Brexit: the No Deal Vote

46 comments on “Brexit: the No Deal Vote ”

• Comments are now closed

1. mickysavage 1

   14 March 2019 at 7:34 am

   What a fuster cluck …
2. Ad 2

   14 March 2019 at 7:48 am

   So sad that it’s sick.
3. Incognito 3

   14 March 2019 at 7:55 am

   So, this is the Westminster system, and the birthplace of modern democracy? Where a Government is voted down and humiliated time after time? When they are in charge to clean up, not to make a bigger mess? And yet they stay in power although it becomes a moot point what power really means (baubles?). If this is a cunning plan to lose citizens’ trust in politicians and the system that ‘enables’ them to run roughshod over a whole country and its economy I couldn’t imagine a better one …
   • Sam 3.1

     14 March 2019 at 8:02 am

     Yep, the Apple Watch really helps too. It makes the numbers smaller so it seems like the plebs are losing less than they actually are. If you wear a blindfold it really helps too. Good for the psychology 👍
   • soddenleaf 3.2

     15 March 2019 at 12:49 pm

     I believe that the whole snafu began when Cameron decided to forefil a promise to reaffirm EU membership with a referenda. The Tories never planned out the rejection. Now they look like incompetents, leaving the EU was all they had to do, they had enough time, they shouldn’t need any more. Conservative governing ability is now questionable. It was a simple task, they should have covered themselves by arguing the case in the referendum. Dont remember anyone talking about NI. Or, dislocated citizens, pensions, etc. So yeah nah, Democracy isn’t harmed, the Tories are, and it does help Labour, who rightly just kept the hot potato from ever landing on them. Labour got brexit right so far.
4. Gosman 4

   14 March 2019 at 8:20 am

   Fresh defeat for May as the amendment that rules out a No deal for good has passed. That is a blow for May AND Brexiters. It wasn’t even clear the amendment would get voted on until last minute as the proposers pulled their support in favour of the Government’s motion (which is now replaced)
   • te reo putake 4.1

     14 March 2019 at 8:34 am

     Weirdly, it appears the Government doesn’t have to be bound by that amendment. The Guardian reports:

     “It is important to stress, of course, that the Spelman amendment passed a few minutes ago does not definitely rule out a no-deal Brexit.

     There are two reasons for that.

     First, it is not a binding amendment. It is not legislation, and it is not a motion that gives a formal instruction to the government (like the “humble address” motions).

     The government could choose to accept it, and treat it as binding, but it has not said yet that it will. And even if it did …

     Second, it is not within the government’s power to rule out no deal (in the terms of the motion) because it does not call for article 50 to be revoked (which would probably require separate legislation anyway). Caroline Spelman and Jack Dromey, who tabled it, intended it to signal that ministers should extend article 50 in the event of no deal being agreed. But, as Theresa May says repeatedly, that only postpones the problem.”
     • Gosman 4.1.1

       14 March 2019 at 9:28 am

       It isn’t weird at all. It would be almost impossible for there to be a law that would force the Government to do something in relation to an agreement in which there is another party that the law holds no sway over.
   • Sam 4.2

     14 March 2019 at 8:34 am

     Why, because BREXIT is bad for Britian and good for Europe ???
   • Matiri 4.3

     14 March 2019 at 8:39 am

     But can May bring back her deal for a third vote if the only choice is her deal or No Brexit? Would bring the Brexiters into line – keep asking the question until you get the answer you want?
     • Sam 4.3.1

       14 March 2019 at 8:44 am

       I don’t know, they’ve been 406’d but there used to be a bunch of BBC melenial BREXIT panels discussing BREXIT and the melenials would go right off script saying stuff like we accept the referendum and it would look bad for democracy if we tried to cancel the first referendum by calling another one. So yeah, remainers just look like right twats.
       • Matiri 4.3.1.1

         14 March 2019 at 8:51 am

         Being reported in the Guardian now that ERG could vote for May’s deal (ie a third or even fourth vote) if the legal advice was ‘clearer’ ie force the Attorney General – Cox to come up with the ‘right’ advice!
         • Sam 4.3.1.1.1

           14 March 2019 at 8:56 am

           I mean if may didn’t listen to her Queen I don’t really see why she’d listen to the Queens underling. And Corbyn is getting the same advice from his advisors which is daft. Europs millionaires are moving to the UK anyway because they can literally see the writing on the wall.
5. te reo putake 5

   14 March 2019 at 8:37 am

   And now it appears the Tories are going to force their MP’s to vote against legislation the Conservatives themselves have proposed, because of the Spelman amendment.

   Utter chaos.
   • Gosman 5.1

     14 March 2019 at 9:10 am

     And they still lost…
6. te reo putake 6

   14 March 2019 at 8:56 am

   No Deal is rejected, with 321 to 278 in favour of the motion ruling out a no-deal Brexit – a majority of 43. That majority is roughly equal to the number of MP’s who abstained; and most of those were Tories.
   • Gosman 6.1

     14 March 2019 at 9:27 am

     What is interesting is the Tory’s applied the whip in the end and still a number of Ministers abstained.
   • Dennis Frank 6.2

     14 March 2019 at 9:38 am

     The BBC reported those numbers, yet in the same report included this: “MPs backed an amendment rejecting any no-deal Brexit by 312 votes to 308”. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47562995

     The latter result was reported on the AM show here. Why are they reporting two different margins for what appears to be the same vote??

