Sam Gyimah, the universities and science minister, has resigned in protest at the Government’s “naive” Brexit plan, saying that any deal we strike with Brussels will be “EU first”
Er, hold on, 'any deal'? Ok, seriously, why would he not have resigned well before now then if he thinks any deal would be unacceptable?
Seems like in his comments he's doing it so we can Remain. Which is a point of view one can hold, but given his comments that any deal would in essence be unacceptable I don't see why the latest comments on Gallileo were the tipping point for him.
He means any deal on the future relationship.
How does that make a difference? He thinks any deal on the future relationship won't work for us, so no matter what the WA was he presumably thinks the same thing, in which case what did he think they have been doing for 2 years?
As May's deal is getting supported by Leadsom - and Norway is reportedly being supported by Gove - can we assume that the initial 5 Cabinet Refuseniks didn't actually come up with the changes they wanted to put to the EU to make the difference?
VONC can be tabled at any time and normally take precedence
Are these normal times and why on earth would Corbyn do that before the meaningful vote. He is not doing that well in the polls and playing politics in this situation would not go down well
Sam Gyimah, the universities and science minister, has resigned in protest at the Government’s “naive” Brexit plan, saying that any deal we strike with Brussels will be “EU first”
Er, hold on, 'any deal'? Ok, seriously, why would he not have resigned well before now then if he thinks any deal would be unacceptable?
Seems like in his comments he's doing it so we can Remain. Which is a point of view one can hold, but given his comments that any deal would in essence be unacceptable I don't see why the latest comments on Gallileo were the tipping point for him.
He was on Question Time not that long ago defending Mrs May and Brexit... You do have to wonder about most of our politicians don't you?
Sam Gyimah, the universities and science minister, has resigned in protest at the Government’s “naive” Brexit plan, saying that any deal we strike with Brussels will be “EU first”
Er, hold on, 'any deal'? Ok, seriously, why would he not have resigned well before now then if he thinks any deal would be unacceptable?
Seems like in his comments he's doing it so we can Remain. Which is a point of view one can hold, but given his comments that any deal would in essence be unacceptable I don't see why the latest comments on Gallileo were the tipping point for him.
He was on Question Time not that long ago defending Mrs May and Brexit... You do have to wonder about most of our politicians don't you?
Do the cabinet wonders think they can just rock up to Brussels "I'd like the Norway fillet please".
2/3 of Parliament does, why wouldn't half the Cabinet?
Tusk went through the menu today.
"No deal soup", "Deal bisque", "Remain with mash and gravy". I didn't hear him mention "Norway fillet".
Well, what would he know about the EU and relationships with the EU, he's just bluffing.
We had better bloody hope so.
We could go with the Norway fillet after the WA, so long as the particular flavour of Norway fillet satisfies the backstop (Customs union sauce I guess). But we could always do that after the WA anyway.
VONC can be tabled at any time and normally take precedence
Are these normal times and why on earth would Corbyn do that before the meaningful vote. He is not doing that well in the polls and playing politics in this situation would not go down well
When the government loses the vote on its most critical policy, which surprisingly many public might still think will not happen, and has a high chance of descending into chaotic bloodletting, it might not go down as poorly as you think. Yes, it would be a distraction from finding a resolution to all this mess, but on the other hand the government really does have a high chance of being completely functionless at that moment. Why shouldn't he try it? Oh no, things might get difficult?
VONC can be tabled at any time and normally take precedence
Are these normal times and why on earth would Corbyn do that before the meaningful vote. He is not doing that well in the polls and playing politics in this situation would not go down well
When the government loses the vote on its most critical policy, which surprisingly many public might still think will not happen, and has a high chance of descending into chaotic bloodletting, it might not go down as poorly as you think. Yes, it would be a distraction from finding a resolution to all this mess, but on the other hand the government really does have a high chance of being completely functionless at that moment. Why shouldn't he try it? Oh no, things might get difficult?
At that time I expect him to.
