Westminstenders: What The Hell Happens Next?!

[RedToothBrush]

John Bercow has just spent over at an hour dealing with a Points of Order, in which he has argued that he is defending the soverignty of the House of Commons and that is his duty, not to simply to be a cheerleader for the executive.

Taking back control seems to have rather upset ERG Brexiteers.

As Jess Phillips astutely pointed out:
"People only care about procedures, and protecting and conserving the procedures, when they don't like the outcome of the thing that is about to happen and never when it is going in their favour."

And given what we have seen the Executive do over the last few months in terms of trying to use procedure for its own political gain, this is quite a fair point.

There are however certain constitutional questions this is all raising. And we have a very real constitutional crisis here.

Bercow has ruled that he CAN allow an amendment (because the previous vote had prevented only a motion and a debate) put forward by Grieve to go to a vote.

This amendment would - if it is passed by the house - require May to report to the house within 3 days if the WA fails to pass next week.

This would be a significant victory, if it passed because at present the position is where May can delay reporting back to the house until it start to get to the point where politically the opposition can't influence things, and a 'meaningful vote' will in practice be more like a gun to the head by the Executive, rather than the House of Commons acting in a sovereign manner and being free to make its own decisions rather than be forced into a corner by Parliamentary Procedure and the politicking of Parliamentary Procedure to undermine the independence of the HoC.

Allowing more time for the opposition to hold the government to account, does not necessarily change anything. It just means the executive can not just run down the clock in the way it perhaps has been intending.

The HoC could of course, vote against the amendment.

The WA is to come to the HoC next week.

And we have no idea what the hell is going to happen next.

France was demonised in the US for not supporting the claims of WMD and not joining in the war.
The US right is increasingly
"if you're not our puppet, then you're our enemy"

May has only 1 aim:
to do what is best for the Tory party and prevent a serious split

That's her only ideology - along with despising immigrants who aren't multi-millionaires

If the Tory party membership were mostly Remainers and if the ERG batshitters were a fanatical pro-EU,
then she would have pandered to them and driven the country towards Remain

Ah JC 'call an election' ad infinitum. Just fecking say what you'd do instead!

I've just called my mother's frozen meals delivery service to enquire about Brexit contingency plans.

After complete incomprehension got through to a manager who after much prompting read out a statement from their M D referring to contingency planning and that 'they all had to hope we didn't get a hard Brexit.'

She also then mumbled something about stockpiling high risk raw ingredients. Then said all their ingredients were British so it wouldn't affect their business

Better than nothing I suppose. No one had asked them the question before, apparently.

Who can forget 'freedom fries'?

How people can look at Trump and think he would be fair on either trade or security is unfathomable to me.

I’m just here for the cat pics

{- As the UK, our key strategic defence and security alliance is NATO, has been for decades, always should remain so IMO.}
The aims of NATO are not necessarily the aims of Europe.
{- I see no advantage to the UK in being a part of any "alternative" alliance, why would we want to be part of something which could challenge NATO?}
The EU would not 'challenge' NATO.
{- I believe that you are correct when you suggest that what I would interpret as a "desire" for EU armed cooperation is based on the perceived lack of trust in American commitment to NATO

• That last point is, I believe nonsense. I've heard no suggestion that America isn't committed to NATO. What is it committed to, is not having a situation where Europe's defence is funded by American taxpayers.}

Trump is destabilising the world massively, as covered by BCF. {- Why would the UK want to commit its forces (or be compelled to commit its forces if it remained an EU member state) to an alliance that isn't NATO?} Any form of increased cooperation between like minded countries is good. {-An EU army should be absolute anathema to the ethos of an organisation that is self declared to be about peaceful co-operation between nations, why isn't it?} This is a ridiculous argument. Writing a strongly worded letter to Putin will have such a dramatic effect. It is obvious that you see the UK as a 'big' country with great power. It is not. You could drop the UK into Venezuela or other places and not be able to find it. The UK is only 'great' when it is working with allies. WW2 the UK did not 'beat' Germany. Allies from around the world were working (and dying) together to defeat Hitler and Japan.

Apart from anything else, the issue of the UK joining an EU army is not bound up with Brexit. The UK can participate in an EU army independently of the Brexit situation.
The fancy new American made F35 jets at a Billion a time have to be serviced by USA service crew in Turkey. Not sure how much 'taking back control' this is.
It is certainly USA taking the money.
In contrast the Eurofighter can be repaired 'in the field' with a decent toolkit and an airdrop of spare parts.

I think Corbyn's speech pretty much kills any hope of a Labour-led PV with Revoke A50 on the ballot.

Extraordinary, really.

