Can any one explain what parliament hope to achieve - what is their end game so to speak....

[Miaowing]

I'm a fairly intelligent person and can normally see the arguments in most things (even if I don't agree). I'll put my cards on the table and say I am a leaver but a moderate one. I just cannot get my head around what is going on at the moment.

Parliament is divided - they cannot agree between themselves what they want. Last year that had a few days where I think just about every single possible permutation was put before them and none of them got enough votes to enact.

They don't want to revoke
They don't want a second referendum
They don't want the WAB
They don't want no deal

They are very very good at saying what they don't want - but not what it is they DO want.

So the answer is a GE. Corbyn is running scared and has now said he won't back one if there is EVER any chance of a no deal. Which is clearly going to be impossible to guarantee unless the UK government are stupid enough to say they'll agree with whatever trade terms the EU want regardless.

However, if the country returned a conservative majority - then surely that is indicative of how they want to go (let not get into the argument that its England that normally chooses the government which is true but based on population numbers). Regardless of how it is portrayed, the GE will be fought on Brexit.

Another three month extension without a GE is groundhog day part 23

I'm a fairly intelligent person and can normally see the arguments in most things so let me regurgitate the Tory spin that I've been digesting over the past 6 months.

Seriously, you might have well just announced yourself as James Cleverly.

It's a valid question but you're unlikely to receive any serious answers. We wouldn't be in this situation at all if parliament hadn't (a) called a referendum (b) invoked Article 50 before agreeing what Brexit meant.

Despite that, certain sections of parliament are refusing to take any responsibility whilst also refusing to commit to anything that would break the current deadlock whether that be a GE, a second referendum, a WA, etc.

Indeed, triggering A50 before agreeing what 'we' want. That was a proper own goal 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

"Parliament" is divided, of course they don't all want a single thing, they're as divided as the country which is as divided as it's possible to be.
The only thing most of the parliamentarians agree on is that no deal is an awful idea. Most of them seem to be doing what they can to avoid that at all costs.

What are they doing to avoid it at all costs? Refusing to propose alternative plans? Refusing to support any WA? Refusing to agree to a GE? Refusing to stand on a second referendum mandate in case they lose their seats? Saying you don't want something repeatedly isn't really doing everything to avoid it at all costs.

What Labour DON'T want is a Tory majority placed in parliament purely on a single issue platform (Brexit) who go on to spend the next five years further decimating our public services and enfeebling our working classes whilst the wealth gap gets wider, when few will have actually voted for that because all they wanted was to "get Brexit done".

This is a Tory trick to give us 5 years of Tory governance simply because they picked the populist choice on this single issue and got us all so fucking exasperated and beleaguered by the whole thing that that became all we cared about.

Hence no GE from Labour.

No deal would be suicidal. Any party or politician advocating for that is either a scumbag or a liar. Apart from that, who knows. There is no good result and they all know it. Asking a simple question about something so complicated was utterly irresponsible.

What Labour DON'T want is a Tory majority placed in parliament purely on a single issue platform (Brexit)
That's exactly what will happen now, as they have abstained on a vote to have an election after Brexit is done, so they will have to go into an election with this crap still going on and no idea how to get it resolved.

Intrigued too so following with interest

Why would you assume there is a parliamentary “end game”?

Parliament is made up of different parties, groups within parties (particularly when it comes to brexit), independents. It’s not like there is an overall parliament “game plan” (god knows things might be going better if there were, impossible though it would be), they are reacting to whatever the government of the day is doing - and so far the governments involved in brexit have tried to limit parliamentary oversight, which has eroded trust and of course some parliamentarians have worked to be permitted some oversight of the process and outcomes. I would have thought leavers who supported the parliamentary democracy in our country would be pleased that authoritarian tactics by government were being challenged by elected MPs, but apparently many lean towards supporting dodgy means to their preferred end.

They are very very good at saying what they don't want - but not what it is they DO want.

It's not just Parliament as a bloc that isn't good at agreeing a course of action. Even the pro Leave group of MPs have been very bad at saying what they DO want.

The Leave MPs and some public supporters have moved position like the tide.

The Leave preferred deal has lurched in three years from :

1. a clear preference for an arrangement like Norway (which was the dominant solution before the ref ). to
2. a variety of opinions including the absurd 'no deal is better' and now the current damaging 'any deal will do.'

Before the referendum Leave campaigners, including both the ruling Tories and the Faragists , were saying reassuring things like "nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market,” ( Hannan).
.
“Only a madman would actually leave the single market,”Owen Paterson

But that position melted away.

If there were great benefits to the current proposal then the Leave MPs would be able to persuade others by highlighting the advantages with skilled statesmanship and impact assessments. The problem is there just aren't benefits to highlight and sell. There just aren't.

Surely a point comes when MPs (and people) accept that if this was the right thing to do, and the right time to do it, then the benefits would be more obvious. If it was a beneficial destination the path would be more attractive and consensual.

