politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » And so MPs move on to vote against leaving the EU with no deal
Comments
-
JRM doing a good impression of the Black Knight from Monty Python.0
-
JRM says we still heading for a no deal0
-
Beeb have got the Weatherspoons bloke on. Everyone he has spoken to (i.e. daytime drinkers) wants No Deal, doncha know?0
-
They could, but they won't.rpjs said:
And whilst this vote doesn't actually say revoke is the will of Parliament, by eliminating the only other possibilities, deal and no-deal, the government could say that Parliament's will is clear and revoke without a further vote.IanB2 said:
If the substantive is clearly passed (with the PM voting in favour), government will have to revoke before getting to no deal.MarqueeMark said:
No Deal continues to slide down the mountain towards 29th March......AndyJS said:Bit of an impasse — parliament votes against the only deal on offer yesterday, and today votes against No Deal. Result = no man's land.
0 -
An ironic thing I don't think has been pointed out enough is this mess is entirely due to May's election.
Had it not been for May's election the government wouldn't have lost this vote by 4.0 -
The EU now know that the Commons will vote for Remain v Deal referendum or even full revoke of Article 50 over No DealSandpit said:
No deal doesn’t die until it’s positively replaced with something else in the eyes of the EU.HYUFD said:
The opposite, the ERG are now faced with No Deal being dead so it is May's Deal or BINO/No Brexit at allsolarflare said:Well that's gone wrong for May, surely.
0 -
To be fair, Tim Martin does know quite a lot about No Deal. Every time I try to order a burger and a pint of proper cider at the same time in a Spoons, that's the exact phrase they use on me.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Beeb have got the Weatherspoons bloke on. Everyone he has spoken to (i.e. daytime drinkers) wants No Deal, doncha know?
0 -
If you want to revoke, you need a change of government.Sean_F said:
They could, but they won't.rpjs said:
And whilst this vote doesn't actually say revoke is the will of Parliament, by eliminating the only other possibilities, deal and no-deal, the government could say that Parliament's will is clear and revoke without a further vote.IanB2 said:
If the substantive is clearly passed (with the PM voting in favour), government will have to revoke before getting to no deal.MarqueeMark said:
No Deal continues to slide down the mountain towards 29th March......AndyJS said:Bit of an impasse — parliament votes against the only deal on offer yesterday, and today votes against No Deal. Result = no man's land.
0 -
Malthouse trounced
For 164 No 3740 -
Malthouse is dead... LOOOLLLL0
-
Malthouse amendment hammered.0
-
The Malthouse unicorn finally meets its maker.0
-
So if we get a different result in this final vote compared to the Spelman amendment vote (i.e. the other way round) then the whole evening's been a waste of time, right?0
-
Mr Moonbeam,
"Beeb have got the Weatherspoons bloke on. Everyone he has spoken to (i.e. daytime drinkers) wants No Deal, doncha know?"
You can't beat Wetherspoons for a cheap meal and a pint. A man with an eye for business and his finger on the pulse.0 -
Haven't they just voted on this?!
0 -
The wisdom of the electorate.Philip_Thompson said:An ironic thing I don't think has been pointed out enough is this mess is entirely due to May's election.
Had it not been for May's election the government wouldn't have lost this vote by 4.0 -
GOVT VOTING AGAINST MAIN MOTION0
-
Malthouse had no chance with the opposition and the ERG against. The same coalition that killed May's deal.0
-
Listening to him just now he looks quite worried and even suggested that Cox has been talking to the DUP this afternoon over MV3Floater said:JRM says we still heading for a no deal
0 -
Government whipping to defeat its own motion following Spelman victory. What a farce.0
-
-
At the time (9th June) I said Tories needed to get rid of May and have another election in the Autumn.Philip_Thompson said:An ironic thing I don't think has been pointed out enough is this mess is entirely due to May's election.
Had it not been for May's election the government wouldn't have lost this vote by 4.0 -
JRM is rattled.0
-
Sounds like he's trying to keep the option of a climb down there.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Listening to him just now he looks quite worried and even suggested that Cox has been talking to the DUP this afternoon over MV3Floater said:JRM says we still heading for a no deal
0 -
Yes though it won't happen.solarflare said:So if we get a different result in this final vote compared to the Spelman amendment vote (i.e. the other way round) then the whole evening's been a waste of time, right?
0 -
This is bloody fantastic tv.0
-
Martin is an odious individual and his pubs are absolute holes.CD13 said:Mr Moonbeam,
"Beeb have got the Weatherspoons bloke on. Everyone he has spoken to (i.e. daytime drinkers) wants No Deal, doncha know?"
