This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
Grieve said his amendment wasn't about primary legislation.
I'm looking forward to the analysis of today in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty where people earnestly explain that the executive is sovereign on governmental matters.
Even though this all makes Brexit less likely I am pleased with these two results. Any argument about negotiation by Parliament being a bad idea (which might at least have had some measure of validity) was ended once the Deal was agreed. From now on it should be Parliament not the Executive that have the final say on these things.
That said they should also be prepared for the consequences if they betray the electorate.
As an aside I still don't see how they get around the deadline issue. If the Government simply chooses not to bring any further legislation forward, how in practice do Parliament force No Deal off the table?
Yes it all rather gives the lie to the piles of steaming garbage that the likes of @Mortimer and @Charles have been serving up on the matter.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of how parliament can negotiate a deal with a third party.
It creates a committee of safety to negotiate with a third party.
That wouldn’t be anything like the one that Robespiere set up would it?
I'm taking inspiration from the English Civil War.
Give me a plain russet coated PBer who knows what he posts for and loves what he knows.
As PB's leading Republican, I'm the man for this occasion.
We should probably be paying attention to Farage at this point too - resigning from UKIP simply has to be the prelude to something else:he's not the type to just go and grow tomatoes.
A well-informed source has suggested to me that there may be a reverse takeover about to take place of the previously moribund SDP. Patrick O’Flynn may be the scout.
What's the advantage, over forming a new party?
In O'Flynn's case, I think it was mainly so he wouldn't be reclassified as a non-escrit and lose his committee seats in the EP.
In a more general sense? Infrastructure and brand recognition, and not having to go through the lengthy process of registering a political party with the electoral commission.
The problem with Parliament taking control is that it has convincing majorities against everything. What is it for?
There's an overwhelming majority for No Deal, which means one of
1) Extending Article 50
2) Revoking Article 50
3) Norway
I think you mean against no deal and I would agree. Which is why the ERG were being even more moronic than usual in not getting behind May’s deal. Too late now I fear. Those that lied about respecting the vote have the whip hand and want far more than May was willing to offer.
So how do you get all that agreed in a couple of months? I am not entirely opposed to it although the customs union idea is deeply dumb and will be a millstone round our necks. But I just don't see how you get to that position from here.
You are right. Any change of direction on what the final relationship should be won't help with the Irish backstop, which is the principal sticking point.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
May should call for a Brexit election now. And actually campaign. Based on her deal.
Norway+ just seems like a dream outcome. Decouples us from ever closer union, the Euro, the CAP and CFP whilst leaving us in the single market. Resolves the NI border issue. Puts a stop to Tories endless nonsensical love affair with chlorinated American chickens.
It crushes our ERG your enemies, sees them driven before us, and to hear the lamentation of their women. Sends the gammons incandescent with rage, splitting off the reactionary half of Tory vote to vote for Tommy Robinson's UKIP, leaving the Tories a ranting, gammon-Mogg filled rump trapped in opposition forever.
I see zero downsides.
I largely agree.
But somebody is going to have to step up and be honest with the British people and tell them that getting the above requires allowing freedom of movement, and that on balance that is a decent deal to accept.
And ongoing large payments into the EU coffers...
And no “voice at the table”
We may as well stay in. It is absurd for Britain to be in a position where it has to abide by rules and pay money to do so without having any say in those rules. The absolute opposite of taking back control, in fact. Quite as humiliating as this backstop everyone is going on about.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
A lot of the comments on “overwhelming opposition to May’s deal”, Parliament will coalesce around an alternative, rather bypass the fact that a large chunk of Labour opposition is based on nothing more than the fact that they didn’t negotiate it.
Perhaps so, but in which case...what? Of course they're more likely to coalesce around an imperfect alternative even if their opposition to some degree is purely just because they did not negotiate it.
We should probably be paying attention to Farage at this point too - resigning from UKIP simply has to be the prelude to something else:he's not the type to just go and grow tomatoes.
He's starting a new party, surely? "There's a huge space for a Brexit party in British politics, but it won't be filled by UKIP".
I'm hoping he joins the SDP like Patrick O'Flynn.
Everything old is new again.
Don’t think I will be along for the ride this time.
Norway+ just seems like a dream outcome. Decouples us from ever closer union, the Euro, the CAP and CFP whilst leaving us in the single market. Resolves the NI border issue. Puts a stop to Tories endless nonsensical love affair with chlorinated American chickens.
It crushes our ERG enemies, sees them driven before us, and to hear the lamentation of their women. Sends the gammons incandescent with rage, splitting off the reactionary half of the Tory vote to vote for Tommy Robinson's UKIP, leaving the Tories a ranting, gammon-Mogg filled rump trapped in opposition forever.
I see zero downsides.
Eloquently put. Your incisive analysis of Tories’ bizarre extramarital affair with knackered broilers was particularly compelling.
We should probably be paying attention to Farage at this point too - resigning from UKIP simply has to be the prelude to something else:he's not the type to just go and grow tomatoes.
A well-informed source has suggested to me that there may be a reverse takeover about to take place of the previously moribund SDP. Patrick O’Flynn may be the scout.
What's the advantage, over forming a new party?
They don't have to come up with a name. Sounds silly, but as several abortive attempts at new centrist parties will show, the name can be a tricky thing.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
May should call for a Brexit election now. And actually campaign. Based on her deal.
