This is a Premium feature
To use this feature subscribe to Mumsnet Premium - get first access to new features see fewer ads, and support Mumsnet.Start using Mumsnet Premium
When MPs vote on December 11th-what are the possible outcomes?!(82 Posts)
If enough people (more than half) agree the plan, Brexit goes ahead and Theresa May and the conservatives remain in power.
If not enough people vote yes, then what? What actually happens? Does that count as a vote of no confidence in the PM or not? Does Brexit still go ahead anyway?
Apologies if those are stupid questions that have been done to death.
I have no idea but would love to know. I have assumed her deal will go through but now I'm starting to think if it doesn't we should have a 2nd vote....
But. What if a second vote comes out the same?
I just wonder if TM doesn’t get this vote through on the 11th, what that will actually look like? It’s looks to me (a very uneducated eye) increasingly likely?!
It's not a vote of no confidence. I think there's a possibility there could be a second meaningful vote.
There are intricate procedural possibilities that I don't understand. Just when someone has explained it, it slips away from my attempts to fix it in my brain.
On the webchat today prof Catherine Bernard said..
"The key question is what will happen in respect to the meaningful vote on 11 December in Westminster. At the moment, it looks like the government will lose that vote, although Theresa May is working hard to overcome the opposition to the vote. I f she does lose then the question is whether she resigns (unlikely), is subject to a leadership challenge, or calls for a general election or a second referendum. I think she might wait to see what happens to the pound and, if it sinks, call a second meaningful vote. It is not very likely that the EU will agree to renegotiate what is already a substantial Treaty."
Not sure if that helps!
I think there's a possibility there could be a second meaningful vote.
What is the difference between a vote and a meaningful vote?
If she doesn’t ‘win’ on the 11th, having another vote a week or two later isn’t going to be any different, is it?
I think if the 2nd vote came out the same then it means that people have voted to leave knowing No Deal is a real possibility whereas when we voted in 2016 No Deal wasn't mentioned! It was all "they need us as much as we need them and of course we will have access to the single market".
I think if the 2nd vote came out the same then it means that people have voted to leave knowing No Deal is a real possibility whereas when we voted in 2016 No Deal wasn't mentioned!
Do you mean a second referendum?
If Commons don't vote for it then we leave with no deal.
Possibility of deal being amended and new vote goes through at last minute.
Possibility of leadership challenge, and or general election.
Can't see another referendum.
But no one really knows.
Following this because I don't understand either
I’m glad it’s not just me !
I don’t really properly understand what a No Deal Brexit is either?
Depends on the scale of any defeat, 10 votes and she'll ask commons to have another vote, 100 plus votes and she'll have to think again, if the defeat was in the 100s, normally, she d be humiliated and resign, though she is hardly normal!
MPs don't want a no deal and would raise an amendment to that effect, Government would normally follow parliaments decision, so a GE, another referendum, seek to renegotiate the treaty or revoke article 50.
In all options, they'd need to ask the EU for an extension to art50.
As to exactly what the Government would do, we don't know, then again with her deal, after 20months to 4years, we are back to where we are now, if they cannot get agreement, well, actually worse, because then we fall into the backstop and could stay there unable to leave unless the EU says so!!
I don't mean a second referendum, I mean a second meaningful vote.
I personally don't want a second referendum for fear that No Deal would be an option and people are just foolish enough to vote for it.
At this stage, I think MPs should be doing what it takes to avoid No Deal. If that means approving a Shit Withdrawal Agreement, so be it.
I don’t fully understand what a no deal Brexit is either
I think lots of people don’t fully understand this. It's very hard to think all the aspects through.
There are definitely some people who think that ‘ no deal’ is a way of making everything go away. Nothing could be further from the truth.
No deal is the most Brexity of Brexits.
No deal means the withdrawal agreement doesn’t apply- but that we still withdraw from the EU and all our piggy back agreements completely.
No deal means on March 29th, Britain’s withdrawal from the EU under Article 50 will become law.
No deal means in Britain the European Communities Act of 1972 is repealed and the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 applies.
