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?

Personally I'd have MORE respect for and faith in our parliamentary system and our politicians if this came to pass, not less.

Your proposal requires honesty from politicians across the political spectrum. I may be jaded, but I think that the leave campaign's plans for unicorns and rainbows were more realistic. I agree that the referendum should never have been held, but I wouldn't know what to say to people who claim I only think that because I don't like the result.

bellini thank you, if a prepper is reasonably confident that no deal is unlikely I can bluff better reassurance!

Louise you are missing the other leg of the process where there is sufficient devolution to English regions to put them on a par with Scottish Parliament etc.

If we are comparing with the US then Senate implies abolition of HoL, but I don't think there would be a need to overlay a Presidency. HoC would be restricted to non-devolved areas - eg International Treaties (so still holding the Brexit cards), Defence

I don't want it to look like a legal stitch-up
which is why another bloody ref would be the approach that does the least damage ... if we have the time !

If it's a panic revoke on 29 March, obviously the PM will just have to fall on her sword.

I suggest STV with 3 options:
Remain, May's WA, No Deal

Ireland seem to have refs sussed.
We should copy their system if poss

Looking at the 2016 ref:

Pass a law requiring each campaign to have an official leader, who is to be personally & criminally liable for accepting any dodgy money, any illegal use of data, or ANY money / services from foreign donors

Ban any unofficial campaign, with criminal penalties too - yes, I know we can't ban foreign social media, but it is easier to point the finger at them !

Louise Yes, I think howabout described much how I visualise it:

Holyrood would deal with everything for Scotland, except say foreign & defence affairs, also trade deals, maybe international agencies like EURATOM etc

For these, we would have a bicameral system, with the HoC elected via the system of PR we use for EU elections
and the Senate replacing the unelected HoL.

For major decisions like going to war, leaving / joining the EU or NAFTA, the Senate would require agreement from all 4 nations (3 when NI has left)

For positioning of potentially dangerous or disruptive infrastructure, like nuclear power stations or nuclear weapons etc,
the country where it is to be placed should also be able to veto in its national assembly, e.g. Holyrood.

Your proposal requires honesty from politicians across the political spectrum. I may be jaded, but I think that the leave campaign's plans for unicorns and rainbows were more realistic. Oh, I totally agree. In fact I make that explicit in my post ('and of course it won't happen').

I agree that the referendum should never have been held, but I wouldn't know what to say to people who claim I only think that because I don't like the result.
I'd say no, I think that because a) we're not a country that normally runs them and we don't know how and b) it was set up with no heed to the necessary checks and parameters.

Ireland doesn’t do STV for referendums. It is a yes or no choice. But a proper Citizens Assembly to look at the issues for months before hand and make recommendations,

Cameron and his goons did not put any checks in place (advisory

The 2016 referendum was only ever advisory.

Which is why the frantic todger-tugging to pretend it's sacrosanct leaves such a sour taste.

The grown up response to the result would be "Great. Thanks for letting us know what you think. We'll go away now and work out the best way to deliver that expectation in the way thats most beneficial to the entire UK. See you in 5 years".

If there's any cosmic justice, Brexit will be revoked, and the completely unnecessary obscene rush to trigger A50 will be seen as the slow puncture that deflated it.

The UK will be demolished to make way for the new hyperspace bypass.

twitter.com/SkyNewsPolitics/status/1072463780007809024

@SkyNewsPolitics tweets: "Theresa May gets locked inside her car as she attempts to meet German Chancellor Angela Merkel"

Beyond. Satire.

I remain convinced that Parliament will avoid No Deal.

I don't - they have shown themselves to be such a bunch of incompetents that crashing out by accident could easily happen.

Allowing no-deal will bring chaos and with a minority government, that'll bring a GE, in which Tories will be blamed.
There are maybe 50 mp's who would support no-deal

Thats why they won't allow it.

May has shown herself time and time again to be vehemently opposed to something and then she is not.

David Allen Green
‏*@davidallengreen*

After all the excitement and drama of the last day or so...

