Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Punters make it a 26% chance that Brexit won’t happen before 2

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited March 14 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Punters make it a 26% chance that Brexit won’t happen before 2022 – if at all

Betdata.io chart of movement on the Betfair exchange

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 12,173
    edited March 14
    Nothing has changed. Nothing will change.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 12,173
    If May gets three attempts, they should definitely run that one again.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100
    Jonathan said:

    Nothing has changed. Nothing will change.

    Something will change. But it may still be a distressingly long time away.

    DIdn't expect Benn to lose. The will of parliament, right? Does he get another go before May does?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 15,741
    We LEAVE two weeks tomorrow... :open_mouth:
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,526
    32 Labour MPs who abstained on the Wollaston amendment say they are committed to a People’s Vote.

  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,524
    edited March 14
    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 7,863

    32 Labour MPs who abstained on the Wollaston amendment say they are committed to a People’s Vote.

    But they'd need to convert some of the people who voted against a referendum, even if every single abstainer voted in favour (which is doubtful enough).
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 26,253

    32 Labour MPs who abstained on the Wollaston amendment say they are committed to a People’s Vote.

    Is that all.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100

    What a survivor - Theresa May

    It seems utterly incredible, but I am beginning to think she might get MV3 or 4 through.

    The DUP will inevitably fall into line. If May could find it in herself to give Parliament some say in the negotiation of the final deal with the EU, a number of Labour MPs would get her over the line.

    For the first, that's been predicted before. For the second, yes, opening up to the same mess we're in right now will be very popular with May I am sure.

    But it won't be her problem, so why not?

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    I disagree. It's reckless and stupid, but it is not disgusting nor even disgraceful - parliament has not yet approved anything else, so she keeps bringing back her recommended solution. They have the power to stop her doing that and so far parliament has implicitly encouraged her to keep going.

    But Bercow should be about to disrupt her - where parliament won't mess with the government, he will.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 26,253

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    How is she ramming it through. MPs have had so many chances and votes to stop it but they do not agree on anything
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 12,173

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    Yup, the damage she is doing is remarkable.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,340

    32 Labour MPs who abstained on the Wollaston amendment say they are committed to a People’s Vote.

    The numbers are woefully short even with these wonders
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,524
    @kle4 this is not a game. She has a responsibility to FIND a consensus. She is the Prime Minister!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100
    Jonathan said:

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    Yup, the damage she is doing is remarkable.
    Parliament can stop her any time they like. They are complicit.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,524

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    How is she ramming it through. MPs have had so many chances and votes to stop it but they do not agree on anything
    You might have noticed that they’ve voted to stop it twice.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,842
    Oh dear

    ' The chief executive of Volkswagen has apologised for evoking a Nazi slogan to describe the importance of boosting the group's profits.

    Herbert Diess used the line "Ebit macht frei" at a company event on Tuesday.

    The phrase echoes the maxim "Arbeit Macht Frei" - meaning "work sets you free" - which was famously emblazoned in wrought-iron on the gates of the Auschwitz concentration camp.
    '

    Oh dear

    ' In a separate announcement prior to Mr Diess' remarks, Volkswagen said it would cut 7,000 jobs, as it shifts its focus to electric cars, which require fewer workers to build. '

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47566898
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 26,253
    kle4 said:

    What a survivor - Theresa May

    It seems utterly incredible, but I am beginning to think she might get MV3 or 4 through.

    The DUP will inevitably fall into line. If May could find it in herself to give Parliament some say in the negotiation of the final deal with the EU, a number of Labour MPs would get her over the line.

    For the first, that's been predicted before. For the second, yes, opening up to the same mess we're in right now will be very popular with May I am sure.

    But it won't be her problem, so why not?

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    I disagree. It's reckless and stupid, but it is not disgusting nor even disgraceful - parliament has not yet approved anything else, so she keeps bringing back her recommended solution. They have the power to stop her doing that and so far parliament has implicitly encouraged her to keep going.

    But Bercow should be about to disrupt her - where parliament won't mess with the government, he will.
    Seems unlikely as the government has made it amendable
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,340

    Oh dear

    ' The chief executive of Volkswagen has apologised for evoking a Nazi slogan to describe the importance of boosting the group's profits.

    Herbert Diess used the line "Ebit macht frei" at a company event on Tuesday.

