EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[DynamicSpirit]

Currently, they seem to be suggesting to go with the proceeding that gathered the most positive votes. While that's an easy way of getting out of the stalemate, it isn't a very good way of doing it.

Well based on those results, a 2nd referendum and going for a customs union are the only two options that are even remotely in the running. They were defeated but only by a few votes. Every other option was massively defeated - in all but one case by well over 100 votes.

 

[fowler9]

Well this is what happens when you try and run a large economy based on the outcome of a referendum with a tiny majority most of whom had little to no idea (on both sides) what they were voting for.

 

[bramling]

A new PM can't alter the mathematics of the House. All they can do is alter/scrap the Withdrawl Bill - which I'm not sure they can - and come up with something better...and then find it still can't get a majority. I bet May now wishes, after MV2, she's simply said "referendum - my deal or remain" and got it off her back. I'm sure others would have, but she's too bloody-minded and that's been the problem all along. Red lines, wouldn't listen, look where we are. At least we're not leaving tomorrow, some comfort there.

What a new PM would hopefully be able to do is communicate better and hopefully gain more widespread buy-in to whatever road they decide to go down. May has been terrible in this respect, and at least some of the problem stems from the disastrous 2017 election.

Having said that I’d prefer to have Theresa May calling the shots over Oliver Letwin, who not so many years ago was regarded as a bumbling laughing stock who couldn’t be trusted near anything serious!

 

[fowler9]

What a new PM would hopefully be able to do is communicate better and hopefully gain more widespread buy-in to whatever road they decide to go down. May has been terrible in this respect, and at least some of the problem stems from the disastrous 2017 election.

Having said that I’d prefer to have Theresa May calling the shots over Oliver Letwin, who not so many years ago was regarded as a bumbling laughing stock who couldn’t be trusted near anything serious!

Got to admit mate I fail to see which candidate would be suitable.

 

[bramling]

Well based on those results, a 2nd referendum and going for a customs union are the only two options that are even remotely in the running. They were defeated but only by a few votes. Every other option was massively defeated - in all but one case by well over 100 votes.

No deal is presumably very much still in the running if the EU lose patience, their supply of which must now surely be running very thin indeed. Is no deal better to the EU than potentially many more months of Westminster procrastination?

Could May call a my deal versus more procrastination referendum? And if it got a majority (which is probably would) would Labour then feel obliged to vote it through? Where would that leave the DUP arrangement?

 

[bramling]

Got to admit mate I fail to see which candidate would be suitable.

I agree. The field of candidates is pretty awful, and that applies to all the parties. One of our big problems is the lack of credible leadership talent. This is one of the reasons why May got it in the first place.

Goodness knows what would happen if a general election was called now. All the parties have stings in their tails, even the SNP.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Not mentioned among all the indicative votes hubbub is that the Statutory Instrument required to legally delay Brexit as per the agreement with the EU last week was passed. So B-day is now officially 12th April or 22nd May depending on whether Parliament can actually find something to agree on.

 

[HH]

Erm you did say that -

Erm, no I didn't. Your comprehension needs improving. I made a general statement, but didn't say it applied to everybody.

I didnt make any claim so I dont have to provide you with any evidence to the contrary - if you're going to make such a statement then it is up to you to prove it not for me nor anyone else to disporve it. Thats kind of how these thigns work and why we are in such a bloody mess with it all right now becvause of people making false claims that they cant back up - get it now?

No. I don't have to prove it any more than you have to disprove it. it's an opinion, just like yours is. Get it now?

 

[Starmill]

I'm absolutely astounded the Speaker said this afternoon that with regard to a 'Paving Motion' to say that the House wishes to consider or debate something, or a 'Notwithstanding Motion' to allow the House to set aside a 'Standing Order' that "the Table Office has been instructed that no such motions will be accepted". Is he really allowed to do that???

It seems uncertain that a paving motion would even pass but if it did then clearly a debate and the so-called 'Meaningful Vote 3' would be an exceptional circumstance and 'the will of the House' - which Mr Bercow has always said it is his intention to uphold even in the face of convention.

Of course, set against this is the clear evidence that two votes have already been held and both were firmly decisive. There is inadequate as yet evidence that a different result would come from considering the question a third time. For my part I'm totally clear I don't want the Government to win this vote, and I dislike strongly the idea of it being held again. However, I'm still surprised at this latest intervention from the Speaker.

