Westminstenders: Erskine Mayhem

[RedToothBrush]

John Bercow has stepped in. We've long made the point, that the position of Speaker was utterly crucial to the outcome of Brexit. However this ruling was long warned as a possibility. It was somewhat overlooked by all (including me).

We are now faced with the bizarre narrative that May was just about to be able to get her deal through, and it's now simply Bercow who has tried to sabotage Brexit.

The reality is that his ruling has the effect of making BOTH no deal And a lengthy extension (possibly with a PV) much more likely.

May now has to embrace one of these option (by accident or design) or find a way to substantially change the terms of her deal as put to the Commons, either through negotiation with the EU or bolting something significantly different to her deal like a variation of the Kyle Amendment (a PV based on her deal or remain). Or find a majority to overturn the standing order that Bercow has cited as the reason for his block.

This block also might apply to the Benn amendment (indicative votes) or other PV amendments. Which could equally be problematic going forward.

In reality Bercow has upped the stakes and forced May to do something meaningful rather than simply holding a gun to MPs heads to vote. Hurrah for parliamentary Sovereignty and limiting the abuse of power of the executive!?!

It's a completely neutral move in practice. The HoC has tied itself in knots with how it's voted for political reason rather than for the national interest. The British Constitution has just stood up for itself. Bercow is just a useful target to blame for the incompetence of the entire house for the last 3 years.

The billion pound question this morning is where does that now leave us?

The honest answer is I'm damned if I know.

Maybe the EU will come up with a magic bullet for May, maybe the Cabinet can come up with a magic bullet, maybe May will take the political magic bullet of a long extension or revocation or maybe we'll just all shoot ourselves in the head and foot with no deal.

I have no idea.

10 days to go.

French officials say in private that they are not alone in their stance but that they are more willing than other countries to stick their necks out because Britain will always blame the French for their misfortunes.

Leaving the EU without a deal on 29 March 2019 is not the “legal default”, as has been repeatedly, but wrongly, asserted. It would, in fact, be in violation of the supreme law at both the domestic and supranational level, ...

ukhumanrightsblog.com/2019/03/19/no-deal-brexit-may-be-unlawful-a-view-from-rose-slowe/

I think she can probably revoke A50 even on 29 March. Although I wouldn’t be comfortable with her cutting it that fine

I always believed it would come down to this - literal last minute no deal vs revoke. Though I'm not convinced she'll revoke.

If this was a gripping political TV drama, maybe one more episode to go before the big season finale, what would your predictions be?

Very interesting @MissMalice

If this were a tv drama I'd be really pissed off that it isn't on Netflix so I can just watch the whole series in one sitting. And I'd highly suspect they are likely to leave the ending open so as to allow for future series.

So, I guess that means I'm fucking sick of waiting around for someone to actually step in as a grown up and sort the whole issue and I really suspect we will have an extension so we are left hanging on for at least another year.

Pity poor Barnier, a man in search of the UK's plan By John Crace

The EU’s chief negotiator would settle for a few hints expressed through interpretive dance

www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/19/pity-poor-barnier-a-man-in-search-of-the-uks-plan?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Is everyone willing to bet money on TM asking for that extension? Because I'm not despite Downing Street saying so earlier.

It’s times like these you really wish Mycroft Holmes was quietly threatening having a word with someone behind the scenes.

These are the days when I long to read Private Eye again - but their typeface is so fucking small I can no longer read it!

God there must be someone sensible who can just tell TM: revoke now, then regroup and everyone can decide what they actually want?

MissMalice
Thanks for that and curious it doesn't seem to have been mentioned before as it would have saved some of the parliamentary discussions.
The whole of the no deal vote apart from anything.

Gary Gibbon on Channel 4 News: "We are in an extraordinary situation which I think, right now, makes next week look as though it's going to make this week's constitutional crisis of the last 24 hours look a bit like a tea party."

The Labour manifesto does not tell us what Corbyn is like, merely what labour think are the best policies to get them elected.

Many of us who know what Corbyn is like have been observing him, listening to what he says, since he became an MP in 1983,
That's long before he was important enough for the Tories to bother demonising him

If this was a gripping political TV drama, maybe one more episode to go before the big season finale, what would your predictions be?