Doesn't stop a large chunk of the Tory Party from not supporting her deal though. Even if she put it into her manifesto and won the election on it, there'd still be enough headbangers to block it.
We should probably be paying attention to Farage at this point too - resigning from UKIP simply has to be the prelude to something else:he's not the type to just go and grow tomatoes.
A well-informed source has suggested to me that there may be a reverse takeover about to take place of the previously moribund SDP. Patrick O’Flynn may be the scout.
What's the advantage, over forming a new party?
I imagine it has various registrations sorted, some form of infrastructure and a folk memory with the name. But I speculate.
So how do you get all that agreed in a couple of months? I am not entirely opposed to it although the customs union idea is deeply dumb and will be a millstone round our necks. But I just don't see how you get to that position from here.
Art50 extension for renegotiation of the WA seems the only way. It'd need to be a fairly lengthy extension too, not the mooted 3mths.
Likely the EU tells us to sod off at that point, of course.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
I imagine it has various registrations sorted, some form of infrastructure and a folk memory with the name. But I speculate.
I'd have thought that the folk memory would be actively harmful. Anyone old enough to remember will think of Shirley Williams, Roy Jenkins and David Owen, none of them natural bedfellows for Farage supporters.
I'm looking forward to the analysis of today in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty where people earnestly explain that the executive is sovereign on governmental matters.
Even though this all makes Brexit less likely I am pleased with these two results. Any argument about negotiation by Parliament being a bad idea (which might at least have had some measure of validity) was ended once the Deal was agreed. From now on it should be Parliament not the Executive that have the final say on these things.
That said they should also be prepared for the consequences if they betray the electorate.
As an aside I still don't see how they get around the deadline issue. If the Government simply chooses not to bring any further legislation forward, how in practice do Parliament force No Deal off the table?
Yes it all rather gives the lie to the piles of steaming garbage that the likes of @Mortimer and @Charles have been serving up on the matter.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of how parliament can negotiate a deal with a third party.
It creates a committee of safety to negotiate with a third party.
That wouldn’t be anything like the one that Robespiere set up would it?
I'm taking inspiration from the English Civil War.
Give me a plain russet coated PBer who knows what he posts for and loves what he knows.
Makes me think of another quote: The remainer need not care how oft he fights... If we fight 100 times and beat them 99 they will be a remainer still, but if they beats us but once, or the last time, we shall be mocked we shall lose our credibility, and our Leave shall be undone.
So, if and when the government loses the meaningful vote, what is there left for Theresa May to do?
Announce the plan is to go for Norway (or whatever) but that she is not the best person to attempt it, so she will ask the party to choose a temporary leader to negotiate that position and when that person is selected she will stand down as PM.
But “Norway” or whatever, would be a post transition period situation. It isn’t even ruled out by May’s deal, since it would be a solution for the future trading arrangements which aren’t part of the deal.
Oh, and it probably wouldn’t meet the EU’s redlines on the Irish border...
That's why I said 'or whatever' since it's mostly just about which unicorn solution she might announce.
Well, Norway+ would require re-opening mpletely Impossible(tm).
Until next week when it is not.
Norway+ Customs Union is now the most likely Brexit nths
Does that not kind of ignore the fact that there would probably have to be a completely new EEA treaty agreed by both the EU and EFTA with unanimity from every country. That should take a couple of years at least. And who is going to support it when it is effectively the backstop in perpetuity?
Ultimately yes but that could be worked out in the future relationship talks, the UK would be committing to signing up to all single market and customs union rules. Bar the ERG Tories and Corbynistas and Field, Mann, Hoey and Stringer and the DUP I would expect most Labour and Tory MPs and all LD and SNP MPs and Lucas and Hermon to back SM and CU over the risk of No Deal if May's Deal is rejected
So how do you get all that agreed in a couple of months? I am not entirely opposed to it although the customs union idea is deeply dumb and will be a millstone round our necks. But I just don't see how you get to that position from here.
As long as it includes the customs union it deals with the backstop and as it also includes the single market even the DUP could accept it as their concern is the single market elements Northern Ireland has to comply with but not GB.
In my view it would be much worse than May's Deal with full free movement and permanent Customs Union but still better than No Deal so Parliament will reject May's Deal for a worse deal though it may be fractionally better for the economy than May's Deal and much better for the economy than No Deal
We should probably be paying attention to Farage at this point too - resigning from UKIP simply has to be the prelude to something else:he's not the type to just go and grow tomatoes.
Farage starts a new party, Boris and dozen of Brexiteer Tories leave the Tory Party and join up with Nigel leading to 18 years of Corbyn government with landslides majorities to boot?
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The quickest option is a simple bill repealing the EU Withdrawal Act and then send the withdrawal letter to Brussels. A weeki or should do it, certainly a month.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
Grieve said his amendment wasn't about primary legislation.
He's an ultra. He may well be smarter than the Brexit ultras but he is still an ultra, he would say and do anything to achieve his aims.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The Tories will at the next GE, they'll be slaughtered.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
Nope. At least some of them never voted to trigger A50 at all, but others have been very sneaky, waiting for the opportunity to reverse Brexit.
I imagine it has various registrations sorted, some form of infrastructure and a folk memory with the name. But I speculate.
I'd have thought that the folk memory would be actively harmful. Anyone old enough to remember will think of Shirley Williams, Roy Jenkins and David Owen, none of them natural bedfellows for Farage supporters.