You can't beat Wetherspoons for a cheap meal and a pint. A man with an eye for business and his finger on the pulse.0 -
p397
matters already decided during the same session
A motion or an amendment which is the same, in substance, as a question which has been decided during a session may not be brought forward again during that same session. Since 1994 this rule has been applied so that, in the case of ten minute rule motions under Standing Order No 23, refusal by the House of leave to introduce a bill should be treated as the rejection of that bill at a substantive stage, with the effect that a bill with the same or a very similar long title could not be presented again in the same season. Attempts have been made made to evade this rule by raising again, with verbal alterations, the essential portions of motions which have been negatived. Whether the second motion is substantially the same as the first is finally a matter for the judgement of the Chair. In some cases the second motion has been ruled to be substantially the same as an earlier motion. The same rule has been applied to an amendment reviewing reviewing a motion which had been already negatived. Some motions, however, have been framed with sufficient ingenuity to avoid the rule. On rare occasions where the House has been offered a series of alternative proposals for its consideration, an order was made specifically directing the Chair to put the questions or later motions notwithstanding any decision of the House on earlier motions.
However, a question which has not been definitely decided may be raised again. Thus, a motion or amendment which has been withdrawn, or on which the Chair has declared the question not decided when it appeared that fewer than 40 Members had taken part in a division, or for some other reason, may be repeated. In such cases a Member may speak again on the second occasion. Where a certain course in relation to the procedure of the House has been rejected on a particular day, it may be revived on a subsequent day.
Other parts may apply as well, but looks to me like it could be possible for another vote on the WA to be allowed, but that the Chair has wide discretion on it. And it is Bercow.0 -
So what happens if the main (utterly rewritten) motion falls? MV3 tomorrow? What if it passes...?0
-
I haven't got a clue what the effect of all this is.solarflare said:So if we get a different result in this final vote compared to the Spelman amendment vote (i.e. the other way round) then the whole evening's been a waste of time, right?
0 -
The Government has just regained controlsolarflare said:So if we get a different result in this final vote compared to the Spelman amendment vote (i.e. the other way round) then the whole evening's been a waste of time, right?
0 -
Unfortunately JRM and the rest of the DUP/ERG have become drunk on their own publicity and have probably blown Brexit forever.Gallowgate said:JRM is rattled.
0 -
Perhaps not, now the Spelman amendment has passed it's hard to see the government tabling another No Deal vote at a later time, assuming this one fails.solarflare said:So if we get a different result in this final vote compared to the Spelman amendment vote (i.e. the other way round) then the whole evening's been a waste of time, right?
0 -
It is cheap, but the notion that he has spoken to a representative sample of the UK population and they all wanted out without a deal (which is what he was claiming) is nonsense.CD13 said:Mr Moonbeam,
"Beeb have got the Weatherspoons bloke on. Everyone he has spoken to (i.e. daytime drinkers) wants No Deal, doncha know?"
You can't beat Wetherspoons for a cheap meal and a pint. A man with an eye for business and his finger on the pulse.
P.S. I'm definitely not a Mr!0 -
It is very confusing much like the whole processGallowgate said:This is bloody fantastic tv.
0 -
You wouldn't say that if he was a remainer._Anazina_ said:
Martin is an odious individual and his pubs are absolute holes.CD13 said:Mr Moonbeam,
"Beeb have got the Weatherspoons bloke on. Everyone he has spoken to (i.e. daytime drinkers) wants No Deal, doncha know?"
You can't beat Wetherspoons for a cheap meal and a pint. A man with an eye for business and his finger on the pulse.0 -
How can May as our national leader justify voting for the original no to 'no deal' motion but opposing the amended one?
The only difference is the technically inaccurate wording that Spelman/Cooper has deleted. And she is surely setting herself up for yet another defeat.0 -
Just bloody resign already - matters such as these you do what you feel is right and bugger to party policy.tlg86 said:0 -
Three line whip against amended substantive will surely force some resignations,0
-
Hopefully we can get a new Chancellor now.0
-
I wonder if any ERG backed Spelman.0
-
This is looking like a complete clusterfuck for everyone involved in what they wanted to achieve.0
-
This is a farce, but that aspect of it is not. It makes plenty of sense to vote against a motion which has been substantially altered. They'll lose on that, so what? They've lost far worse._Anazina_ said:Government whipping to defeat its own motion following Spelman victory. What a farce.
0 -
Our chances of taking part in the Euro elections must be rising quite fast at the moment.0
-
But it hasn't been altered in any way significantly different from the intent of the original intention of the motion as confirmed by Gove during his opening speech.kle4 said:
This is a farce, but that aspect of it is not. It makes plenty of sense to vote against a motion which has been substantially altered. They'll lose on that, so what? They've lost far worse._Anazina_ said:Government whipping to defeat its own motion following Spelman victory. What a farce.
