time a politician will have tried getting support of people he disagrees with to leverage his own view. I really dont understand the fuss or surprise.
The frustration is we and the EU will have no real idea if the WA will pass after today because the amended motion will include people who wont back the legislation.
It keeps us in limbo. Which is fine, but Letwin is pretending that it doesnt.
The numbers look like they are there for the govt, so expect it to pass but sounds like next week as govt throwing toys out of pram today.
Not sure how long the yes vote coalition will last so it would be a tactical mistake to not hold the vote today imo.
However it plays out, we are not going to no deal from here which is a big relief.
Except in 18 months.
True, one step at a time. I dont think the PM has any interest in delivering no deal though despite his rhetoric.
The government will send mps home if Letwin passes and will bring it back on monday
Hopefully everyone will be happy then.
EU Ambassadors sitting tomorrow so by monday the question of an extension may well be answered by the EU
It appears any extension has to be given by EU leaders sitting together and it is unlikely to happen before 27th just 4 days before exit day
I think we know they could do it by phone if necessary. But it would make most sense for them to acknowledge the request but monitor further developments in parliament before giving an answer.
No. The procedure was explained just now and the Ambassadors meet tomorrow and if it is a formal request a special meeting of leaders has to be convened and they discuss it face to face with each having a veto
Yes - obviously they all have a veto, however it's discussed. As I remember, when this was discussed before, the consensus was that in an emergency it could be done by conference call. But who knows, if you've heard something different on Sky?
Yes - the BBC reported the question of an extension has to go to the EU leaders and suggested the 27th would be the earliest but no doubt could be brought forward
Well anyway, apart from the question of whether it's face-to-face or telephone conference, what I'm suggesting is that it would suit the EU better to respond later rather than sooner, and 27th would fit the bill perfectly. If it's true the WAIB can be passed in a week, the UK may have ratified the agreement by then anyway.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Are you advocating civil disobedience ?
I am advocating and Boris will push all out war against diehard Remainers using any means possible if Brexit has not passed by the end of the week.
Obviously if possible that should be within the law though it could go close to the boundary, though personally I would not advocate violence some of the more extreme Brexiteers may decide otherwise
So it looks like this whole thing will be abandoned later in the day?
Have I followed this correctly? They will spend hours arguing and making interventions with each other and then the Gov pulls its MPs out and sends them home?
They might still have the vote on the No Deal motion. It will be a chance for the Commons to give a second referendum another defeat.
I think they will have to vote iirc.
The vote cannot be pulled now. It has been proposed by PM.
The government can just send its MPs home and thereby abstain.
Well at least they are onboard with the idea that Letwin is intended to give a chance to still fuck things up.....
Letwin has probably sunk Johnson's deal IMO.
It's either a very clever amendment or a very dumb one, because I think you are right. I just cannot get past how Letwin, who is not a remainer fanatic, can claim this is about getting the deal done (but in the right way) when it is overwhelmingly to be backed by those who want the deal dead.
They Dont regard the amendment as supporting the deal, so how can he say it is?
You're still confusing the amendment with the motion.
The amendment isn't meant to support the deal - it's meant to insure against no deal, by ensuring the Benn Act is triggered.
But Letwin's stated intention is that the amended motion would serve as an "indicative" vote in favour of the deal (but one which wouldn't prevent the Benn Act from being triggered).
I'm not confusing it. You are confusing the amendment in isolation with the substantive motion. His stated intention is irrelevant, it would be about what the motion now actually says, and it wint say what you claim it will, nor what he claims it will.
Go on, tell me the 300 opposition mos backing the amendment are so stupid that they are voting for something which means the amended motion is indicative support for a deal? Even with them voting against the motion that would make passing the amendment pointless from their side.
If you were right theyd not back the amendment as it does not deliver what they want from it.
It delivers triggering the Benn Act, that's why they would back it.
Need I repeat a VoNC, a GNU and a letter of extension and , possibly, a people's vote was within grasp last month but someone who won a meaningless election that does not affect day-to-day lives of people [ even Parish council elections do ] decided she would play to the gallery. Corbyn is a baddie, but what could a baddie do with less than 250 votes.
