Bye bye Theresa

[Simon]

It's odd - I thought with the terrible election result (for the Tories) at the last election would effectively force them to go softer Brexit, and if we must leave then EFTA+CU must surely be the least damaging way to do that (and not cause problems for our neighbours in Ireland), but the two sides of this seem irreconcilable in my opinion. Which is why I'm for taking it out of the politicians hands and having the electorate decide it - that way 'we' can't be angry at 'them' if we remain, because it would be the (new) will of the people.

[JonMad]

Well, let’s see what Wednesday brings. Bercow’s jokey comment nearly got him in trouble at the end tonight. He’s good value entertainment though.

[Swervin_Mervin]

the two sides of this seem irreconcilable in my opinion. Which is why I'm for taking it out of the politicians hands and having the electorate decide it - that way 'we' can't be angry at 'them' if we remain, because it would be the (new) will of the people.

I disagree. If it's anything but a massive swing in a new referendum result it's only going to further cement division in the populace.

[Beany]

Amazing stuff today.

Apparently the ERG are being called the Grand Wizards by press sources.



Which was hastily rolled back by LK


I mean, I grew up in the far, far north, and even I know that Grand Wizard = KKK = massive racist cunts.

I suppose I'd best stop taking the piss out of US press reporting, I suspect these days we're even worse.

[Simon]

LK's normally pretty good, this looks like an innocent slip up.

[Swervin_Mervin]

Rumours now that JRM et all will vote for May's deal.

[Zonda_]

Rumours now that JRM et all will vote for May's deal.

Not rumours, JRM said it publicly as have others

[GG.]

Its the "et al" that is the questionable bit. I don't think all ERGers will follow and even more sceptical about the DUP.

[Jobbo]

Rumours now that JRM et all will vote for May's deal.

The vote fell 391 against, 232 in favour on the second meaningful vote. I imagine there were plenty of Remainers who voted in favour, who would now potentially vote against due to the prospect of revocation or a further referendum. JRM is not going to tip the balance, particularly when his acolytes seem not to share his change of heart.

[DaveE]

I'm sorry, but I genuinely have no clue what's going on any more.

Who's voting for what, what the vote is for, what happens when the vote is won/lost.

Nothing.

It's politically number-wang.

[JLv3.0]

Same here. Haven't got a fucking clue. Something like voting to see if the vote counts as a vote before voting whether to vote on whether voting is valid or whether it should just go to a vote / vote vote / non-vote vote / vote non-vote / non-vote non-vote / non-vote. Or something.

[240PP]

I'm sorry, but I genuinely have no clue what's going on any more.

Same here. Maybe that’s their plan.

[Rich B]

Maybe GG could sum it up concisely?

[JLv3.0]

[GG.]

AFAIK...

1. next set of votes, I believe today, is to set the timetable for indicative votes, i.e. when they are going to hold votes on the alternative options to May's deal;
2. then there are votes, I think tomorrow, on the substance of those indicative votes, i.e. second ref, EFTA, Norway plus, etc. Basically what is going to be on the motions for MPs to vote for. Some or many of these may already have been put to the house and voted against in the past (irony klaxon re the consistent application of Bercow's point re parliamentary precedent on repeated votes)!

Then there will be the votes themselves - timing TBC - see 1. Obviously the key thing to be aware of is that these indicative votes are NOT binding directly on the government which may choose to ignore it..

There may be a way of compelling May to pursue a course of action vis a vis negotiations with the EU but the mechanism behind that I'm not clear on. Simply a convincing vote for one of these options may be enough to force May's hand if she's to avoid a second election/vote of confidence as a result of ignoring the house.

There also is the possibility given these votes are YES/NO, rather than vote for option 1, 2, 3, 4 - that none of them pass (i.e. have a majority in the house), in which case we're back to square one/no deal/May's deal rises from the dead.

If may does then go into bat with the EU to pursue a different option (assuming not 'no deal') then that would clearly require a longer extension and participation in EU elections. That consequence in itself may be a factor behind none of these alternative options being popular given they extend the timetable further.

EU may also then say "non" to whatever we come up with as not being a good enough reason (likely as not achievable/acceptable to them) to extend Art 50 further.

That's as succinct as it gets without omitting material info I'm afraid.

[JLv3.0]

Ah phew - for a moment there I thought this was all a phenomenally embarrassing fuck up but now I see a clear and logical plan has been in place all this time

[JonMad]

It is built into your contract of employment, I wonder, that if you vote against the party whip you're obliged to resign? I assume this only counts for ministers, and if a minister resigns is it just their post that they resign from and they're still MP for wherever - it's not like proper resigning.

[GG.]

Correct re ministers being the ones that any sanction could be taken against. Its not mandatory that you have to resign/get sacked if you rebel, given that potentially weakens the government further as they're on the backbenches and no hope that you can influence them to follow your agenda.

You ask an interesting question about the legal mechanics of appointment as a minister. I don't know the answer but presume it could (indeed is likely) to be regulated through parliamentary procedure rather than contract law with a contract of employment, otherwise can you imagine all the unfair dismissal claims

[GG.]

Ah phew - for a moment there I thought this was all a phenomenally embarrassing fuck up but now I see a clear and logical plan has been in place all this time

DUP have just stuck the knife into May's deal saying they prefer a long extension to the "prison" of the Withdrawal Agreement so its looking safe to say May's deal is not getting passed in a hurry.

[JonathanE]

So let me make sure I understand - they are going to vote on when to vote, then they are going to vote on what to vote on, then they are going to vote. Then May decides, then the EU decides? That's pretty succinct (and insane).

Jonathan