But now before the debate and vote as some suggested would be an act of utter self harm
Everyone needs to keep this for reference,. This is the procedure the HOC will follow managed by Bercow
Certainly no time for faffing about with "this and that" deal or trying to get a second referendum together.
As I've been saying, basically by January times up so if nothing is in place by then we leave with No Deal.
And we then face the worst recession since the 1930s and the potential breakup of the UK, May's Deal is the only sane Brexit on the cards, the alternative a very divisive EUref2. Gyimah and others should stop attention seeking and focus on getting the best Deal for the UK
Everyone needs to keep this for reference,. This is the procedure the HOC will follow managed by Bercow
Certainly no time for faffing about with "this and that" deal or trying to get a second referendum together.
As I've been saying, basically by January times up so if nothing is in place by then we leave with No Deal.
And we then face the worst recession since the 1930s and the potential breakup of the UK, May's Deal is the only sane Brexit on the cards, the alternative a very divisive EUref2. Gyimah and others should stop attention seeking and focus on getting the best Deal for the UK
Well that ship has sailed. It's over. Nothing but different flavours of chaos now.
As a result of reading it, though, I am finding it harder to see why majority of MPs are not supporting May's deal tbh.
Because they're all a bunch of grandstanding wazzocks that can't wait to show their peacock manes off to the Daily Brexitgraph.
Questions: Even without the backstop, would the single Irish animal health zone place some restriction on the possibility of reaching a full, UK wide, UK-US trade deal?
With the 'technological border' back on the FFA, wouldn't such a fully delivered border, as the Brexiteers have promised they can do (let's set aside practical doubts, they have said they can) plus Canada still be a perfectly valid configuration to exit from the backstop? The FFA envisages a different trade relationship, but is non binding so does not exclude the trade talks going in a different direction under a new leader.
@Williamglenn: I held off this theory for a couple of weeks after your comments, but the re-appearance of the technology border on the FFA surely mean that, IF Boris can deliver fully on all he has proposed, an independent panel could readily lift the Backstop.
Note my view is Boris can't deliver, and permanent backstop would be a real possible if we followed this route. But, I would blame the Brexiteers' lies for this, and not May's holding them good to their promises.
Cripes did he only just notice the Tories are quite a eurosceptic party right now. Has he been to many meetings of his constituency association ?
I know it feels like an eon ago, but but before the referendum the Tories and Labour were both more mixed than they are now. (Anyone remember David Cameron?) Their votership became much more polarised afterwards. Under May the Tories have indeed become the Brexit Party, and the party's fortunes are inextricably linked to it.
Everyone needs to keep this for reference,. This is the procedure the HOC will follow managed by Bercow
Certainly no time for faffing about with "this and that" deal or trying to get a second referendum together.
As I've been saying, basically by January times up so if nothing is in place by then we leave with No Deal.
And we then face the worst recession since the 1930s and the potential breakup of the UK, May's Deal is the only sane Brexit on the cards, the alternative a very divisive EUref2. Gyimah and others should stop attention seeking and focus on getting the best Deal for the UK
Well that ship has sailed. It's over. Nothing but different flavours of chaos now.
Good night all.
Nothing is ever over until the final votes, there will be a big protest vote in the first vote but if that is defeated a second vote should concentrate minds of the consequences if the Deal is rejected again
TM has a max of 21 days to return to parliament with a response duing which time the government cannot be vnoc as long as it complies with the speakers requests
Why do you say the government cannot get VONCed during that time? The EUWA doesn't repeal any part of the FTPA. The EUWA doesn't say it has to be the government at the time the motion is defeated that makes the statement within 21 days.
Those 21 days are solar days.
Some of the other stipulations in the Act use Commons sitting days or Lords sitting days (terms defined in s13(16)), but this one doesn't. So that will be by 1 January then.
It is parliamentary procedure and as long as the government follows the Speakers advice it will not happen. Read the roadmap that lays out the process
I haven't heard of a parliamentary procedure that mandates the Speaker to refuse to allow the opposition to table a motion of no confidence for 3 weeks so long as the Government follows his advice. To which document are you referring when you say "roadmap"?