Not a Boris fan at all but thought he gave it a good old go to sound vaguely measured and statesman-like. Corbyn just dived straight into angry man rant mode.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
You've lost it. 'State of War' 'Enemy'. We live in a democracy and the democratic process is running it's course.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Are you advocating civil disobedience ?
I am advocating and Boris will push all out war against diehard Remainers using any means possible if Brexit has not passed by the end of the week.
Obviously if possible that should be within the law though it could go close to the boundary, though personally I would not advocate violence some of the more extreme Brexiteers may decide otherwise
So far Boris’s all our war against diehard Remainers has consisted of capitulating on a customs border in the Irish Sea.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Are you advocating civil disobedience ?
I am advocating and Boris will push all out war against diehard Remainers using any means possible if Brexit has not passed by the end of the week.
Obviously if possible that should be within the law though it could go close to the boundary, though personally I would not advocate violence some of the more extreme Brexiteers may decide otherwise
At what point in time, do you think you became a fascist ?
Will Govt now curtail QS debate? They surely have to get the WAIB into Parliament absolutely immediately.
Not sure. Optimum outcome for Boris is probably to be forced to send the "surrender" letter by Parliament being totally unreasonable and then have a general election on his deal and Parliament Vs the People.
Losing the QS is probably a way Boris can get to a general election next week.
I wouldn't be surprised if this Parliament never votes on Boris's deal and we're into a general election campain by the end of next week.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
You've lost it. 'State of War' 'Enemy'. We live in a democracy and the democratic process is running it's course.
Until the democratic vote to leave the EU is respected by MPs for most Leavers we do not now live in a democracy and some will now respond in kind with non democratic protest
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Are you advocating civil disobedience ?
I am advocating and Boris will push all out war against diehard Remainers using any means possible if Brexit has not passed by the end of the week.
Obviously if possible that should be within the law though it could go close to the boundary, though personally I would not advocate violence some of the more extreme Brexiteers may decide otherwise
At what point in time, do you think you became a fascist ?
FT prediction was Lamb voting for with maj of 4, so thats tight with him confirmed a no.
Not that the numbers will match today given the vote now has no meaning, but as a sterr for the real votes next week.
There are hidden Labour defectors. The number for Johnson if the vote took place today would have been more comfortable. Next week and beyond, I don't know.
Well at least they are onboard with the idea that Letwin is intended to give a chance to still fuck things up.....
Letwin has probably sunk Johnson's deal IMO.
It's either a very clever amendment or a very dumb one, because I think you are right. I just cannot get past how Letwin, who is not a remainer fanatic, can claim this is about getting the deal done (but in the right way) when it is overwhelmingly to be backed by those who want the deal dead.
They Dont regard the amendment as supporting the deal, so how can he say it is?
You're still confusing the amendment with the motion.
The amendment isn't meant to support the deal - it's meant to insure against no deal, by ensuring the Benn Act is triggered.
But Letwin's stated intention is that the amended motion would serve as an "indicative" vote in favour of the deal (but one which wouldn't prevent the Benn Act from being triggered).
I'm not confusing it. You are confusing the amendment in isolation with the substantive motion. His stated intention is irrelevant, it would be about what the motion now actually says, and it wint say what you claim it will, nor what he claims it will.
Go on, tell me the 300 opposition mos backing the amendment are so stupid that they are voting for something which means the amended motion is indicative support for a deal? Even with them voting against the motion that would make passing the amendment pointless from their side.
If you were right theyd not back the amendment as it does not deliver what they want from it.
It delivers triggering the Benn Act, that's why they would back it.
This really isn't rocket science.
No it isn't- you're acting like that is all they want, but Letwin wants the deal passed too and they dont, so in addition to triggering the Benn act the amendment must also mean they can still shoot down the deal, while he is claiming and you have repeated, incorrectly, that it means indicative support has been given. That's nonsense.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
You've lost it. 'State of War' 'Enemy'. We live in a democracy and the democratic process is running it's course.