No deal means that in three months time all the free trade agreements with over 70 countries no longer apply to the U.K.
No deal means the U.K. will fall back onto tariffs set by the World Trade Organization.
No deal means British consumers would face higher prices for many goods and services.
No deal means more than tariffs as many legal obligations, insurances, safety mechanisms etc lapse immediately, putting at risk air travel, electricity interconnections,financial services.
No deal means the status of EU citizens in Britain and millions of British citizens in the EU is in doubt.
No deal means that if there’s only two minutes more transit time per lorry at Dover and the Channel Tunnel that translates into a 47km traffic jam. (The government has contingency plans for turning a 20km stretch of the M20, into a park)
No deal means the supermarket maximum one-and-a-half days’ fresh food in their supply chain leads to shortages.The government takes control ( we wanted that) and distributes food with inevitable rationing.
No deal means supply of medical supplies is disrupted. The British Pharmaceutical Industry, says the industry has been on notice to accelerate its preparation for no deal. Stocks of medicines have been increased with a 16-week cushion for some supplies. In October MPs were told there were simply not enough cold warehouses to ensure supplies of drugs that need a constant temperature from manufacture to injections. Drug companies working with the government were prevented from talking about the planning needed by strict gagging clauses. The Nuffield Trust estimated that no deal would cost the nhs an additional £2.3bn by 2020.
No deal means the City is in chaos ,financial passporting ends and London’s role as Europe’s biggest centre for trading and clearing is in crisis.
No deal means the pound falls further, inflation, interest rate rises
I could go on but this article explains it better.
No deal is shit yet on some surveys 30% of people want it.
I'm a prepper and, contrary to popular misconception, I don't want the shit to hit the fan. No deal would do this. I wish people would take it seriously and stop trotting out childish "Project Fear " memes and slogans.
People need to be grown ups about this.
The debate is due to last five days in advance of the vote.
The tabloids and the TV news will be in palpitations the whole time.
I have absolutely no idea how the vote will go because I have long ago ceased understanding what is driving our elected reprsentatives
I don’t fully understand what a no deal Brexit is either
It means no deals at all of any kind with anybody.
Every deal with everybody in the world that we are part of has been done through the EU
and they will all cease to exist at 11pm on march 29th 2019
unless we have a deal with the EU
to allow all the other deals to roll over to be sorted out
We currently have a seat on the plane
A deal would give us a parachute when we jump out
No deal = No parachute
I spent time with my brexiteer family this week- farming folk, very rural. They have absolutely NO understanding of how Brexit (deal or no deal) is going to affect their industry. I was really shocked. They are under the illusion that British people will continue to buy British produced meat and produce (and European ones produced to high welfare standards), if our markets are opened up to cheap, low quality American imports produced using methods that are currently illegal across the EU
My understanding is that if she loses the meaningful vote in Parliament, no one knows for certain what will happen next.
If she loses, it isn't an automatic vote of no confidence (due to Fixed Term Parliaments Act). If she loses by a small margin, she could try to win some small concessions from the EU and then try again - 2nd vote in Parliament. But if she loses by a landslide (50-100 votes +) then it's hard to see what her next move is. Under the motion agreed in Parliament that gave MPs a meaningful vote, she has 21 days to review the Government's position and come back with something else. This could be another type of Brexit eg Norway option being bruited about - BUT no certainty she'd get support for any of them, and would still require EU agreeing extension of Article 50 to renegotiate.
She could resign but a change of leader wouldn't really solve anything. No chance of the Tory turkeys voting for Xmas via another general election.
Which is why I am quietly hopeful (and have been for some time) that a people's vote is the only way out of this mess. Interestingly, John McDonnell came out today saying something like if there was a referendum it should be May's deal or no Brexit... I know which one I'd vote for!
Normally if you lose the first vote you'd try to make changes before putting it to a second vote. Not sure how meaningful those changes would have to be, but EU unlikely to agree to anything more than minor tweaks. But there are so many hand grenades which can be thrown into this mix that anything could happen: initial ruling on whether we an withdraw A50 unilaterally, building support for norway option, markets may tank after first vote, not to mention any EU leaks or Trump's proclamations or stories about the tactics used by the whips, or a vote of no confidence. It's going to be an awful few weeks but I am glad it's not sorted because the PV is still a possibility.
