Westminstenders: Adrift at Sea

[RedToothBrush]

After May lost the Meaningful Vote last night by a long way she has lost control of the agenda. She managed to persuade just 40 out of the 116 she needed to support here.

This leaves us all adrift with nothing apparent to a solution.

May announced that tonight's vote will be to stop No Deal. She has announced that it will be a free vote and she herself intends to vote against No Deal. This looks set to be blocked but the amendments that go with it are more important. Particularly the Spelman / Dromey amendment which is pitched to stop no deal completely (it doesn't) which is more about trying to kill off a Meaningful Vote III instead.

Tomorrow's vote is perhaps more important though. Its about an extension to a50. We NEED an extension. However the length of the extension is yet to be argued as is the purpose of the extension.

This is also against whispers that the Italian Far Right group has been lobbied by Leave.EU and Farage has directly asked Eurospectics in the EP to veto any extension. Whether this would happen remains to be seen but it certainly raises questions over an extension is even now possible. This was always a probable action; Banks & Farage have for 3 years aggitated to cause maximum problems for the government. Its also true that they only have power due to this dynamic of being a hostile force.

With No Deal so catastophic that Hammond today made the point in his Spring Budget that, if he feels there's almost nothing he'd feel able to do to mitigate the effects of what he sees as the car crash of no deal, this leaves one option on the table. Ironically it is possible that the actions of Banks and Co might be more likely to have that effect rather than to stop an extension. The question, however, would then be whether May had the guts to revoke.

We certainly have, at least, reached crunch point. Have we done so too late to make a difference? And will our new found sovereignity be twarted by Brexiteers inviting the interference of foriegn hostile forces to intervene?

The UK needs a small military incursion to wake government up.
Maybe an attack on Westminster by the Isle of Arran Girl Guides.
I would suggest the Scouts but there would be greater risk of injury.

we are DEFINITELY getting an PV amendment today. We just don't know which...
Do you have any idea of what time will we know which will be chosen Red ?

I can't believe she's going for a third MV How is that even allowed??

I'm yet to hear a rational objection to a PV.

The UK needs a small military incursion to wake government up.

DH suggested that in a reverse Macbeth moment Nicola Sturgeon could ride in and save us disguised as the new forest.

Are the Arran Scouts particularly ferocious, leClerc, more so than the Guides? Of course neither are, strictly speaking, single sex organisations any more, so that wouldn’t make a difference, would it?

I'm yet to hear a rational reason for leaving

I'm yet to hear a rational objection to a PV.

Apart from the fact I'm totally over referendum right now, a PV would seem a sensible way to pause and allow the public to consider next steps in the absence of any leadership from our elected representatives. Of course the fact it could be a sensible way forward is almost enough to convince me it will never happen.

I'm yet to have coffee and think of anything worry to say but some of you lot have me chuckle already this morning

I'm hoping JB does not allow it

Witty*!

My main worry with a referendum is that I don't believe we have put in place the things needed to ensure it is free and absent of the meddling and illegal actions that marred the last one. This makes me very uncomfortable to be honest.

My main worry with a referendum is that 26% can't distinguish no deal and no breakfast.

Oh lonely, they will be so hungry by lunchtime (or by the next constitutional crisis, whichever comes first).

Does anyone else think that a long extension now looks the most likely outcome?

Last night, the Tories have taken ownership of no-deal which is going to be electoral kryptonite. At the same time, the ERG has backed themselves into a corner. They cannot vote for the WA. All the EU has to do now is say that there will be no future changes.

The ERG cannot vote for the WA, and the Tories cannot allow no deal, the EU won't accept a short technical extension without an actual plan, and therefore a long extension, which could include a second referendum seems the only way forward.

How does this scenario sound? Am I missing anything?

Interesting ongoing thread by Beth Rigby that I can't paste a link to via my bloody tablet.

This tweet caught my eye most though
Top of govt last night worried that Cooper/Letwin were working up something to force govt hand. And now @JackBlanchard reports a plan for cross-party amendment forcing the government to hold indicative votes. That could be a very big deal today if tabled. Could well pass 3/

Philip Hammond being v clear on Today right now that the only logical choice now is May’s deal or Revoke (“rescind Article 50”), unless the HoC comes up with a positive alternative. Also doing a very good job of not actually punching Humphrys.
May used the R word yesterday evening iirc.

My main worry with a referendum is that 26% can't distinguish no deal and no breakfast.

Well, yeah, that too...😂

But if you were an ERGer (heaven forbid) your worries about revoke would now increase? Perhaps sufficiently for you to vote for the WA?

Yes. And last night that appeared to be what some ERGers were saying.

I don't know what time Bercow will confirm amendments. I'd guess around lunchtime.

The Bloody Sunday prosecution decision is 11am, so something else to look out for which is highly significant today.

I'm yet to hear a rational objection to a PV.

1. if we are deadlocked on Brexit legislation what makes you think parliament wouldn't get deadlocked on ref legislation

2. May would be leading the legislation for a ref. With everything we've seen so far, what makes you think she wouldn't manage it to favour a WA anyway

3. Remain strategists still haven't worked out why and how they got things wrong. This is concerning as this could easily be used against remain

4. Another referendum would create even more division and fractures in society. We need to repair the damage of the last one. Referendum have historically been unhealthy for society; 4 in a row in Germany helped the Nazis enormously and that's why they are banned there. We had a murder during the course of the last one.

5. Social media and dark money have been shown to have been used extensively in an illegal manner during the last ref. As yet these issues are far from addressed and thus the referendum is very vulnerable to outside interference again. The Electoral Commission are not robust enough to tackle these problems.

6. What happens if leave wins again? Where does that leave us? A referendum at this stage is just a vague idea without proper planning and thought as to the next steps for each possible outcome. We could just end up straight back here if the legislation is fudged (which is likely given May and the current parliament)

And that's just off the top of my head.

Conversely I'd argue I'm yet to hear a proper rational argument for a PV which addresses all these concerns. It remains wishful, pie in the sky thinking which neglects important issues crucial to its success.

Guys, i think I understand why most politicians are discarding the PV option. They’re cooped up around parliament and, despite the fact that Londoners voted remain, the HoC is surrounded by scenes of shakespearean protest, with screams and banners that are quite scary. The idea of giving back to these people the vote, in truth, would not convince me. I’m starting to think that my dad was right. He used to say provocatively that they should put common sense questions at the entrance to polling stations. Something like: mark Argentina on this map; when are tomatoes ripe in western climate (December/August/the first Sunday of every month?); how often do you elect the queen of England?
...

I very much think the desire for a 2nd ref is an emotional not rational one.

I thought PV was the policy agreed at the Labour Party conference? Or am I remembering that wrong?

And we need a return to rational not emotional politics on both sides.

It scares me I found the strength to write this absurdity, which goes against every principle (a democracy means every vote counts!). But I can’t help thinking about it!