    The phrase echoes the maxim "Arbeit Macht Frei" - meaning "work sets you free" - which was famously emblazoned in wrought-iron on the gates of the Auschwitz concentration camp.
    '

    Oh dear

    ' In a separate announcement prior to Mr Diess' remarks, Volkswagen said it would cut 7,000 jobs, as it shifts its focus to electric cars, which require fewer workers to build. '

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47566898

    Wasn't the whole history of Volkswagen founded from err errm
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 12,173

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    How is she ramming it through. MPs have had so many chances and votes to stop it but they do not agree on anything
    You might have noticed that they’ve voted to stop it twice.
    Quite two massive defeats and found in contempt of parliament.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    How is she ramming it through. MPs have had so many chances and votes to stop it but they do not agree on anything
    You might have noticed that they’ve voted to stop it twice.
    No, they voted not to approve it, but have not approved anything to go in its stead. It's damaging that May insists on trying the same deal, and a bad idea, but until parliament actually says 'Do this instead' the table is blank and May is entitled to put what she thinks best upon it.

    As has long been noted, it is not enough to just say you don't want something if you don't say what you do want. Parliament, so far, has shown itself content to be messed about by May.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 3,358
    Jonathan said:

    Nothing has changed. Nothing will change.

  • A50 extension request motion passed.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 9,172
    Can is being kicked. Hurrah!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 22,674
    I think I’ll be leaving this market well alone, Parliament having now voted against every option put in front of it. God only knows what happens now.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,842

    32 Labour MPs who abstained on the Wollaston amendment say they are committed to a People’s Vote.

    So a total of 57 Labour MPs have said they support a second referendum.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    Govt win 412:202
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100
    edited March 14

    @kle4 this is not a game. She has a responsibility to FIND a consensus. She is the Prime Minister!

    Did you not notice I said she was being reckless and stupid? I am very aware it is not a game. They are Parliament, it is their collective job to look after this nation, and so far they refuse to remove the PM, yet refuse to do as she recommends. We could all hope she takes different actions, but they have the power to take the choice from her if she is being so stupid and reckless.

    If Parliament won't remove her, and won't approve something else, it's basically telling her to keep trying what she is doing. They can stop moaning about that and either force her to stop doing it or just do it. She bears a lot of responsibility as PM, to be sure, but parliament is sovereign after all - they are not helpless to act, they've simply chosen not to, and as such they must collectively share the blame May gets.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,396
    lol

    Jezza makes it up again, whinge whinge moan, but Im going to do bugger all but whinge some more
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 9,172
    Brexit Sec votes against Brexit policy.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,524
    kle4 said:

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    How is she ramming it through. MPs have had so many chances and votes to stop it but they do not agree on anything
    You might have noticed that they’ve voted to stop it twice.
    No, they voted not to approve it, but have not approved anything to go in its stead. It's damaging that May insists on trying the same deal, and a bad idea, but until parliament actually says 'Do this instead' the table is blank and May is entitled to put what she thinks best upon it.

    As has long been noted, it is not enough to just say you don't want something if you don't say what you do want. Parliament, so far, has shown itself content to be messed about by May.
    I would have agreed with this statement if May hadn’t left this to the last minute. She had a responsibility to find a consensus with plenty of time so things could be implemented in a timely manner, with no cliff edge.

    Unfortunately her arrogance has prevented this from happening.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 1,510
    Jezza gets shouty...
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,281
    The 312-314 was surely the HoC giving May one final chance. Presumably it comes back again if she fails to take it.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 23,885

    Brexit Sec votes against Brexit policy.
    Plus Trade Secretary and whips? Some mistake surely?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100
    As expected

    Not sure why he submitted it if he was not confident of it passing, and this gave cover to the Speaker to reject MV3.

    Obviously we know what Bercow would like to do, anything that stops Brexit, but is the only hope for the government that Bercow will need to allow back some very similar votes to those already moved to get what he wants?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 4,218
    Fairly clear that not everyone understands that the Betfair "No Deal" market is really "No Deal on 29 March". Prices currently imply this is _more_ likely than "Brexit by 29 March."
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,842
    Don't know much about Barclay but the thought of a Fox vs Williamson leadership contest ...
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 7,863
    Tbh, even 202 MPs against seems higher than expected. Does that mean more than half of Tory MPs opposed?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,524
    kle4 said:

    @kle4 this is not a game. She has a responsibility to FIND a consensus. She is the Prime Minister!