Nick provided it down thread.
It is the procedure in this case
Thanks. I've read it now - in a tweet from a Commons department. It doesn't say anything about VONCs, and if it said what you thought it did it would be wrong. Just because the Government have 21 statutory days to do something doesn't mean they can't be VONCed during that time.
Theresa May can also rise to her feet as soon as the Deal gets voted down (or indeed before it is tabled) and table a motion for a general election if she wishes. She won't be in breach of the EUWA if she does so.
For those who enjoy thinking about possibilities for future drama:
* the Commons is due to rise on 20 Dec (11 Dec +9 days) and return on 7 January (+27 days)
So if the Deal is voted down and the Government wish to lay their statement before the Commons between 10 and 21 days later, the Speaker will need to recall the Commons for them to do it. Obviously in those circumstances he would.
But if the Opposition want the Commons to be recalled so that they can VONC the Government, then parliamentary procedure says "So what?" The rule is that the Speaker may recall the Commons when requested to by the Government, and if he isn't requested by the Government he doesn't have the authority!
VONC can be tabled at any time and normally take precedence
Even on Christmas Day ?!
Nick is perhaps not quite clear enough. A VoNC can be called at any time when Parliament is sitting. The motion has to be made on the floor of the House so if the House is in recess then there can be no motion and hence no VoNC.
Jeremy Corbyn wants to be Prime Minister. He therefore needs the government to lose a VoNC.
That will only happen, if we're being realistic, if the DUP desert the Conservative Party.
The only circumstances that would happen are if Mrs May's Deal passes the first stage in the House of Commons. At this point, bringing down the Government becomes the DUP's only way to prevent its passage.
So, if you're Jeremy Corbyn, then getting a fair number of your MPs to abstain could potentially destabilise the government. And if it doesn't work, and the Deal is defeated, you will at least have really laid Tory divisions bare - much more so than if its a massive defeat, when it's just May's failure.
VONC can be tabled at any time and normally take precedence
Even on Christmas Day ?!
Nick is perhaps not quite clear enough. A VoNC can be called at any time when Parliament is sitting. The motion has to be made on the floor of the House so if the House is in recess then there can be no motion and hence no VoNC.
True!
RCS's plan has been suggested here before, but it requires a level of devious cunning which, or good or ill, Jeremy doesn't have.
A more likely proposition to my mind is that the DUP get a better offer. Republican though Labour's leadership is, they don't actually plan to do anything to bring Irish union about. If they put that in writing and promise absolutely no change in Ulster's status and no separate customs area, I can see the DUP thinking that they've heard worse. They are, after all, the party who formed a government with Sinn Fein.
VONC can be tabled at any time and normally take precedence
Even on Christmas Day ?!
Nick is perhaps not quite clear enough. A VoNC can be called at any time when Parliament is sitting. The motion has to be made on the floor of the House so if the House is in recess then there can be no motion and hence no VoNC.
Jeremy Corbyn wants to be Prime Minister. He therefore needs the government to lose a VoNC.
That will only happen, if we're being realistic, if the DUP desert the Conservative Party.
The only circumstances that would happen are if Mrs May's Deal passes the first stage in the House of Commons. At this point, bringing down the Government becomes the DUP's only way to prevent its passage.
So, if you're Jeremy Corbyn, then getting a fair number of your MPs to abstain could potentially destabilise the government. And if it doesn't work, and the Deal is defeated, you will at least have really laid Tory divisions bare - much more so than if its a massive defeat, when it's just May's failure.
I half seriously thought that was Labour's plan to start with, the problem is the deal is too unpopular with the Tories that there is no way for Labour to get enough support for it or abstainers to see it through, without it being obviously a political ploy playing chicken with Brexit.
Jeremy Corbyn wants to be Prime Minister. He therefore needs the government to lose a VoNC.
