Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Mikey1874]

Just now, Lord BJ said:

 

Thar’s quite interesting. It wasn’t a particulary well supported when they voted last week. It really is the softest of soft options, and you do kind of ask why leave, but that’s a different question.

 

The tories Brexiteers would hate this option and would fight tooth and nail to stop it. Might even cause a GE?

 

I have no idea how this plays out tonight.

 

Lots of discussion and compromise since last week though we don't know how vote will go. For example will SNP support it. 

 

Would be amazing to get a compromise agreed from Parliament in around a week after 3 years of the Government failing to do that. 

[Poseidon]

I still think for the SNP and the likes of the ERG are employing quite a lot of gamesmanship here. Both not really fancying what's on offer but trying to put severe pressure on Teresa May, knowing that regardless of the result she wouldn't be mad enough to say 'Aye ok then'.

 

The SNPs ambition to Revoke A50 and the hard Brexiteers hopeful of a change in Leadership to try and force a harder Brexit. They probably feel that could become more of a reality voting yes on the CM 2.0 option today.

[Cade]

Stattos reckon CM 2.0 will win 307 to 253 based on what we've heard so far today

 

[JamboX2]

19 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Sorry I was referring to the EU and its predecessors and to our date of joining the EEC (1974). The UK's industrial decline predated even that date by many decades of course, and actually Thatcher probably more than "decimated" what was left.

I just find the sneering at people in the Welsh valleys, Sunderland, Swindon and other areas which have suffered from this very long decline a bit distasteful. I think it is understandable that they want something to change, even if they may be a bit off-target. People in England and Wales have targeted EU membership. People in Scotland of course tend to target the other Union. I am not sure the latter's aim is any surer.

 

 

Agree with your thinking. It's an easy and identifiable object to kick. That MPs have too readily lashed out at both rather than face the harder choices.

[hughesie27]

5 minutes ago, Cade said:

Stattos reckon CM 2.0 will win 307 to 253 based on what we've heard so far today

 

Wouldn't really mean much unless something gets closer to 320.

[Mikey1874]

8 minutes ago, Poseidon said:

I still think for the SNP and the likes of the ERG are employing quite a lot of gamesmanship here. Both not really fancying what's on offer but trying to put severe pressure on Teresa May, knowing that regardless of the result she wouldn't be mad enough to say 'Aye ok then'.

 

The SNPs ambition to Revoke A50 and the hard Brexiteers hopeful of a change in Leadership to try and force a harder Brexit. They probably feel that could become more of a reality voting yes on the CM 2.0 option today.

 

The big risk for SNP and indeed Labour  is May's deal passing.

 

But also for Labour having to fight a General election with a completely dived position. 

 

Despite trying to get the Tories out a general election after we have left EU suits everyone. 

[Mikey1874]

13 minutes ago, Cade said:

Stattos reckon CM 2.0 will win 307 to 253 based on what we've heard so far today

 

 

307 not enough to defeat government though. 

 

Hughsie27 beat me to it. 

 

But it's a good step forward. 

Edited April 1, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Mikey1874]

Government still opposing having the votes today. There will need to be a vote on that again before they get started. 

 

Despite saying it would support this process.

Edited April 1, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Poseidon]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

The big risk for SNP and indeed Labour  is May's deal passing.

 

But also for Labour having to fight a General election with a completely dived position. 

 

Despite trying to get the Tories out a general election after we have left EU suits everyone. 

Yeah I suppose so. Gives May one last big push with her deal through a final MV. Surely if that fails then it'd be GE time.

[Cade]

Gideon Osbourne may be a contemptible, slimy shit of a man at least partly responsible for the mess we're in but he's right about this:

I don’t know why you’re astounded.

MPs have been unable to come up with a successful exit plan from the EU because there isn’t one.

We can refuse to acknowledge the trade-offs between sovereignty, prosperity and security — and then blame the politicians for failing to deliver an impossible task.

Or we can, as a country, face the truth that all forms of Brexit make Britain poorer, less secure and less influential.

If that’s the price the majority of the public is willing to pay then, fine, we’re a democracy.

It looks like they’ll soon get a chance to have their say in an election or referendum.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

41 minutes ago, Cade said:

Gideon Osbourne may be a contemptible, slimy shit of a man at least partly responsible for the mess we're in but he's right about this:

I don’t know why you’re astounded.

MPs have been unable to come up with a successful exit plan from the EU because there isn’t one.

We can refuse to acknowledge the trade-offs between sovereignty, prosperity and security — and then blame the politicians for failing to deliver an impossible task.

Or we can, as a country, face the truth that all forms of Brexit make Britain poorer, less secure and less influential.

If that’s the price the majority of the public is willing to pay then, fine, we’re a democracy.

It looks like they’ll soon get a chance to have their say in an election or referendum.

 

I'm not opposed to it but another referendum will be awful. If you thought the last one was poisonous, get ready for something off the scale.

 

The government and parliament owe it to everyone to meet in the middle and thrash something out.

[Bindy Badgy]

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

With the ability to suspend free movement. 