    Did you not notice I said she was being reckless and stupid? I am very aware it is not a game. They are Parliament, it is their collective job to look after this nation, and so far they refuse to remove the PM, yet refuse to do as she recommends. We could all hope she takes different actions, but they have the power to take the choice from her if she is being so stupid and reckless.

    If Parliament won't remove her, and won't approve something else, it's basically telling her to keep trying what she is doing. They can stop moaning about that and either force her to stop doing it or just do it. She bears a lot of responsibility as PM, to be sure, but parliament is sovereign after all - they are not helpless to act, they've simply chosen not to, and as such they must collectively share the blame May gets.
    I’m sympathetic to what you are saying but we know party politics gets in the way a lot of the time.

    May could have made it easier for them. In my view, she had a responsibility to make it easier for them. But we know that from day 1 shes not been interested in compromise.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100

    kle4 said:

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    How is she ramming it through. MPs have had so many chances and votes to stop it but they do not agree on anything
    You might have noticed that they’ve voted to stop it twice.
    No, they voted not to approve it, but have not approved anything to go in its stead. It's damaging that May insists on trying the same deal, and a bad idea, but until parliament actually says 'Do this instead' the table is blank and May is entitled to put what she thinks best upon it.

    As has long been noted, it is not enough to just say you don't want something if you don't say what you do want. Parliament, so far, has shown itself content to be messed about by May.
    I would have agreed with this statement if May hadn’t left this to the last minute. She had a responsibility to find a consensus with plenty of time so things could be implemented in a timely manner, with no cliff edge.

    Unfortunately her arrogance has prevented this from happening.
    She has made it worse, to be sure. That doesn't mean they can escape their own responsibility, particularly when even now they are allowing her to dictate the agenda.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,281
    So now the government needs to find a reason to ask for the extension. Does that take us to a vote on May’s deal or no deal?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100

    Brexit Sec votes against Brexit policy.
    Practically tradition, given they only last a little while and then quit anyway.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 393

    Jonathan said:

    Nothing has changed. Nothing will change.

    Magnificent song; terrible video; weirdly dated lyric - “secretaries turn off typewriters’
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,842

    kle4 said:

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    How is she ramming it through. MPs have had so many chances and votes to stop it but they do not agree on anything
    You might have noticed that they’ve voted to stop it twice.
    No, they voted not to approve it, but have not approved anything to go in its stead. It's damaging that May insists on trying the same deal, and a bad idea, but until parliament actually says 'Do this instead' the table is blank and May is entitled to put what she thinks best upon it.

    As has long been noted, it is not enough to just say you don't want something if you don't say what you do want. Parliament, so far, has shown itself content to be messed about by May.
    I would have agreed with this statement if May hadn’t left this to the last minute. She had a responsibility to find a consensus with plenty of time so things could be implemented in a timely manner, with no cliff edge.

    Unfortunately her arrogance has prevented this from happening.
    Perhaps she thought there was a consensus and perhaps there isn't a consensus.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 23,371

    So now the government needs to find a reason to ask for the extension. Does that take us to a vote on May’s deal or no deal?

    This is the text of the motion which has just passed:

    That this house:

    (1) notes the resolutions of the house of 12 and 13 March, and accordingly agrees that the government will seek to agree with the European Union an extension of the period specified in article 50(3);

    (2) agrees that, if the house has passed a resolution approving the negotiated withdrawal agreement and the framework for the future relationship for the purposes of section 13(1) (b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 by 20 March 2019, then the government will seek to agree with the European Union a one-off extension of the period specified in article 50(3) for a period ending on 30 June 2019 for the purpose of passing the necessary EU exit legislation; and

    (3) notes that, if the house has not passed a resolution approving the negotiated withdrawal agreement and the framework for the future relationship for the purposes of section 13(1)(b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 by 20 March 2019, then it is highly likely that the European council at its meeting the following day would require a clear purpose for any extension, not least to determine its length, and that any extension beyond 30 June 2019 would require the United Kingdom to hold European parliament elections in May 2019.