It's like parenting -one of the key things is to be consistent. We are ruled here by inconsistent parents. Their advice to us is unrecognisable after three years, defined by an inconsistent and non- consensual vision.

The protagonists for Leave won control but are not following through with what we were sold before the ref.

If there were great benefits to the current proposal then the Leave MPs would be able to persuade others by highlighting the advantages with skilled statesmanship and impact assessments. The problem is there just aren't benefits to highlight and sell. There just aren't.

Surely a point comes when MPs (and people) accept that if this was the right thing to do, and the right time to do it, then the benefits would be more obvious. If it was a beneficial destination the path would be more attractive and consensual.

I totally agree with this and have said so for a long time. Why, after 3.5 years, have the benefits not been made clear if they are so abundant? When people bang on about 'acepting the vote' and 'working together', this is the biggest stumbling block for me. No-one has been able explain why Brexit is good for UK society or the economy. Discussions of downsides are dismissed as Project Fear, we're told not to worry about Operation Yellowhammer because it's only a worst case scenario, etc. Where are the disussions of the upsides? When we see the gov's 'get ready for Brexit' notices telling us we now need health insurance to travel in the EU, for example, where is the equivalent good news? eg. You have to do this (annoying thing) now; however, the benefit is ...

How are they ever going to break this deadlock though? If all they're doing is saying no to every suggestion the clock will run down with no movement and then what? Will they ask for another extension at the end of January?

If what they want is to revoke why aren't any parties actually calling for it?

If what they want is to revoke why aren't any parties actually calling for it?
The LimDems are calling for revoke.
As for the others, to champion revoke would be to go against the 'will of the people' mantra. If it had been acknowledged from June 2016 that this was an advisory referendum and the government had taken the result as an indication of the mood of the country before moving forward cautiously, we wouldn't be in this position. Instead, we got red lines, nonsense about 'citizens of nowhere', and endless blathering on about 'the people have spoken'. Meanwhile, the 48% of voters who did not want this were ignored, as were those who were unable/not permitted to vote. The government has painted itself into a corner and don't know how to get out because that would mean admitting (a) they took the wrong approach (b) there is no form of Brexit that will not damage the country. The main opposition party is useless and has failed to oppose, and its leader doesn't seem to realise that their attempt to please leave and remain voters has alienated both sides both sides of the argument.

their attempt to please leave and remain voters has alienated both sides both sides of the argument.

I think this sums it up. All parties are trying to appeal to all voters and it just can't be done. Hence we are at stalemate.

Maybe they're waiting for the EU to force a decision on us. It's not just us communications here. The European economies are having to live with the uncertainty too. The Lib Dems are advocating revoke, but for them to win would need an astronomical shift and would probably lead to the destruction of the Labour Party. If Labour's 'plan' is election, beg for lengthy delay, beg for reopening of WA, renegotiate, referendum, reject their own deal during said referendum campaign and then hope they can revoke, it makes more sense to have election, revoke, think of a deal, referendum on deal. I bet they would get a majority for that if they joined forces with the Lib Dems.

It's not just our economy here

Many MPs are, individually, saying what they want loud and clear. The problem is that no one group of MPs can get enough support to create a majority. So parliament as a whole can't agree on anything.

The whole situation is a mess.
I voted Leave and anticipated a sensible deal that parl would agree on so the country could move forward.
It's like watching a car crash in slow motion.

Hopefully a GE will provide clarity and a majority so that the paralysis can be ended.

Hopefully a GE will provide clarity and a majority so that the paralysis can be ended.
A single issue GE is such an appalling idea. It might provide 'clarity' on Brexit, but elections should not be fought on a single issue. GEs should determine who we trust with education, the health service, the economy, defence, transport, environment etc.

Someone mooted the idea of a GE and a referendum on the same day. It will never happen, but seemed very sensible to me. I'm sure Leavers wouldn't agree, given their resistance to a further referendum. It seems odd to me that their stance is that further voting in form of GE = acceptable/democratic (despite the Fixed Term Parliament Act), but further voting in form of second referendum = unacceptable/anti-democratic. The reason for that seems glaringly obvious to me.

I’ve given up trying to follow it. I spent hours a day with radio on so it’s not for lack of trying. Labour have spent years shouting for a G E and now don’t want one?

When we were leaving on 31st plenty adverts saying make sure we had travel insurance for medical bills etc in Europe yet I’ve no idea if same also applies to EU members coming here?

Boris dosnt even have decency to defend why he’s staying when he said it would never happen. You can promise what you like and no explanation needed when you fail to do it.

Parliament doesnt 'want' one thing.

It's nonsensical to try and talk about as if it has one end goal re Brexit. It's a collection of individuals trying to their best by their own constituents, the country, themselves or their vested interests.

This is why politics should be compulsory in schools from very early on. So little understanding amongst some adults.

Nothing. It's a whole list of catch 22 scenarios.