Westminstenders: Stalemate

[RedToothBrush]

After May's Meaningless Vote defeat and Corbyns Pointless Vote for Your Own Party defeat we are well and truly at Stalemate.

May has invited other parties to come and talk to her to find a compromise. Except she has so many red lines all she is asking is for everyone else to compromise whilst she gets exactly what she wants.

Corbyn made a tactical error in not initially speaking to May, so now she gets to say that its Labour who are being difficult and not wanting to work together in the national interest.

Corbyn has in addition put down the red line of saying he won't talk to May until she agrees to drop no deal. Except since no deal is the default until an alternative solution is agreed! Corbyn is expecting May to say that she would revoke if there was no alternative agreed, whilst is isn't really reasonable from a compromise point of view.

They are as bad as each other. Both too stubborn for the country to move forward. Its long been said that they were alike in this respect, but having it put to the test about which is more stubborn has the potential to destory the country in the process.

In addition to this, Leadsom has removed all other Brexit related HoC business from the schedule until after the 29th January. This is a blantant attempt to try and stop backbenchers having the opportunity to table pesky amendments which the government don't like.

The 29th January is due to be the Meaningless Vote II. Given that May has made it clear that in her head 'compromise' means 'do exactly what I want and capitulate' it looks like the Withdrawal Agreement will be represented to parliament to vote on with little change. Perhaps with a few amendments there designed to attract support, though it remains to be seen where this support will come from given the spectulator level of the rejection the HoC gave it. May's Plan is literally to run the clock down and hold a gun of no deal to the head of remain leaning MPs or to scare Brexiteers by suggesting that she might revoke or there might be an extension.

Its beyond farce.

Of course the role of the Speaker becomes paramount.

Technically speaking no bill can be presented to the HoC twice in the same parliament. Its against the rules. So how is May going to get around this, and will the Speaker indeed allow it?

The Speaker may also try and help backbenchers out by allowing amendments and motions to be tabled outside the normal rules. Normally the government alone control the majority of parliamentary time, with the opposition parties being given so many debates depending on whether they are the official opposition and then according to their size. Backbenchers don't tend to get much parliamentary time. However the Speaker's actions last week showed he was willing to be creative and bend the rules to allow backbenchers more influence and power than under normal circumstances because of the way that the Executive was trying to frustrate the house. So not timetabling any further Brexit Business between now and the 29th January seems a sure fire way to have the Government straight on course for another run in with Bercow.

So what next:

Do not forget that whatever happens May has to agree to it, or we go to no deal. Whether that be a 2nd Ref, Revoking, Staying in the Customs Union, Norway + or Any Other Alternative May has to agree to it on some level.

Backbenchers can table amendments all day long to 'guide' or put pressure on May but they may not be able stop her ultimately. Boles, Grieve, Benn and Cooper seem to be the ones to watch.

So May's stubborness is the biggest barrier and issue there is to preventing No Deal.

Corbyn, whilst he might well be very right to avoid getting sucked into May's trap, isn't helping matters with his own stubborness. His priority is party politics and stopping the Labour Party from splitting. Not solving Brexit.

There is not a shread of pragmatism nor thought for the national interest between them. Party before Country.

So we are to go through all of the last week, possibly with another vote of no confidence thrown in for good measure in another 12 days.

Won't that be fun?

OYBK In theory, she should be presenting a Plan B, early next week.

She isn't, though. She's just ignoring the Grieve amendment and coming back to serve the HoC sloppy seconds.

Violet - the mess can only be resolved by both parties splitting. And that’s really been the case - domestically and with regard to our relationship with the rest of the world - for a very long time.

May really does have something of the night about her, doesn't she?

PV will not solve it. Too chancy on what the outcome would be. It will split both Tory and labour parties which means nothing will get sorted and no deal ensues. It must be a revoke not a PV. And May must be the one to do it.
Why don't we get a people to demonstrate outside parliament with revoke banners instead of PV banners. It just might work. Saves the voters getting the blame too.

Sostenueto Yes food banks take sanitary products and toiletries.

Going to sleep now as need a rest from this head fuck that is brexit. I just wanted to say a big thank you though to all the posters, especially the main players, on this thread, who have helped teach me about politics. I only became interested at the time of the referendum, having spent 39 years not understanding or caring too much about politics. It's been a fascinating and steep learning curve and I'm grateful to all those who have helped, and are helping me, to understand as best I can, the batshittery of brexit, our political history, and many other things. to you all. I wish you all brexit free dreams (I dreamt of it last night ffs).

So which politician was driving the white Fiat that pushed Phil the Greek off the road?
and thus Brexit of the top slot of ITV news

If, in the event of a No Deal Brexit, everything goes to hell with insufficient food, medicine, if there a mass redundancies , I'm interested to know how the architects of this farce believe they will be able to keep their families & homes safe. Especially given that the police force has been cut back to the bare bones.