 

[edwin_m]

Of course, set against this is the clear evidence that two votes have already been held and both were firmly decisive. There is inadequate as yet evidence that a different result would come from considering the question a third time. For my part I'm totally clear I don't want the Government to win this vote, and I dislike strongly the idea of it being held again. However, I'm still surprised at this latest intervention from the Speaker.

Pretty much agree with that, with the proviso that the indicative vote process should be allowed to run its course first. It seems to have always been the plan to have another vote on the better-supported options, some of which got more votes than May's deal. For example the customs union fell only a few votes short and the referendum got the most votes in favour - would combining the two result in a majority? If this second round didn't result in consensus then that could be enough reason to bring back May's deal for another vote.

I also think May offering to resign if her deal is passed exposes the true motivation of those who immediately lined up behind it - either personal ambition or they want to be in a position to make the long-term relationship much harder. The only way that could be stopped would be for enough moderate Tories to defect, and put us back in the position of no majority for anything.

 

[Groningen]

Would a new PM solve all the current problems? The DUP is still against the deal TM made in Brussel. Would the talks with Brussel start all over again? Around 46 Labour members of Parlement voted against the People's Vote.

 

[nlogax]

Would a new PM solve all the current problems? The DUP is still against the deal TM made in Brussel. Would the talks with Brussel start all over again? Around 46 Labour members of Parlement voted against the People's Vote.

At this stage god only knows. Unless Monday yields something around which MPs could properly coalesce, it's difficult to see where we go from here.

 

[SteveP29]

Not terrifited, rightly annoyed that they come in and do jobs that either should not be done or accept poor conditions and drive wages down.

What jobs do they do that just don't need doing?
List some please and reasons why they don't need doing.

Clue, if somebody is prepared to pay somebody to do something, then that job needs doing.
I would say your list is going to be considerably less than one job.

For starters, vetting is easier - especially for 'minor' offences that could escalate once in the UK. At least if they are in another country they are well away. It is a bonus is if their retained social mechanisms in their home country prevent them from re-offending at any level.

Edit: It also prevents them from being an embarassment to their own country.

So, we keep all foreigners out because they 'might' commit a minor offence?
Does that mean we leave opportunities open for white British to commit these minor offences?
If that's the case, you can't say that the UK isn't an equal opportunities country

 

[HH]

At this stage god only knows. Unless Monday yields something around which MPs could properly coalesce, it's difficult to see where we go from here.

Certainly only an omniscient being could know what will happen from here, with everyone knowing what they don't want, but the only few that know what they do want (i.e. some MPs) are more worried about their career prospects than what's best for the country.

It's a mad dog's (or maybe a mad god's) Brexit and we're doomed.

 

[Esker-pades]

Currently, the UK is a bus which is approaching a T-junction. It has multiple drivers. This is what happened last night:
"Shall we go left"? No!
"Shall we go right?" No!
"Shall we drive forwards into a ditch"? No!
"Shall we go back?" No!
"Shall we go right but drive in the wrong side of the road?" No!
"Shall we go left but really slowly?" No!
"Shall we ask the people on the bus what they want to do?" No!
"Shall we just stay here?" No!

Options that are left:
Hope that the bus is a reincarnation of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang and can fly off into the sunset.

(Guess which one is which.)

 

[SteveP29]

That plus geography means that I rarely bother to leave the UK; quite frankly before any laws have come into play I have already decided that it's not worth the bother.

I bet you go down a right storm at parties.
What's the quote? Misery loves company?

 

[Howardh]

Certainly only an omniscient being could know what will happen from here, with everyone knowing what they don't want, but the only few that know what they do want (i.e. some MPs) are more worried about their career prospects than what's best for the country.

It's a mad dog's (or maybe a mad god's) Brexit and we're doomed.

Perhaps if there was an ultimate time limit - say 4pm next Friday, where something HAD to have a majority OR Article 50 is pulled then a few minds might be concentrated. Could also write a majority OR no deal - so MP's have to vote on which happens if they can't reach a conclusion and if they can't get there then it's no-one's fault except their own.

But they couldn't even fix a default position if they ran out of time, legally it's no-deal but they've voted that down. Maybe they could franchise out the decision to the Scots Parliament??

 

[edwin_m]

Just noticed that the Indpendents didn't vote for the customs union option. If that comes back in the proposed further discussion on Monday, then coupled with a referendum it has a chance of being agreed.

However before that there is the rumoured jiggery-pokery of putting May's withdrawal agreement to the vote without the accompanying political declaration. I can't see that working because the declaration contains the mitigations and mollifcations associated with the backstop. But if it does then there are two elephant traps ahead - the departure gets delayed but becomes inevitable unless the EU elections are actioned beforehand, and May would have left the field open for a successor to propose whatever they like in the political declaration.

