Skip to content
Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » And so MPs move on to vote against leaving the EU with no deal

SystemSystem Posts: 12,598
edited March 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » And so MPs move on to vote against leaving the EU with no deal

So after last night’s excitement today’s focus is a new Commons vote at 7pm on ruling out the UK leaving the EU with no deal. Then we’ll get tomorrow’s Article 50 extension move.

Read the full story here


«134567

Comments

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,833
    We're back!
  • AramintaMoonbeamQCAramintaMoonbeamQC Posts: 3,905
    Phew. Good timing.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,874
    May should take up Jezza's offer on customs etc. I think that plays out better for the govt than a second vote
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    So when will Bercow dash May's hopes of MV3? If he thinks an extension and all that will follow is on the cards he will be desperate to prevent even the slim chance the Commons might change its mind.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,251
    Fifth like MV5.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    Woo, main site back again!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    Moral FIRST!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Pulpstar said:

    May should take up Jezza's offer on customs etc. I think that plays out better for the govt than a second vote

    As Labour MPs, even ones who supposedly could accept the deal, refuse to do so because it is a Tory government, so too most Tories won't back May on taking up that offer even if she were inclined to do so, because it is a Labour offer.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    This debate on no deal is doing a great job of tearing chunks out of the whole notion of Brexit.
  • steve_garnersteve_garner Posts: 1,019
    At last, somebody has taken back control of the PB comments.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    What time is the vote happening?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,751
    TheJezziah said:

    What time is the vote happening?

    7
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,358
    I am lazy. Which amendments are being voted on by tonight's shitshow?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    Pulpstar said:

    May should take up Jezza's offer on customs etc. I think that plays out better for the govt than a second vote

    If we have to leave, surely you are right. But how humiliating for May to leave office (for that is what would follow) trashing three years' work and having to sign up for Corbyn's plan.

  • eekeek Posts: 30,802
    Yippee - back on the site which feels right..
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    FPT
    nico67 said:

    I have much more respect for ardent Brexiters than Nicky Morgan . Clearly ditched any principles she had and is now fawning over the ERG in an effort to get a cabinet job after May goes.

    Cabinet job? She wants to be the one handing them out.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    viewcode said:

    I am lazy. Which amendments are being voted on by tonight's shitshow?

    Malthouse and Spelman - Unicorn and Really really no deal I think they are termed.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    Gallowgate said:

    TheJezziah said:

    What time is the vote happening?

    7
    Thanks, thought it might be the same time as yesterday but wasn't sure.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,874
    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    May should take up Jezza's offer on customs etc. I think that plays out better for the govt than a second vote

    As Labour MPs, even ones who supposedly could accept the deal, refuse to do so because it is a Tory government, so too most Tories won't back May on taking up that offer even if she were inclined to do so, because it is a Labour offer.
    Corbyn and May can whip a majority between themselves, surely lol
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,751
    These Malthouse Compromisers are deluded.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 4,070
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    I am lazy. Which amendments are being voted on by tonight's shitshow?

    Malthouse and Spelman - Unicorn and Really really no deal I think they are termed.
    Well, there seems to be some confusion about the Spelman one at least now.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    edited March 2019
    viewcode said:

    I am lazy. Which amendments are being voted on by tonight's shitshow?

    All of them that were moved, with a question mark over Spelman who appears to have been nobbled.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,251
    As it stands, no-one has yet said they'll move Spelman to a vote.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Caroline Lucas speaking - for some reason I am instinctively wary when people start moaning about needing a 'new social contract'. I have this suspicion it doesn't mean anything other than 'I should get the political things I want'.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,874
    El_Capitano said:

    As it stands, no-one has yet said they'll move Spelman to a vote.

    Who would be eligible to
  • twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,641
    williamglenn said:

    FPT

    nico67 said:

    I have much more respect for ardent Brexiters than Nicky Morgan . Clearly ditched any principles she had and is now fawning over the ERG in an effort to get a cabinet job after May goes.

