Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Europe IV: The Final Hour

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Europe IV: The Final Hour



    Barnier has said that the door to a long extension to Article 50 remains open but in essential the EU will require a damned good reason to accept the request and to take on all the disruption and risk that comes with allowing it and reminds MP's that for all their voting in the last week only one deal is on the table, the one they hate the most.
    Last edited by Neon Ignition; 31-01-2020, 09:32.

    #2


    The Cabinet Secretary has 'leaked' a memo breaking down the effects of No Deal

    Comment


      #3
      Even knowing that a No Deal Brexit would be a total mess, some of that seems alarmist. Yep, NI could be a total train wreck and I hate to think of the long term consequences there if that happens given the progress that has been made over the last few decades. But the judicial system stuff and making the UK less safe? I don't know. There will be less flow of information certainly and you're going to have a whole bunch of lawyers getting well paid to replace laws and systems that came through the EU over the last few decades but I'm not totally seeing this. Maybe I just don't know enough about the consequences in those areas.

      Comment


        #4
        Thing is DT, would you trust this current government to run the country in a national crisis that required wartime-style measures, even if they were able to act in good faith? Me neither. (And I don’t think Corbyn would be any better, just beholden to a different ideological orthodoxy.)

        Comment


          #5


          May is holding her lengthy meeting at the moment to work out how best to tackle a fourth vote on her deal but a new update has said that clerks in the commons have been working to make it as clear as possible to the Government that Speaker Bercow will not entertain having another vote on her deal. If Bercow, presumably within the coming 48 hours, is required to publicly state that the deal can never return for another vote it will mean that May's approach is finally finished and the full bracing for No Deal will begin.

          Comment


            #6


            From the pre-cabinet meeting it's being said that if May faced No Deal or Revoke Article 50 she would opt for No Deal.

            She's said to be discussing ways of getting around Bercows ban on a fourth vote but on the basis that they need more support and the DUP won't give it, this means bringing her deal back in a way that appeals to Labour members. The Tory party is said to be too fractured to be able to endure a General Election currently so one of the ideas being floated is to bring May's Deal back with a Second Referendum attached to it along with an Article 50 extension to the end of the year which means May's preferred option along with the SNPs move forward with enough Labour support to push it over the finish line.


            The actual meetings conversation may dither from this but it's blatantly the obvious way forward especially as Letwin is said to be giving up on plans for a third run of Indicative Voting. If they don't do something like this they won't be able to avoid or survive No Deal.

            Comment


              #7
              How can anyone justify a fourth vote on the deal?

              Comment


                #8
                How did she justify a second?

                Comment


                  #9
                  Apparently her deal remains viable because it's the only official one in play and MP's haven't shown any majority for anything else. For all the last months wrangling the country's official and only choice is May's Deal or No Deal and by overwhelmingly voting against No Deal it means her deal has to remain in play.

                  However, parliamentary rules means she has to be able to clearly justify each return vote with change. The first vote was the official one, the second was with her 'agreed changes' that were minimal, the third wasn't an official vote and now we face a fourth but she needs a significant change to it. If the EU won't allow any changes then something domestic has to be bolted on and a 2nd Ref is really the only card they can play without the EU having to be asked to reopen the deal.

                  Pray... pray to god that it happens...

                  Comment


                    #10
                    They saw a far larger majority against May's deal than all but one of the 2nd round indicative votes compared to May's third time of trying - there is far less disagreement with those than May's deal, even if the total number of votes was higher for May's deal.

                    May's 1st Time: Majority against: 230 (largest in parliamentary history against government)
                    May's 2nd Time: Majority against: 149 (4th largest in parliamentary history against government)
                    May's 3rd Time: Majority against: 58

                    Indicative vote Customs union: Majority against: 3
                    Indicative vote Common market 2.0: Majority against: 23
                    Indicative vote Confirmatory public vote (2nd ref): Majority against: 12
                    Indicative vote Parliamentary supremacy (revoke): Majority against: 102

                    May's deal is well down the list.

                    1st Customs union (Against 3)
                    2nd Confirmatory public vote (Against 12)
                    3rd Common market 2.0 (Against 23)
                    4th May's 3rd Try (Against 58)
                    5th Parliamentary supremacy (Against 102)
                    6th May's 2nd Try (Against 149)
                    7th May's 1st Try (Against 230)

                    1st Round Against May

                    1st Customs Union (Proposed by Ken Clarke) Against 8
                    2nd Second Referendum (Proposed by Margaret Beckett) Against 27
                    3rd May's 3rd Try (Against 58)
                    4th Common Market 2.0 (Proposed by Nick Boles) Against 95
                    5th Parliamentary supremacy (Against 102)
                    6th Revoke Article 50 to prevent No Deal (Proposed by Joanna Cherry) Against 109
                    7th May's 2nd Try (Against 149)
                    8th May's 1st Try (Against 230)
                    9th No Deal (Proposed by John Baron) Against 240
                    10th Labour Plan (Proposed by Jeremy Corbyn) Against 257
                    11th Contingent Preferential Arrangements (Proposed by Marcus Fysh) Against 283
                    12th EFTA/EEA (Proposed by George Eustice) Against 312

                    In the 1st round we see No Deal isn't bottom of the list.
                    Last edited by MartyG; 02-04-2019, 12:38.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      That's the trouble though, even if one of the indicative votes managed to creep above the line in a third vote, May is under no requirement to pay attention to it. MP's can vote for anything they like but as the clock runs out they still officially only have her deal or no deal in play so unless she suddenly takes their movements on board (a first) she either amends the circumstances surrounding her deal enough to push it through (without any EU involved alterations) or we crash out. Balls back in her court - and the responsibility

                      Comment


                        #12
                        My ideas:

                        New form of government. You put a manifesto in place, with short term goals (4 years) and long term targets (4-8 years). You have to state how the goals will be measured. If you get into power, you are measured at the end of 4 years. If you achieve less than 50% of goals, then your party is not allowed to run for the next term at all and MPs have to go back to their other jobs for the next 4 years. If you make it to a second term, then you also have to achieve a new 50% of short term and 25% of long term goals.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          The trouble with having concrete promises is you run into the very problem we're facing now: the people voted for Brexit.

                          So now we have to because that was the promise, even though it turned out to be a very bad idea. What you're suggesting is the promises made will have to be carried out, even if it turns out those promises were a load of gumpf (which most of them are generally); what looked good four or eight years ago may be the polar opposite of what is needed in the now.

                          What you'll end up with is no MPs, or manifestos full of silly little things that can definitely be done so the 50% threshold is met.
                          Last edited by MartyG; 02-04-2019, 14:54.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Pfft. Details. It's a flawless plan. No worse than what we have now.

                            But seriously, if it was a business, and people were pitching for a contract, they'd tell you what they were going to do, the business (british people) would vote on who they think best to deliver, and on-board them. If they didn't deliver, they'd get sued, or not paid or something. We can't sue the government, but there must be some way to penalise them without putting them off trying. Any other ideas?

                            And also, would we really end up with no MPs? Maybe we'd end up with people who are happy to make a difference for 4 years, to leave a legacy and point to something and say "I achieved that".Career politicians on a gravy train aren't compelled to make a difference.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              I’ve said it before but why isn’t representing your constituency handled like jury service? It’s your civic duty and if you have a good reason not to do it you will be excused. No room for career politicians then. Ban lobbying and political parties too. And ditch all the traditional nonsense you see and hear at parliament and run things properly.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X