0 -
https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1104375781919281152_Anazina_ said:
Martin is an odious individual and his pubs are absolute holes.CD13 said:Mr Moonbeam,
"Beeb have got the Weatherspoons bloke on. Everyone he has spoken to (i.e. daytime drinkers) wants No Deal, doncha know?"
You can't beat Wetherspoons for a cheap meal and a pint. A man with an eye for business and his finger on the pulse.0 -
Adam Boulton has just said that if this is defeated Cooper will bitterly regret her move and it would be a huge mistake by her0
-
4 member of cabinet allowed to abstain.. including Rudd... LOLOLOLOLOL0
-
"Brussels will grant an extension to allow time for a general election or a second referendum. It would consider a short extension to give more time to prepare for no deal but is likely to reject a British request for a brief extension to try and get the Brexit deal ratified"Floater said: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.
OH SHIT!!!!!
0 -
Ms Moonbeam,
"It is cheap, but the notion that he has spoken to a representative sample of the UK population and they all wanted out without a deal (which is what he was claiming) is nonsense."
We all live in a mini echo chamber to some extent. In the group I frequent, I suggested we shoot one in ten MPs pour encourager les autres, but I was shouted down for being too soft.0 -
His PM says differently. Plus this way they can claim to ERG they tried to fight their corner.IanB2 said:
But it hasn't been altered in any way significantly different from the intent of the original intention of the motion as confirmed by Gove during his opening speech.kle4 said:
This is a farce, but that aspect of it is not. It makes plenty of sense to vote against a motion which has been substantially altered. They'll lose on that, so what? They've lost far worse._Anazina_ said:Government whipping to defeat its own motion following Spelman victory. What a farce.
0 -
Gauke, Rudd, Clarke all abstained, Cabinet now in open revolt0
-
Why? It's not like the government can sack themIanB2 said:Three line whip against amended substantive will surely force some resignations,
0 -
Laura K says ministers are breaking the whip/abstaining.0
-
BREAKING: some Tory ministers are abstaining.
Could tip the balance against?0 -
I'm a woolly old Liberal at heart, but I can see a case for that, under the present circs.CD13 said:Ms Moonbeam,
"It is cheap, but the notion that he has spoken to a representative sample of the UK population and they all wanted out without a deal (which is what he was claiming) is nonsense."
We all live in a mini echo chamber to some extent. In the group I frequent, I suggested we shoot one in ten MPs pour encourager les autres, but I was shouted down for being too soft.0 -
Good thing all these MPs are so busy congratulating themselves
The BBC's Europe Editor says that the EU is warning that the first amendment still does not take no-deal off the table.
She says that the EU states unless MPs rally round a plan, then no-deal will happen by default.
"The EU is saying 'please, be realistic'," she says.
"It is still not clear" if there is one particular plan for Brexit that MPs would vote for.
MPs on all sides still in virtue signalling mode.0 -
This vote will pass if the first one did I think...0
-
Presumably they voted against on the amendment?IanB2 said:BREAKING: some Tory ministers are abstaining.
Could tip the balance against?0 -
Surely if all these ministers voted against Spelman but are now abstaining it will fly through?Slackbladder said:This vote will pass if the first one did I think...
0 -
JRM has turned out to be a real dickhead.GIN1138 said:
Unfortunately JRM and the rest of the DUP/ERG have become drunk on their own publicity and have probably blown Brexit forever.Gallowgate said:JRM is rattled.
0 -
Doesn't that just mean it must be ratified before the end date, ie if you are to MV3, it has to be this week?viewcode said:
"Brussels will grant an extension to allow time for a general election or a second referendum. It would consider a short extension to give more time to prepare for no deal but is likely to reject a British request for a brief extension to try and get the Brexit deal ratified"Floater said: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.
OH SHIT!!!!0 -
If the substantive goes down we really are in chaos0
-
They abstained on first vote but will no doubt on this one too... its all very unclear.Gallowgate said:
Surely if all these ministers voted against Spelman but are now abstaining it will fly through?Slackbladder said:This vote will pass if the first one did I think...
0 -
I'd have thought so - why would no deal suddenly win the day?Gallowgate said:
Surely if all these ministers voted against Spelman but are now abstaining it will fly through?Slackbladder said:This vote will pass if the first one did I think...
0 -
If only there had been some clues to alert us to this.Casino_Royale said:
JRM has turned out to be a real dickhead.GIN1138 said:
Unfortunately JRM and the rest of the DUP/ERG have become drunk on their own publicity and have probably blown Brexit forever.Gallowgate said:JRM is rattled.