    Cabinet job? She wants to be the one handing them out.
    Morgan is my MP. She only does what is best for Nicky Morgan.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    TheJezziah said:

    Gallowgate said:

    TheJezziah said:

    What time is the vote happening?

    7
    Thanks, thought it might be the same time as yesterday but wasn't sure.
    There’s two amendments to be voted on first, so the vote on the substantive motion will be 7:25 or 7:30, with the result 7:40 - 7:45.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Pulpstar said:

    May should take up Jezza's offer on customs etc. I think that plays out better for the govt than a second vote

    I think that offer has expired now - partly because the one thing the Tiggers succeeded in was giving the "People's Vote" extremists within the PLP the upper-hand, but also because May's shown herself to be so untrustworthy that I doubt the Labour front-bench would (or should) trust May to stick to a commitment to negotiate a customs union.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,700
    Ironic that the EU are taking a leaf of the ERGs book and publically refusing to take No Deal off the table.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    twistedfirestopper3 said:

    williamglenn said:

    FPT

    nico67 said:

    I have much more respect for ardent Brexiters than Nicky Morgan . Clearly ditched any principles she had and is now fawning over the ERG in an effort to get a cabinet job after May goes.

    Cabinet job? She wants to be the one handing them out.
    Morgan is my MP. She only does what is best for Nicky Morgan.
    We now know that they all are...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Pro_Rata said:

    Ironic that the EU are taking a leaf of the ERGs book and publically refusing to take No Deal off the table.

    The EU can't force us to revoke Article 50.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    A group of MPs is planning to force indicative votes in parliament on a series of Brexit options, including a second referendum and a softer departure, as several cabinet ministers suggested it could be the only way to resolve the political impasse.

    If MPs vote down the possibility of a no-deal Brexit on Wednesday night, they will vote on Thursday on whether to seek an extension to article 50. Efforts are under way to persuade Theresa May to announce plans then to hold debates on Brexit options the following week in order to determine a new path for parliament during a short extension.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/13/group-of-mps-plan-to-force-indicative-votes-on-brexit-options
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,874
    Danny565 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    May should take up Jezza's offer on customs etc. I think that plays out better for the govt than a second vote

    I think that offer has expired now - partly because the one thing the Tiggers succeeded in was giving the "People's Vote" extremists within the PLP the upper-hand, but also because May's shown herself to be so untrustworthy that I doubt the Labour front-bench would (or should) trust May to stick to a commitment to negotiate a customs union.
    Long Bailey, Gardiner and Corbyn are all still quite Labour brexit though
  • twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,641
    edited March 2019
    williamglenn said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Ironic that the EU are taking a leaf of the ERGs book and publically refusing to take No Deal off the table.

    The EU can't force us to revoke Article 50.
    As much as they'd like to!
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,358
    edited March 2019
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    I am lazy. Which amendments are being voted on by tonight's shitshow?

    Malthouse and Spelman - Unicorn and Really really no deal I think they are termed.
    I thought that was an afternoon ITV drama starring Suranne Jones and Sarah Parish. Together they juggle home lives and solving crime. Tonights episode: Malthouse is convinced the murderer is DS Brackman but Spelman is distracted by her daughter's decision to not go to Uni. Followed by Extreme Measures, with Trevor Eve, Friday at 9, BBC 1.

    (Thank you kindly, by the way... :) )
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,700
    williamglenn said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Ironic that the EU are taking a leaf of the ERGs book and publically refusing to take No Deal off the table.

    The EU can't force us to revoke Article 50.
    More in regards of extension. I know they can't pre empty the 27, and that public comment is in order, but it is still an irony
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    IanB2 said:

    A group of MPs is planning to force indicative votes in parliament on a series of Brexit options, including a second referendum and a softer departure, as several cabinet ministers suggested it could be the only way to resolve the political impasse.