     And a differential of four is miniscule compared to 43, or less than 1% difference compared to 7%. Parliament split down the middle, reflecting a country split likewise. You could see it as evidence that the `yeah, nah’ stance has spread from youngsters to infect the entire body politic.
     • te reo putake 6.2.1

       14 March 2019 at 9:47 am

       The first vote (passed by 4 votes) was on an amendment to the substantial motion (the Spelman amendment). Nearly every MP voted one way or the other on that proposal. When that narrowly passed, it was added to the original motion, and then that combined motion was voted on and passed by the larger actual majority, but with 30 or so abstentions.
       • Gosman 6.2.1.1

         14 March 2019 at 9:49 am

         Additionally the amendment caused May to whip her party AGAINST the motion whereas before she had agreed to let a free vote. The fact she had Cabinet Ministers ignoring 3 line whip (The very highest) by abstaining on the second vote is of major concern to her.
7. mikesh 7

   14 March 2019 at 9:10 am

   Presumably they can only revoke or extend article 50 if the Europeans agree. Otherwise anything parliament does now will be otiose.
8. WeTheBleeple 8

   14 March 2019 at 9:13 am

   My understanding of all this is severely limited. I get a general feeling some believe the Tories want Brexit for their own ends?

   So far, all I know is it’s something like a nasty divorce where pre-nuptials are making it damn hard for England to leave without Europe claiming ‘half’.

   If someone could lay out the gist in laymans terms of the supposed machinations behind this I’d appreciate it, and I reckon a lot of other readers might as well.

   Why are the millionaires moving to UK? What’s the caper?
   • Gosman 8.1

     14 March 2019 at 9:31 am

     Actually the agreement that May has arrived at has got most of the elements that the Brexiters want OTHER than it includes a clause around the border with Northern Ireland which they feel MAY trap them in a type of Customs Union with the EU with no unilateral way of exiting it.
   • Sam 8.2

     14 March 2019 at 9:35 am

     Headlines that is probably 90% certain to NOT be reported in 2019 .., “Eurozone GDP Growth Expectations Soar on Brexit Break-up” – When and How are the only things to worry about in terms of making money out of the inevitable and impending European rout of Financial Assets.
     • WeTheBleeple 8.2.1

       14 March 2019 at 10:06 am

       OK I kinda get that. It’s a carvery for the carver uppers. I was trying to understand the movements of some (rich) locals who are selling up and off to the UK while others are coming here to get away from it.

       Opportunism. A carry on on the carrion.
       • Sam 8.2.1.1

         14 March 2019 at 10:21 am

         It’s rat behaviour on fears of an EU recession, based on the current rate of change in leading indicators and GDP contraction…, not to Brexit. That could be anything.
       • greywarshark 8.2.1.2

         14 March 2019 at 10:35 am

         A carry on the carrion. A unique summary of large parts of the world’s society and economy.
9. Wayne 9

   14 March 2019 at 9:30 am

   The passing of the No Deal resolution is just that, a resolution. It is not legislation.

   As May notes, the logical inference is to vote for a delay of Article 50. If that passes (which it will) that means the UK government has to go back to the EU for the extension, which they may or may not agree to.

   It seems that there is a significant group of MP’s who think the Barnier’s “no more changes” is a bluff, that there can be more tweaks to the May deal.

   From what I read, the ERG group has finally woken up to the fact that the UK is now at real risk of having no Brexit at all. And thus May’s deal starts to have more appeal to the ERG.

   My prediction is that May will put her deal to Parliament again before May 29. Maybe with some more changes, and maybe with a fresh think by the AG as to whether the UK can cancel it, if the EU does not do a proper FTA in the next two years.
   • Gosman 9.1

     14 March 2019 at 9:32 am

     Why don’t the Brexiters just come up with a solution to the border problem in Northern Ireland Wayne?Then there would be no need for any backstop kicking in which is their fear. They stated this would be easy to do. Now they don’t even mention the solutions for some reason.
     • Sam 9.1.1

       14 March 2019 at 9:43 am

       Because you can’t be half prego with one toe in the £pound and another in the €uro. Every accountant with half a brain would offset any tariffs by shifting profits to Ireland.
       • Gosman 9.1.1.1

         14 March 2019 at 9:51 am

         Ummm… your analysis makes little to no sense. It isn’t even answering my question to Wayne. I think you should sit this one out champ and let the adults discuss the topic.
         • Sam 9.1.1.1.1

           14 March 2019 at 9:55 am

           Your red hearings is not an argument. Who cares if you are struggling to get your head around BREXIT, really. So you’ve found a buddy with which you can discuss an article 50 extension as if it’s, really going to happen, this time. That’s interesting.
     • SPC 9.1.2

       14 March 2019 at 12:36 pm

       There is a solution but the DUP are part of the governing coalition – it is holding a province of Ulster wide referendum on the continuance of Northern Ireland within the UK, the way it should have been held some decades ago (rather than the gerrymandering down to the Protestant majority rump of Ulster now called Northern Ireland).
   • SPC 9.2

     14 March 2019 at 12:47 pm

     Given the ERG’s attitude to those Tory MP’s who dared oppose a no deal Brexit, there is the chance they might themselves then bow down to accept Tory whipping behind the May deal – but even then some of the caucus would abstain and others vote on conscience.