Loose use of the word "Democratic" there mind you. This country does not have real democracy.
There is something delicious in seeing the DUP, having taken the strategically idiotic decision of going for Leave, now being hoist by their own petard and being cut loose by the Tories.
They should have listened to a few Irishmen: “You can’t trust the Brits.
Heart of stone .....
Wouldn’t it be funny if they now backed a confirmatory referendum !
They would, but dont think it has the votes regardless. Also would make leave with a deal a reasonable fav if the tory party is united behind deal.
There also isn’t time. It’ll take, what, six months to do this? So let’s say we hold it, the EU agree the extension till April but then those clever clog Remainers lose. We take the deal but the transition only runs for eight more months. Woefully inadequate to negotiate a FTA.
Or are those proposing it simply doing a Cameron and assuming there is no possible way Remain would lose this 2nd Ref?
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
You've lost it. 'State of War' 'Enemy'. We live in a democracy and the democratic process is running it's course.
Until the democratic vote to leave the EU is respected by MPs for most Leavers we do not live in a democracy and some will now respond in kind with non democratic protest
Which camp does Nigel Farage fall into at present?
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Are you advocating civil disobedience ?
I am advocating and Boris will push all out war against diehard Remainers using any means possible if Brexit has not passed by the end of the week.
Obviously if possible that should be within the law though it could go close to the boundary, though personally I would not advocate violence some of the more extreme Brexiteers may decide otherwise
At what point in time, do you think you became a fascist ?
There is nothing Fascist about committing to deliver what 17 million people voted for by any means possible but if diehard Remainers wish to call those who respect democracy Fascist you go ahead
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Are you advocating civil disobedience ?
I am advocating and Boris will push all out war against diehard Remainers using any means possible if Brexit has not passed by the end of the week.
Obviously if possible that should be within the law though it could go close to the boundary, though personally I would not advocate violence some of the more extreme Brexiteers may decide otherwise
At what point in time, do you think you became a fascist ?
There is nothing Fascist about committing to deliver what 17 million people voted for by any means possible but if diehard Remainers wish to call those who respect democracy Fascist you go ahead
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
You've lost it. 'State of War' 'Enemy'. We live in a democracy and the democratic process is running it's course.
Until the democratic vote to leave the EU is respected by MPs for most Leavers we do not live in a democracy and some will now respond in kind with non democratic protest
Which camp does Nigel Farage fall into at present?
The No Deal camp but Farage is only interested in Farage
If Letwin passes but the motion is then lost, can the Govt legally introduce the legislation next week?
Yes. There was nothing to stop the Government laying the WAIB before Parliament at any time. The point of these votes is to ascertain whether it is likely to pass. Of course if MPs are going to vote for this motion and then vote against the WAIB then it makes the whole process today rather pointless.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Are you advocating civil disobedience ?
I am advocating and Boris will push all out war against diehard Remainers using any means possible if Brexit has not passed by the end of the week.
Obviously if possible that should be within the law though it could go close to the boundary, though personally I would not advocate violence some of the more extreme Brexiteers may decide otherwise
At what point in time, do you think you became a fascist ?
There is nothing Fascist about committing to deliver what 17 million people voted for by any means possible but if diehard Remainers wish to call those who respect democracy Fascist you go ahead
God this is so boring.
I cannot believe how far he has moved to the extremes
One point worth remembering which might help Govt.
Bercow resigning on 31 Oct (unless he changes mind) - so Govt may have more neutral Speaker less likely to allow derailing tactics if legislation being pushed through in Nov.
The Speaker who will be elected will be the one elected mostly by the members of the Opposition.
It's either a very clever amendment or a very dumb one, because I think you are right. I just cannot get past how Letwin, who is not a remainer fanatic, can claim this is about getting the deal done (but in the right way) when it is overwhelmingly to be backed by those who want the deal dead.
They Dont regard the amendment as supporting the deal, so how can he say it is?
You're still confusing the amendment with the motion.
The amendment isn't meant to support the deal - it's meant to insure against no deal, by ensuring the Benn Act is triggered.