Norway+ just seems like a dream outcome. Decouples us from ever closer union, the Euro, the CAP and CFP whilst leaving us in the single market. Resolves the NI border issue. Puts a stop to Tories endless nonsensical love affair with chlorinated American chickens.
It crushes our ERG your enemies, sees them driven before us, and to hear the lamentation of their women. Sends the gammons incandescent with rage, splitting off the reactionary half of Tory vote to vote for Tommy Robinson's UKIP, leaving the Tories a ranting, gammon-Mogg filled rump trapped in opposition forever.
I see zero downsides.
I largely agree.
But somebody is going to have to step up and be honest with the British people and tell them that getting the above requires allowing freedom of movement, and that on balance that is a decent deal to accept.
And ongoing large payments into the EU coffers...
And no “voice at the table”
We may as well stay in. It is absurd for Britain to be in a position where it has to abide by rules and pay money to do so without having any say in those rules. The absolute opposite of taking back control, in fact. Quite as humiliating as this backstop everyone is going on about.
Over the last few weeks, the options seem to have narrowed and only May's Deal and Remain are left. I wonder if, in two week's time, only Remain will be left?
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The Tories will at the next GE, they'll be slaughtered.
Not as badly as they'd be slaughtered by No Deal. Anyway at this rate they'll be slaughtered in all scenarios.
I imagine it has various registrations sorted, some form of infrastructure and a folk memory with the name. But I speculate.
I'd have thought that the folk memory would be actively harmful. Anyone old enough to remember will think of Shirley Williams, Roy Jenkins and David Owen, none of them natural bedfellows for Farage supporters.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The quickest option is a simple bill repealing the EU Withdrawal Act and then send the withdrawal letter to Brussels. A weeki or should do it, certainly a month.
Needs must when the Devil drives....
I honestly wonder if our democracy could survive that. But remainers won’t care. Anything for the cause.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
May should call for a Brexit election now. And actually campaign. Based on her deal.
Would her MPs back her manifesto? or fight a coupon election on No deal or Remain manifestos?
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
I think that both we and they are in danger of forgetting the basic situation out in the country. As others have pointed out, for all the back and forth inside the Westminster Bubble, the country is still pretty much evenly split between Leave and Remain. Anything that can (and will) be painted as abandoning Brexit will cause absolute uproar. Now that might be okay for people like Beverly with her Ireland bolthole but the chaos that will follow such a move will bring down a great many of those MPs at the very least and basically undermines any remaining faith that many people had in our democratic system. That is extremely dangerous.
I agree entirely with Parliament having the final say in thee matters but, just as with going to war, it is one thing to have the power but quite another to be daft enough to exercise it.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The Tories will at the next GE, they'll be slaughtered.
I'm looking forward to the analysis of today in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty where people earnestly explain that the executive is sovereign on governmental matters.
Even though this all makes Brexit less likely I am pleased with these two results. Any argument about negotiation by Parliament being a bad idea (which might at least have had some measure of validity) was ended once the Deal was agreed. From now on it should be Parliament not the Executive that have the final say on these things.
That said they should also be prepared for the consequences if they betray the electorate.
As an aside I still don't see how they get around the deadline issue. If the Government simply chooses not to bring any further legislation forward, how in practice do Parliament force No Deal off the table?
Yes it all rather gives the lie to the piles of steaming garbage that the likes of @Mortimer and @Charles have been serving up on the matter.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of how parliament can negotiate a deal with a third party.
It creates a committee of safety to negotiate with a third party.
That wouldn’t be anything like the one that Robespiere set up would it?
I'm taking inspiration from the English Civil War.
Makes sense. Executing Charles I was like triggering A50 - it satisfied the army/public vote, but those doing it didn't really have a coherent plan for what they would do afterwards, tried a number of extreme and desperate options before stabilising around a system quite a bit like what they had removed, except in name, and then at the end the whole thing was just called off and it was a massive waste of time and lives.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
May should call for a Brexit election now. And actually campaign. Based on her deal.
No - because Brexit won't be the issue that determines many people's votes.
Lab will just go big on handouts for everyone and that will drown out Brexit - at least to a significant degree.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The Tories will at the next GE, they'll be slaughtered.
I imagine it has various registrations sorted, some form of infrastructure and a folk memory with the name. But I speculate.
I'd have thought that the folk memory would be actively harmful. Anyone old enough to remember will think of Shirley Williams, Roy Jenkins and David Owen, none of them natural bedfellows for Farage supporters.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The quickest option is a simple bill repealing the EU Withdrawal Act and then send the withdrawal letter to Brussels. A weeki or should do it, certainly a month.
Needs must when the Devil drives....
I honestly wonder if our democracy could survive that. But remainers won’t care. Anything for the cause.
So, you think it will survive No-Deal or a Vasslage Deal?
Its extraordinary. We have an utterly woeful Prime Minister not in control of even her own Cabinet heading for a massive defeat. We also have an utterly woeful Leader of the Opposition in the deep shadow of the Shadow Brexit Secretary stamping his wellies all over the careful and forensic parliamentary work done by his colleagues.
A General Election that offers us a choice of these two is obviously why tomorrow Farage is to launch the Farage party expecting he will win a majority of 704
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The Tories will at the next GE, they'll be slaughtered.
By whom? Corbyn? Lol.