    If MPs vote down the possibility of a no-deal Brexit on Wednesday night, they will vote on Thursday on whether to seek an extension to article 50. Efforts are under way to persuade Theresa May to announce plans then to hold debates on Brexit options the following week in order to determine a new path for parliament during a short extension.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/13/group-of-mps-plan-to-force-indicative-votes-on-brexit-options

    Indicative votes is the closest to a way forward in advance of an extension that we may have, but my gods does there need to debate? They mention all the various other options in the debates they've had for 6 months.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    Canada bans 737 Max flights - isolates Trump and the US
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,251
    Pulpstar said:

    El_Capitano said:

    As it stands, no-one has yet said they'll move Spelman to a vote.

    Who would be eligible to
    Any of the signatories, I believe.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Pulpstar said:

    Danny565 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    May should take up Jezza's offer on customs etc. I think that plays out better for the govt than a second vote

    I think that offer has expired now - partly because the one thing the Tiggers succeeded in was giving the "People's Vote" extremists within the PLP the upper-hand, but also because May's shown herself to be so untrustworthy that I doubt the Labour front-bench would (or should) trust May to stick to a commitment to negotiate a customs union.
    Long Bailey, Gardiner and Corbyn are all still quite Labour brexit though
    Yeah, and also, by all accounts (well, mostly Stephen Bush's accounts), a lot of Corbyn's advisers were keen to get Brexit "boxed off" asap, so that politics could return to the issues they felt they could score more points on. So I think Corbyn's offer to work with May on a "Labour-friendly" Brexit was genuine. But it's much too late now, the window closed weeks if not months ago.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    IanB2 said:

    Canada bans 737 Max flights - isolates Trump and the US

    Hearing Trump is ordering FAA to ground them in the states as well..
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    edited March 2019
    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    I am lazy. Which amendments are being voted on by tonight's shitshow?

    Malthouse and Spelman - Unicorn and Really really no deal I think they are termed.
    I thought that was an afternoon ITV drama starring Suranne Jones and Sarah Parish. Together they juggle home lives and solving crime. Tonights episode: Malthouse is convinced the murderer is DS Brackman but Spelman is distracted by her daughter's decision to not go to Uni. Followed by Extreme Measures, with Trevor Eve, Friday at 9, BBC 1.

    (Thank you kindly, by the way... :) )
    You might want to pitch that to a producer before someone steals it. It'll be the next Rizzoli and Isles
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
    Bottom line is that the ERG leavers had their chance and have blown it.

    That puts the whole question of Brexit (being trashed in the Commons with almost every speech) back on the table.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,512
    timmo said:

    IanB2 said:

    Canada bans 737 Max flights - isolates Trump and the US

    Hearing Trump is ordering FAA to ground them in the states as well..
    Confirmed:
    https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/h_90b712a98f5346d3ffddcbb61990aa40
    Not before bloody time...
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    Tomorrow's debate - particularly over the length of extension we will be asking for - will be more critical than today's. Today's is just trashing the idea that Brexit had anything positive to offer our country.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    edited March 2019
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
    Bottom line is that the ERG leavers had their chance and have blown it.

    That puts the whole question of Brexit (being trashed in the Commons with almost every speech) back on the table.
    I struggle with how some of the more passionate ones who think any Brexit would be terrible can not support revocation. Yes, referendum and all that, but if any Brexit is as bad as they say, and they don't feel bound by the first referendum, why should they risk any Brexit in a second? It might be the best they can hope for, but I don't know that it is logically coherent to say any Brexit is a tragedy but that it'll be ok if the public vote for it...the second time. They should surely at least want to revoke.

    Those who want a vote to prevent no deal is more reasonable.

    And the accepted terminology now is ERG Remainers. People who fight against Brexit that hard deserve the label.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
    Bottom line is that the ERG leavers had their chance and have blown it.

    That puts the whole question of Brexit (being trashed in the Commons with almost every speech) back on the table.
    I struggle with how some of the more passionate ones who think any Brexit would be terrible can not support revocation. Yes, referendum and all that, but if any Brexit is as bad as they say, and they don't feel bound by the first referendum, why should they risk any Brexit in a second? It might be the best they can hope for, but I don't know that it is logically coherent to say any Brexit is a tragedy but that it'll be ok if the public vote for it...the second time.