But Letwin's stated intention is that the amended motion would serve as an "indicative" vote in favour of the deal (but one which wouldn't prevent the Benn Act from being triggered).
I'm not confusing it. You are confusing the amendment in isolation with the substantive motion. His stated intention is irrelevant, it would be about what the motion now actually says, and it wint say what you claim it will, nor what he claims it will.
Go on, tell me the 300 opposition mos backing the amendment are so stupid that they are voting for something which means the amended motion is indicative support for a deal? Even with them voting against the motion that would make passing the amendment pointless from their side.
If you were right theyd not back the amendment as it does not deliver what they want from it.
It delivers triggering the Benn Act, that's why they would back it.
This really isn't rocket science.
No it isn't- you're acting like that is all they want, but Letwin wants the deal passed too and they dont, so in addition to triggering the Benn act the amendment must also mean they can still shoot down the deal, while he is claiming and you have repeated, incorrectly, that it means indicative support has been given. That's nonsense.
It really isn't rocket science.
Obviously, people can vote for something if they think it mitigates the situation, even if it doesn't achieve all they want.
As for whether the motion will be indicative of support for the deal, that depends how MPs treat it. If they treat it as an indicative vote, it will be one. I am really not sure why anyone on either side would not want to treat it that way. But if it goes ahead, I think it will be pretty clear whether or not they have. And if there are some doubtful cases, I'm sure the media will do a good job of ferreting out their true opinions.
FT prediction was Lamb voting for with maj of 4, so thats tight with him confirmed a no.
Not that the numbers will match today given the vote now has no meaning, but as a sterr for the real votes next week.
There are hidden Labour defectors. The number for Johnson if the vote took place today would have been more comfortable. Next week and beyond, I don't know.
And that is the point of the delay in a nutshell. Letwin may believe the vote today morally binds but it doesnt.
The government will have an almighty scrap on its hands and will probably need to gut whole sections of the legislation to retain all the votes it needs.
Which in fairness is why sufficient time is needed when passing legislation, not that Letwin and co mind that, but it makes figuring out if we are actually leaving or not tricky.
Remain need to unite behind an option, imminently, or they will lose this even with the delay.
So it looks like this whole thing will be abandoned later in the day?
Have I followed this correctly? They will spend hours arguing and making interventions with each other and then the Gov pulls its MPs out and sends them home?
They might still have the vote on the No Deal motion. It will be a chance for the Commons to give a second referendum another defeat.
I think they will have to vote iirc.
The vote cannot be pulled now. It has been proposed by PM.
The government can just send its MPs home and thereby abstain.
Which will be voted on first? Letwin or referendum amendment? If Letwin first and Boris sends his troops home, referendum is sure to sail through. Could the substantive motion with a referendum attached then pass!
FT prediction was Lamb voting for with maj of 4, so thats tight with him confirmed a no.
Not that the numbers will match today given the vote now has no meaning, but as a sterr for the real votes next week.
There are hidden Labour defectors. The number for Johnson if the vote took place today would have been more comfortable. Next week and beyond, I don't know.
And that is the point of the delay in a nutshell. Letwin may believe the vote today morally binds but it doesnt.
The government will have an almighty scrap on its hands and will probably need to get whole sections of the legislation to retain all the votes it needs.
Which in fairness is why sufficient time is needed when passing legislation, not that Letwin and co mind that, but it makes figuring out if we are actually leaving or not tricky.
Remain need to unite behind an option, imminently, or they will lose this even with the delay.
Has to be a General Election. Now is the time. All cards are on the table.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Have you also shaved your hair to complement your state of mind ? Boots ?
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Don't be so daft. The law officers would need to resign not because of their views on Brexit but because they cannot in all honour and conscience serve a client who breaks undertakings given to the Court and who deliberately breaks the law in contravention, incidentally, of the oath that every MP takes when they become an MP.
If you cannot understand why the rule of law matters, why it is essential then there is little point debating with you. But don't make yourself look ridiculous with this nonsense talk of "war" and "enemies" and "them and us".