    It's clear as mud, TBH.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100
    This strikes me as an odd comment. I'm sure it happens, but I'd have thought most despotic governments make sure you vote the right way the first time
  • stodgestodge Posts: 5,660
    Evening all :)

    So "a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing" might sum up today's Westminster nonsense. A second vote is dead - we all knew that. We can ask the EU for an extension if the WA isn't passed by 29/3 but it's up to the EU what kind of extension it will be.

    Bercow now has to decide if there will be an MV3 - if not, we're down to revocation, extension or leaving without a Deal on 29/3. If we get MV3 that will be next week's jollifications.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,842
    kle4 said:

    Brexit Sec votes against Brexit policy.
    Practically tradition, given they only last a little while and then quit anyway.
    But DD voted for the MV this week.

    So perhaps they go round in a circle.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 393
    kle4 said:

    This strikes me as an odd comment. I'm sure it happens, but I'd have thought most despotic governments make sure you vote the right way the first time

    Yes, that’s just stupid. Parliament is doing what parliaments do: vote. We have these votes INSTEAD of royal decrees or dictatorial ukases.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    So "a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing" might sum up today's Westminster nonsense. A second vote is dead - we all knew that. We can ask the EU for an extension if the WA isn't passed by 29/3 but it's up to the EU what kind of extension it will be.

    Bercow now has to decide if there will be an MV3 - if not, we're down to revocation, extension or leaving without a Deal on 29/3. If we get MV3 that will be next week's jollifications.

    He should allow it, since it is currently widely expected to lose anyway since the plans floating around are to win on MV4! He can say 4 is too many.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 4,218

    So now the government needs to find a reason to ask for the extension. Does that take us to a vote on May’s deal or no deal?

    This is the text of the motion which has just passed:

    That this house:

    (1) notes the resolutions of the house of 12 and 13 March, and accordingly agrees that the government will seek to agree with the European Union an extension of the period specified in article 50(3);

    (2) agrees that, if the house has passed a resolution approving the negotiated withdrawal agreement and the framework for the future relationship for the purposes of section 13(1) (b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 by 20 March 2019, then the government will seek to agree with the European Union a one-off extension of the period specified in article 50(3) for a period ending on 30 June 2019 for the purpose of passing the necessary EU exit legislation; and

    (3) notes that, if the house has not passed a resolution approving the negotiated withdrawal agreement and the framework for the future relationship for the purposes of section 13(1)(b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 by 20 March 2019, then it is highly likely that the European council at its meeting the following day would require a clear purpose for any extension, not least to determine its length, and that any extension beyond 30 June 2019 would require the United Kingdom to hold European parliament elections in May 2019.


    It's clear as mud, TBH.
    You can just tell that May said "We have to find a way of threatening Remainers with No Deal and Brexiteers with No Brexit if they don't agree the deal within the next week."
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 23,371
    kle4 said:

    This strikes me as an odd comment. I'm sure it happens, but I'd have thought most despotic governments make sure you vote the right way the first time

    To be fair, parliament are simply being asked to make SOME decision. Any one will do.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 16,808

    kle4 said:

    This strikes me as an odd comment. I'm sure it happens, but I'd have thought most despotic governments make sure you vote the right way the first time

    To be fair, parliament are simply being asked to make SOME decision. Any one will do.
    Indeed. Just do something. The paralysis is becoming ridiculous.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,281
    So now the EU has more control over us than it has ever had before. It gets to decide whether or not we crash out on 29th March. What a thing.
  • dotsdots Posts: 615
    Where can dots find a herd of horny honey badgers? Asking for a friend.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 9,651


    Corbyn changing course once more on a referendum. Perhaps he might find a new stance by midnight.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 12,173

    So now the EU has more control over us than it has ever had before. It gets to decide whether or not we crash out on 29th March. What a thing.

    Brexit means Brexit. No deal is better than a bad deal. A red, white and blue Brexit.

    It was all so clear and well thought through before.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 23,885

    So now the EU has more control over us than it has ever had before. It gets to decide whether or not we crash out on 29th March. What a thing.

    So . . . Nothing has changed?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100

    kle4 said:

    This strikes me as an odd comment. I'm sure it happens, but I'd have thought most despotic governments make sure you vote the right way the first time

    To be fair, parliament are simply being asked to make SOME decision. Any one will do.
    Well quite.

