UKC

So, what happens now  - lots of speculation

Will May go before Monday? Will there be a way ahead after Mondays vote?

Or will we fall off the end of the cliff and leave with no deal?

My ideal solution :

May gos and a clown like Boris replaces her.

General Election.  A maximum of remainers should vote for the parties that pledge to give the people a second say ( at this moment in time Lib Dems & SNP ? ). If they obtain the majority or even a working minority to steer the country in the right direction,  but firstly revoking Article 50. There's no longer any hurry  especially if  the 27 think that it is likely for the UK  to remain. 

Yes, I think a GE is almost inevitable now. But that will be many weeks away ... and there'll be a really confusing time in the interim.

And Corbyn will pretend to be promising a referendum in the Labour manifesto but only conditional upon pigs starting to fly.

I think Labour will promise a Confirmatory Vote on its negotiated deal. A deal which I think could command the support of a majority in the country.

I struggle too see how any good will come out of a general election where people are effectively encouraged to vote on a single issue.

If we are going to go down that line then it may just be time to have a 2nd referendum.

No there’s not enough time to call a GE before 12th April. All eyes now on Europe. We will have to ask for an extension or go No Deal. EU might offer 2 years (at a price, perhaps a 2nd referendum) or Macron may block it. 

Eu is now in control. The only way we get it back is by no deal or revoking.

No deal exit by default. None of the other options can command a majority.

How the hell would that actually work?  Currently we have less than two weeks before crashing out with no deal.

On Newsnight last night Nick Watt reported a verbatim conversation with a current cabinet minister. 

From memory (it was pretty memorable): in response to the question 'So, what is Mrs May's plan then?' the answer was 'F*ck knows.  I'm past caring.  It's like the living dead. One side will argue for option X, she smiles and nods, but says nothing.  The other side argues for option Y, she smiles and nods and says nothing.  Then she goes off and does Z.'

That's a very good point. General elections should not be about a single issue and I can't recall one that really was but this one would be. 

2nd ref would be more democratic in that regard.

...now we see what Monday brings.

In the mean time the sun is shining and spring has sprung, I'm looking forward to a tailwind for the ride home and a pint in the sun with my dog.

jk

Yet.

jk

DUP align with group proposing customs union as a way of delivering Brexit, avoiding need for Irish border and protecting the union whilst allaying worst economic fears of the majority of NI voters who voted for remain

Far fetched I know but we live in strange times

So at least the longer extension would be necessary for a GE. Tories will attempt to avoid GE because there is a good chance of defeat in which case Labour would negotiate the deal IT wants (which probably also won't involve checking by referendum what the people actually want Now). In the event of a deal/treaty the ERG and allies would like a Brexiteer in charge to negotiate final settlement.

Incidentally whatever happened to the five year interval we were supposed to be having between elections nowadays (2011 Act)?

It’s got to be a soft Brexit hasn’t it now? That’s if it happens at all.

I suspect that it may be creeping that way but it somehow seems like the worst of both worlds

Another two or three goes and May's deal passes, surely? We've got two weeks!

I wish I was more than half joking.

That’s what many said 3 years ago. The only way we can leave would be through allowing the movement of people and goods but with no say on policy..

One of the problems with not having a written Constitution and higher threshold for its amendment, is that a law such as the Fixed Term Parliament Act can be ignored or repealed at any time simply be gaining a majority in Parliament.

No deal brexit was rejected by an even greater majority.

The problem is asking yes/no questions rather than here's a list of all the options, we'll go for that which most people prefer

Didn't the pantomime characters vote against a no deal ? 

Surely it is all such a massive shambles that anything put through now would be rushed, so the only option is a long extension which would give the time to work out the way forward without rushing.

I hope you're right. I just don't see how there is time to turn this thing around.

(From the downvotes my comment got, I assume people must think I want no deal. Whereas in fact I want no brexit.)

Yes, but it is the default.  All that is needed for it to happen is for MPs not to be able to agree about how to stop it.  Right now, if a fire broke out in the chamber of the commons, they would all burn to death before being able to agree about what should be done.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47752017

According to the article above, the remaining possibilities have now conclusively been reduced to:

Further extension, no deal brexit, another vote on May's deal, renegotiation with the EU, a second referendum, a general election, or canceling brexit.

... it's good to see things finally being narrowed down a little.

No deal is the default outcome. The Spelman amendment only said that parliament "rejects the United Kingdom leaving the European Union without a Withdrawal Agreement and a Framework for the Future Relationship". It doesn't prevent a no deal brexit from happening by default.

I hate to say it but even as someone who really would prefer to remain I'm inclined to wonder whether  no deal is preferable to a fudge involving a customs union.

A customs union is not a fudge but essential to protect 100,000s of manufacturing jobs which rely on heavily integrated supply chains with components passing back and forth across European borders in making aircraft, cars, etc etc. There will be a short term impact in loss of profits and medium/long term impact in lost investment and factory closures 

As someone.who will be very directly affected by any restriction on exports I'd sooner see no Brexit or a free trade agreement. A customs union is likely to involve more stringent ties to the EU rulebook as I understand it. To be ties to the rules with no input seems crazy.

