Westminstenders: Flextension

[RedToothBrush]

Just wrote an intro and wiped it. So this is as quick as I can sum up.

EU response is extension to 22nd May if May passes her deal by 29th March

Or an unconditional extension to 12 April which could be extended with a plan and understanding to take part in EU elections.

This isn't what may wanted. It gives her less time and leverage

It opens up the possibility of her being ousted as PM in the next couple of days. Graham Brady asked her to quit on Monday. Remain Cabinet ministers are threatening to quit if May whips a vote to support no deal.

The talk is May has indeed flipped to supporting no deal with many think she's pretty much gone full on Colonel Kurtz.

The EU are in effect supporting parliamentary sovereignty and are being incredibly reasonable.

May now has to decide whether to accept.

The whole situation looks explosive and likely that one half of the cabinet or the other are on the brink of walking. And May's power is so shattered.

However she remains the gatekeeper and as it stands if she's hell bent on no deal, it will be extremely difficult for Parliament to prevent that.

Petition now over 4 million!

4 million signatures on the petition now!!

because the EU know they cannot trust the govt / HoC to renege the minute after the backstop is removed

I get that we’ve lost all credibility when it comes to actually doing what we say and that a back stop of sorts would always be needed

bear What specifically do you want to change in the WA ?

The backstop will remain, whatever the future relationship

The EU don't trust us, so they need this insurance policy to stop the UK choosing a course after Brexit that requires a hard border

PETITION stands at: 4,000,239 !!!

This is the only backstop that the EU will agree to

4 million !

Very nearly a quarter of the way to 17.4 million. That'd show Andrea Loathsome!

BCF I understand we are untrustworthy but if this WA has to pass then why are the EU talking about an extension beyond 12th April if it doesn’t pass next week.

They’ve said we need a new plan in that scenario

Just spoken to exH and explained that whilst a. it is of course perfectly fine to disagree about everything about Brexit it is not OK to sneer at someone's fears (whether you consider them legit or not) esp in front of children. I think he took it on the chin?
I lived through the IndyRef in a particularly polarised Scottish village where there are still 'bridges to be built'. It's all so horrible.
Sorry to be negative. I'm in tears this am - I SO want to be in London.

fluffy They keep saying the HoC must make up its mind
They want specific choices
The problem throughout is that the HoC has just wanted "something else, not on offer"

It is very obvious that the EU will not blindly grant an extension for a PV without knowing what the options will be
(not the exact wording of course)

I don't necessarily agree that your extrapolation of what's been said means that they want to know the content of the PV before agreeing to one. Until that is specifically stated, then it's all one person's interpretation of what has been said.

Yes, they want us to make our minds up as to what we DO rather than DON'T want (understandably) but I don't agree that this means they won't extend for a PV without knowing the options being given.

I'm not saying your interpretation is wrong, just that it IS an interpretation, NOT what has been said.

I think they'd agree a long extension for a PV without the method of leaving being agreed on, purely to shift the cliff edge away. The only condition, to my mind, would be EP elections.

I do this kind of thing at work all the time; agree to move deadlines set by the Court to give the parties breathing space, but sorting more pertinent details later. So I see it as mutually amending Directions with more specific detail to follow later, as that's what I do day in, day out.

But I don't believe in making assumptions based on interpretations of what's been said.

The new plan is probably a PV and / or HoC agreement on the basics of a new PD
e.g. SM and dropping UK red lines on FOM and ECJ

Extra time would be needed to negotiate the exact text of a new PD,
draft it in legal terms to form a document for signing
and get it approved by the 28 heads of govt, the HoC, the EP

However, analysts in Germany and Brussels are pessimist about the chances
They all fear No Deal is the most likely option

BCF, I do agree with that post about the new plan and time being needed for that.

I just think they would prefer the cliff edge to move a very long way in the distance! So as long as we've changed tack from TM and her red lines / intransigence, they will oblige.

Whoever takes over from her owes the EU27 a MASSIVE apology.

Red re the article in The Times you linked to saying May needs to step down and someone else needs to lead a cross party census. I can't see anyone in the Tory Party being able to do this as the next leader is likely to an ardent Brexiteer. I worry about what is coming next.

As above, I’d just like to see the source which states this WA, with no amendments has to pass whatever the future deal.

On the face of it that completely contradicts Bervow’s ruling on not being able to keep on voting for it.

There is a problem with any cross party attempt and its not just blue in colour.

It's also shaped like a 70 year old stubborn man who is into ideological purity.

fluffy EU heads of govt have repeatedly said the UK must have a plan for a long extension
They don't mean vague ideas

Any member can - and will - veto a long extension if they are not satisfied of the benefit

There is no comparison to your delays:
they don't cost businesses money and they don't risk extremists filling a vacuum

Uncertainty & delay is damaging to the EU, both politically and to businesses who don't want to keep prepping for deadlines which don't happen

The EU wants Brexit over with - they have said this repeatedly
Brexit is taking up far too much time when the EU have several other vital matters they want to handle:
refugees, Middle East, Trump, Putin, climate change ....