0 -
Lol @ "turned out"Casino_Royale said:
JRM has turned out to be a real dickhead.GIN1138 said:
Unfortunately JRM and the rest of the DUP/ERG have become drunk on their own publicity and have probably blown Brexit forever.Gallowgate said:JRM is rattled.
0 -
at least 4 cabinet ministers abstained, including Rudd, Mundell, Gauke...0
-
They cannot say they haven't been warned. They really are poor at thisCasino_Royale said:
JRM has turned out to be a real dickhead.GIN1138 said:
Unfortunately JRM and the rest of the DUP/ERG have become drunk on their own publicity and have probably blown Brexit forever.Gallowgate said:JRM is rattled.
0 -
Dickhead's the word. I used to think he was an amusing oddball.Casino_Royale said:
JRM has turned out to be a real dickhead.GIN1138 said:
Unfortunately JRM and the rest of the DUP/ERG have become drunk on their own publicity and have probably blown Brexit forever.Gallowgate said:JRM is rattled.
0 -
Nothing changes !!!!IanB2 said:If the substantive goes down we really are in chaos
0 -
He visited a local pub where I live and I was tempted to go and tell him he was factually incorrect about many things he says the EU does. I decided not to go as I feared for my safety plus I did not want to line his pockets or my stomach with his beer! An example of him being factually incorrect in the last 6 months was when he claimed that European commissioners decided the level of immigration into the UK, which is wrong. European commissioners have zero influence on UK immigration policy and it is absurd to say they do as they patently do not. The bloke talks out of his arse! An ignorant man who mixes with his own kind creating an infinite feed back loop of stupidity!AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
It is cheap, but the notion that he has spoken to a representative sample of the UK population and they all wanted out without a deal (which is what he was claiming) is nonsense.CD13 said:Mr Moonbeam,
"Beeb have got the Weatherspoons bloke on. Everyone he has spoken to (i.e. daytime drinkers) wants No Deal, doncha know?"
You can't beat Wetherspoons for a cheap meal and a pint. A man with an eye for business and his finger on the pulse.
P.S. I'm definitely not a Mr!0 -
My head is spinning0
-
Bad Al Cambell has nearly jizzed his pants on Sky0
-
Ayes 321 Noes 278
Government defeated, Parliament takes control0 -
That hasn't existed for a long time. All this talk of people needing to resign voting against May - who cares? She has no authority in her cabinet or her governmenttlg86 said:
So much for collective cabinet ministerial responsibility.HYUFD said:Gauke, Rudd, Clarke all abstained, Cabinet now in open revolt
321 to 278 says Taxi for May0 -
"Government" motion as amended passes despite being three-line opposed by the government that tabled it.
321 v 2780 -
LOLOLOL clear clear pass....!!!0
-
"his pubs are absolute holes."
The food is cheap and they're very popular. I'm not sure a Michelin-starred eatery will be a better gauge of public opinion.0 -
It's called Brexit nausea, and it is quite serious.twistedfirestopper3 said:My head is spinning
0 -
Far from it, this tells the ERG it is May's Deal or No Brexit/BINORochdalePioneers said:
That hasn't existed for a long time. All this talk of people needing to resign voting against May - who cares? She has no authority in her cabinet or her governmenttlg86 said:
So much for collective cabinet ministerial responsibility.HYUFD said:Gauke, Rudd, Clarke all abstained, Cabinet now in open revolt
321 to 278 says Taxi for May0 -
shes' really not going to try 'nothing has changed.....?????'0
-
God, she is so awful.0
-
Yup.Slackbladder said:shes' really not going to try 'nothing has changed.....?????'
0 -
It's gone from bad to worse for the Tories !0
-
That's pretty much what they've been saying all along.viewcode said:
"Brussels will grant an extension to allow time for a general election or a second referendum. It would consider a short extension to give more time to prepare for no deal but is likely to reject a British request for a brief extension to try and get the Brexit deal ratified"Floater said: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.
OH SHIT!!!!!0 -
Okay this is now absolute chaos. More of the same tomorrow folks!0
-
No. It means that if Parliament has not agreed on anything by the 29th and May asks for a short extension before the 29th, they will allow a short extension to prepare for no deal. This means we will leave with no deal in around May/June, which is the event I'm not covered for.kle4 said:
Doesn't that just mean it must be ratified before the end date, ie if you are to MV3, it has to be this week?viewcode said:
"Brussels will grant an extension to allow time for a general election or a second referendum. It would consider a short extension to give more time to prepare for no deal but is likely to reject a British request for a brief extension to try and get the Brexit deal ratified"Floater said: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.
OH SHIT!!!!0 -
How the hell can May carry on? She is finished.0
