Can someone please explain to me what just happened with the vote??

[FFSFFSFFS]

I am beyond relieved that it means No Deal?

But can anyone explain in very simple language what the vote was about??

(the newspapers can't seem to explain it clearly enough for my teeny mind...)

This is what I think happened tonight...

Today, the government tabled a motion that ruling out 'No Deal' on 29th March but the motion was worded to say leaving without a deal remains the default in UK and EU law unless this house and the EU ratify an agreement.

There were two amendments made to the motion. The Malthouse amendment which failed, and an amendment that was proposed by Caroline Spelman. This last amendment stuck out the whole leaving without a deal remans the default.

The Spelman amendment passed with 312 - 308 votes. And so the motion effectively became there can never be a No Deal Brexit.

At this point, the goverment introduced a three-line whip against their own motion. And it failed.

At the end of today's play, we stand with two options - Mrs May's deal or No Brexit. Tomorrow, they're going to vote on requesting an extention of Article 50. Then it's up to the EU to grant it.

And I understand now why she wanted them to vote against that actually.

Thomas, that is correct, her motion was a free vote. But it was amended. She whipped against the amendment, it passed. Her original motion was never then voted on.

Finally! ThomasRichard, that actually explains it clearly - thank you!!

Excellent. I do get it now, well as much as I get politics at all.

They really fucked this whole thing up by taking in the DUP. It's laughable.

If the first amendment not passed, then would May have voted for the main motion? I don’t understand how the main motion amended so what the voted on text was in the third vote. How did it differ from a)?

Bluntness is talking good sense, thank you!

No no deal never!
A little heavy on the double negatives, but catchy :)

My understanding is we now have no deal off the table forever, is that right?

This is correct, technically it's not off thr table forever till it's passed into legislation but she confirmed both before and after the vote she would honour it and do so.

So yes, it's off the table forever, we will either leave with a deal or not at all.

Ok, I get it now too thanks to the previous posters. When did May promise to turn this vote into legislation?

@Anywalls - first post I've understood!!

Not that everyone has not provided very helpful posts.

But fuck me.

Here's another one if anyone can help - what are the main reasons MPs voted against the WA? Or is the Irish backstop THE reason?

Am I alone in not understanding Bluntness and this “commuted” thing?

We're trending people. Look lively.

):)

When did May promise to turn this vote into legislation

At least twice that I watched prior to the vote and once after, in her speeches. Hence why she cannot renage without being in contempt of parliament.

Sorry I have sticky typing on here, I mean committed.

I've seen one dude at EU parliament saying - I VILL NOT GRANT VON MORE ZECOND OV EXTENZIONZ UNLESS UK TELLZ UZ VY ZEY VANT ZIS EXTENZIONZ.
Leo Varadkar off on his Jean Claude Juncker to Washington for Paddy's day said 'Eh, we've negotiated and they're not willing to compromise, so they can fuck off coming back to us again.'

Not direct quotes.

They just said on telly that if you are not confused you should be.

Well some of the political commentators disagree. One of them said the House has said what it would like to happen but it's a bit like a child having a wishlist. They want to take no deal off the table but actually that isn't a position the UK can unilaterally adopt. If the EU doesn't agree a deal with us then we leave with no deal. It's not an 'option'. It's not a type of deal. It's literally the absence of a deal and as such it can't be ruled out because both the EU and UK are needed to conclude a deal.

“Sorry I have sticky typing on here, I mean committed.”

Lol

Trending

< puts lipstick on >

I feel as OP I should give an update on where we're at but my teeny mind is still spinning around so I'm just highlighting Bluntness' post (thanks for that!):

Tonight parliament voted to stay in the eu unless we have a deal agreed,

Teresa May has committed to pass this into legislation

As such the U.K. faces two options.

We either agree a deal

Or

We revoke

The delay is nothing more than logistics to enable us to come to either of those conclusions.

It is that simple.

And someone else has confirmed that we can revoke unilaterally - i.e. don't need EU's permission.

Parliament are now bending over backwards to go against 17.4 million votes.

No, Parliament trying to do its democratic duty and vote for what they believe is the good for the whole country which includes 48,000 million who didn't vote Leave.

She doesn't have to enshrine this no-deal in law because it was not a binding vote.

Nor was the original Referendum result.

If the EU doesn't agree a deal with us then we leave with no deal

Or we don't leave at all, of course.