Maybe not by Corbyn, but it'll be a corrosive sort of effect denting the vote total by a couple of million for decades.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
Nope. At least some of them never voted to trigger A50 at all, but others have been very sneaky, waiting for the opportunity to reverse Brexit.
Pretty much the only ones who voted against art 50 was the SNP. The remainers lied so they could be re-elected.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
I think that both we and they are in danger of forgetting the basic situation out in the country. As others have pointed out, for all the back and forth inside the Westminster Bubble, the country is still pretty much evenly split between Leave and Remain. Anything that can (and will) be painted as abandoning Brexit will cause absolute uproar. Now that might be okay for people like Beverly with her Ireland bolthole but the chaos that will follow such a move will bring down a great many of those MPs at the very least and basically undermines any remaining faith that many people had in our democratic system. That is extremely dangerous.
I agree entirely with Parliament having the final say in thee matters but, just as with going to war, it is one thing to have the power but quite another to be daft enough to exercise it.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
I think that both we and they are in danger of forgetting the basic situation out in the country. As others have pointed out, for all the back and forth inside the Westminster Bubble, the country is still pretty much evenly split between Leave and Remain. Anything that can (and will) be painted as abandoning Brexit will cause absolute uproar. Now that might be okay for people like Beverly with her Ireland bolthole but the chaos that will follow such a move will bring down a great many of those MPs at the very least and basically undermines any remaining faith that many people had in our democratic system. That is extremely dangerous.
I agree entirely with Parliament having the final say in thee matters but, just as with going to war, it is one thing to have the power but quite another to be daft enough to exercise it.
A disorderly exit is likely to have the same results though. Leavers have to understand that May's deal is the hardest Brexit that is actually possible.
If this extraordinary episode was a film in the classic Japanese tradition the final act would involve Cameron committing hara-kiri as the audience cheered.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The Tories will at the next GE, they'll be slaughtered.
By whom? Corbyn? Lol.
I can see it happening when Con split. It will be like a reverse of the 1980's.
I'm looking forward to the analysis of today in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty where people earnestly explain that the executive is sovereign on governmental matters.
Even though this all makes Brexit less likely I am pleased with these two results. Any argument about negotiation by Parliament being a bad idea (which might at least have had some measure of validity) was ended once the Deal was agreed. From now on it should be Parliament not the Executive that have the final say on these things.
That said they should also be prepared for the consequences if they betray the electorate.
As an aside I still don't see how they get around the deadline issue. If the Government simply chooses not to bring any further legislation forward, how in practice do Parliament force No Deal off the table?
Yes it all rather gives the lie to the piles of steaming garbage that the likes of @Mortimer and @Charles have been serving up on the matter.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of how parliament can negotiate a deal with a third party.
It creates a committee of safety to negotiate with a third party.
That wouldn’t be anything like the one that Robespiere set up would it?
I'm taking inspiration from the English Civil War.
Makes sense. Executing Charles I was like triggering A50 - it satisfied the army/public vote, but those doing it didn't really have a coherent plan for what they would do afterwards, tried a number of extreme and desperate options before stabilising around a system quite a bit like what they had removed, except in name, and then at the end the whole thing was just called off and it was a massive waste of time and lives.
I keep on meaning to do a thread on that but it turns into quite the magnum opus.
I'm looking forward to the analysis of today in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty where people earnestly explain that the executive is sovereign on governmental matters.
Even though this all makes Brexit less likely I am pleased with these two results. Any argument about negotiation by Parliament being a bad idea (which might at least have had some measure of validity) was ended once the Deal was agreed. From now on it should be Parliament not the Executive that have the final say on these things.
That said they should also be prepared for the consequences if they betray the electorate.
As an aside I still don't see how they get around the deadline issue. If the Government simply chooses not to bring any further legislation forward, how in practice do Parliament force No Deal off the table?
Yes it all rather gives the lie to the piles of steaming garbage that the likes of @Mortimer and @Charles have been serving up on the matter.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of how parliament can negotiate a deal with a third party.
It creates a committee of safety to negotiate with a third party.
That wouldn’t be anything like the one that Robespiere set up would it?
I'm taking inspiration from the English Civil War.
Give me a plain russet coated PBer who knows what he posts for and loves what he knows.
As PB's leading Republican, I'm the man for this occasion.
I'm looking forward to the analysis of today in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty where people earnestly explain that the executive is sovereign on governmental matters.
Even though this all makes Brexit less likely I am pleased with these two results. Any argument about negotiation by Parliament being a bad idea (which might at least have had some measure of validity) was ended once the Deal was agreed. From now on it should be Parliament not the Executive that have the final say on these things.
That said they should also be prepared for the consequences if they betray the electorate.
As an aside I still don't see how they get around the deadline issue. If the Government simply chooses not to bring any further legislation forward, how in practice do Parliament force No Deal off the table?
Yes it all rather gives the lie to the piles of steaming garbage that the likes of @Mortimer and @Charles have been serving up on the matter.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of how parliament can negotiate a deal with a third party.
It creates a committee of safety to negotiate with a third party.
That wouldn’t be anything like the one that Robespiere set up would it?
I'm taking inspiration from the English Civil War.
Makes sense. Executing Charles I was like triggering A50 - it satisfied the army/public vote, but those doing it didn't really have a coherent plan for what they would do afterwards, tried a number of extreme and desperate options before stabilising around a system quite a bit like what they had removed, except in name, and then at the end the whole thing was just called off and it was a massive waste of time and lives.