    Those who want a vote to prevent no deal is more reasonable.
    The right answer for the country is obviously revocation. The question is how to get there with democratic endorsement.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    turns on BBC Parliament, John Baron speaking gives way to Andrew buffoon Bridgen.

    turns off BBC Parliament
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    ydoethur said:

    timmo said:

    IanB2 said:

    Canada bans 737 Max flights - isolates Trump and the US

    Hearing Trump is ordering FAA to ground them in the states as well..
    Confirmed:
    https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/h_90b712a98f5346d3ffddcbb61990aa40
    Not before bloody time...
    They had run out of countries that they could fly them to.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    Sandpit said:

    TheJezziah said:

    Gallowgate said:

    TheJezziah said:

    What time is the vote happening?

    7
    Thanks, thought it might be the same time as yesterday but wasn't sure.
    There’s two amendments to be voted on first, so the vote on the substantive motion will be 7:25 or 7:30, with the result 7:40 - 7:45.
    Good point, voting starts at 7 but 10-15 minutes each I guess and I wasn't sure the number of amendments were being voted on.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
    Bottom line is that the ERG leavers had their chance and have blown it.

    That puts the whole question of Brexit (being trashed in the Commons with almost every speech) back on the table.
    I struggle with how some of the more passionate ones who think any Brexit would be terrible can not support revocation. Yes, referendum and all that, but if any Brexit is as bad as they say, and they don't feel bound by the first referendum, why should they risk any Brexit in a second? It might be the best they can hope for, but I don't know that it is logically coherent to say any Brexit is a tragedy but that it'll be ok if the public vote for it...the second time. They should surely at least want to revoke.

    Those who want a vote to prevent no deal is more reasonable.

    And the accepted terminology now is ERG Remainers. People who fight against Brexit that hard deserve the label.

    The new terminology is a bit like the Sinn Fein/IRA tag that unionists in Northern Ireland use!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    edited March 2019
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
    Bottom line is that the ERG leavers had their chance and have blown it.

    That puts the whole question of Brexit (being trashed in the Commons with almost every speech) back on the table.
    I struggle with how some of the more passionate ones who think any Brexit would be terrible can not support revocation. Yes, referendum and all that, but if any Brexit is as bad as they say, and they don't feel bound by the first referendum, why should they risk any Brexit in a second? It might be the best they can hope for, but I don't know that it is logically coherent to say any Brexit is a tragedy but that it'll be ok if the public vote for it...the second time.

    Those who want a vote to prevent no deal is more reasonable.
    The right answer for the country is obviously revocation. The question is how to get there with democratic endorsement.
    But that is not the question. Democratic endorsement is politically necessary for many, but people have quit their parties over this, they talk in apocalyptic terms about what Brexit will do to the country. If it is that bad, then revocation without such democratic cover is the position they should admit they think we need. Face the consequences for saying they cannot risk the public allowing Brexit because it is just too bad for the country.

    Yes they would not get that through the House. But that even most of those most damning about Brexit won't even try to do that just makes me think that implicitly they don't Brexit is as bad as they say.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,998
    ydoethur said:

    timmo said:

    IanB2 said:

    Canada bans 737 Max flights - isolates Trump and the US

    Hearing Trump is ordering FAA to ground them in the states as well..
    Confirmed:
    https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/h_90b712a98f5346d3ffddcbb61990aa40
    Not before bloody time...
    WTF is Trump doing announcing that? At least let the quango appear to do its job.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,512
    edited March 2019
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    timmo said:

    IanB2 said:

    Canada bans 737 Max flights - isolates Trump and the US

    Hearing Trump is ordering FAA to ground them in the states as well..
    Confirmed:
    https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/h_90b712a98f5346d3ffddcbb61990aa40
    Not before bloody time...
    They had run out of countries that they could fly them to.
    Didn't stop them using it for internal flights.