Not in doubt. But it's how many are yes to that and subsequent legislation that is key, mostly the labour figures who have been promised legal commitments.
So it looks like this whole thing will be abandoned later in the day?
Have I followed this correctly? They will spend hours arguing and making interventions with each other and then the Gov pulls its MPs out and sends them home?
They might still have the vote on the No Deal motion. It will be a chance for the Commons to give a second referendum another defeat.
I think they will have to vote iirc.
The vote cannot be pulled now. It has been proposed by PM.
The government can just send its MPs home and thereby abstain.
Which will be voted on first? Letwin or referendum amendment? If Letwin first and Boris sends his troops home, referendum is sure to sail through?. Could the substantive motion with a referendum attached then pass!
Letwin amendment is first. Main motion vote (as the main vote in its amended or unamended form) 2nd Referendum amendment No Deal vote (as the main vote in its amended or unamended form)
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Don't be so daft. The law officers would need to resign not because of their views on Brexit but because they cannot in all honour and conscience serve a client who breaks undertakings given to the Court and who deliberately breaks the law in contravention, incidentally, of the oath that every MP takes when they become an MP.
If you cannot understand why the rule of law matters, why it is essential then there is little point debating with you. But don't make yourself look ridiculous with this nonsense talk of "war" and "enemies" and "them and us".
So it looks like this whole thing will be abandoned later in the day?
Have I followed this correctly? They will spend hours arguing and making interventions with each other and then the Gov pulls its MPs out and sends them home?
They might still have the vote on the No Deal motion. It will be a chance for the Commons to give a second referendum another defeat.
I think they will have to vote iirc.
The vote cannot be pulled now. It has been proposed by PM.
The government can just send its MPs home and thereby abstain.
Which will be voted on first? Letwin or referendum amendment? If Letwin first and Boris sends his troops home, referendum is sure to sail through. Could the substantive motion with a referendum attached then pass!
Referendum isn't on first motion it is an amendment to the second motion which hasn't been moved yet. Second motion surely could be pulled?
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Are you advocating civil disobedience ?
I am advocating and Boris will push all out war against diehard Remainers using any means possible if Brexit has not passed by the end of the week.
Obviously if possible that should be within the law though it could go close to the boundary, though personally I would not advocate violence some of the more extreme Brexiteers may decide otherwise
Ilegal action to support a vote that was won by an illegal campaign. That about cements it.
Mr. Glenn, a legitimate argument, but Grieve's proposal is for a three-option referendum.
Of course, if presented together that would split the Leave vote. And if multi-stage, there'll be arguments about how that works too.
Grieve’s argument was that you can’t leave off an option that has substantial support, but that’s no longer the case.
So you’re saying we should leave off Remain, then?
Remain has substantial support.
But you cannot say no deal has no support.
Recent polls have put it at 40% and of course TBP sole purpose is a clean no deal break
Indeed if a referendum without no deal was proposed I would expect TBP to mount a legal challenge
The referendum version that is best for the government, and "respects" the original vote the most is one that is actually confirmatory. So govt deal or extend for a further 6/12 months to go back to square one.
No idea why it never gets a mention, it would pass as people want Brexit over, and is hard to argue against given parliament has failed to reach a consensus.
Now that we have two deals, Johnson's and May's, that have substantial differences in how they treat the Union with Northern Ireland and in how much divergence from the EU economy is envisaged, it would be perfectly logical to hold a referendum between those two deals.
I dont think they have substantial enough differences to justify a referendum personally, but wouldnt have a problem with it.
Isn’t there meant to be a PV march today in London?
12 noon I think
Yes I'll be on it. It will be big again.
Johnson has had all the running the last week or so and the momentum has been with him. Today he loses a bit of momentum and this march is part of that.
It will be interesting to assess the mood in the crowd.
So it looks like this whole thing will be abandoned later in the day?
Have I followed this correctly? They will spend hours arguing and making interventions with each other and then the Gov pulls its MPs out and sends them home?
They might still have the vote on the No Deal motion. It will be a chance for the Commons to give a second referendum another defeat.
I think they will have to vote iirc.