Corbyn-bollocks:

He wants:

Labour to go into a GE promising to "urgently" renegotiate and Deliver brexit

• no tie and renegotiation of the WA is not on other, except modifying the PD to aim for a softer Brexit

"strong relationship with the single market" (no membership) which delivers "frictionless trade"

• Meaningless bollocks: full frictionless is not possible without SM, ECJ & FOM

CU

• you fuckwit; it is SM - plus a customs arrangement - that is necessary for frictionless trade

So basically he wants "his" version of Brexit, which won't work and which the EU won't give
and he doesn't want a PV
We don't have time for this droning fuckwit.

Clearly, I'm not voting for Labour if they don't ditch this fuckwit and his fuckwit policies
and Labour, after replacing him, would have to promise, if he and / or May have Brexitted us, that they would immediately apply to Rejoin

no tie time

Agreed BCF on all points.

Clearly, I'm not voting for Labour if they don't ditch this fuckwit and his fuckwit policies

I will be forced to vote LD again.

Grinch I have been considering calling the company that supplies the school lunches and asking what their plans are too - glad it's not just me. I don't imagine the tories have considered anything as in-depth as continuous feeding of the children in the poorly funded schools...

That tallies with my assessment, BigChoc. It's ludicrous.

I also think it's blown a hole in the movement for a PV (which had been really gaining traction/numbers).

And I think it will make rebel MPs less likely to do any rebelling in a NC vote - which was always looking pretty unwinnable.

It really is ridiculous. It's not the speech of someone who is taking the fight to this government.

Frankly, I actually find it perplexing. It's genuinely poor.

I think Corbyn thinks he will win the election but if i was him I wouldn't be so sure. I voted Labour at the last election but I will possibly vote green or lib dems this time. Unless Labour comes out against brexit. I doubt I'm alone in my thinking.

Worst of all, it panders to the whole fantasy that 'Brexit isn't so bad' (it's not the 'main issue' in people's lives).

That is a. An unforgivable untruth and
b. Actual electoral suicide - Labour should be fighting the conservatives on unleashing a catastrofuck on the UK - not claiming it's not a biggie really.

His speech made no sense. He basically admitted that the issues in this country weren't caused by the EU but then banged on about how we have to leave anyway.

A bit like the government and their immigration policy where they admit that immigration has been good for our country but they're going to reduce it anyway.

@1tisILeClerc,
thanks for your response. I'm not going to do point by point again because it's clear that we view Britain's key alliances and priorities very differently.

When it comes to opposing president Putin I am merely glad that we are part of (and a mid sized player at least) of an alliance committed to common security in the West since 1949, and a nuclear armed one too.

Your attribution to me of views about the "way I see Britain" is simply wrong and the bit about WW2 similarly wrong. I don't think like that, but thank you for assuming that I do.

@thecatfromjapan , "catastrofuck" may well be the funniest thing I have read all day.

{I also think it's blown a hole in the movement for a PV }
The PV is only a mechanism for the UK to come up with a 'justifiable' decision. The EU don't really give a damn about it, they just want a letter delivered on 29 March saying Revoke, WA or out.

{Worst of all, it panders to the whole fantasy that 'Brexit isn't so bad' (it's not the 'main issue' in people's lives).}
In Europe it probably gets relatively little thought at 'citizen' level. There are more important issues such as development of the far right.
Brexit in the UK appears to be paralysing the country gradually.

Corbyn backs Brexit? And doesn't want a PV?

Well I'm shocked. Really I am.

No surprise from Corbyn, he's absolutely pathetic. He's done now anyway.

When it comes to opposing president Putin I am merely glad that we are part of (and a mid sized player at least) of an alliance committed to common security in the West since 1949, and a nuclear armed one too.

Yes, but with the breakup of the USSR and now the election of Trump, who seems to be keen to cosy up to Putin, the position has changed. There is less point in being part of an alliance, when the leading power in that alliance decides to forge a relationship with someone they were once against.

I know, Red.

But it shows how very, very little control the Party and PLP have over him.

That is the speech of a tiny, tiny, tiny group in the Labour Party.

And is, of course, utterly irrational, too.

That is very worrying.

Louisecollins
{Your attribution to me of views about the "way I see Britain" is simply wrong and the bit about WW2 similarly wrong. I don't think like that, but thank you for assuming that I do.}
Sorry I got that wrong. Looking at other threads where there is so much rubbish being spouted and people are 'angry' where things aren't going their way, but then not articulating what 'their way' is and that they are feeling picked on. Getting confused!
The fuckwits in Westminster are still playing silly games but I am trying to discuss what happens on the morning of 30th March where the UK is probably out of the EU, Large chunks of business can be seen thundering over the rarely used Dover to Calais ferry and the UK is standing in the street in its underwear. What the hell happens then?
Where are the plans for Monday morning?
At present, even with 'Revoke' there may well be workers being handed their P45s as their company has either folded or is packing up top leave. Westminster will still be squabbling of course, blaming everybody but themselves. Meanwhile Europeans across the water will be rubbing their hands together, although many with a sense of sadness, to the new opportunities opening up.

No point in another election. Tory’s will scrape through again. If you vote labour you get counted in the pro brexit count so may as well vote Lib Dem.