    What I don't get is why they weren't grounded after the LionAir crash. It should have been obvious even to somebody as thick as a Boeing executive that something was out of place then. And if that had happened these people in Ethiopia wouldn't have died.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    turns on BBC Parliament, John Baron speaking gives way to Andrew buffoon Bridgen.

    turns off BBC Parliament

    You had me wondering whether mine was on delay, but Bridgen was merely an intervention.
    Pennycook (a boy trying to do a man's job) followed Baron.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    timmo said:

    IanB2 said:

    Canada bans 737 Max flights - isolates Trump and the US

    Hearing Trump is ordering FAA to ground them in the states as well..
    Confirmed:
    https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/h_90b712a98f5346d3ffddcbb61990aa40
    Not before bloody time...
    They had run out of countries that they could fly them to.
    Didn't stop them using it for internal flights.

    What I don't get is why they weren't grounded after the LionAir crash. It should have been obvious even to somebody as thick as a Boeing executive that something was out of place then. And if that had happened these people in Ethiopia wouldn't have died.
    Once is misfortune, twice...
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,575
    eek said:

    Yippee - back on the site which feels right..

    I have been on all day and not seen any issue with site?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,512
    tlg86 said:

    ydoethur said:

    timmo said:

    IanB2 said:

    Canada bans 737 Max flights - isolates Trump and the US

    Hearing Trump is ordering FAA to ground them in the states as well..
    Confirmed:
    https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/h_90b712a98f5346d3ffddcbb61990aa40
    Not before bloody time...
    WTF is Trump doing announcing that? At least let the quango appear to do its job.
    Hugo Chavez used to do things like that too.

    And Corbyn would if he ever got into power.

    I have a theory that it's probably something to do with penis length, or lack thereof.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,718
    Voting to extend is all very well but haven't they heard the EU say that Britain has to provide a reasoned justification as to what the extension is going to be for.

    Buggering about some more, I'm guessing, will not pass the EU's reasoned justification test.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
    Bottom line is that the ERG leavers had their chance and have blown it.

    That puts the whole question of Brexit (being trashed in the Commons with almost every speech) back on the table.
    I struggle with how some of the more passionate ones who think any Brexit would be terrible can not support revocation. Yes, referendum and all that, but if any Brexit is as bad as they say, and they don't feel bound by the first referendum, why should they risk any Brexit in a second? It might be the best they can hope for, but I don't know that it is logically coherent to say any Brexit is a tragedy but that it'll be ok if the public vote for it...the second time.

    Those who want a vote to prevent no deal is more reasonable.
    The right answer for the country is obviously revocation. The question is how to get there with democratic endorsement.
    But that is not the question. Democratic endorsement is politically necessary for many, but people have quit their parties over this, they talk in apocalyptic terms about what Brexit will do to the country. If it is that bad, then revocation without such democratic cover is the position they should admit they think we need. Face the consequences for saying they cannot risk the public allowing Brexit because it is just too bad for the country.

    Yes they would not get that through the House. But that even most of those most damning about Brexit won't even try to do that just makes me think that implicitly they don't Brexit is as bad as they say.
    Yes, we are in need of political leadership and for someone to tell us some hard truths. Reasons why this isn't happening are already familiar to most PB'ers.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,512
    edited March 2019
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    timmo said:

    IanB2 said:

    Canada bans 737 Max flights - isolates Trump and the US

    Hearing Trump is ordering FAA to ground them in the states as well..
    Confirmed:
    https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/h_90b712a98f5346d3ffddcbb61990aa40
    Not before bloody time...
    They had run out of countries that they could fly them to.
    Didn't stop them using it for internal flights.

    What I don't get is why they weren't grounded after the LionAir crash. It should have been obvious even to somebody as thick as a Boeing executive that something was out of place then. And if that had happened these people in Ethiopia wouldn't have died.
    Once is misfortune, twice...
    An aircraft with a computer that actively tries to crash it (and succeeds) is not a misfortune, it's a fecking menace.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Cyclefree said:

    Voting to extend is all very well but haven't they heard the EU say that Britain has to provide a reasoned justification as to what the extension is going to be for.

    Buggering about some more, I'm guessing, will not pass the EU's reasoned justification test.