 

My (limited) understanding is that free movement is mandatory if joining the common market?

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

5 minutes ago, Stokesy said:

 

My (limited) understanding is that free movement is mandatory if joining the common market?

 

I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would want to stop free movement.

[Bindy Badgy]

1 minute ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would want to stop free movement.

 

Neither can I but, the supposed ability to do seemed to be the main reason why my mum's side of the family voted Leave.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

11 minutes ago, Stokesy said:

 

Neither can I but, the supposed ability to do seemed to be the main reason why my mum's side of the family voted Leave.

 

Have they ever explained the logic?

[Notts1874]

11 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would want to stop free movement.

If I'm being brutally honest and living in a massive leave voting constituency in the Midlands they think it means less foreigners which to them is a good thing.

[Cade]

14 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would want to stop free movement.

something something housing crisis something something strain on services something something moslems something something invasion something something white genocide

[Mikey1874]

57 minutes ago, Cade said:

Gideon Osbourne may be a contemptible, slimy shit of a man at least partly responsible for the mess we're in but he's right about this:

I don’t know why you’re astounded.

MPs have been unable to come up with a successful exit plan from the EU because there isn’t one.

We can refuse to acknowledge the trade-offs between sovereignty, prosperity and security — and then blame the politicians for failing to deliver an impossible task.

Or we can, as a country, face the truth that all forms of Brexit make Britain poorer, less secure and less influential.

If that’s the price the majority of the public is willing to pay then, fine, we’re a democracy.

It looks like they’ll soon get a chance to have their say in an election or referendum.

 

Yep

 

Soft Brexit always the clear option 

[Mikey1874]

I find it **** (struggle to find right word) that people still try to say they know what people were all thinking when they voted to leave.

 

All the people against Common Market 2.0 saying that now. 

[Notts1874]

Motion passed and all hard/no deal Brexit options off the table

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Notts1874 said:

Motion passed and all hard/no deal Brexit options off the table

 

And an interesting vote 322 to 277

 

Maybe an indication of what might follow

[Mikey1874]

To debate and vote on 

 

1. Customs Union 

2. Common Market 2.0

3. Confirmation public vote 

4. Parliamentary Supremacy (presumably about allowing Parliament to lead process going forward) 

[Notts1874]

3 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

And an interesting vote 322 to 277

 

Maybe an indication of what might follow

Good point. Bigger margin than last week if my memory is right?

[Cade]

Ken Clark's Customs Union. Lost by 6 last week.

Nick Boles' Common Market 2.0. Lost by 94 last week.

Peter Kyle's Confirmatory Referendum. Lost by 27 last week.

Joanna Cherry's Cancel Article 50 if No Deal. Lost by 109 last week.

[Mikey1874]

7 minutes ago, Notts1874 said:

Good point. Bigger margin than last week if my memory is right?

 

Yes

 

Last week was 327 to 300

[Francis Albert]

30 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would want to stop free movement.

Like most I have no real idea of why 17.4m voted to leave or for that matter why 16.1m voted to remain.

 

I can however understand why people would want controlled immigration rather than free movement. It is after all the basis on which almost every independent nation in the world operates. An immigration policy which favours relatively well off and relatively less qualified and predominantly white  people over poorer, better qualified and (to use a favourite Remainer term) browner people seems a bit objectionable to me.

Just as a protectionist economic bloc which subsidises inefficient and relatively rich local agricultural and other producers over poorer and more efficient and cheaper sources seems to me to be less than a perfect  example of a "free market". 

[Mikey1874]

8 minutes ago, Cade said:

Ken Clark's Customs Union. Lost by 6 last week.

Nick Boles' Common Market 2.0. Lost by 94 last week.

Peter Kyle's Confirmatory Referendum. Lost by 27 last week.

Joanna Cherry's Cancel Article 50 if No Deal. Lost by 109 last week.

 

No Cancel Article 50 motion being debated today. It wasn't picked for debate as presumably has very little chance of happening given no deal has been ruled out.

 

Joanna Cherry has put forward a new motion G.

 

 

Edited April 1, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Bindy Badgy]

35 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

Have they ever explained the logic?

 

Whenever the subject is broached my mum's sister just rolls her eyes. She's had vehemently anti-EU views for over a quarter of a century and I've never heard her give a rational reason why she holds these views.

[Cade]

The SNP MP Joanna Cherry joins Grieve and MPs from other parties with this plan to seek an extension to the Brexit process, and if this is not possible then parliament will choose between either no deal or revoking article 50.

[Francis Albert]

On ‎24‎/‎03‎/‎2019 at 15:46, Francis Albert said:

The Observer has given up any pretence of being a newspaper rather than a propaganda sheet. It's front page headline "A million march against Brexit" is not supported by anything in the text of the article and the rest of the multi-page coverage of this event. In fact the report says that  the organisers say it is very difficult to estimate the numbers. The inner page headline above the rest of the news story goes further and says "More than a million march against Brexit".