...UK is still set to leave EU by automatic operation of law on 29 March 2019, deal or no deal, unless something is done to avert or delay it...

...and there is nothing yet in sight which will avert or delay it.

There are maybe 50 mp's who would support no-deal

Doesn't matter if there was only one of even none. What matters is whether there is a majority that will get themselves organised enough to get any other option agreed and acted upon. If they don't we will drop out without a deal.

I'm with peregrina on this. No deal is a real possibility not because people want it but because they are too incompetent and busy just trying to keep their own arses alive for another day that it will just end up happening.

I'd say no, I think that because a) we're not a country that normally runs them and we don't know how and b) it was set up with no heed to the necessary checks and parameters.

These arguments hold no weight with the people I know who supported leave. And, tbh, this is actually what is undermining my belief in the parliamentary system as it stands. Self-serving politicians who are unable to even handle basic checks and balances for holding a referendum. The level of dishonesty shown by the leave campaign hit a new low IMO.

Which is why the frantic todger-tugging to pretend it's sacrosanct leaves such a sour taste.

I don't think that everyone is "pretending" that it is sacrosanct. I, personally, am deeply uncomfortable with the idea of a parliament completely disregarding the referendum without very good reason. And "the economy will fall off a cliff" and "the GFA cannot be properly honoured" sound like a good reasons, except those points were made by the remainers in the run up to the referendum and the leave vote still won. The only new piece of information we have is what deal has actually been able to be achieved.

@Peregrina . Which is why I have put No Deal Crash Out higher up my list of bad things that might happen to affect my family and prep for it as best I can.
However , I still think that our rag taggle bunch of MPs on both sides will avoid it. I also think TM will avoid it. She will blink if she has to.

I think she’s more likely to quit at the eleventh hour than revoke A50.

Every time I think she's going to quit, she doesn't. She'll see it as her patriotic duty to revoke if it comes to it.
Not saying that will make people happy but I'm absolutely certain that despite the bluster, no one (apart from disaster capitalists and their acolytes) will be happy withNo Deal.

the economy will fall off a cliff" and "the GFA cannot be properly honoured" sound like a good reasons, except those points were made by the remainers in the run up to the referendum and the leave vote still won. That speaks more to the power of the appeal to emotion of the leave vote and the sensibilities of the average leave voter than to anything else.

The only new piece of information we have is what deal has actually been able to be achieved. We also have the fact that May is buggering on trying (albeit ham-fistedly and futilely) to get a deal at all. If she actually thought we'd be OK with WTO rules she wouldn't be bothering.

No deal may be the default position but that doesn't make it the most likely outcome.

Even the most loony Brexiters who favour no deal in principle, don’t necesarily favour it in practice with no preparation. It is literally economic suicide and could quite possibly trigger a state of emergency. The Tories would never recover. They want be in power and that would be the end of it.

Now we know for sure that article 50 can be unilaterally revoked, parliament can bring the government down and stop Brexit if the worst comes to the worst. There are enough Tories/DUP MPs who would rather vote against the government or abstain in a vote of no confidence than allow us to crash out without a deal (it wouldn't take many). Even if it goes down to the wire on an emergency motion to revoke article 50 notice at 22.30 on March 29th.

If it looks like May is going for No Deal that is when Corbyn will strike with a No Confidence motion in the hope Tories like Grieve back it out of disgust for what May is planning (and for the sake of the country and the Tory party).

If that fails then emergency motion would be passed to halt the exit day

Is it me or most of the MPs that are actually doing their job and looking after the country are women??

However , I still think that our rag taggle bunch of MPs on both sides will avoid it. I also think TM will avoid it. She will blink if she has to

I agree. They’re playing a game of dare on the railway tracks. They will jump out of the way of the train when it comes to it. Even May.

I don't think that everyone is "pretending" that it is sacrosanct.

No. Just the majority of MPs who it suits to.

This made me laugh

@conorsmith
It is clear now that Sinn Fein have a duty to take their seats in Westminster to pull off the greatest mace heist the world has ever seen

Don’t give the population the choice of no deal though - they will vote for it.