    Which is why the indicative vote plan, repeated until something has a majority (besides just 'extension just because') surely has to be the way forward. They can faff about with agreeing to an extension in principle, and no doubt they''ll argue about the length of it as a proxy debate for their preferred options (the shorter the proposal the more someone will back MV3 or no deal presumably, the longer the more they want revocation), but their aversion to saying 'yes' to things is really quite infuriating.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    The big story is that the government has already spent £4,200,000,000 of our tax income on preparing for the no deal scenario that Parliament is about to rule out of question.
  • eekeek Posts: 30,802
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
    Bottom line is that the ERG leavers had their chance and have blown it.

    That puts the whole question of Brexit (being trashed in the Commons with almost every speech) back on the table.
    I struggle with how some of the more passionate ones who think any Brexit would be terrible can not support revocation. Yes, referendum and all that, but if any Brexit is as bad as they say, and they don't feel bound by the first referendum, why should they risk any Brexit in a second? It might be the best they can hope for, but I don't know that it is logically coherent to say any Brexit is a tragedy but that it'll be ok if the public vote for it...the second time.

    Those who want a vote to prevent no deal is more reasonable.
    The right answer for the country is obviously revocation. The question is how to get there with democratic endorsement.
    The question everyone is currently asking is how do I get there without getting the blame.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    US now grounds 800 and 900 series MAX aircraft
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    IanB2 said:

    The big story is that the government has already spent £4,200,000,000 of our tax income on preparing for the no deal scenario that Parliament is about to rule out of question.

    That's not really a big story despite the huge sum of money. As the default legal option it would be even more reckless than they've already been to spend nothing just assuming MPs would eventually rule it out.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,247
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
    Bottom line is that the ERG leavers had their chance and have blown it.

    That puts the whole question of Brexit (being trashed in the Commons with almost every speech) back on the table.
    I struggle with how some of the more passionate ones who think any Brexit would be terrible can not support revocation. Yes, referendum and all that, but if any Brexit is as bad as they say, and they don't feel bound by the first referendum, why should they risk any Brexit in a second? It might be the best they can hope for, but I don't know that it is logically coherent to say any Brexit is a tragedy but that it'll be ok if the public vote for it...the second time.

    Those who want a vote to prevent no deal is more reasonable.
    The right answer for the country is obviously revocation. The question is how to get there with democratic endorsement.
    The question is how to get there at the same time as passing the buck.

    If you think the Withdrawal Agreement is so bad that you cannot vote for it, you have no business putting it to the public.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Mr Pennycook accuses the government of "endlessly repeating the nonsensical mantra that no deal is better than a bad deal".

    That, he argues, "desensitised many people in this country to the risks involved".

    I certainly hope no one else ever endlessly repeats nonsensical mantras, like 'For the many not the few'.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 4,070
    IanB2 said:

    The big story is that the government has already spent £4,200,000,000 of our tax income on preparing for the no deal scenario that Parliament is about to rule out of question.

    Yes but the vote itself tonight does not invalidate that money being spent, until such times as we work out what we're going to do instead of the no-deal default position.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Cyclefree said:

    Voting to extend is all very well but haven't they heard the EU say that Britain has to provide a reasoned justification as to what the extension is going to be for.

    Buggering about some more, I'm guessing, will not pass the EU's reasoned justification test.

    Why did Merkel say an extension would be "easy", then?: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/13/angela-merkel-said-it-would-be-easy-to-get-eu-to-extend-article-50
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    Hint of desperation in Fox's speech. He should stick to feeding fake news to Americans.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,784
    kle4 said:

    Mr Pennycook accuses the government of "endlessly repeating the nonsensical mantra that no deal is better than a bad deal".

    That, he argues, "desensitised many people in this country to the risks involved".

    I certainly hope no one else ever endlessly repeats nonsensical mantras, like 'For the many not the few'.

    Or Brexit Means Brexit?
  • eekeek Posts: 30,802
    Cyclefree said:

    Voting to extend is all very well but haven't they heard the EU say that Britain has to provide a reasoned justification as to what the extension is going to be for.

