Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Westminstenders: The Rebellion

970 replies

RedToothBrush · 23/02/2019 22:43

This week is the start of another big week. Touted (again) as high noon. However the end of February marks a watershed in many ways. Parliament simply can not kick the can further. Its last stand time.

Three Cabinet ministers are openly saying back Cooper-Boles. They are joined by other ministers and intend to vote for it regardless of the government position. And will break protocol by refusing to resign to do so. This leaves May with the option of accepting it or sacking them.

The breaking of collective responsibility would be a bit deal. But May can not easily sack them. She simply has so little power left.

These ministers are backed by up to 100 moderates too. And with the emergence of the TIGGERS the mood has changed with others emboldened in their rebellion and arguably more likely to go.

Meanwhile Corbyn is losing even more authority. In what looks like a last ditch attempt to retain remain support in the face of the TIGGERS whilst also leaving to the point where it is realistic, noises are being made that Labour are about to back a People's Vote. It sounds symbolic rather than meaningful in anyway.

The antisemitic row, however, seems to be engulfing the party even further with MPs seen as Jewish, or not loyal Corbynites subject to intense amounts of abuse for being diplomatic or sympathetic in the face of resignations. The spectacle of Labour infighting has been laid bare in a very public way and it doesn't look healthy and is swallowing all column inches over and above any policy regarding either austerity or Brexit.

What this means for votes this week is important. The power of the whip on both sides of the house is completely fractured. MPs are more likely to vote with conscience than party lines than previously.

Where this leads us is now wide open.

An extension now looks all but inevitable. But for how long, at what price and for what ends ultimately in terms of a deal or no deal.

This noise seems very much at odds with other voices.

The Government itself, however, still seems to be planning to get WA legislation through parliament at the last minute at the end of March. (This would also involve May using measures which break parliamentary constitutional arrangements). And prominent leavers are suggesting that an extention will just kill Brexit off completely.

A GE is also very much looming. The TIGGERS emergence is such a threat that both parties will now possibly want it sooner rather than later (for slightly differing reasons). They will not want them to become established or prepared for an election. But calling an election now closes parliament and enables no deal by default. A GE after an extension or Brexit is a different prospect too.

Things are likely to get very busy this week. Time to brace once again.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
24
Namechangedforgoodreason · 26/02/2019 14:08

But if no deal is taken off the table by the vote against before the extension vote. It can't be no deal if the extension is rejected. Because we haven't voted for a deal. But we have voted against no deal. But then we fall out having voted against no deal so get no deal

My brain. Arrrrgghhhh!!!!

IalwayswantedtobeBeth · 26/02/2019 14:20

I do understand why, from TM's perspective, the Malthouse issue is the only one stopping a vote on her deal but her perspective is one of tunnel vision. She can only see the problems others have via a vote. There will almost certainly be some who voted for the Malthouse amendment who will not vote for her deal whatever she brings back but she seem to lack the necessary wherewithal to understand the perceptions of others.

Surely the issue is nothing to do with the withdrawal agreement but with the fact that the Political Declaration on the future arrangement tells us nothing. If we extend for the time required - up to 2021 if necessary - we can negotiate remaining in the single market and a customs union specific for the UK/EU. There would then be no backstop issues, or any issues with Ireland. If necessary this could be put to a people's vote (although I would rather not) but I don't see the point of Malthouse or the point of a people's vote at this time.

Yogurty · 26/02/2019 14:29

1tisILeClerc

Thank you. I'm just wondering where this statement is on the continuum of "completely untrue (but let's say it anyway because it backs up our Brexity 'we just have to hold our nerve' position)" to "concrete examples of x, y and z negotiations".

I have a feeling that it's quite near the first one.

TatianaLarina · 26/02/2019 14:36

Not convinced the EU will extend for 2 months, only to repeat this white knuckle ride in May. They may say 21 months or vas t’en.

HazardGhost · 26/02/2019 14:40

If they could add a vote for revoke for MPs to say no to that would be hilarious 😂

Wanna WA? NOOOO.
Wanna no deal? NOOOOOO.
Wanna extend? Nope.
Wanna revoke? NOOOO.

The world's very best, very special, very public tantrum.

1tisILeClerc · 26/02/2019 14:48

Of course, crash out on 29th is the default whatever the UK decides to do or not do. Parliament can't vote that away.

MadAboutWands · 26/02/2019 14:50

@IanDunt

Fact May dodged it is highly pertinent. Because chances are her plan is to refuse to participate in Euro elections. Then no-deal becomes unavoidable unless Commons passes her deal.

That is important, especially in light of the fact the EU has said clearly that the elections in May aren’t an issue and the U.K. could participate and have some MEP (for a short period) until things are sorted.

OhYouBadBadKitten · 26/02/2019 15:00

It would be more than pointless, it would be incredibly damaging to extend for two months. All that would do is allow more stockpiling and more businesses fleeing before we crash out.

jasjas1973 · 26/02/2019 15:02

TatianaLarina agree, why would the EU want a 2month extension? no reason to do so.

What May has done today is ensure the EU will give her even less, in regard to the backstop - that leaves her having to agree a far longer extension and a renegotiation, without her Red lines, its even possible we will have a PV !
May choosing a no-deal will destroy her party together with the economy.
Perhaps Labour will soar in the polls and that could focus MPs minds too.