I have an adapted version of this, somewhat spoilt by the dwindling light of the Independent group.

1. A single issue "People's vote!" party forms.
2. They pledge to run in the election with a solitary mandate of either singularly, or in cahoots with another party, securing a second referendum.
3. This is with the added caveat that, if they win and a 2nd ref becomes promised, they immediately dissolve and a followup "proper" election is called.
4. This would essnetially make the 1st election a referendum for or against a people's vote, and then leave everyone free to vote for whichever party they want in the followup election, without the overhang of Brexit warping their decision-making, and the awkward issue of neither viable party offering remain or 2nd ref as an option.

I accept that its preposterous to do this and maybe less than likely to succeed.  But it seems the only way of getting what all sides in this need; if Leave wins again they have a clear mandate that we can't argue with, if Remain wins then good (but it will need a ratification ref at some point in the future to make it a "best of three"), and even no-deal can be on the ballot but most likely eliminated in the first round of the pre-referendum.

Chaotic times can make you appreciate the simple and important times (Edit was meant to read 'things' rather than 'times', but both work). ''I'm off to Stanage Pole'' pops into my head from a similar sentiment to your's.  I 'have a hunch' we're shuffling towards a second referendum, but it might just be because I think it's a simple(ish) way of clearing things up.

Are you joking about another vote on May's deal?

I just don't know anymore. 

It's moving so fast by the time I read an article on Brexit its out of date.

... and VoteLeave has chosen Brexit day to finally drop its appeal against the decision of the Electoral Commission, thereby openly admitting that the referendum was carried out with multiple irregularities.

Remarkably, no!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47752017

A No 10 source indicated that the prime minister would continue to seek support in the Commons for her deal.

"Clearly it was not the result we wanted. But, that said, we have had a number of senior Conservative colleagues who have felt able to vote with the government today. They have done so in higher numbers than previously," the source said.

"Clearly there is more work to do. We are at least going in the right direction."

Corbyn will be in Belize celebrating the 90th anniversary of the drafting of the constitution of the first union of sugar-workers. 

We are perhaps losing sight of the fact that Macron may just say that he's bored and tell us to sod off with no deal.

Theresa follows Arlene into the ladies, pins her against the wall and demands her billion quid back.

I'm going to stick my head above the parapet here and disagree with the idea that a general election is a bad thing. I think it would be a very good thing, for the following reasons:

1. The current state of our politics - 2 party FPTP, is broken. Both parties are in such a shambles, it's difficult to see how anyone would vote for either, except in extremis or because that's what they've always done. A GE would force them to focus on a message and policies that reunite them as parties, or alternatively splinter up into multiple ones.

2. Regarding GE issues, you can't avoid the fact that an election is going to happen sooner or later. What is the good of having two major parties neither of whom are unable to negotiate a good deal for the Uk effectively? This problem needs to be sorted out sooner rather than later.

3. I fundamentally disagree with the idea of ref2. This is not ping pong. Our elected representatives are supposed to be the experts on understanding the very complicated issues involved and sorting out our relationships with the rest of the world. How on earth do you expect the general population to do that in some kind of yes / no vote? It's crazy.

4. [out on a limb a bit here]. We are in the middle of a revolution, which in our typical British way we are calling a bit of a constitutional crisis. BRING IT ON. Most Brexiters want a shake up that sees a new order where they feel their needs are being represented in government. In the context of a situation where we had to revoke A50 or are in a customs union, why is this bad?

5. Today is my birthday. You know what - I can't even figure out if I'm a remainer any more... Maybe it's the ageing process.

Now I'm off to do myself some damage.

It's bad because most of what leavers want is either nasty or unattainable. Granted it's difficult to see what's to be done about them, but the less that, say, Tommy Robinson's views are represented in government, the better.

jcm

So May wants a run off between her deal and customs union. Help me out here; I don't get it. Her deal is a withdrawal agreement. Customs union would be part of the political declaration. Those aren't even alternatives - say Parliament approves customs union, what then?? There still has to be a withdrawal agreement.

jcm

A GE would most likely result in a hung parliament. That wouldn't help in resolving anything.

A GE would most likely result in a hung parliament. That wouldn't help in negotiating anything.

Given that it's today been confirmed beyond possibility of appeal that the referendum was run illegally, a re-run rightfully ought to happen. However, most people now understand the problem with a referendum with one ill-defined outcome so think a better-defined referendum on a well-defined alternative to Remaining would be preferable.

A shake-up that principally involves exiting the EU would do nothing whatsoever to resolve any of the issues that disaffected voters in the first place, which were internal UK government policy choices leading to widespread social discontent.

If you were a remainer before, I'd love to know any possible reason why you might not be now, as it seems inconceivable from my perspective given all of the last three years wrangling by Brexiters completely unable to even agree what they want let alone convince anyone else it's a good thing.

That’s a good shout if you’re a Tory voter? That party has caused this mess. I say vote them out.