That will only happen, if we're being realistic, if the DUP desert the Conservative Party.
The only circumstances that would happen are if Mrs May's Deal passes the first stage in the House of Commons. At this point, bringing down the Government becomes the DUP's only way to prevent its passage.
So, if you're Jeremy Corbyn, then getting a fair number of your MPs to abstain could potentially destabilise the government. And if it doesn't work, and the Deal is defeated, you will at least have really laid Tory divisions bare - much more so than if its a massive defeat, when it's just May's failure.
Yes but . Losing the single most important piece of legislation of the last 70 years by a record margin also destabilises the government and keeps the opposition together .
TM has a max of 21 days to return to parliament with a response duing which time the government cannot be vnoc as long as it complies with the speakers requests
Why do you say the government cannot get VONCed during that time? The EUWA doesn't repeal any part of the FTPA. The EUWA doesn't say it has to be the government at the time the motion is defeated that makes the statement within 21 days.
Those 21 days are solar days.
Some of the other stipulations in the Act use Commons sitting days or Lords sitting days (terms defined in s13(16)), but this one doesn't. So that will be by 1 January then.
It is parliamentary procedure and as long as the government follows the Speakers advice it will not happen. Read the roadmap that lays out the process
I haven't heard of a parliamentary procedure that mandates the Speaker to refuse to allow the opposition to table a motion of no confidence for 3 weeks so long as the Government follows his advice. To which document are you referring when you say "roadmap"?
Nick provided it down thread.
It is the procedure in this case
Thanks. I've read it now - in a tweet from a Commons department. It doesn't say anything about VONCs, and if it said what you thought it did it would be wrong. Just because the Government have 21 statutory days to do something doesn't mean they can't be VONCed during that time.
Theresa May can also rise to her feet as soon as the Deal gets voted down (or indeed before it is tabled) and table a motion for a general election if she wishes. She won't be in breach of the EUWA if she does so.
For those who enjoy thinking about possibilities for future drama:
* the Commons is due to rise on 20 Dec (11 Dec +9 days) and return on 7 January (+27 days)
So if the Deal is voted down and the Government wish to lay their statement before the Commons between 10 and 21 days later, the Speaker will need to recall the Commons for them to do it. Obviously in those circumstances he would.
But if the Opposition want the Commons to be recalled so that they can VONC the Government, then parliamentary procedure says "So what?" The rule is that the Speaker may recall the Commons when requested to by the Government, and if he isn't requested by the Government he doesn't have the authority!
A VONC can only be tabled whilst Parliament is sitting!
Jeremy Corbyn wants to be Prime Minister. He therefore needs the government to lose a VoNC.
That will only happen, if we're being realistic, if the DUP desert the Conservative Party.
The only circumstances that would happen are if Mrs May's Deal passes the first stage in the House of Commons. At this point, bringing down the Government becomes the DUP's only way to prevent its passage.
So, if you're Jeremy Corbyn, then getting a fair number of your MPs to abstain could potentially destabilise the government. And if it doesn't work, and the Deal is defeated, you will at least have really laid Tory divisions bare - much more so than if its a massive defeat, when it's just May's failure.
Yes but . Losing the single most important piece of legislation of the last 70 years by a record margin also destabilises the government and keeps the opposition together .
I'd think a lot less of an MP who absained on such a measure. Surely an MP, of all people, cannot appear to be unable to make up their mind on this question.
There was, IIRC, little or no talk of an election around Christmas 1973, yet by very early March 1974 it was all done and dusted and a new Government was in place.
Hmm, polls definitely swinging toward leave right now.
Lol @ "definitely". Yes, it was a larger poll, but there is still MoE and the difference between two successive polls doubly so.
The country remains divided and a clear opinion is unlikely to appear until either the economy has collapsed or our streets are covered in unicorn crap, depending on how Brexit goes. Unless the government collapses meantime, of course.
Did all those allegations of President Bush being a serial groper ever get resolved?