I think the whip will require all the conservative MPs to vote with the government. If an MP defies a whip, the consequences can be serious - particularly a three line whip, so I think more MPs will vote with the 'deal' (which isn't really a deal yet) in the end. But MPs do defy the whip so I couldn't say for sure.
The DUP are the ones that could put the spanner in the works as they can reassess their confidence and supply deal, which Arlene Foster has said she will do.
The 'deal' is not really a deal, it is a document putting preferences in for the deal. The withdrawal agreement is the 500 page doc that is a legal document. It basically makes it a smooth exit and buys both of us (EU and UK) time to make another 500odd page doc outlining the actual deal - end point 2020 I think. If no deal is reached in that time, then we enter the dreaded backstop which is what everyone hates - nobody, including the EU, wants to enter the backstop as that is just dragging things on and has some economic consequences for NI, as well as this border issue, although I think that is a bit of a red herring.
I cant remember if Arlene Foster (DUP) hates the withdrawal agreement and the backstop, or just the backstop. If there was some way of separating the two, perhaps she would be happier, I can't remember.
It is a good story to say it won't get through parliament but the whips will have other ideas, unless MPs are given a free vote, which I cannot imagine they will be. But I don't actually know that at the mo.
If it doesn't go through, Theresa may go back to the EU and negotiate again, and perhaps get the things that are rubbish sorted, although I wish she would do that now - although the EU aren't playing that game at this stage I don't think. Saying that, they could be talking behind closed doors. Perhaps she will say, look I can get the withdrawal agreement through, but not the backstop - which is the 'safety net' (which people def don't like) in the event of no deal then being arranged.
I cannot say for sure obviously, but I highly doubt the occurrence of a 2nd ref or a GE (there won't be the majority for either, the Tories won't put the option of a 2nd ref through the house, not a chance as I see it, and there is no other way to get one, and after last time there is no way May will call a GE lol) - if anything, it'll be a leadership challenge - it which case I think there is 14 days where the Conservatives have to get behind the new Leader which the party, and the DUP, then have to vote for - there has to be a majority backing the new leader/govt/cabinet. Then perhaps, if it was someone like Boris who is a bit kamikaze, we would go out on WTO without a transition arrangement/withdrawal agreement, which we would have under Theresa May, ...but then we would have to negotiate a deal anyway.
We cannot negotiate a deal until we are out, after March, it is not legally possible, so we have to come out first, and then sort the deal. The difference is that with Theresa May's 'deal' (although it is not a deal as such), we will have a transition period so that we don't have full on WTO rules - basically starting again, where there would be more chaos I would think.
Anyway, either way we leave, it is just how we leave. And Labour, and others, mucking about and saying we want a GE or a 2nd ref is just sabotaging the process and making it worse imo, not to mention getting people's hopes up perhaps, not to mention them standing on a manifesto saying they would act on the referendum. But its a good story lol and gets them on telly perhaps. Anyway, we leave in March, and ideally, we need a transition period of time, which Theresa May has managed to get legally agreed, if we vote it through. I think actually you will get more MPs voting it through than the media are saying - wouldn't make a good story though would it, across all the parties, as coming straight out on WTO is a total ballache. Doable, but more of a ballache that having time to then negotiate an actual deal.
If an MP defies a whip, the consequences can be serious - particularly a three line whip
Tell that to Jeremy Corbyn.
He voted against his own government hundreds of times including 3 line whips
yes that is true Talkinpeece - I think it maybe depends on the 'management' of the party as to what happens to them... perhaps it was because he was a known rebel as it were... some MPs have been known to get ousted from the party for defying a three line whip
fusionchefgeoff it is a vote that is 'underlined three times' - so put as utmost importance that mps vote the way the govt want them to vote.. as opposed to one and two line whips, which are less important as it were