Perhaps if there was an ultimate time limit - say 4pm next Friday, where something HAD to have a majority OR Article 50 is pulled then a few minds might be concentrated. Could also write a majority OR no deal - so MP's have to vote on which happens if they can't reach a conclusion and if they can't get there then it's no-one's fault except their own.

Revoking A50 automatically the day before expiry of EU membership if there is no deal in the meantime was one of the more heavily defeated options yesterday.

 

[SHD]

Currently, the UK is a bus which is approaching a T-junction. It has multiple drivers. This is what happened last night:
"Shall we go left"? No!
"Shall we go right?" No!
"Shall we drive forwards into a ditch"? No!
"Shall we go back?" No!
"Shall we go right but drive in the wrong side of the road?" No!
"Shall we go left but really slowly?" No!
"Shall we ask the people on the bus what they want to do?" No!
"Shall we just stay here?" No!

Options that are left:
Hope that the bus is a reincarnation of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang and can fly off into the sunset.

(Guess which one is which.)

You forgot to add that the bus’ fuel supply will be forcefully cut off in minutes and that a blizzard is coming.

 

[Groningen]

So when will the third vote be?

 

[Esker-pades]

So when will the third vote be?

Friday. I think.

 

[Howardh]

Just noticed that the Indpendents didn't vote for the customs union option. If that comes back in the proposed further discussion on Monday, then coupled with a referendum it has a chance of being agreed.

However before that there is the rumoured jiggery-pokery of putting May's withdrawal agreement to the vote without the accompanying political declaration. I can't see that working because the declaration contains the mitigations and mollifcations associated with the backstop. But if it does then there are two elephant traps ahead - the departure gets delayed but becomes inevitable unless the EU elections are actioned beforehand, and May would have left the field open for a successor to propose whatever they like in the political declaration.


Revoking A50 automatically the day before expiry of EU membership if there is no deal in the meantime was one of the more heavily defeated options yesterday.

So was May's deal but it keeps coming back....

 

[Howardh]

Friday. I think.

The DUP have been reported to be back in Northern Ireland - or at least in transit. Sorry, Theresa, they'll be back tomorrow to vote you down. Unless Flybe or British Airways collapses overnight.

 

[Aictos]

The only thing I don't want to see despite seeing many calling for it on social media is a general election, I rather the UK resolves the Brexit Emergency first and let the dust settle then waste resources on a general election.

I may be in the minority but I don't believe that a general election called right now is the right thing for the UK no matter who insists on calling one.

 

[Groningen]

From what i understand of the Dutch media tomorrow the third vote will be about the Backstop. The future relation with the EU is not included in the vote.

 

[edwin_m]

From what i understand of the Dutch media tomorrow the third vote will be about the Backstop. The future relation with the EU is not included in the vote.

It's just the withdrawal agreement without the political agreement. Several big problems with separating them as I said a few posts back. Not to mention that May ruled out separating them back in January.

 

[mmh]

It's just the withdrawal agreement without the political agreement. Several big problems with separating them as I said a few posts back. Not to mention that May ruled out separating them back in January.

That'll be the same May who's famously told the Commons 108 times we're leaving the EU tomorrow.

Anything can happen, and right now it could be worth thinking of the most ridiculous thing that could and going and putting a bet on it.

 

[WAB]

Some interesting analysis by Jon Worth as to why MPs should not vote for May's deal:

Jon Worth @Jonworth
https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1111323277107044352

The way the government has drafted this Motion to approve the Withdrawal Agreement tomorrow is really nasty.

It's designed narrowly to fulfil the European Council's criteria so as to set 22 May as exit date. But then the government would just sit on its hands until 12 April, and once that date is passed there would be no way back for UK as it couldn't organise a European Parliament election.

Once you are beyond 12 April, asking for a further extension to the #Article50 period would be a legal nightmare. So then, after 12 April, May just has to go "It's My Deal or No Deal".

So MPs must absolutely NOT fall for this ruse tomorrow. It would open the way for them to be subject to pressure and blackmail from May and the government the like which we have not seen so far. In short: it's a despicable move.

 

[Struner]

(withdrawn, obsolete, took me too long to answer - cooking, way more important )

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Some interesting analysis by Jon Worth as to why MPs should not vote for May's deal:

Jon Worth @Jonworth
https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1111323277107044352

Interesting, and yes - very nasty if it's true. Is there anywhere that backs up that analysis?