    Buggering about some more, I'm guessing, will not pass the EU's reasoned justification test.

    True but how do we get Parliament to make any decision in the time left. I suspect we end up with Revoke, new Tory leader and a General Election almost be default..

    Mind you that could equally be No Deal, 6 months of increasing pain, a new Tory Leader and a General election with Corbyn winning 400 seats.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,874
    IanB2 said:

    The big story is that the government has already spent £4,200,000,000 of our tax income on preparing for the no deal scenario that Parliament is about to rule out of question.

    This vote doesn't stop no deal.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 5,137
    williamglenn said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Ironic that the EU are taking a leaf of the ERGs book and publically refusing to take No Deal off the table.

    The EU can't force us to revoke Article 50.
    But they can refuse to extend it. Which would rule out the GE and EURef2 escape routes.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Peter_the_Punter said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr Pennycook accuses the government of "endlessly repeating the nonsensical mantra that no deal is better than a bad deal".

    That, he argues, "desensitised many people in this country to the risks involved".

    I certainly hope no one else ever endlessly repeats nonsensical mantras, like 'For the many not the few'.

    Or Brexit Means Brexit?
    That one was even worse, yes.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,486
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
    Bottom line is that the ERG leavers had their chance and have blown it.

    That puts the whole question of Brexit (being trashed in the Commons with almost every speech) back on the table.
    I struggle with how some of the more passionate ones who think any Brexit would be terrible can not support revocation. Yes, referendum and all that, but if any Brexit is as bad as they say, and they don't feel bound by the first referendum, why should they risk any Brexit in a second? It might be the best they can hope for, but I don't know that it is logically coherent to say any Brexit is a tragedy but that it'll be ok if the public vote for it...the second time.

    Those who want a vote to prevent no deal is more reasonable.
    The right answer for the country is obviously revocation. The question is how to get there with democratic endorsement.
    You can't. If you revoke you have decided democracy no longer matters. I am sure many politicians, not least Corbyn, are going to be very happy with that precedent.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    ydoethur said:

    timmo said:

    IanB2 said:

    Canada bans 737 Max flights - isolates Trump and the US

    Hearing Trump is ordering FAA to ground them in the states as well..
    Confirmed:
    https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/h_90b712a98f5346d3ffddcbb61990aa40
    Not before bloody time...
    This is the sort of thing that might increase Trump's popularity with voters. I'm not sure most other presidents would have done the same thing, they would have just gone along with the decision of the official air authority.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/13/brussels-will-tell-theresa-may-ask-long-brexit-extension/

    This completely contradicts what the EU were saying publicly yesterday.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    edited March 2019
    Fox has lost it.

    This is the moment Brexit dies.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    eek said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Voting to extend is all very well but haven't they heard the EU say that Britain has to provide a reasoned justification as to what the extension is going to be for.

    Buggering about some more, I'm guessing, will not pass the EU's reasoned justification test.

    True but how do we get Parliament to make any decision in the time left. I suspect we end up with Revoke, new Tory leader and a General Election almost be default..

    Mind you that could equally be No Deal, 6 months of increasing pain, a new Tory Leader and a General election with Corbyn winning 400 seats.
    LMAO, not even in my wildest of crack fantasies.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,751
    He said ‘good conservative management’ with a straight face. :D
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,784
    eek said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandbach another MP making the point that voting for the government's deal twice is respect enough for the referendum result.

    More and more people on the deal side are trying to dissuade the government from trying MV3 it seems - essentially saying don't count on new switchers to get it over the line, I'm done.
    Bottom line is that the ERG leavers had their chance and have blown it.

    That puts the whole question of Brexit (being trashed in the Commons with almost every speech) back on the table.
    I struggle with how some of the more passionate ones who think any Brexit would be terrible can not support revocation. Yes, referendum and all that, but if any Brexit is as bad as they say, and they don't feel bound by the first referendum, why should they risk any Brexit in a second? It might be the best they can hope for, but I don't know that it is logically coherent to say any Brexit is a tragedy but that it'll be ok if the public vote for it...the second time.

