Reply to: Confirmatory referendum or customs union

[Old Greg]

Time of an It's a Knockout solution.

[Whorty]

Compromise is needed, but these fools don't know how to do that. Sensible solution would be to take the 1 or 2 favoured options from last night (Ken Clarke and Labour?) and vote on favoured. This then goes head to head with May's deal. Most likely Ken's deal will win that.

Then, parliament vote on whether they put that leave option back to the people vs Remain. Before leave whingers start on, 'no deal' is not an option as it has minority support so don't even go there.

Personally, I'd prefer parliament to select and not offer a choice back to the people. Whether this is May's deal, or Ken's deal, pick one and let's move forward. And I say this even though I think under a people's confirmation vote remain would actually win.

Process should therefore be ...

1) Whittle down 8 options to 1 (probably Ken Clarke CU)
2) MPs option vs May (straight vote - highest votes win. Abstain counts as zero as it did in the actual ref)
3) Decide to place final option vs Remain back to people. If yes go to 4, if no go to 5.
4) Ref Final option vs Remain. If Final option, continue leave process. If Remain, go to 5
5) Revoke A50

[BlasterBates]

Boris Johnson to vote against May's deal

Mark Francois has said he would not back the deal even “if they put a shotgun in my mouth”

The only game in town is the Customs Union on Monday, otherwise it will be an exciting cliff edge between no deal and "Extenshun".

This could be a huge boost to my "pro Brexit" portfolio.

[BlasterBates]

Who is fretting. All yesterday demonstrated was that our MPs are not fit for purpose. Hypocrites the lot of them.

Not at all, MPs reflect the opinion in the country.

36% of the electorate voted for Brexit, 34% voted for remain and 30% didn't have an opinion.

That is roughly the case the house of commons. A third firm remain, a third firm Brexit and a third could go either way.

This is the problem when a referendum gets passed on 50% of those who actually turn out. A constitutional change should have a much higher hurdle such as more than 50% of the electorate. If that had been the case Brexit would have passed smoothly through the House of Commons after a GE.

Labour campaigned for a form of Brexit which means they can fully justify opposing May's deal otherwise they would be reneging on their manifesto.

The fact is in the UK, the Brexiteers simply don't have the numbers. They need to come up with a plan to convince enough "don't knows", and they don't. Their Brexit is too bad.

[meridian]

Parliament is, was, and always will be, in total control as per the U.K. constitution as confirmed by the judiciary in the Miller case

FTFY.

Gina Miller didn’t change our Parliamentary control, she merely set the case for the court to confirm what the constitution agrees.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

But it was their wish that she should submit A50 was it not. She just followed their wishes. Parliament is, was, and always will be, in total control thanks to Gina Millar

Parliament voted to confer the power on her to invoke A50 as she sees fit in response to the Gina Millar case.

That act did not specify when she had to invoke it. She set the date, nobody else did.

European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 - Wikipedia

[Yorkie62]

No, they voted to give the PM authority to do so. They did not instruct her on when she should do it.

But it was their wish that she should submit A50 was it not. She just followed their wishes. Parliament is, was, and always will be, in total control thanks to Gina Millar

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

All MPs voted for submitting Article 50 to the EU.

HTH BIDI

No, they voted to give the PM authority to do so. They did not instruct her on when she should do it.

[Bean]

It was May who decided when to trigger A50, not MPs.

It is however ridiculous that all the MPs who voted against No Deal yesterday or at other times did not vote for the only option that would change the legal default to revoking A50.

All MPs voted for submitting Article 50 to the EU.

HTH BIDI

[NotAllThere]

So I guess, there will be another round of votes for the favourites, and maybe a consensus can appear. Marginally, customs union seems the most likely outcome.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

Close is irrelevant. There is no majority for anything, fact, end of story. Nothing to discuss here.

There is but one option that parliament voted for when it set the original leaving date, and now the new leaving date, in place and that is No Deal. Its the only thing they have voted for a majority on.

It was May who decided when to trigger A50, not MPs.

It is however ridiculous that all the MPs who voted against No Deal yesterday or at other times did not vote for the only option that would change the legal default to revoking A50.

[Yorkie62]

No they didn’t. No Deal was and still is the default, but nobody has specifically voted for it.



Because unicorns.

Don’t fret about the results yesterday, it was “indicative”. The Government can choose to be sensible and work out how they can translate indicative options into a workable solution, or they can continue to bludgeon their way to either MV3 or No Deal.

Who is fretting. All yesterday demonstrated was that our MPs are not fit for purpose. Hypocrites the lot of them.

[meridian]

But hey voted for no deal when they set March 29th,

No they didn’t. No Deal was and still is the default, but nobody has specifically voted for it.

and now April12th in place. Can you not see the hypocrisy. If we don't have a deal by 12th April we leave with no deal that is what our law currently states. they have just had an opportunity to change this when they changed the date, but they declined to do so. Why?

Because unicorns.

Don’t fret about the results yesterday, it was “indicative”. The Government can choose to be sensible and work out how they can translate indicative options into a workable solution, or they can continue to bludgeon their way to either MV3 or No Deal.

[Yorkie62]

They don't seem to like the idea now.

No-deal exit on 12 April - For: 160 Against: 400

But hey voted for no deal when they set March 29th, and now April12th in place. Can you not see the hypocrisy. If we don't have a deal by 12th April we leave with no deal that is what our law currently states. they have just had an opportunity to change this when they changed the date, but they declined to do so. Why?

[stonehenge]

They don't seem to like the idea now.

No-deal exit on 12 April - For: 160 Against: 400