    I am quite the fan of procedural issues (although frankly the way the rules are worded it seems like it is designed such that if you are creative enough, or the House wants it enough, it can do anything it wants) but at the end of the day they do need to make a decision, even if that means considering things they have looked at before, and recurrent votes in a parliament are really not the same thing as rerunning a massive nation wide referendum (which I support, btw). Simply ignoring the rules is not something to be done lightly, or easily (I do enjoy the examples of Acts passed in a few minutes, but by expediting each stage, rather than ignoring them), but the rules are deliberately bendable it seems, since no one wants an assembly unable to decide certain things when on a tight timescale.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    So now the EU has more control over us than it has ever had before. It gets to decide whether or not we crash out on 29th March. What a thing.

    You can be assured that the mood music from the EU* will be dire - no delay, £Bn more...

    Prepare for MOAR FEAR !


    *BBC
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 5,044
    Was the main motion a free vote?

    Surely Barclay can't have broken whip?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 15,741
    And.... The Good Ship May sails on serenely...
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 23,885
    dr_spyn said:



    Corbyn changing course once more on a referendum. Perhaps he might find a new stance by midnight.

    He is an expert level cynic.

    Abstain on motion to require a public vote thus ensuring it fails.
    Give a soundbite sounding like you want one to keep your supporters.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100
    Kevin Barron the only Labour MP willing to vote against Corbyn's amendment. Pretty sure that was the case on an earlier vote too - surprised not to have heard he is in the firing line.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,722
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    So "a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing" might sum up today's Westminster nonsense. A second vote is dead - we all knew that. We can ask the EU for an extension if the WA isn't passed by 29/3 but it's up to the EU what kind of extension it will be.

    Bercow now has to decide if there will be an MV3 - if not, we're down to revocation, extension or leaving without a Deal on 29/3. If we get MV3 that will be next week's jollifications.

    You think Bercow wants to be remembered as The Man Who Caused No Deal Brexit?

    He and his wife would never speak again.

    Which would be ironic. For a Speaker.
  • According to the twitter:

    Hilary Benn's motion failed by two votes.
    Jared O'Mara and Fiona Onasanya abstained.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100

    dr_spyn said:



    Corbyn changing course once more on a referendum. Perhaps he might find a new stance by midnight.

    He is an expert level cynic.

    Abstain on motion to require a public vote thus ensuring it fails.
    Give a soundbite sounding like you want one to keep your supporters.
    It's worked for him so far, but it is a tight line.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,281
    Jonathan said:

    So now the EU has more control over us than it has ever had before. It gets to decide whether or not we crash out on 29th March. What a thing.

    Brexit means Brexit. No deal is better than a bad deal. A red, white and blue Brexit.

    It was all so clear and well thought through before.

    We are literally handing the fate of our economy - and perhaps the UK itself - to 27 foreign governments.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 12,173
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This strikes me as an odd comment. I'm sure it happens, but I'd have thought most despotic governments make sure you vote the right way the first time

    To be fair, parliament are simply being asked to make SOME decision. Any one will do.
    Well quite.

    I am quite the fan of procedural issues (although frankly the way the rules are worded it seems like it is designed such that if you are creative enough, or the House wants it enough, it can do anything it wants) but at the end of the day they do need to make a decision, even if that means considering things they have looked at before, and recurrent votes in a parliament are really not the same thing as rerunning a massive nation wide referendum (which I support, btw). Simply ignoring the rules is not something to be done lightly, or easily (I do enjoy the examples of Acts passed in a few minutes, but by expediting each stage, rather than ignoring them), but the rules are deliberately bendable it seems, since no one wants an assembly unable to decide certain things when on a tight timescale.
    The executive is responsible for putting together the options on which parliament decides. Its plan A having been defeated, the responsibility is on the executive to come up with another idea and whip the government benches and its notional majority to support it. Instead we have the failed plan A again and again.

    That is what is wrong. May is the problem.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100
    edited March 14
    Anyway, after the triumph of the government avoiding more defeats by the skin of its teeth, it is time to move on to the undue optimism weekend phase part of the cycle.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 2,125
    MikeL said:

    Was the main motion a free vote?

    Surely Barclay can't have broken whip?

    It was a free vote.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,842

    According to the twitter:

    Hilary Benn's motion failed by two votes.
    Jared O'Mara and Fiona Onasanya abstained.