That shows a stunning lack of understanding of the ECW and what it meant. Removing the King established the supremacy of Parliament after all other options (including allowing Charles to remain King but with the real power vested in Parliament) were refused by Charles. It was his arrogance and stubbornness that led to his execution. Most importantly it meant that when Charles II came to the throne he did so on Parliament's terms not his own. To say it was a massive waste of time and lives is ludicrous given it helped establish our modern democracy (after the blip of James II).
The ERG nutjobs overplayed their hand . Either back Mays deal or get a softer Brexit or no Brexit .
Too late. There was a moment when that might have worked but they fluffed it. Remainers will not back May’s deal now. And they were always the majority.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The quickest option is a simple bill repealing the EU Withdrawal Act and then send the withdrawal letter to Brussels. A weeki or should do it, certainly a month.
Needs must when the Devil drives....
I honestly wonder if our democracy could survive that. But remainers won’t care. Anything for the cause.
A big difference between remain and brexit ultras in parliament is that the latter at least know they are ultras. Indeed, that is part of why they are so angry all the time.
I'm looking forward to the analysis of today in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty where people earnestly explain that the executive is sovereign on governmental matters.
Even though this all makes Brexit less likely I am pleased with these two results. Any argument about negotiation by Parliament being a bad idea (which might at least have had some measure of validity) was ended once the Deal was agreed. From now on it should be Parliament not the Executive that have the final say on these things.
That said they should also be prepared for the consequences if they betray the electorate.
As an aside I still don't see how they get around the deadline issue. If the Government simply chooses not to bring any further legislation forward, how in practice do Parliament force No Deal off the table?
Yes it all rather gives the lie to the piles of steaming garbage that the likes of @Mortimer and @Charles have been serving up on the matter.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of how parliament can negotiate a deal with a third party.
It creates a committee of safety to negotiate with a third party.
That wouldn’t be anything like the one that Robespiere set up would it?
I'm taking inspiration from the English Civil War.
Makes sense. Executing Charles I was like triggering A50 - it satisfied the army/public vote, but those doing it didn't really have a coherent plan for what they would do afterwards, tried a number of extreme and desperate options before stabilising around a system quite a bit like what they had removed, except in name, and then at the end the whole thing was just called off and it was a massive waste of time and lives.
And then they had another go 25 years later in a more moderate way, and got it right that time
Its extraordinary. We have an utterly woeful Prime Minister not in control of even her own Cabinet heading for a massive defeat. We also have an utterly woeful Leader of the Opposition in the deep shadow of the Shadow Brexit Secretary stamping his wellies all over the careful and forensic parliamentary work done by his colleagues.
A General Election that offers us a choice of these two is obviously why tomorrow Farage is to launch the Farage party expecting he will win a majority of 704
He's tried taking a party from very little to be a political, if not electoral, power.
Perhaps he's thinking of a take over with his friends, the useful idiots in the ERG?
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
Nope. At least some of them never voted to trigger A50 at all, but others have been very sneaky, waiting for the opportunity to reverse Brexit.
Pretty much the only ones who voted against art 50 was the SNP. The remainers lied so they could be re-elected.
That's unfair. They didn't know that the ERG and fellow travellers were going to trash the only workable form of Brexit actually available. That's also why Richard Tyndall's argument that the referendum result has to be respected to avoid democratic disillusionment on a big scale is no longer compelling: those trashing the deal have ensured we're going to get such disillusionment whether or not the referendum result is respected.
As long as it includes the customs union it deals with the backstop and as it also includes the single market even the DUP could accept it as their concern is the single market elements Northern Ireland has to comply with but not GB.
In my view it would be much worse than May's Deal with full free movement and permanent Customs Union but still better than No Deal so Parliament will reject May's Deal for a worse deal though it may be fractionally better for the economy than May's Deal and much better for the economy than No Deal
I am not talking about agreement on the British side. You need to get both the EU and probably EFTA to agree.
I'm looking forward to the analysis of today in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty where people earnestly explain that the executive is sovereign on governmental matters.
Even though this all makes Brexit less likely I am pleased with these two results. Any argument about negotiation by Parliament being a bad idea (which might at least have had some measure of validity) was ended once the Deal was agreed. From now on it should be Parliament not the Executive that have the final say on these things.
That said they should also be prepared for the consequences if they betray the electorate.
As an aside I still don't see how they get around the deadline issue. If the Government simply chooses not to bring any further legislation forward, how in practice do Parliament force No Deal off the table?
Yes it all rather gives the lie to the piles of steaming garbage that the likes of @Mortimer and @Charles have been serving up on the matter.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of how parliament can negotiate a deal with a third party.
It creates a committee of safety to negotiate with a third party.
That wouldn’t be anything like the one that Robespiere set up would it?
I'm taking inspiration from the English Civil War.
Makes sense. Executing Chte of time and lives.
That shows a stunning lack of understanding of the ECW and what it meant. Removing the King established the supremacy of Parliament after all other options (including allowing Charles to remain King but with the real power vested in Parliament) were refused by Charles. It was his arrogance and stubbornness that led to his execution. Most importantly it meant that when Charles II came to the throne he did so on Parliament's terms not his own. To say it was a massive waste of time and lives is ludicrous given it helped establish our modern democracy (after the blip of James II).
It was a joke Richard, I literally wrote two dissertations on the politics of the interregnum so I am well aware of the significance of what occurred (You cannot go back to the way things were, even if you try, after executing a king in the manner that they did). It was meant to be an amusing forced analogy, not literal.