Ancient history now but independent assessments by experts (there are specialists in the field) put the numbers at less than half a million, some much less. But the "lie" has done its job (Tusk for example citing over a million demonstrators as evidence that the UK is moving towards a majority to reverse the Brexit vote) and the facts (or something much closer to them) have been buried.

Edited April 1, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Cade]

Chebs oot in the public gallery!

 

[The Real Maroonblood]

11 minutes ago, Cade said:

Chebs oot in the public gallery!

 

[Mikey1874]

12 minutes ago, Cade said:

Chebs oot in the public gallery!

 

 

Pictures are available online 

 

 

[Cruyff Turn]

19 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Pictures are available online 

 

 

Link please. ?

 

Nevermind, just a bunch of hippies 

Edited April 1, 2019 by Cruyff Turn

[Victorian]

The Cherry amendment is very comprehensive and clearly allows for Brexit to happen in some form.     If they can't accept that this amendment represents the best faith compromise possible then they are simply dishonest.     

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Cruyff Turn said:

Link please. ?

 

Nevermind, just a bunch of hippies 

 

Not sure I'm allowed to post nude pics

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Victorian said:

The Cherry amendment is very comprehensive and clearly allows for Brexit to happen in some form.     If they can't accept that this amendment represents the best faith compromise possible then they are simply dishonest.     

 

But not a specific actual plan which is needed.

 

And while it is sensible the fact it includes revoke, which I wrongly said above it wasn't suggests it will be defeated. 

 

 

[Cruyff Turn]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Not sure I'm allowed to post nude pics

Seen it anyway now Mikey, no one said there was dudes in loin clothes?

[Victorian]

Just now, Mikey1874 said:

 

But not a specific actual plan which is needed.

 

And while it is sensible the fact it includes revoke, which I wrongly said above it wasn't suggests it will be defeated. 

 

 

 

Primarily it is an insurance policy but it also maps out the process to return to delivering Brexit after art50 is revoked,   if it has to be revoked.      An excellent compromise.    

[Don Dan]

52 minutes ago, Cruyff Turn said:

Link please. ?

 

Nevermind, just a bunch of hippies 

 

They could have at least got some lookers up there rather than Ragtag and Bobtail look alikes!

Edited April 1, 2019 by Dannie Boy
Than

[Mikey1874]

[Cruyff Turn]

Labour whipped for every indicative vote but abstain for Joanna Cherry’s. I hope that Labour don’t find themselves in a position at a future GE where they need to beg the SNP to support their minority Government. They should be told to sling their hook. 

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Cruyff Turn said:

Labour whipped for every indicative vote but abstain for Joanna Cherry’s. I hope that Labour don’t find themselves in a position at a future GE where they need to beg the SNP to support their minority Government. They should be told to sling their hook. 

 

I was thinking that too. They have been extremely parochial in this - they don't do "allies" very well. The very fact that they are whipping at all in the indicative votes is disappointing.

[Victorian]

6 minutes ago, Cruyff Turn said:

Labour whipped for every indicative vote but abstain for Joanna Cherry’s. I hope that Labour don’t find themselves in a position at a future GE where they need to beg the SNP to support their minority Government. They should be told to sling their hook. 

 

The SNP would have to agree to coalition or C&S with Labour.     The SNP cannot take a course of action that leads to the Tories forming a government instead.     Pro-independence majority at Holyrood + SNP's hand up Corbyn's bum at Westminster = referendum.

Edited April 1, 2019 by Victorian

[Cade]

The seethe in Ingerlund if the "uppity Jocks" were in any coalition government would be tremendous.

They only (barely) accept the DUP are they're as nationalistic and unionist as they are themselves.

[Cruyff Turn]

2 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

I was thinking that too. They have been extremely parochial in this - they don't do "allies" very well. The very fact that they are whipping at all in the indicative votes is disappointing.

Well, they had their chance to end Brexit and I’m sure ardent remain voters will be made aware that Labour didn’t stand up for them. 

[Victorian]

4 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

I was thinking that too. They have been extremely parochial in this - they don't do "allies" very well. The very fact that they are whipping at all in the indicative votes is disappointing.

 

They can't easily be allies with the SNP until elected.    It would not be popular in England.

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

 

They can't easily be allies with the SNP until elected.    It would not be popular in England.

 

Agreed, but they could allow free votes on SNP-led proposals which also lie within their own aims rather than whipping to defeat them.

[redjambo]

4 minutes ago, Cruyff Turn said:

Well, they had their chance to end Brexit and I’m sure ardent remain voters will be made aware that Labour didn’t stand up for them. 

 

It has certainly reinforced the opinions of this ex-Labour voter.

[Victorian]

3 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Agreed, but they could allow free votes on SNP-led proposals which also lie within their own aims rather than whipping to defeat them.

 

Yes.   A free vote would have been better but even that leaves them liable to the same accusation.     Leave voting,  English voters are not going to like Labour doing anything other than opposing the perceived Brexit frustrating proposals of remainer Scottish MPs.     Election poison.

 

Labour could work with the SNP and be the good guys of Brexit but it severely jeopardises their election prospects.