I think it was established that he was an occasional 'bottom-patter'.
A small blemish on a life of service to his country, whatever one thinks of his politics.
He was balls deep in Iran Contra. He handed out pardons like candy on the issue.
He continued the GOP persecution complex that somehow Nixon was hard done by and his, and his administrations, nagging sense of Saddam getting one over on him lead to his son's botched Iraq adventure.
The timing of the funeral could have political implications back home, with May being absent at a key moment.
Send Prince Charles? Or else the mice will play......
For Reagan both Chaz and Tone went. Off course, Magz showed up too. Tezza and Jezza H will have to go.
Opportuunity for Vince to stage a coup?
Incidentally, did anyone see last weeks QT? I hear Layla Moran was very good on it; is it worth having a look? I, like many others here I gather, have ceased to bother with it as a regular watch.
I've never heard of Sam Gyimah but anyone who can quit his job with a soundbite as catchy as "We've lost our veto and our vote and gone from rule makers to rule takers" is a politician to watch.
...and if he doesn't make it in politics I can think of several agencies who could do with a copywriter.
Hmm, polls definitely swinging toward leave right now.
Lol @ "definitely". Yes, it was a larger poll, but there is still MoE and the difference between two successive polls doubly so.
The country remains divided and a clear opinion is unlikely to appear until either the economy has collapsed or our streets are covered in unicorn crap, depending on how Brexit goes. Unless the government collapses meantime, of course.
It is also England and Wales, so it imples that there is a slim majority for Remain in all 4 home nations. Leavers have truly failed to convince on the wisdom of Leave, independent of the style of Brexit.
RIP Bush Snr. How far the Republicans have fallen since.
Did all those allegations of President Bush being a serial groper ever get resolved?
I think it was established that he was an occasional 'bottom-patter'.
A small blemish on a life of service to his country, whatever one thinks of his politics.
He was balls deep in Iran Contra. He handed out pardons like candy on the issue.
He continued the GOP persecution complex that somehow Nixon was hard done by and his, and his administrations, nagging sense of Saddam getting one over on him lead to his son's botched Iraq adventure.
IME Nixon does get a bad press, with people using his period in office to deflect blame from presidents before and after. He certainly wasn't as bad as JFK, for instance.
BTW, I'm not saying he was good; just not as bad as made out.
The timing of the funeral could have political implications back home, with May being absent at a key moment.
Send Prince Charles? Or else the mice will play......
For Reagan both Chaz and Tone went. Off course, Magz showed up too. Tezza and Jezza H will have to go.
Opportuunity for Vince to stage a coup?
Incidentally, did anyone see last weeks QT? I hear Layla Moran was very good on it; is it worth having a look? I, like many others here I gather, have ceased to bother with it as a regular watch.
She generally did well, and does have a rather refreshing charm. She appears to be a normal person rather than party hack. A bit naive at times, but I would vote for her.
Did all those allegations of President Bush being a serial groper ever get resolved?
I think it was established that he was an occasional 'bottom-patter'.
A small blemish on a life of service to his country, whatever one thinks of his politics.
He was balls deep in Iran Contra. He handed out pardons like candy on the issue.
He continued the GOP persecution complex that somehow Nixon was hard done by and his, and his administrations, nagging sense of Saddam getting one over on him lead to his son's botched Iraq adventure.
Th Iran Contra scandal was quite something. A government secretetly breaking its own arms embargo so as to raise funds for an endea vor specifically banned by Congress.
But it was "read my lips, no new taxes" that made him that unusual thing, a single term POTUS.
I've never heard of Sam Gyimah but anyone who can quit his job with a soundbite as catchy as "We've lost our veto and our vote and gone from rule makers to rule takers" is a politician to watch.
...and if he doesn't make it in politics I can think of several agencies who could do with a copywriter.
He's my MP. Not especially popular with the voters who see him as a ruthless careerist with zero interest in the local area.
This is an odd development that smacks of manoeuvres really. I wonder if he's on some sort of promise.