The vote cannot be pulled now. It has been proposed by PM.
The government can just send its MPs home and thereby abstain.
Which will be voted on first? Letwin or referendum amendment? If Letwin first and Boris sends his troops home, referendum is sure to sail through. Could the substantive motion with a referendum attached then pass!
Surely Letwin is 1st. The Kylie amendment on ref is to 2nd motion.
Mr. Glenn, a legitimate argument, but Grieve's proposal is for a three-option referendum.
Of course, if presented together that would split the Leave vote. And if multi-stage, there'll be arguments about how that works too.
Grieve’s argument was that you can’t leave off an option that has substantial support, but that’s no longer the case.
So you’re saying we should leave off Remain, then?
Remain has substantial support.
But you cannot say no deal has no support.
Recent polls have put it at 40% and of course TBP sole purpose is a clean no deal break
Indeed if a referendum without no deal was proposed I would expect TBP to mount a legal challenge
The referendum version that is best for the government, and "respects" the original vote the most is one that is actually confirmatory. So govt deal or extend for a further 6/12 months to go back to square one.
No idea why it never gets a mention, it would pass as people want Brexit over, and is hard to argue against given parliament has failed to reach a consensus.
Now that we have two deals, Johnson's and May's, that have substantial differences in how they treat the Union with Northern Ireland and in how much divergence from the EU economy is envisaged, it would be perfectly logical to hold a referendum between those two deals.
I dont think they have substantial enough differences to justify a referendum personally, but wouldnt have a problem with it.
Isn’t there meant to be a PV march today in London?
12 noon I think
Thank you.
BTW I hope you and your lady wife enjoyed your recent holiday. It sounded wonderful. My husband is quite keen on the idea of something similar but as I am a very bad sailor I'm not at all convinced that it is worth spending a lot of money for me to pass the time afloat with my head down a toilet.
I like long train journeys instead. One of my great regrets is not doing the train journey from Istanbul to Damascus via Aleppo while there was still the chance a few years ago.
No. He said he would vote for the deal and with his integrity he will vote to leave
Not the kind of person they want in today’s Tory party.
Yes we do
Er. You resigned. He was sacked.
I may have resigned but I am still a conservative and Boris is committed to a deal and if he achieves brexit and moves onto his QS policies I will rejoin
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Don't be so daft. The law officers would need to resign not because of their views on Brexit but because they cannot in all honour and conscience serve a client who breaks undertakings given to the Court and who deliberately breaks the law in contravention, incidentally, of the oath that every MP takes when they become an MP.
If you cannot understand why the rule of law matters, why it is essential then there is little point debating with you. But don't make yourself look ridiculous with this nonsense talk of "war" and "enemies" and "them and us".
I won't bother to repeat it but needless to say Thomas More's speech as written by Robert Bolt seems apt at this point.
So yes of course you are right. Johnson cannot break the law. What I do believe he would be quite right to do is resign as PM thus avoiding having to enact the ruling.
No. He said he would vote for the deal and with his integrity he will vote to leave
Not the kind of person they want in today’s Tory party.
Yes we do
Er. You resigned. He was sacked.
Indeed. It's like those sad individuals who get kicked out of labour but still insist how they are true labour. The tories demonstrably dont want Clarke in their party. They might let him back in, but if speaks his mind in a way they dont like hed be kicked out again.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
You've lost it. 'State of War' 'Enemy'. We live in a democracy and the democratic process is running it's course.
Until the democratic vote to leave the EU is respected by MPs for most Leavers we do not now live in a democracy and some will now respond in kind with non democratic protest
Just listen to yourself ..... it is quite embarrassing.
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
No need, Macron will veto further extension by the end of the week.
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Comments
It means no business investment for 18months until the future trading position with the EU is established.
Want to approve regardless =approx 300
Want to approve subject to scrutiny =approx 20
Want to reject =approx 300
Letwin is in the middle group. He cannot get the govt to agree to it, and wouldnt trust them regardless. To achieve his outcome he can use the reject votes, who are willing to back it mostly because it gives Boris an uncomfortable time having to write the letter, to achieve his objective.