    Those who want a vote to prevent no deal is more reasonable.
    The right answer for the country is obviously revocation. The question is how to get there with democratic endorsement.
    The question everyone is currently asking is how do I get there without getting the blame.
    Might be a little unfair to them but don't the DUP have the perfect qualifications for scapegoats?
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,742
    kle4 said:

    Peter_the_Punter said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr Pennycook accuses the government of "endlessly repeating the nonsensical mantra that no deal is better than a bad deal".

    That, he argues, "desensitised many people in this country to the risks involved".

    I certainly hope no one else ever endlessly repeats nonsensical mantras, like 'For the many not the few'.

    Or Brexit Means Brexit?
    That one was even worse, yes.
    Strong And Stable Leadership (In The National Interest) has to be the winner, surely?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Gallowgate said:

    He said ‘good conservative management’ with a straight face. :D

    And people say he is not a talented professional. He must be to manage that.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    IanB2 said:

    Fox has lost it.

    This is the moment Brexit dies.

    Says the bloke who rubbishes brexit nigh on every post.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,251
    Heidi Allen is going to move the Spelman-Dromey motion:

    https://twitter.com/heidiallen75/status/1105902971030786050
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,274
    IanB2 said:

    Fox has lost it.

    This is the moment Brexit dies.

    I have heard that so many times, I have even said it myself but it is still default
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    Floater said:

    IanB2 said:

    Fox has lost it.

    This is the moment Brexit dies.

    Says the bloke who rubbishes brexit nigh on every post.
    Are you listening to the desperation in his speech?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    kle4 said:

    Peter_the_Punter said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr Pennycook accuses the government of "endlessly repeating the nonsensical mantra that no deal is better than a bad deal".

    That, he argues, "desensitised many people in this country to the risks involved".

    I certainly hope no one else ever endlessly repeats nonsensical mantras, like 'For the many not the few'.

    Or Brexit Means Brexit?
    That one was even worse, yes.
    No deal better than a bad deal?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    numbertwelve said:

    kle4 said:

    Peter_the_Punter said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr Pennycook accuses the government of "endlessly repeating the nonsensical mantra that no deal is better than a bad deal".

    That, he argues, "desensitised many people in this country to the risks involved".

    I certainly hope no one else ever endlessly repeats nonsensical mantras, like 'For the many not the few'.

    Or Brexit Means Brexit?
    That one was even worse, yes.
    Strong And Stable Leadership (In The National Interest) has to be the winner, surely?
    That actually means something even if it was not true though (in fairness 'for the many not the few' means about as much and is a snappy slogan even if everyone says they are for the many). Brexit means Brexit could mean pretty much anything though.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,512
    IanB2 said:

    Fox has lost it.

    This is the moment Brexit dies.

    That's a ridiculous post.

    It implies there was a time the disagraced national security risk had 'it.'
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,942
    Ah we're back!

    And just in time to get "No Deal" off the table! :D
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,751
    edited March 2019
    So are tories whipping against this amendment??
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,529
    edited March 2019
    Spelman amendment is moved by Cooper

    Edit/division
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    edited March 2019
    numbertwelve said:

    kle4 said:

    Peter_the_Punter said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr Pennycook accuses the government of "endlessly repeating the nonsensical mantra that no deal is better than a bad deal".

    That, he argues, "desensitised many people in this country to the risks involved".

    I certainly hope no one else ever endlessly repeats nonsensical mantras, like 'For the many not the few'.

    Or Brexit Means Brexit?
    That one was even worse, yes.
    Strong And Stable Leadership (In The National Interest) has to be the winner, surely?
    Aren't 'strong and stable' and 'for the many not the few' just slogans whereas 'no deal is better than a bad deal' is actually something of a policy position, maybe a slogan as well....

    His arguments about desensitising the country can't really apply to the slogans because they aren't really policy positions.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    Cooper moves Spelman.
  • twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,641
    Bercow looks crazed. The whole lot of them have driven themselves batshit over Brexit. I love a bit of chaos!
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025