Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Brexit
Original poster

A bill has been passed to prevent no deal brexit

207 replies

StealthPolarBear · 09/04/2019 11:14

I would have thought would have been the lead story on the bbc news, and in fact would have popped up on breaking news. I can't find it anywhere on there. In fact they're still reporting no deal will happen on Friday in the absence of anything else.
I am so confused, can anyone explain this to me?

OP posts:
CruCru · 09/04/2019 13:18

Than those of the country). However, I see that in that case it is possible to accuse a monarch of treason - thank you.

FishesaPlenty · 09/04/2019 13:22

If we don't get a further extension this week is there still opportunity and time for Parliament to pass legislation to revoke (or whatever) before Friday?

FusionChefGeoff · 09/04/2019 13:26

In a word, no.

It was tabled on Weds last week and only passed last night - so 4 working days.

We won't find out about the extension until tomorrow.

DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 13:29

Ah I see. My understanding had been that Charles I was actually accused of treason against the Crown (since he was acting in his own personal interests rather than those of the country).

Well to be fair, up until then, they were usually considered the one and the same thing. However times were changing and the religious divide of the Reformation was still raw with the fear of a Catholic invasion very real. Against that backdrop, the powers of the Monarch were balanced against the power of parliament.

It's a fascinating time in history (as indeed are all times Grin) but all the more so because it's effects can be seen in everyday life in Britain.

doIreallyneedto · 09/04/2019 13:32

If we don't get a further extension this week is there still opportunity and time for Parliament to pass legislation to revoke (or whatever) before Friday?

Is legislation required to revoke or can TM do it unilaterally or with consent by a vote of parliament?

FusionChefGeoff · 09/04/2019 13:34

She can do it unilaterally. The legislation would be needed to force her to do though as she's very very very against the idea

DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 13:34

Is legislation required to revoke or can TM do it unilaterally or with consent by a vote of parliament?

I think experts agree it can be done with a simply "Dear EU" letter from the Prime Minister. However, they can't be forced to write it ... although it would then avoid the no-deal they can't allow to happen.

(Hears theme music to "Soap" ....)

doIreallyneedto · 09/04/2019 13:40

I half answered my own question - TM is unlikely to be able to revoke unilaterally but it would need need a legal challenge to confirm www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-cancel-stop-revoke-article-50-explained-remain-stay-eu-latest-parliament-theresa-may-a8690886.html

The answer seems to be that as the supreme court rule a vote was required to invoke, a vote would also be required to revoke.

Does that mean that a vote is sufficient or does a vote need to be enshrined in law to become a vote iykwim?

doIreallyneedto · 09/04/2019 13:41

So it sounds like she needs a vote in parliament to revoke before she can write the Dear EU letter?

woman19 · 09/04/2019 14:00

If you read the Stephen Bush article, posted upthread, there's now a possibility that it might not just be May who can ensure a revoke, to prevent crash out. Wink

‏
@andrew_lilico blaming of the Queen, is quite a thing though.

We were used to them blaming 'remainers', judges, MPs, academics etc,

But our Queen? Shock

The80sweregreat · 09/04/2019 14:02

Woman, James o Brian asked people to ring in if they blame the Queen for the Brexit stalemate problem and someone did!

woman19 · 09/04/2019 14:04

Shock the80s

DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 14:05

@andrew_lilico blaming of the Queen, is quite a thing though.

I didn't read it as blaming, just an observation that there had been no intervention, despite the country being plunged into political chaos and a potential catastrophe which by their own admission the government are stockpiling body bags for.

Can't speak for AL, but growing up, one counter to any republican sentiments was how the Monarchy was a protection for the country against such occurrences.

Well, clearly not.

FishesaPlenty · 09/04/2019 14:07

If you read the Stephen Bush article, posted upthread, there's now a possibility that it might not just be May who can ensure a revoke, to prevent crash out.

It was that article which prompted my question on the possibility of forcing through some legislation before Friday night. It looks like it's not possible because of the timescale though.

woman19 · 09/04/2019 14:10

The HOC staff Halo raced to get it through, in 48 working hours? We find our fate tomorrow night? It is super tight though I agree fishes

countchuckula · 09/04/2019 14:11

Is it possible the EU could get sick of us after three years of all this and just boot us out? I don't know if that's a possibility? I mean, just how much longer can this go on for?

DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 14:12

The HOC staff halo raced to get it through, in 48 working hours?

and (for all the criticism) Her Majesty did stay up until it was ready to sign, from what we are told. Make of that what you will.

The80sweregreat · 09/04/2019 14:14

I'm not sure what the caller on lbc said as I had get out to get the petrol , he was just about to speak too! I was gutted as I wanted to hear why he thinks it's her fault ; some other politicians think this too though?
What can she do? Could she intervene?
It's all very bizarre.

bellinisurge · 09/04/2019 14:17

Blaming the Queen shows the descent into toddler tantrum gathers speed.
Not sure you can get more sovereign than the actual sovereign.

Original poster
StealthPolarBear · 09/04/2019 14:18

"? We find our fate tomorrow night?"
Doubt it. It'll just be yet another confusing non decision.

OP posts:
DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 14:22

Blaming the Queen shows the descent into toddler tantrum gathers speed. Not sure you can get more sovereign than the actual sovereign.

It was noted (by me Grin) a few weeks ago that the BrexitBus had gotten so out of control that even if the Queen herself were to cancel Brexit, she'd be called "a traitor". The hyperbole being intended to highlight how Brexit was never about anything but Brexiteers, and all this talk of "sovereign" was a badly fitting fig-leaf for the more accurate and truthful whatever we want.

I think Brenda is safe for now. But I suspect Charles III (should he chose that as his regnal name ...) is going to be seeing some major changes in the relationship of the Monarch, the Crown, Parliament and the people. Although given his age, it would probably make more sense to look to William ...

FishesaPlenty · 09/04/2019 14:30

Doubt it. It'll just be yet another confusing non decision.

Well no, there'll either be an extension or there won't.

Original poster
StealthPolarBear · 09/04/2019 14:42

That's what I mean though. An extension does not mean our fate has been decided at all. It just means there's loads more to do, same old stuff rehashed.

OP posts:
FishesaPlenty · 09/04/2019 14:46

To me it just creates a few weeks for the MPs to grow some balls and do their jobs - now that their minds are (hopefully) fully focused.

tigerbear · 09/04/2019 14:48

@Stealthpolarbear - when I first clicked on this thread, my first thought was confusion as I was under the impression that as of LAST WEEK, No Deal couldn’t happen.
My DP came in last week saying he’d seen reports that it had been stopped.

Agree, the news reports are incredibly confusing.
So, can it it still happen??

The Guardian is now saying that the extension is very likely.