Yeah. Because when the choice is between useless or useless that kind of balances out. Which leads you back to policies. And Labour have the traction there - what policies do the Tories have that aren't Brexit?
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
Nope. At least some of them never voted to trigger A50 at all, but others have been very sneaky, waiting for the opportunity to reverse Brexit.
Pretty much the only ones who voted against art 50 was the SNP. The remainers lied so they could be re-elected.
That's unfair. They didn't know that the ERG and fellow travellers were going to trash the only workable form of Brexit actually available. That's also why Richard Tyndall's argument that the referendum result has to be respected to avoid democratic disillusionment on a big scale is no longer compelling: those trashing the deal have ensured we're going to get such disillusionment whether or not the referendum result is respected.
I don’t agree. The ERG are a maximum of 47 loons, possibly less. If remainers had remained true to their word they could have been ignored. As they will be now.
I'm looking forward to the analysis of today in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty where people earnestly explain that the executive is sovereign on governmental matters.
Even though this all makes Brexit less likely I am pleased with these two results. Any argument about negotiation by Parliament being a bad idea (which might at least have had some measure of validity) was ended once the Deal was agreed. From now on it should be Parliament not the Executive that have the final say on these things.
That said they should also be prepared for the consequences if they betray the electorate.
As an aside I still don't see how they get around the deadline issue. If the Government simply chooses not to bring any further legislation forward, how in practice do Parliament force No Deal off the table?
Yes it all rather gives the lie to the piles of steaming garbage that the likes of @Mortimer and @Charles have been serving up on the matter.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of how parliament can negotiate a deal with a third party.
It creates a committee of safety to negotiate with a third party.
That wouldn’t be anything like the one that Robespiere set up would it?
I'm taking inspiration from the English Civil War.
Makes sense. Executing Chte of time and lives.
That shows a stunning lack of understanding of the ECW and what it meant. Removing the King established the supremacy of Parliament after all other options (including allowing Charles to remain King but with the real power vested in Parliament) were refused by Charles. It was his arrogance and stubbornness that led to his execution. Most importantly it meant that when Charles II came to the throne he did so on Parliament's terms not his own. To say it was a massive waste of time and lives is ludicrous given it helped establish our modern democracy (after the blip of James II).
It was a joke Richard, I literally wrote two dissertations on the politics of the interregnum so I am well aware of the significance of what occurred (You cannot go back to the way things were, even if you try, after executing a king in the manner that they did). It was meant to be an amusing forced analogy, not literal.
Apologies. Once again it is hard to tell when people are being serious or not on here.
The ERG nutjobs overplayed their hand . Either back Mays deal or get a softer Brexit or no Brexit .
Too late. There was a moment when that might have worked but they fluffed it. Remainers will not back May’s deal now. And they were always the majority.
They weren't with the country though and they certainly aren't within their own Party... Hence why Con are finished.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The quickest option is a simple bill repealing the EU Withdrawal Act and then send the withdrawal letter to Brussels. A weeki or should do it, certainly a month.
Needs must when the Devil drives....
I honestly wonder if our democracy could survive that. But remainers won’t care. Anything for the cause.
A big difference between remain and brexit ultras in parliament is that the latter at least know they are ultras. Indeed, that is part of why they are so angry all the time.
Well that and being loons. The moon is so enticing!
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
Nope. At least some of them never voted to trigger A50 at all, but others have been very sneaky, waiting for the opportunity to reverse Brexit.
Pretty much the only ones who voted against art 50 was the SNP. The remainers lied so they could be re-elected.
That's unfair. They didn't know that the ERG and fellow travellers were going to trash the only workable form of Brexit actually available.
They knew no deal was a possibility when they triggered. Switching to remain out of horror of no deal is not plausible. They were always going to try for remain, no matter what.
I remember an interview with Starmer in 2015 where he was asked about his ambitions - having been the DPP did he see himself in a leadership role again in politics? At the time he said that as a novice to Parliamentary processes and the workings of politics he wanted to learn first and foremost.
Three years on in perhaps the most important Shadow Cabinet role at the moment, with a string of wins under his belt both in the party and in the Commons, he must sit there listening to the boss thinking "I could do so much better"
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
The quickest option is a simple bill repealing the EU Withdrawal Act and then send the withdrawal letter to Brussels. A weeki or should do it, certainly a month.
Needs must when the Devil drives....
I honestly wonder if our democracy could survive that. But remainers won’t care. Anything for the cause.
A big difference between remain and brexit ultras in parliament is that the latter at least know they are ultras. Indeed, that is part of why they are so angry all the time.
Well that and being loons. The moon is so enticing!
Well there are other differences, certainly. But its the extremeness that makes the ultra, not lunacy.
We should probably be paying attention to Farage at this point too - resigning from UKIP simply has to be the prelude to something else:he's not the type to just go and grow tomatoes.
A well-informed source has suggested to me that there may be a reverse takeover about to take place of the previously moribund SDP. Patrick O’Flynn may be the scout.
Seems more likely that starting again from scratch, which has been much discussed for months, but nothing has emerged.
Makes Blair's new party name choice a tad more difficult though.
I don’t agree. The ERG are a maximum of 47 loons, possibly less. If remainers had remained true to their word they could have been ignored. As they will be now.