Had she lost her bearings by then? The Accidental Mourner....
(Many years back, a friend's mum was passing a church where a funeral was taking place. Saddened that there were hardly any mourners, she went in the church and sat at the back "to make up the numbers a bit".
After the service, she was approached by a couple of Special Branch - and quizzed as to how she knew the deceased....)
I've never heard of Sam Gyimah but anyone who can quit his job with a soundbite as catchy as "We've lost our veto and our vote and gone from rule makers to rule takers" is a politician to watch.
...and if he doesn't make it in politics I can think of several agencies who could do with a copywriter.
He's my MP. Not especially popular with the voters who see him as a ruthless careerist with zero interest in the local area.
This is an odd development that smacks of manoeuvres really. I wonder if he's on some sort of promise.
Yes, very hard to respect such deceitful and hitherto equivocal behaviour, before plunging in a dirty knife at the 11th hour.
So a couple of things are clear with Gyimah’s resignation:
1. As someone said above, Remainers are making their play for a second referendum and I bet Labour will (eventually) join them in supporting one.
2. There may well be a majority in the House for a second ref at that stage.
What I don’t understand is how the Remain people hope to actually engineer that referendum - because it requires primary legislation and (in all likelihood) an extension to article 50, which the government would need to request from the EU.
Therefore, if you want a second vote you’d need to get the government to concede the principle of holding one, or else change the government. Changing the government’s mind seems all but impossible - surely Tory MPs would kick out Theresa May the minute she even suggested a second referendum, and I suspect she’d rather resign that go down that route anyway. And obviously nobody would win the Tory leadership on a second referendum platform, so as soon as Theresa is kicked out/resigns then Tory members surely just replace her with a Brexiteer.
Changing the government requires Tory Remainers to vote down their own government in a VNOC (which I think is unlikely) and precipitates a general election which could take us past 29th March anyway.
This is the crux of it really - No Deal is the default position and was approved by our esteemed Parliamentarians not six months ago. Against this backdrop, I don’t think that MPs really have a choice - if they want to avoid no deal I think they *have* to approve the Withdrawal Agreement. The government can simply close off all other courses of action, including a second vote, even if those alternative courses of action command a majority in the House.
I've never heard of Sam Gyimah but anyone who can quit his job with a soundbite as catchy as "We've lost our veto and our vote and gone from rule makers to rule takers" is a politician to watch.
...and if he doesn't make it in politics I can think of several agencies who could do with a copywriter.
He's my MP. Not especially popular with the voters who see him as a ruthless careerist with zero interest in the local area.
This is an odd development that smacks of manoeuvres really. I wonder if he's on some sort of promise.
As I thought..... one to watch particularly as I believe that when all the dust settles the ex Remainers -which I believe he is-will be in the ascendency
So a couple of things are clear with Gyimah’s resignation:
1. As someone said above, Remainers are making their play for a second referendum and I bet Labour will (eventually) join them in supporting one.
2. There may well be a majority in the House for a second ref at that stage.
What I don’t understand is how the Remain people hope to actually engineer that referendum - because it requires primary legislation and (in all likelihood) an extension to article 50, which the government would need to request from the EU.
Therefore, if you want a second vote you’d need to get the government to concede the principle of holding one, or else change the government. Changing the government’s mind seems all but impossible - surely Tory MPs would kick out Theresa May the minute she even suggested a second referendum, and I suspect she’d rather resign that go down that route anyway. And obviously nobody would win the Tory leadership on a second referendum platform, so as soon as Theresa is kicked out/resigns then Tory members surely just replace her with a Brexiteer.
Changing the government requires Tory Remainers to vote down their own government in a VNOC (which I think is unlikely) and precipitates a general election which could take us past 29th March anyway.
This is the crux of it really - No Deal is the default position and was approved by our esteemed Parliamentarians not six months ago. Against this backdrop, I don’t think that MPs really have a choice - if they want to avoid no deal I think they *have* to approve the Withdrawal Agreement. The government can simply close off all other courses of action, including a second vote, even if those alternative courses of action command a majority in the House.
Theresa is clearly canvassing the people rather than MPs, with the fairly clear implication that the people will be the ones who get to decide on Brexit, if parliament cannot.
Parliament sets the rules, and is free to change them.
There's clearly a lot of MPs who would like said referendum. But the mechanics of it still look tricky. Ignoring the significant matter of question and options, how would it get through the Commons?
I think May could trigger such a vote but the time frame to do so would be small. Her successor as Conservative leader would be unlikely to do so. The mooted Government of National Unity perhaps led by a Ken Clarke type figure could do so, and have the numbers, but the shift and break down in party allegiances would be immense.
Edited extra bit: plan on putting my season review up today, incidentally.
Comments
VONC can be tabled at any time and normally take precedence
"No deal soup", "Deal bisque", "Remain with mash and gravy". I didn't hear him mention "Norway fillet".
We had better bloody hope so.
The headline makes him look thick as mince quite honestly.
But now before the debate and vote as some suggested would be an act of utter self harm
BOB
BINO or remain are increasing by the minute but what happens to the party or politics is anyone's guess
Who will it be in the Sunday papers?
Night all...
Good night all.
Even without the backstop, would the single Irish animal health zone place some restriction on the possibility of reaching a full, UK wide, UK-US trade deal?
With the 'technological border' back on the FFA, wouldn't such a fully delivered border, as the Brexiteers have promised they can do (let's set aside practical doubts, they have said they can) plus Canada still be a perfectly valid configuration to exit from the backstop? The FFA envisages a different trade relationship, but is non binding so does not exclude the trade talks going in a different direction under a new leader.
@Williamglenn: I held off this theory for a couple of weeks after your comments, but the re-appearance of the technology border on the FFA surely mean that, IF Boris can deliver fully on all he has proposed, an independent panel could readily lift the Backstop.
Note my view is Boris can't deliver, and permanent backstop would be a real possible if we followed this route. But, I would blame the Brexiteers' lies for this, and not May's holding them good to their promises.
Theresa May can also rise to her feet as soon as the Deal gets voted down (or indeed before it is tabled) and table a motion for a general election if she wishes. She won't be in breach of the EUWA if she does so.
For those who enjoy thinking about possibilities for future drama:
* the Commons is due to rise on 20 Dec (11 Dec +9 days) and return on 7 January (+27 days)
So if the Deal is voted down and the Government wish to lay their statement before the Commons between 10 and 21 days later, the Speaker will need to recall the Commons for them to do it. Obviously in those circumstances he would.
But if the Opposition want the Commons to be recalled so that they can VONC the Government, then parliamentary procedure says "So what?" The rule is that the Speaker may recall the Commons when requested to by the Government, and if he isn't requested by the Government he doesn't have the authority!
Jeremy Corbyn wants to be Prime Minister. He therefore needs the government to lose a VoNC.
That will only happen, if we're being realistic, if the DUP desert the Conservative Party.
The only circumstances that would happen are if Mrs May's Deal passes the first stage in the House of Commons. At this point, bringing down the Government becomes the DUP's only way to prevent its passage.
So, if you're Jeremy Corbyn, then getting a fair number of your MPs to abstain could potentially destabilise the government. And if it doesn't work, and the Deal is defeated, you will at least have really laid Tory divisions bare - much more so than if its a massive defeat, when it's just May's failure.
RCS's plan has been suggested here before, but it requires a level of devious cunning which, or good or ill, Jeremy doesn't have.
A more likely proposition to my mind is that the DUP get a better offer. Republican though Labour's leadership is, they don't actually plan to do anything to bring Irish union about. If they put that in writing and promise absolutely no change in Ulster's status and no separate customs area, I can see the DUP thinking that they've heard worse. They are, after all, the party who formed a government with Sinn Fein.
Theresa May still needs to resign and she still needs to resign immediately.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46405192
Justine Greening
Both talk a lot about 'young people'
Do I detect a future scenario cabinet?