Its now even more vital the WA is voted down, my brexitier MP is about to get another batch of emails, esp in regard to the Govt papers on fishing, if a no deal, will destroy the Cornish fishing industry.

MadAboutWands · 26/02/2019 15:06

@samcoatetimes

Some senior government figures believe that Theresa May has today pushed Britain closer to - rather than further from - no deal....

This is because:
1. The cliff edge is still there. Just around three months later. And it's MUCH harder for TM to get a second extension.

2. The pressure on MPs to vote for her brexit deal has just dropped dramatically, on all sides, because there's no cliff edge. You can vote down Meaningful Vote 2 - with little consequence cos two days later you vote for an extension

The delay also energise opponents of her deal

3. If Meaningful Vote 2 is voted down, what happens then? Does she

A. Keep her deal despite 2 defeats and ask for more from Brussels (!)

B. Change tack with indicative votes - which Hammond asked for in cabinet - or customs union?

In other words what does delay solve?

Some senior Tory MPs believe Coopes-Boles-Letwin still necessary to avoid no deal at end of June

ERG very relaxed, saying no deal will happen if the backstop is still in place at end of June

IalwayswantedtobeBeth · 26/02/2019 15:11

"Of course, crash out on 29th is the default whatever the UK decides to do or not do. Parliament can't vote that away."

This keeps being said by leavers but it is a very simplistic take on what is happening TatianaLarina . You are right a vote against no deal does not automatically change the date in Article 50 that says when we will leave but it does mean that the Government is tasked to get an extension to the Article 50 agreement. "Crashing out" does not have to happen.

Equally, we now know that legally we can revoke Article 50 and not leave at all as long as we do it before we reach the end date.

Hasenstein · 26/02/2019 15:16

So would it be possible to vote for an extension (delay) and then revoke Article 50 within that period, or must this be done before March 29th?

jasjas1973 · 26/02/2019 15:18

Madabout

Sam Coats and his Govt sources are making the same old mistake that the UK demands and the EU will say "how high?"

EU have repeatedly said they will not extend for no reason - there is still all to play for here.

MadAboutWands · 26/02/2019 15:20

I don’t agree.
An extension by a couple of month just moves the ‘crash out’ by a couple of months. But it would still be happening.
To be ready for a no deal brexit we need a couple of years. Not a couple of months.
Or you need a WA. And we all know TM has got the best WA she could get with her red lines (esp her red line on immigration that is making things much harder). I’m not sure what is the point of another two months if you have nothing new to bring to the table.

And even then, there is an urgent need to start tackling what created Brexit in the first place. The consistently bigger and bigger divide between rich and poor in the U.K.

MadAboutWands · 26/02/2019 15:23

This is not how I read that jasjas but more that, the whole thing has made it more likely that the EU will crash out regardless or not if the EU gives them a two months extension (which I think they wouod tbh)

FishesaPlenty · 26/02/2019 15:29

So would it be possible to vote for an extension (delay) and then revoke Article 50 within that period...

It looks like it. It's not an additional period where we have different rights, it's a lengthening of the original period - with the same rights.

TalkinPeece · 26/02/2019 15:46

I know I shouldn't but its such fun baiting political parties on FB
especially when I am saying exactly the same thing to both of them Grin

Missbel · 26/02/2019 15:47

TM just seems to be piling layer after layer of confusion onto the issue. I'm sure that the ultimate goal is to get MPs to vote for her deal rather than be seen to be defying the "will of the people" sic (...or even sick...)

SparklySneakers · 26/02/2019 15:51

Can we delay indefinitely please? Grin
Or to the year 3050 or similar. So far into the future that the planet is no longer habitable and is therefore irrelevant.

prettybird · 26/02/2019 15:53

Dh and I are disagreeing about this: I'm saying that an extension to the end of June makes Leave or No Deal cliff-edge (probably the latter) more likely as without EU Parliament elections, Revoke would no longer be an option.

Dh thinks that if necessary, the current MEPs could be tasked to stay on (and as an aside, imagine Farage being forced to continue as an MEP Grin personally I think he'd love it: all that money for doing nothing and for continuing to have a "legitimate" platform Hmm)

FishesaPlenty · 26/02/2019 16:00

as without EU Parliament elections, Revoke would no longer be an option.

Why? I can't see that.

prettybird · 26/02/2019 16:07

Because - unless dh is right and our current MEPs can stay on (although that adds in a whole different question about "democracy") into the new EU Parliament - it makes the new EU Parliament itself illegitimate and unable to pass laws as one of the E28 (because the UK is still a member) would not have any representation Confused

Now I know that UKIP would love to stymie the work of the EU Parliament and to claim it is undemocratic - but I don't see the E27 allowing it Hmm

prettybird · 26/02/2019 16:10

....that was why Ian Blackford was making the point that the Conservatives (and other parties) should be continuing to go through the process of selecting MEP candidates - as the SNP is doing.

Sostenueto · 26/02/2019 16:26

Got to hand it to TM she's a crafty old bird. No need now for the cross party amendment. ( cooper-letwin). I do not trust TM one bit. And she would not answer whether she would vote against herself for not accepting a no deal.

HesterThrale · 26/02/2019 16:28

Yes. We should push to take part in the EU elections, just in case we still happen to be in the EU after 1st July.

This article suggests the SNP, Scottish Greens and Lib Dems were thinking of that last month.
www.heraldscotland.com/news/17371130.snp-to-select-candidates-for-european-elections-in-case-brexit-is-delayed/