Loons + Labour + SNP + LibDems + Plaid + Indies + DUP = Defeat by a substantial margin. There's nothing that sensible Remainers, who wanted the referendum result respected even if they think it was a mistake, can do about that. Therefore the game has changed: it's now looking like Revoke or No Deal. On that choice, any MP with the interests of the country at heart is going to go for Revoke every time, unless they are one of the few dozen who do actually think it's OK to crash out in utter chaos.
That's unfair. They didn't know that the ERG and fellow travellers were going to trash the only workable form of Brexit actually available. That's also why Richard Tyndall's argument that the referendum result has to be respected to avoid democratic disillusionment on a big scale is no longer compelling: those trashing the deal have ensured we're going to get such disillusionment whether or not the referendum result is respected.
You are ignoring the dynamics here. For the vast majority of Leavers the message will not be that the ERG screwed up by trying to push for a hard Brexit but that Parliament decided to ignore the vote and abandoned Brexit. There is nothing nuanced about this. It will be a straight betrayal narrative and at best it will cause disillusionment with the political system for decades. At worst it will cause real civil strife.
I'm looking forward to the analysis of today in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty where people earnestly explain that the executive is sovereign on governmental matters.
Even That saidble?
Yes it all rather gives the lie to the piles of steaming garbage that the likes of @Mortimer and @Charles have been serving up on the matter.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of how parliament can negotiate a deal with a third party.
It creates a committee of safety to negotiate with a third party.
That wouldn’t be anything like the one that Robespiere set up would it?
I'm taking inspiration from the English Civil War.
Makes sense. Executing Chte of time and lives.
That shows a stunning lack of understanding of the ECW and what it meant. Removing the King established the supremacy of Parliament after all other options (including allowing Charles to remain King but with the real power vested in Parliament) were refused by Charles. It was his arrogance and stubbornness that led to his execution. Most importantly it meant that when Charles II came to the throne he did so on Parliament's terms not his own. To say it was a massive waste of time and lives is ludicrous given it helped establish our modern democracy (after the blip of James II).
It was a joke Richard, I literally wrote two dissertations on the politics of the interregnum so I am well aware of the significance of what occurred (You cannot go back to the way things were, even if you try, after executing a king in the manner that they did). It was meant to be an amusing forced analogy, not literal.
Apologies. Once again it is hard to tell when people are being serious or not on here.
That's the internet. I do think there are parallels one could draw with the period, but as with any historical analogy it will require getting creative!
That's unfair. They didn't know that the ERG and fellow travellers were going to trash the only workable form of Brexit actually available. That's also why Richard Tyndall's argument that the referendum result has to be respected to avoid democratic disillusionment on a big scale is no longer compelling: those trashing the deal have ensured we're going to get such disillusionment whether or not the referendum result is respected.
You are ignoring the dynamics here. For the vast majority of Leavers the message will not be that the ERG screwed up by trying to push for a hard Brexit but that Parliament decided to ignore the vote and abandoned Brexit. There is nothing nuanced about this. It will be a straight betrayal narrative and at best it will cause disillusionment with the political system for decades. At worst it will cause real civil strife.
Parliament will deserve all they get.
I agree, but you are ignoring the alternative dynamic: the utter chaos of No Deal. We are not talking mild inconvenience, we are talking about major disruption unparalleled in modern peacetime.
I think that you and I agree that the best way forward is to sign up to the deal, but we don't get to decide!
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
I think that both we and they are in danger of forgetting the basic situation out in the country. As others have pointed out, for all the back and forth inside the Westminster Bubble, the country is still pretty much evenly split between Leave and Remain. Anything that can (and will) be painted as abandoning Brexit will cause absolute uproar. Now that might be okay for people like Beverly with her Ireland bolthole but the chaos that will follow such a move will bring down a great many of those MPs at the very least and basically undermines any remaining faith that many people had in our democratic system. That is extremely dangerous.
I agree entirely with Parliament having the final say in thee matters but, just as with going to war, it is one thing to have the power but quite another to be daft enough to exercise it.
My " ... Ireland bolthole ..."?
I am still here. Unlike some Leavers....
And yet you keep telling us how you really don't care because of your Irish bolthole.
This Parliament won’t pass the deal, which only the executive can negotiate. A new one is required.
Indeed. The whole point about the legislature firmly taking control from a floundering and powerless executive is that no government can function as a government if it does not have the support of the House.
The scenario is there for all to see. Tory MPs voting down every measure proposed by the Tory government. Then voting confidence in the government, sustaining in office a government removed from power by their votes.
So, the government bound to avoid hard Brexit refusing to do so. An election - regardless of what the result may be - would be the ONLY solution. It is increasingly inevitable.
Not just refusing, but unable to.
Legislation means we leave on 29th March. Something else needs to be passed to prevent that.
Of course the spanner in the works is that Tory MPs can block an election, too.
Surely, after todays ruling Parliament could vote to withdraw A50, while we put our thinking caps on.
How? Even if you want to ignore the political fallout It would require primary legislation. How do you do that whilst May is still in power?
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
You really think that the majority in Parliament care about that?
I think that both we and they are in danger of forgetting the basic situation out in the country. As others have pointed out, for all the back and forth inside the Westminster Bubble, the country is still pretty much evenly split between Leave and Remain. Anything that can (and will) be painted as abandoning Brexit will cause absolute uproar. Now that might be okay for people like Beverly with her Ireland bolthole but the chaos that will follow such a move will bring down a great many of those MPs at the very least and basically undermines any remaining faith that many people had in our democratic system. That is extremely dangerous.