     They would need a fair few of the Labour MP’s to support it (which in sustaining the Tory government would amount to rebellion against the Labour call for fresh elections – thus asking to be de-selected, more so if Labour responded by whipping in opposition to the May deal as an electionering position).
10. Dennis Frank 10

    14 March 2019 at 9:51 am

    “Labour has further backed away from its support for a fresh Brexit referendum by saying it no longer supports a public vote on Theresa May’s deal.” https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-labour-second-referendum-theresa-may-deal-corbyn-a8821896.html

    Some unusually nimble repositioning from the Labour leader! His spokesman: “Clearly May’s deal has been overwhelmingly rejected and it is loathed by almost all parts of the political spectrum. Therefore clearly it would not be right for that deal in its current form to be put to a referendum.”

    Seems sensible. Any referendum needs to be grounded in political reality. Erecting a castle on shifting sands is a waste of time. May & the EU are competing hurricanes moving the dunes around continually, whereas a referendum needs them to expose bed-rock instead.
    • greywarshark 10.1

      14 March 2019 at 10:36 am

      I like your succinct analogies Dennis F.
11. JohnSelway 11

    14 March 2019 at 10:54 am

    Well that’s the end of May…
    • Wayne 11.1

      14 March 2019 at 1:23 pm

      I think is is still too soon to tell about May’s future.

      One thing is clear, May is unusually determined. She will press on for some time yet. At least until the end of the next phase.

      I reckon that will be an extension of Art 50, and then some modification of the current deal, which will then pass. Most of Labour will vote against, but maybe more than 3 will support.

      I reckon the New Independent group will get real power. They may be the votes that ultimately count. I reckon they will say they are taking a responsible line to get the UK through the current crisis, which means some form of Brexit deal passing.

      Of course that could be the end of them, or it could show they are a new centre voice. Who knows?

      As for May, she will go sometime in the next 2 years, before the next election.

      And if a Brexit deal gets through, the next election will not take place until its due date in May 2022, basically three years away. The Conservatives will have a new leader. Labour will have Jeremy.
      • Sam 11.1.1

        14 March 2019 at 1:37 pm

        The conservitives push world wide to reject female leadership is destroying the conservative movement and there’s not a single thing anyone can do to save it. Good day progressives, just swell.
    • left_forward 11.2

      15 March 2019 at 7:01 am

      Not yet, more like the ides of March.
12. Tom Pained 12

    14 March 2019 at 11:25 am

    Brexit attrition leaves Teresa a leader in name only

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/13/as-the-losses-take-their-toll-may-is-now-a-leader-in-name-only
    • Dennis Frank 12.1

      14 March 2019 at 11:36 am

      Includes this gem: “Spelman thus won a vote she wanted to lose, making her the anti-May.” The Speaker proved a right bully, enforcing the vote, poor woman.

      Now that the habit of referring to the pope as anti-christ has lapsed, we have the spectre of the anti-May emerging as a cultural phenomenon. Little children will just have to ponder the important question of whether the anti-May is more scary than the May, or not…
13. CHCoff 13

    14 March 2019 at 10:50 pm

    The EU is at a reform phase.

    A concluding British referendum to determine a broad mandate from within the dynamics of that process, that the UK member parties are then bound to support & promote, would give a greater impetus to the reach/’efficacy of the reforms due to having the more direct support & engagement of the British public behind them, which would help give the various positions a positive makeover to go forward with.

    There seems to be some good sound positions within the EU mix to produce a well rounded upgrade.
    • mikesh 13.1

      15 March 2019 at 9:24 am

      I think the Europeans need to make clear what their intentions are come the 29th before the UK parliament can decide on its next move.
      • Sam 13.1.1

        15 March 2019 at 10:13 am

        The intensions of Brussels and particularly Westminster is to fuck an entire generation and I say this as some one who was originally a remainer in love with the idea that Europe could put aside its centuries of bitter internal war and live and let live. But they excluded Russia and couldn’t sort out a fiscal Union so states didn’t have to borrow at inflated rates. The only thing some one like me can say is abandon ship and help some mates out who want to leave. Such a wast of hundreds of years of economic development and growth.
        • CHCoff 13.1.1.1

          15 March 2019 at 2:20 pm

          The arrangement of chairs around elephants in a room, is seldom a practical matter for public political discourse to understand ( the brexit ref being a case in point ).

          Once the chairs are arranged however, then public political discourse can grasp the practicalities of the best arrangements with a far greater degree of accuracy. That this approach is less common, is simply a matter of things being poorer for it.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS