Westminstenders: A vote too far?

[RedToothBrush]

The ECJ have ruled that the UK can unilaterally revoke A50.

There maybe lots of other news today, but that's the big one.

May has her big vote tomorrow. Or does she.

Will she survive until the end of the week?

Wasn't remaining in the Customs Union a Tory manifesto pledge?

I think that one, together with the £350 million lie bus, are classified as "Oh, politicians lie, Leavers never believed those things."

Conversely, anything about honouring the referendum result is "Respect The WILL of the People because politicians should never lie! And the only way to Respect the WILL of the People is to create a cheese submarine Brexit that is precisely according to my personal fantasy."

Any govt that depends on bribing the DUP is a disgrace
A diseased tick controlling the dog.

Ironically, the DUP have been one of the main causes of Brexit crashing, with their refusal to let NI be treated differently from Britain.
That's what happens when you hang on to a shameful colonial relic

My best hope re Corbyn is that we know he is against the "precious union" with NI, so he should accelerate cross-border links and accelerate the wait until it is no longer our problem

OMG Loathesome is at it again. She just can't get out of her own way. Amazing that the Tories deputise her again and again to speak to the press:

Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, has claimed that concessions are possible, because the EU has a habit of shifting at the last possible minute in negotiations. Speaking on the Today programme she said this happened in the talks with Greece during the financial crisis. She said:
The EU is always in a position where it negotiates at the last possible moment.

I think it would be very clear to colleagues, friends and neighbours in Europe, as well as the UK, that the deal as it stood was not going to get through the UK parliament.

If we want to avoid a no-deal Brexit next March we need to go back to the drawing board to ensure that UK parliament has that democratic capability that it is demanding, quite rightly. That is why the prime minister is right to do this.

Leadsom has suggested that John Bercow, the Commons speaker, is biased against Brexit. Speaking on Today, Leadsom, a Brexiter, said:
[Bercow has] made his views on Brexit on the record, and the problem with that of course is that the chair’s impartiality is absolutely essential.

Asked whether she believed his position was “tainted”, she replied:

He’s made his views known on Brexit ... it’s a matter for him but nevertheless it’s a challenge and all colleagues nee d to form their own view of that.

I just can't get on board with the idea that a Parliament can have a house full of MPs (pretty much) all elected on the basis that Brexit is going ahead to then change tack completely.

This would only be known to be true if the parties concerned had published one line Manifestos - "We support Brexit". Instead they offered a number of proposals - student fees, renationising the railways etc, and some voters will have voted on that basis. So they could do a U turn - the Tories did after the 2015 election when they said that they would support the Single Market and then decided that they wouldn't after all.

The problem with a GE is that Brexit is not a party political issue
so we probably wouldn't have a neat Remain vs leave, but a (new) Tory leader and Corbyn each claiming they could renegotiate a better deal in a few months.

No reason why the EU would grant an extension to just get more of the same ignorant crap
so the HoC would need to call a GE to run before Brexit Day ... and then Corbyn has no time left

Why I think Invoking again would need a new referendum:

Revoke would mean the UK crawls away from this Brexit attempt with its tail between its legs and the world laughing.
Either a desperate PM revoking at the last moment, or as a result of a PV to cover her back.

I don't expect any public enthusiasm for a repeat performance soon
and if there has been a PV to Remain, that would further decrease the public mandate

Leave have their shot
make it work this time - accept the WA - or go away and plan properly for the next 10 years

Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, has claimed that concessions are possible, because the EU has a habit of shifting at the last possible minute in negotiations.

Leasdom misses the point that the negotiations end up being to the mutual benefit of both sides. She is still asking the EU for all the benefits without the obligations, and they have already made some concessions, which no doubt have escaped her.

It's up to her and her fellow Leavers to say exactly what they want. Which they won't spell out, because it's to trash the economy so that they and their wealthy chums benefit. In the same way that Cameron couldn't sell the advantages of the EU because it would be making it clear that the problems facing the country were the result of his policies.

Legalls, the HoC - or to be exact, the PM - can always make an emergency decision if we're headng over a cliff.

Otherwise, I agree, having had the bloody stupid 2016 referendum,
morally, we really need another bloody stupid referendum, to end Brexit for the next several years

twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1072424163992879104?s=21

#Brexit has become a mess. A vote delayed. Mrs May returning to Brussels. My two messages: we'll never let down Ireland; it’s out of the question to renegotiate the backstop & if you are looking for a closer future relationship to avoid the backstop, this will be no problem w/ us

Big Choc
I am not sure you are right that Revocation can be solely down to the PM. Yesterday the court ruled that revocation can happen but must happen through that country’s parliamentary process. Since the Gina Millar case I think that means through the HoC but not necessarily a referendum.

I suppose that is why I was hoping for a vote , making revocation something a majority in the HoC would want. I do understand though why people might th8nk that a ref is politically necessary.

The renegotiation all these Tories want is to make the backstop meaningless.
The EU will never agree to that,
even at the 59th minute - like DD & other delusional Brexiters keep claiming.

That, incidentally, is the great advantage to small countries like Ireland that the EU negotiates as a bloc.
Otherwise, if it were 27 countries, each out for their own interest, Britain could steamroller over Ireland and do what it wants.