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1068645983163203585
Whatever you think of his politics, there can be little doubt that he loved his country, and served it with distinction.
http://ww2awartobewon.com/wwii-articles/george-bush-shot-down-rescue/
He was also exceptionally lucky:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chichijima_incident
By the way, have you seen this story:
https://tinyurl.com/ydgf93fk
The chairman of HS2 is facing the sack less than five months after his appointment because of fears that costs are spiralling out of control.
No roses bloom on a seaman's grave. RIP.
There was, IIRC, little or no talk of an election around Christmas 1973, yet by very early March 1974 it was all done and dusted and a new Government was in place.
Embarrassing though, as the government / DfT should have had an inkling that not all was well with Crossrail when they appointed him.
The country remains divided and a clear opinion is unlikely to appear until either the economy has collapsed or our streets are covered in unicorn crap, depending on how Brexit goes. Unless the government collapses meantime, of course.
A small blemish on a life of service to his country, whatever one thinks of his politics.
He continued the GOP persecution complex that somehow Nixon was hard done by and his, and his administrations, nagging sense of Saddam getting one over on him lead to his son's botched Iraq adventure.
Incidentally, did anyone see last weeks QT? I hear Layla Moran was very good on it; is it worth having a look? I, like many others here I gather, have ceased to bother with it as a regular watch.
...and if he doesn't make it in politics I can think of several agencies who could do with a copywriter.
RIP Bush Snr. How far the Republicans have fallen since.
BTW, I'm not saying he was good; just not as bad as made out.
But it was "read my lips, no new taxes" that made him that unusual thing, a single term POTUS.
He's my MP. Not especially popular with the voters who see him as a ruthless careerist with zero interest in the local area.
This is an odd development that smacks of manoeuvres really. I wonder if he's on some sort of promise.
(Many years back, a friend's mum was passing a church where a funeral was taking place. Saddened that there were hardly any mourners, she went in the church and sat at the back "to make up the numbers a bit".
After the service, she was approached by a couple of Special Branch - and quizzed as to how she knew the deceased....)
He will please neither side.
1. As someone said above, Remainers are making their play for a second referendum and I bet Labour will (eventually) join them in supporting one.
2. There may well be a majority in the House for a second ref at that stage.
What I don’t understand is how the Remain people hope to actually engineer that referendum - because it requires primary legislation and (in all likelihood) an extension to article 50, which the government would need to request from the EU.
Therefore, if you want a second vote you’d need to get the government to concede the principle of holding one, or else change the government. Changing the government’s mind seems all but impossible - surely Tory MPs would kick out Theresa May the minute she even suggested a second referendum, and I suspect she’d rather resign that go down that route anyway. And obviously nobody would win the Tory leadership on a second referendum platform, so as soon as Theresa is kicked out/resigns then Tory members surely just replace her with a Brexiteer.
Changing the government requires Tory Remainers to vote down their own government in a VNOC (which I think is unlikely) and precipitates a general election which could take us past 29th March anyway.
This is the crux of it really - No Deal is the default position and was approved by our esteemed Parliamentarians not six months ago. Against this backdrop, I don’t think that MPs really have a choice - if they want to avoid no deal I think they *have* to approve the Withdrawal Agreement. The government can simply close off all other courses of action, including a second vote, even if those alternative courses of action command a majority in the House.
With hat. And goggles.
*titters to self at the thought....*
Parliament sets the rules, and is free to change them.
There's clearly a lot of MPs who would like said referendum. But the mechanics of it still look tricky. Ignoring the significant matter of question and options, how would it get through the Commons?
I think May could trigger such a vote but the time frame to do so would be small. Her successor as Conservative leader would be unlikely to do so. The mooted Government of National Unity perhaps led by a Ken Clarke type figure could do so, and have the numbers, but the shift and break down in party allegiances would be immense.
Edited extra bit: plan on putting my season review up today, incidentally.