    Abstained in person or were they otherwise engaged ?
  • eekeek Posts: 5,524


    Which is basically we could give you an extension but really want to know what you plan to do with it...

    So please make up your minds for once and for all...
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 393
    MaxPB said:

    kle4 said:

    This strikes me as an odd comment. I'm sure it happens, but I'd have thought most despotic governments make sure you vote the right way the first time

    To be fair, parliament are simply being asked to make SOME decision. Any one will do.
    Indeed. Just do something. The paralysis is becoming ridiculous.
    And yet parliament is doing what it is meant to do: reflect the will of the people. The will of the people is horribly divided and conflicted. The referendum was won 52:48 and all polls show Remain is now ahead, but only very narrowly. Basically we are split down the middle, just like the Commons.

    TMay’s most egregious error was not seeing that narrow win by Leave as a driver for compromise and Soft Brexit. EFTA or whatever. Instead, for stupid partisan reasons, she decided to take it as a decisive vote instructing her to seek a bloody Hard Brexit, scrawled with stupid red lines, She is politically autistic, if not actually autistic.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100

    According to the twitter:

    Hilary Benn's motion failed by two votes.
    Jared O'Mara and Fiona Onasanya abstained.

    That's true. But 6 Lab and 3 Con abstentions too
  • dotsdots Posts: 615
    edited March 14
    Do not underestimate the psychological impact of the fact UK government has just handed power to EU to humiliate us.

    Politics is about getting your opponents to do your bidding, spout your policy. The EU May have just won.

    What follows? British Government and the People’s brexit now at the mercy of the EU it will be seen as weak, its effectively failed leadership. For Any Extension UK will accept strings. those strings in hands of Macron, Tusk, Dublin. our negotiation our Brexit on the end of those strings.

    People big up no deal brexit like it’s end of the world. But an extension with strings is politically very very difficult. More difficult than the no deal now certain to eventually happen.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,751
    No 'no deal' exit on 29/3 is now 1.1 on BFE. Which would appear to be free money, with a speedy return.

    Except: someone is once again putting up money on the other side. And one of the ERG on R4 this morning was claiming they had some procedural trick up their sleeve to thwart any extension. So DYoR.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 19,805
    kle4 said:

    This strikes me as an odd comment. I'm sure it happens, but I'd have thought most despotic governments make sure you vote the right way the first time

    And that there is 100% turnout.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 5,044
    rpjs said:

    MikeL said:

    Was the main motion a free vote?

    Surely Barclay can't have broken whip?

    It was a free vote.
    Ah OK - thanks a lot!
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 23,984
    GIN1138 said:

    We LEAVE two weeks tomorrow... :open_mouth:

    or we never leave
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 3,582

    Brexit Sec votes against Brexit policy.
    Jesus...

    Why doesn't she just suspend government and assign all cabinet posts to herself? Its not like she has a functioning cabinet is it?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100
    AndyJS said:
    But...I thought the motion was to recognise that even if we sign the deal now we are not ready to leave by 29 March, so there's no possibility of doing so?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 28,342
    Departure on 29th March now 10/1 with Betfair Exchange.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,526
    Stephen Barclay's statement suggests May might try to get a conditional extension and go for MV3 on March 25th.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 2,125
    eek said:



    Which is basically we could give you an extension but really want to know what you plan to do with it...

    So please make up your minds for once and for all...

    Precisely. What is the point of an extension if all May's going to do with it is put up the same deal which has been rejected twice already? Clearly she thinks that if she strings it out to next week it might concentrate a few more minds, maybe even the DUP, but the ERG seem to be as firmly against it as ever. She's not going to get an MV3, or 4 or whatever through.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 12,173

    Stephen Barclay's statement suggests May might try to get a conditional extension and go for MV3 on March 25th.

    That is utterly reckless.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 2,451

    The way May is trying to ram this through is disgusting. It really is. No compromise. No consensus. Her way, or the highway. Just a disgrace.

    Those are my feelings, it is an absolute disgrace particularly coming from someone who lost her party's majority at the last GE.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Just 1 country can veto an extension.

    The shopping list for Hammond to stump up for could be very long and expensive...
  • oldpoliticsoldpolitics Posts: 408

    According to the twitter:

    Hilary Benn's motion failed by two votes.
    Jared O'Mara and Fiona Onasanya abstained.