I'm obviously not advocating, supporting or proposing that anyone should take part in any such action. But just remembering what happened in 2011 with the riots, it doesn't bear thinking about, what could happen if the populace ever did have a genuine reason to rise up. The thought is almost more worrying that the prospect of a No Deal scenario.

Oh, he probably just means that it's cute you have the names of a popular children's series.

As in s/he thinks we’re not real?

I can assure you, I am very much real; currently sitting on my sofa watching Sky News and worrying (which is all I seem to be doing lately).

Charly was the name of my dog, who sadly passed away a few years ago.

When you look at it logically if you take off no deal cos a majority doesn't want that, and the WA because that's a dead dodo the only option on a PV is remain or a new unicorn deal. You cannot put no deal or the WA because these are unfair options for the leavers where the majority would not want a no deal, only the hard brexiteers would want that (assuming a lot here so may turn into an ass!) And the WA is dead. So revoke solves wtf do you put on a PV as a fair choice.

Charlie and Lola

Thank you autumncrow

Ouch.

You are rude, Charly.

I was being lighthearted and conciliatory - am emollient for your spikes defensiveness.

I was being welcoming and polite.

I'm really unimpressed by your ability to find insult in an open hand.

(And, just in case I am not clear, I am no longer being so emollient. You have offended me.)

Surely if WA was touted by May as an option for a PV the DUP would then decide not to back the government anymore. So May can't suggest that as an option for a referendum without the potential to bring about a general election.

???????

Agree isobel

PMK, thank you RTB.
And thank you BigChoc for the last thread, which went by in a blur.

Bovril I'm asuming protecting the politicians responsible for this Brexshit - and protecting their property even if they flee abroad -
will be one of the hidden reasons for the military reserve callup:

www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2019-01-17/HCWS1254/

"A new order has been made under section 56(1B) of the Reserve Forces Act 1996 to enable Reservists to be called into permanent service
in support of the HMG contingency planning for a no deal EU exit scenario.

Defence is committed to assisting the Cabinet Office coordinated work programme to ensure that there are effective and proportionate contingency plans in place to mitigate the potential immediate impacts leaving the EU, under a ‘No Deal’ scenario, might have on the welfare, health and security of UK citizens and economic stability of the UK.

Reserve Forces will be on standby to deliver a range of Defence outputs such as: reinforcement of Regular sub-units, liaison officer roles and the provision of specialist skills.

A particularly important role may be the planned reinforcement of Regional Points of Command, to enable their 24/7 operation and resilience.

We would also expect Reserves to be drawn upon to support the implementation of contingency plans developed by Other Government Departments.

The order shall take effect from the beginning of 10 February 2019 and shall cease to have effect at the end of 9 February 2020"

So those reserves, who'll mostly have jobs, would be called up for a full year 🤔
I wonder how many will then join the ranks of the unemployed

The govt could theoretically make it illegal to sack people for going on reserve, but that could bankrupt smaller firms.

Just been reading Mark Elliott’s legal opinion (Prof of public law at Cambridge and legal advisor to the Lords select committee on the constitution) on whether Parl can block No Deal. Note that was written before the outcome of the ECJ.

So can Parliament block a ‘no deal’ or a ‘bad deal’ Brexit? The answer must be that it cannot do so unilaterally unless the UK’s Article 50(2) notification is unilaterally revocable, in which case Parliament could insist that the UK Government withdraws that notification if Parliament decides that no acceptable deal has been reached.

Longer discussion here:

publiclawforeveryone.com/2017/10/16/can-parliament-block-a-no-deal-brexit/

Note in his discussion of Miller, that the decision art50 is revocable raises doubts about the Miller ruling as it was partly based on the assumption that art 50 could not be unilaterally revoked.

Miller’s legal team and the UK government agreed to that position because it was legally simpler to do so which increased the constitutional role of parliament. The ECJ has now said that was wrong.

You see, reading that, BigChoc , makes me so so angry, all over again. And makes me wonder why we are putting up with this.

🤷‍♀️

It's as though we are discounting the reality we can see unfolding right in front of our eyes.

Corbyn could face string of resignations if he backs 'people's vote'
www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/17/corbyn-could-face-string-of-resignations-if-he-backs-peoples-vote?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Is this meant to be a joke? I mean who is even on the Labour front bench? Nobody knows.

I miss Miss Moon. She was our legal expert

I thought companies had to give employees unpaid leave for reservist duties, a bit like jury duty. Bloody hell, that's yet more research I need to do! Brexit may be shit, but I really am learning a lot about UK law as well as the inner workings of parliament.

Charly22 and loletta
Sorry just that when DC was small Charly and Lola was on the telly, small kids cartoon, and I tend to do a bit of 'word association'.
Entirely harmless I assure you.

😁I'm so glad you said that, Elenade.