The UK is still an EU member and is continuing to block progress on things the EU wnat to do
It is sucking up to the far right govts in Hungary & Poland and blocking measures to deal with them

All serious analysts agree the EU have run out of patience with the UK

There is also a risk that populists in the EU will seize on the continuing delay toclaim the EU won't let countries leave

Good luck to everyone marching today! Sadly we can't be there but donated so others can. I'll be looking out for red toothbrushes!

Right, time to set off. RTB proudly pinned to jacket. Stay safe everyone and let's show the world we want to stay part of it.

mrslaughan - I'm not surprised your handyman thinks that about the SNP: like the EU, Scotland/the Scots has been the subject of decades of jibes of being "scroungers" - partly because of the Barnett Formula.

I could post up links to the McCrone report (which points out the oil would cause all sorts of problems in making Scotland too rich ) and other civil service reports that demonstrate that for the last 100 years (ie not just since the oil ), Scotland's overall economic contribution has been positive, but they won't counter the feelz - just like the population was manipulated by the MSM over decades about the EU

And the fact that the last few years GERS has shown a negative is a) arguably because not all of Scotland's GDP is allocated to Scotland (for example, there is an awful lot of oil that is allocated to an undetermined geographic location and not Scotland , because although it comes from Scottish waters, it doesn't make first landfall in Scotland), b) because it is based on WM's spending and macro-economic plans, including paying for Trident and other major infrastructure that we might not choose to be involved in, and c) the "negative" has been mostly comparable with the deficit that WM had been running so is something that could've been managed (and in any case, we should have had a Sovereign Wealth Fund like Norway to be able to smooth over ups and downs in the economy but let's not cry over spilt milk ).

Scotland (until recent events in Venezuela ) was the only country to discover oil and end up poorer

I'd also turn it around and say (ignoring the oil) that the fact that a country with the resources and industries that Scotland has - food, farming, forestry, fishing, tourism, whisky, gin, call centres, bio technology, gaming & software, water, renewables - is supposedly a "scrounging nation", is an indictment of 400 years of WM "rule"

The MSM has also been very good at making the SNP the bogeyman and perpetuating the trope that they would be the only party in an independent Scotland . If people don't want the SNP in an independent Scotland, then they can vote for who the fuck they like : we already have a Scottish Green Party, a new Labour Party (not led by Corbyn ) would need to be set up, a "One Nation" (as in "belief in society") Conservative Party, and you never know, the LibDems might become more relevant (but there again, under Willie Rennie maybe not

And breeeaaathe you'd never believe that in 1979 I'd have voted against "home rule" but couldn't as I was a few weeks too young

BCF, stating you will have a PV is a concrete plan.

You are interpreting what has been said to say something it doesn't. They may well mean what you claim they do, but they HAVE NOT specifically said it.

Again, I'm not saying your interpretation is wrong, but it may be.

I spend my working life negotiating and moving legal deadlines. I don't necessarily need something set in stone to be able / willing to do this if it allows breathing space. I can't really see this being any different.

But we won't agree, so there's no point carrying on!

I guess some of the confusion is from people referring to the WA when they mean the entire package of WA, PD, and the associated statements. Can anyone clarify what exactly is it out of that package that the HoC needs to pass to get the 22 May extension? Presumably any subset of that would automatically be substantially different from MVII and no requirement for lifting standing orders?

If she is saying (BBC news) that she won’t hold a third meaningless vote if people won’t vote for it, what’s the next plan?!

A series of indicative votes seems sensible but not if she’s going to whip MPs!

bear The HoC bill for the WA can be modified without altering the WA itself
e.g. by changing the date on which Brexit happens
That is not the EU's responsibility; it is for the Uk to sort out.

The EU have repeatedly said the WA cannot be altered but they have tried to avoid going into insulting detail for MPs about WA & PD - or we'd definitely get No Deal.
They said back in November after the WA was agreed that there would be no changes and have repeated it many times since
Maybe they have to keep repeating this to MPs every day ?

The real issue for MPs is the backstop
and you can Google yourself how many hundreds of times the EU has said that cannot be changed

Soubry in her C4 interview said MPs had finally realised they cannot alter the WA, only the PD^
Do you think she is wrong ?

Umpteen EU statements that the WA cannot be changed, e.g.

European Council President Donald Tusk

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-tusk-juncker/eus-tusk-says-no-more-brexit-negotiations-idUSKBN1OD21Z

“I have no mandate to organize any further negotiations.
We have to exclude any further opening of the withdrawal agreement,”

EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-juncker/eu-can-go-no-further-to-accommodate-uk-on-brexit-says-juncker-idUKKCN1R10MJ?il=0

“There will be no re-negotiations, no new negotiations, no additional guarantees in addition to those already given,” Juncker told Germany’s Deutschlandfunk radio.
“We have intensively moved towards Britain, there can be no more.”

Chancellor Merkel

uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-germany-merkel/merkel-said-there-will-be-no-more-negotiations-on-brexit-sources-idUKKBN1OA1NC

Chancellor Angela Merkel told her conservative parliamentary group on Tuesday that there would be no further negotiations on Brexit, two German conservative sources said.

BCF, stating you will have a PV is a concrete plan.

I don't agree with that. Not unless you state the terms of the PV. Otherwise you could end up with parliament arguing the toss over the terms for months. Including what is even on the ballot.

A PV in itself is not necessarily a solution for this reason.