    Weird, she was apparently sitting with Benn earlier.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,751
    rpjs said:

    MikeL said:

    Was the main motion a free vote?

    Surely Barclay can't have broken whip?

    It was a free vote.
    The government seems happy to allow its hard leavers free votes, but remainers, not so much.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,100
    edited March 14
    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    This strikes me as an odd comment. I'm sure it happens, but I'd have thought most despotic governments make sure you vote the right way the first time

    To be fair, parliament are simply being asked to make SOME decision. Any one will do.
    Well quite.

    I am quite the fan of procedural issues (although frankly the way the rules are worded it seems like it is designed such that if you are creative enough, or the House wants it enough, it can do anything it wants) but at the end of the day they do need to make a decision, even if that means considering things they have looked at before, and recurrent votes in a parliament are really not the same thing as rerunning a massive nation wide referendum (which I support, btw). Simply ignoring the rules is not something to be done lightly, or easily (I do enjoy the examples of Acts passed in a few minutes, but by expediting each stage, rather than ignoring them), but the rules are deliberately bendable it seems, since no one wants an assembly unable to decide certain things when on a tight timescale.
    The executive is responsible for putting together the options on which parliament decides. Its plan A having been defeated, the responsibility is on the executive to come up with another idea and whip the government benches and its notional majority to support it. Instead we have the failed plan A again and again.

    That is what is wrong. May is the problem.
    I take issue with the word 'the' there. She's 'a' problem, not the only problem. You can talk all you want that it is the executive's responsibility to come up with another idea which might gain support, but that doesn't erase the collective responsibility of the House. Indeed, as we've just seen if the House wanted it could have taken away the executive's responsibility to put together options for parliament, demonstrably proving that by declining to do so, it endorses, for now, the executive's plan by default. 'The executive is responsible for putting together options' as you just put it is not inevitable, parliament allows it as they confirmed in the votes tonight. So it is not something they have no power to overcome her.

    None of that makes May less responsible, she is meant to be leading parliament and achieving outcomes after all, but it would be to pretend to suggest she is 'the' problem, particularly when Mps collectively rejected taking the responsibility for options off her.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,842
    SeanT said:

    MaxPB said:

    kle4 said:

    This strikes me as an odd comment. I'm sure it happens, but I'd have thought most despotic governments make sure you vote the right way the first time

    To be fair, parliament are simply being asked to make SOME decision. Any one will do.
    Indeed. Just do something. The paralysis is becoming ridiculous.
    And yet parliament is doing what it is meant to do: reflect the will of the people. The will of the people is horribly divided and conflicted. The referendum was won 52:48 and all polls show Remain is now ahead, but only very narrowly. Basically we are split down the middle, just like the Commons.

    TMay’s most egregious error was not seeing that narrow win by Leave as a driver for compromise and Soft Brexit. EFTA or whatever. Instead, for stupid partisan reasons, she decided to take it as a decisive vote instructing her to seek a bloody Hard Brexit, scrawled with stupid red lines, She is politically autistic, if not actually autistic.
    But May's Brexit isn't hard enough for many MPs and a majority of MPs are Remain supporters.

    Is there any alternative which would have won over more of the Remain MPs than it lost Leave MPs ?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,400
    So 412 MPs vote for Article 50 extension, for a few billion more and with the requirement of standing candidates in the European Parliament elections the EU might agree
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,722

    So now the EU has more control over us than it has ever had before. It gets to decide whether or not we crash out on 29th March. What a thing.

    The period since March 29th 2017 will be studied for decades as a master class in How To Fuck Up Negotiating. It is comically inept.

    The Legislature DEMANDED to be involved in the meetings, opining on the minutiae of the process. Then demonstrated they hadn't a clue what they were doing in there. It's like the commercial director trying to do a deal, not just having the Board in negotiations with him for instruction and guidance (which would be bad enough) - but also every bloody shareholder too.

    A business doing that would be in administration by teatime.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,751
    edited March 14
    Chris said:

    Fairly clear that not everyone understands that the Betfair "No Deal" market is really "No Deal on 29 March". Prices currently imply this is _more_ likely than "Brexit by 29 March."

    It's the most misleading bet title I have ever seen from Betfair. They are in for some grief from their punters if 29/3 passes and they settle the bet and those expecting a later no deal realise they should have read the small print.
This discussion has been closed.