Mogg revealed to be a Labour secret agent
Mark Francois and David Davis wrestling in front of a roaring fire to prove who's the toughest
Leadsom lying in Corbyn's arms as they enjoy a post coital cigarette
The screen (and Britain) fades to grey...

Sorry, reply to frankie

The legal pov MissMalice referred to is interesting, but I haven't seen other lawyers, including Remainers such as Jo Maugham, take it up

In practice, since all parties agree that No Deal is the default, I expect that is what we would end up with.

and A50 wouldn't be "expelling" the UK, because being unable to get your act together in the available time has not been a get-out clause for international treaties afaik

'An extension will have consequences' says EU as Downing Street admits 'crisis' over Brexit

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-19/downing-street-admits-britain-in-crisis-over-brexit-deal/

Robert Peston assessed that Mr Barnier's comments imply a general election or referendum would be required in the UK before the EU commits to a longer extension.
....
"This is the greatest failure of our Parliamentary and Government system that any of us alive have witnessed."

I’ve always said that Mogg is an EU/Vatican “sleeper”. He’s now inclined to back May, which proves my point. It’s a longitudinal plot by the Pope to destroy the DUP and return England (in particular) to the Catholic Church. So as Big Ben ticks towards the hour and the camera zooms in on the clock face we suddenly cut to St Peter’s Square, where Pope Francis strides (or shuffles) out on to the balcony, raises his hands towards Heaven and....
Music swells! Wait for Series Two! (Are they still series? I don’t watch box sets and stuff any more.)

Thanks for that and curious it doesn't seem to have been mentioned before

It has been mentioned been mentioned before, by me. One of the ‘Three Knights’ is a friend of mine - who is not herself a knight but a QC and an authority in public law. She appeared for the people in the Miller case.

I posted another analysis of the Knights’ opinion here (by a Cambridge law professor).

publiclawforeveryone.com/2017/02/17/the-three-knights-opinion-on-brexit-a-response/

And I posted a piece by her here:

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/the-governments-brexit-stance-is-riddled-with-legal-confusion

What happens if, as a result of that vote, parliament rejects whatever deal is on offer? The government says the only other option is to leave with no deal. That is simply constitutionally wrong. In the absence of parliamentary authority, the prime minister cannot take us out of the EU on any terms at all. That is what the rule of law means.

Were the government to attempt to take us out of the EU without a deal approved by parliament, it is likely that this would be subject to a further successful court challenge. As Hope put it, “It is all about respecting the sovereignty of parliament. The law will see to that, whatever the government think, as it always does.”

I thought the job ads from 2 pages ago were spooks on Twitter, just for a laugh. They’re 10 real job openings
www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk/csr/index.cgi?SID=dXNlcnNlYXJjaGNvbnRleHQ9NzQ2NDM5MTMmcGFnZWNsYXNzPUpvYnMmc2VhcmNoX3NsaWNlX2N1cnJlbnQ9MSZvd25lcnR5cGU9ZmFpciZvd25lcj01MDcwMDAwJmpvYmxpc3Rfdmlld192YWM9MTYxMzI4NCZwYWdlYWN0aW9uPXZpZXd2YWNieWpvYmxpc3QmcmVxc2lnPTE1NTMwMjkzNTItMGUxMDhmOGEzZDE2MzM5NjczZGU3ZTYwODdiNzMwMTBhNzdkM2M5Ng==

Clermont- that guardian article is brilliant

French officials say in private that they are not alone in their stance but that they are more willing than other countries to stick their necks out because Britain will always blame the French for their misfortunes.

Not just Brexiteers that can play on history .

Sorry to our French neighbours for having to put up with our mess ...

I should have highlighted Prof Elliott’s conclusion which differs from Rose Slowe’s:

For that reason, it is questionable whether the opinion of Sir David Edward et al can withstand the majority judgment in Miller, given that the former denies Article 50 notification an effect that is central to the reasoning contained in the latter. If Miller is right — or if we at least accept that it represents the law, as we now surely must — then it is hard to see how the ‘Three Knights’ can be correct as well. One cannot have one’s cake and eat it.

Apparently Italy is going to veto any extension as a favour to Farage.