It is sensible clever politics based on counting, if our party leaders did more of this we would be in less of a mess.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1185332233156124674?s=20
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=32&LAB=24&LIB=21&Brexit=13&Green=2&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base
If the day is pulled the PM still has to ask for an extension. Or be in court on Monday and face the resignation of the government’s law officers.
It keeps us in limbo. Which is fine, but Letwin is pretending that it doesnt.
So it looks like this whole thing will be abandoned later in the day?
Have I followed this correctly? They will spend hours arguing and making interventions with each other and then the Gov pulls its MPs out and sends them home?
And sod the law officers if they are diehard Remainers and wish to resign let them, we are now in a state of war with the die hard Remainers and if you are not with Boris to deliver Brexit you are now the enemy
Once again Parliament makes the whole country look ridiculous.
Not sure how long the yes vote coalition will last so it would be a tactical mistake to not hold the vote today imo.
However it plays out, we are not going to no deal from here which is a big relief.
2019 Parliament votes for required vote to be rendered meaningless.
Bercow resigning on 31 Oct (unless he changes mind) - so Govt may have more neutral Speaker less likely to allow derailing tactics if legislation being pushed through in Nov.
Go on, tell me the 300 opposition mos backing the amendment are so stupid that they are voting for something which means the amended motion is indicative support for a deal? Even with them voting against the motion that would make passing the amendment pointless from their side.
If you were right theyd not back the amendment as it does not deliver what they want from it.
Obviously if possible that should be within the law though it could go close to the boundary, though personally I would not advocate violence some of the more extreme Brexiteers may decide otherwise
The vote cannot be pulled now. It has been proposed by PM.
The government can just send its MPs home and thereby abstain.
This really isn't rocket science.
Will Govt now curtail QS debate? They surely have to get the WAIB into Parliament absolutely immediately.
Not that the numbers will match today given the vote now has no meaning, but as a sterr for the real votes next week.
Losing the QS is probably a way Boris can get to a general election next week.
I wouldn't be surprised if this Parliament never votes on Boris's deal and we're into a general election campain by the end of next week.
It really isn't rocket science.
Or are those proposing it simply doing a Cameron and assuming there is no possible way Remain would lose this 2nd Ref?
https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/1185484065257996294?s=19
As for whether the motion will be indicative of support for the deal, that depends how MPs treat it. If they treat it as an indicative vote, it will be one. I am really not sure why anyone on either side would not want to treat it that way. But if it goes ahead, I think it will be pretty clear whether or not they have. And if there are some doubtful cases, I'm sure the media will do a good job of ferreting out their true opinions.
The government will have an almighty scrap on its hands and will probably need to gut whole sections of the legislation to retain all the votes it needs.
Which in fairness is why sufficient time is needed when passing legislation, not that Letwin and co mind that, but it makes figuring out if we are actually leaving or not tricky.
Remain need to unite behind an option, imminently, or they will lose this even with the delay.
Saturday: And if you don't vote for it I will take up arms
If you cannot understand why the rule of law matters, why it is essential then there is little point debating with you. But don't make yourself look ridiculous with this nonsense talk of "war" and "enemies" and "them and us".
Main motion vote (as the main vote in its amended or unamended form)
2nd Referendum amendment
No Deal vote (as the main vote in its amended or unamended form)
Johnson has had all the running the last week or so and the momentum has been with him. Today he loses a bit of momentum and this march is part of that.
It will be interesting to assess the mood in the crowd.
BTW I hope you and your lady wife enjoyed your recent holiday. It sounded wonderful. My husband is quite keen on the idea of something similar but as I am a very bad sailor I'm not at all convinced that it is worth spending a lot of money for me to pass the time afloat with my head down a toilet.
I like long train journeys instead. One of my great regrets is not doing the train journey from Istanbul to Damascus via Aleppo while there was still the chance a few years ago.
So yes of course you are right. Johnson cannot break the law. What I do believe he would be quite right to do is resign as PM thus avoiding having to enact the ruling.
Just listen to yourself ..... it is quite embarrassing.