That's why the govt keeps trying to talk to individual countries:
ministers have been trying to persuade them to dump Ireland.
It's not worked

It's why revoke and a fresh invoke would produce the same result:
a WA that crashes on the NI border.

So guy Verhofstadt is also advocating revocation. Didn’t May see him this am? Maybe other leaders will advise similar .

{so we probably wouldn't have a neat Remain vs leave, but a (new) Tory leader and Corbyn each claiming they could renegotiate a better deal in a few months.}

As time ticks slowly by, The EU are getting more and more prepared for the UK leaving. While they may not be fully prepared by March 2019 much of it will be in place so the UK's decision will be relatively unimportant. Apart from the customs tariffs it would be a good time to add a few cents to the price of everything sold to the UK (like when decimalisation came in, it was always rounded up).

Why does Leadsom think that the EU will suddenly capitulate? A minor wiggle maybe but NOTHING that will damage the 4 pillars.
Although I don't know the details of the Greek negotiations I think it is essentially money and swirling it around a bit, not that the Greeks were threatening to dismantle the EU.

2bees the ECJ said it must happen accoording to our constitutional process

The PM is the only one who can legally revoke, via a letter to the EU Commission
she does not need HoC permission, not can they do it themselves
That is our constitution

The UK is unusual in that the PM has so much individual power, which was taken over the last 150 years or so from the rights of the Sovereign.

Contrast the PM to say POTUS, who has far more constraints from Congress

Also, if we do ditch Brexit, by whatever means,
I will be watching carefully to see if / when the govt abolishes those Henry VIII powers it gave itself 🤔
Such powers have a habit of becoming a permanent feature.

BigChoc I agree that was and may still be our constitution but I am questioning the effect of the Gina Miller case giving parliment power in this , up till then govt thought they under constitution could do what they liked. It comes back to the wording of the original Bill before the Ref.

2bees from what I read on legal twitter yesterday, it seems that the Miller case was based on a false assumption about revocation (as there was previously no case law about article 50). So the Miller case doesn't change what the ECJ ruling says. If the Miller case was held now though, the ECJ ruling would have changed the Miller outcome.

I will be watching carefully to see if / when the govt abolishes those Henry VIII powers it gave itself 🤔 Such powers have a habit of becoming a permanent feature

No one has ever explained to me in a manner which didn't support a hidden agenda why such powerful bills are automatically located within a template sunset clause text ?

When I was younger, a lot of what I saw seemed pretty shit, and I had to be content with my elders patting me on the head and sagely saying "I was too young to understand".

Bollocks. I wasn't. Things really are that shit.

This Xmas emigre DB is visiting, so I'll have to hear how he realised it (thanks to me - I'm older) and decided to emigrate ... to the US.

I guess we both lost out there /

Gina Miller can't change our constitution.

I've been reading various "expert" legal opinion, who so far all agree she just needs to write a letter to the EU Commission, no HoC legislation necessary.

I've lost my original legal source reference, but here are more popular ones:

www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/10/uk-can-unilaterally-stop-brexit-process-eu-court-rules
"the European court ruling meant it was in the prime minister’s gift to personally take Brexit off the table. The prime minister indicated that was true"

news.sky.com/story/government-could-bypass-parliament-to-revoke-article-50-11571873

However, after even the HoC Twitter feed was wrong, it seems likely that even the experts are sometimes confused atm !

Note: a big worry the ERG have about May is that she could theoretically Revoke
So they at least think it is legally feasible

Thanks, pepvixen I remember now that the Miller case was based on the assumption that unilateral revocation wasn't possible.
Hence it has been superceded by the ECJ decision

I have not got to the end of Yanis Varoufakis's book yet, but has any of you had the impression that the EU / Troika has capitulated to Greece's demands?

Thank you for explaining . Constitutional law definitely not my speciality! Ask me all about knitting instead, concentrating on that right now!

If the backstop is the main issue TM needs to revoke Art 50 and then agree the future relationship before re invoking. The backstop is only an isssue if a future relationship which respects the GFA cannot be agreed.

So what exactly do you think their mandate now is howabout? Ed Vaizey in his acceptance speech at the Count for last year's election said that it meant Hard Brexit was dead, and that it was a vote against austerity.

Search me, since they have all spent the last 18 months completely destroying any public trust in what they say or even purport to do. No wonder the Opposition have bother opposing. If the Government and their Party knew and understood and explained what they were proposing then that might be a start.

If the backstop is the main issue TM needs to revoke Art 50 and then agree the future relationship before re invoking. The backstop is only an issue if a future relationship which respects the GFA cannot be agreed.

Agreed and worth repeating Inniu

However as the ERG keep pointing out the Backstop is NOT the problem. The Backstop is being used as the shoehorn to keep the UK in the Hotel California indefinitely. The EU have shown no serious intent to ever negotiate a future trading relationship other than Norway minus plus customs union.

So Leadsome has basically admitted that the government are trying to force the hand of the EU by threatening a no-deal Brexit. I can't see them capitulating on the Irish border issue tbh.