I agree entirely with Parliament having the final say in thee matters but, just as with going to war, it is one thing to have the power but quite another to be daft enough to exercise it.
A disorderly exit is likely to have the same results though. Leavers have to understand that May's deal is the hardest Brexit that is actually possible.
I am a reluctant supporter of May's deal. You are preaching to the wrong person.
I don’t agree. The ERG are a maximum of 47 loons, possibly less. If remainers had remained true to their word they could have been ignored. As they will be now.
Loons + Labour + SNP + LibDems + Plaid + Indies + DUP = Defeat by a substantial margin. There's nothing that sensible Remainers, who wanted the referendum result respected even if they think it was a mistake, can do about that. Therefore the game has changed: it's now looking like Revoke or No Deal. On that choice, any MP with the interests of the country at heart is going to go for Revoke every time, unless they are one of the few dozen who do actually think it's OK to crash out in utter chaos.
47 labour MPs,the SNP 7 LDs and Caroline Lucas voted against Article 50.Plus Kenneth Clarke!
Clarke's vote is very interesting, particularly as, unlike other remainers, he is backing May's deal. Now, as someone who was openly saying we should not have to follow the referendum and backed that up by not voting to trigger A50, that he is not making a play to remain at this stage even though he surely wants to rejoin the EU, speaks to his character I think.
Not that I think every remainer has to vote for a deal they think is bad, but it is impossible to consider at this point that just as some leavers would not back any deal as they want no deal, some remainers appear to be making the same analysis.
We should probably be paying attention to Farage at this point too - resigning from UKIP simply has to be the prelude to something else:he's not the type to just go and grow tomatoes.
A well-informed source has suggested to me that there may be a reverse takeover about to take place of the previously moribund SDP. Patrick O’Flynn may be the scout.
Yes, it was the most catastrophic election result of my lifetime. The next one is likely to be worse though, albeit likely to give us the grim satisfaction of laughing at Labour trying to negotiate a way through the mess with an even smaller number of MPs.
We should probably be paying attention to Farage at this point too - resigning from UKIP simply has to be the prelude to something else:he's not the type to just go and grow tomatoes.
Farage starts a new party, Boris and dozen of Brexiteer Tories leave the Tory Party and join up with Nigel leading to 18 years of Corbyn government with landslides majorities to boot?
More likely Boris ultimately ends up Tory leader based on current Tory membership polls
We should probably be paying attention to Farage at this point too - resigning from UKIP simply has to be the prelude to something else:he's not the type to just go and grow tomatoes.
A well-informed source has suggested to me that there may be a reverse takeover about to take place of the previously moribund SDP. Patrick O’Flynn may be the scout.
I thought Farage and O'Flynn did not get on.
Two Falls, Two Submissions or a Knockout for leadership of the SDP
There was no need to laugh, it is technically true that makes her position slightly better, though still hardly good.
Given if May's Deal goes down the alternative is BINO SM+CU that could be enough on a second vote
Now that remain is very much a possibility how does May (assuming for the sake of argument she is not gone next week) entice over enough Labour MPs to see it through? She still won't have the DUP and, even optimistically, at least some number of her own MPs. In any scenario she needs mass abstentions or more than a mere handful of Lavour leavers.
Comments
In a more general sense? Infrastructure and brand recognition, and not having to go through the lengthy process of registering a political party with the electoral commission.
And of course it will be (rightly) be painted as reversing the Brexit vote.
Don’t think I will be along for the ride this time.
Likely the EU tells us to sod off at that point, of course.
The remainer need not care how oft he fights... If we fight 100 times and beat them 99 they will be a remainer still, but if they beats us but once, or the last time, we shall be mocked we shall lose our credibility, and our Leave shall be undone.
In my view it would be much worse than May's Deal with full free movement and permanent Customs Union but still better than No Deal so Parliament will reject May's Deal for a worse deal though it may be fractionally better for the economy than May's Deal and much better for the economy than No Deal
Needs must when the Devil drives....
I agree entirely with Parliament having the final say in thee matters but, just as with going to war, it is one thing to have the power but quite another to be daft enough to exercise it.
By whom? Corbyn? Lol.
Lab will just go big on handouts for everyone and that will drown out Brexit - at least to a significant degree.
UK politics is in trouble no matter what happens.
A General Election that offers us a choice of these two is obviously why tomorrow Farage is to launch the Farage party expecting he will win a majority of 704
I am still here. Unlike some Leavers....
Too late. There was a moment when that might have worked but they fluffed it. Remainers will not back May’s deal now. And they were always the majority.
Perhaps he's thinking of a take over with his friends, the useful idiots in the ERG?
Well that and being loons. The moon is so enticing!
Three years on in perhaps the most important Shadow Cabinet role at the moment, with a string of wins under his belt both in the party and in the Commons, he must sit there listening to the boss thinking "I could do so much better"
Makes Blair's new party name choice a tad more difficult though.
Parliament will deserve all they get.
I think that you and I agree that the best way forward is to sign up to the deal, but we don't get to decide!
I like him and my close friends and family are starting to notice him.
Not that I think every remainer has to vote for a deal they think is bad, but it is impossible to consider at this point that just as some leavers would not back any deal as they want no deal, some remainers appear to be making the same analysis.