They are a disgrace. Sadly so are Labour.

i think go for a second referendum first. It’s a waste of a GE on a single issue.

It’s bargaining John, opposition will only support withdrawal agreement in return for cast iron guarantee of customs union. If they just support WA now May will be replaced by hard Brexiter who will never allow a customs union . I think a CU will win on Monday and may even have a slight chance of DUP support (see my post above)

Surely we are tied to the rules whatever happens? Even if we left with “no deal”, then anything we exported to the EU would still have to comply with the same rules a Customs Union would demand?

Not a chance. A GE would just be a referendum between two shades of Brexit, no other issues would figure. Also I don’t think there would be much change in balance of power until Corbyn goes.

It would effectively be a single issue election, with Labour being equivocal on where they stand on that issue. May as well just have a second referendum. 

I’d put the cash on Arlene - quids in for the DUP.

Well, yes, but what is this 'cast iron guarantee' of which you speak? You think Johnson will consider himself bound by what May might agree, for instance?

And anyway, that's the point, isn't it? What would this 'runoff' look like? What would the two alternatives be?

jcm

A bill passed in Parliament and agreed with EU

Newsflash. Absolutely shocking, really. The Beaconsfield Conservative Party are kicking out Dominic Grieve - he's just lost their confidence vote ... 

But the EU won't make a deal on the future relationship without a withdrawal agreement first.

jcm

Did you see the article in the Guardian ?

"The local campaign against Grieve was led by the man who stood as the Ukip candidate for Beaconsfield in 2017."

The tory equivalent of the Militant infiltration of the Labour party back in the 80s?

... which led to 15 years of Tory government.

If only there was a credible opposition this kind of self-destructing move to the extreme would be welcomed. Bit of a longshot to have to rely on LD, Greens or TIG/CUK to provide the most electable opposition to the ever more right wing Tory/UKIP merger.

Can't see that ending well for Theresa. Have you seen Foster? 

I'm not sure that it matters who you vote for, a general election now would be a clumsy solution.

As I understand it without a customs union we would be more likely to agree to recognise each other's standards rather than being rigidly tied to those that the EU define.

Who cares - makes no difference to us either way - no point voting remain or leave its not decided by us . 

My Ideal solution:

Revoke Article 50

General Election

New Government to be tasked with: First and Foremost Governing the Country, and

two; commissioning a full and detailed Experts' ( such experts to be drawn from economists, business people, lawyers etc, but NOT politicians) report into the pros and cons of leaving the EU, and exactly what the process of leaving would entail, and how it would impact on the economy and well being of the population. This could take up to two years, probably more. The report to be factual and devoid of scare mongering and pipe dream promises.

The fully detailed report to be considered by Parliament and then put to the people to make an informed vote on whether they wished to Remain or vote on a variety of Leave Options varying from soft to hard, with all the implications (pros and cons) of each option fully explained

This is, of course, what Cameron's Government should have done in 2016 and where he failed the country miserably

In practice that means we would need to recognise EU standards for almost everything anyway and the advantage of operating separate UK standards would be if they were needed to trade more with the US. It goes without saying that if these separate standards were as high as EU ones we wouldn't need them at all! It also goes without saying that we no longer would be involved in actually setting the EU standards we'd mostly need to be meeting.

Hardly rocket science, but the 'setting our own' emotional soundbite seems to override simple reasoning for a lot of people.

She will try again. 

Labour votes to support the plan are dwindling, they have realised there is the whiff of a GE in the air. 

Tories want to stay in power whatever happens. They will then all back the deal when faced with the hard reality of a GE. 

My view is that it is a political war war one of attrition. 

yes of course, but it's a package deal

While Brexit would be a major issue it certainly wouldn't be the only one, for instance many would still vote to just keep the other side out. Only a single issue referendum would give a decision on that single issue.

Hi John, I have a great deal of sympathy with your viewpoint in general, however I think I need to follow the pilgrimage currently going on at Westminster, whereby they go through the painful process of understanding the needs of the UK population, not just their own strongly held views.

However much you and I may appreciate the benefits of EU membership, others do not. Personally I've lived abroad for long enough periods that I think of myself as an EU citizen as well as a British national, and if I had to choose (and if there was a good economic reason) I would choose the EU, and look forward to a United States of Europe. I for one welcome our German overlords

More seriously, it seems to me that Britain has always had one foot in Europe and one foot in the Atlantic Ocean (I can't speak for Ireland with any authority). There was a Dutch article posted recently pointing this out very clearly. Nothing has really changed now, it's just that our attention has been forcibly drawn to this fact. I happen to think the previous pretty scrappy half-in half-out relationship wasn't all bad, but it's clear to me that now is the time to understand what might be better; there is no going back without more pain, and defranchising half the UK population. However leaving without a deal and without some kind of customs arrangement is just daft.

With respect to a hung parliament, it's my view that if we are to move our political system forward, it must change. Perhaps we need to abandon the two party system, and move towards a system where negotiation and debate rule over arbitrary leadership?

Dutch article: https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2019/03/14/perhaps-theyd-better-go-a3953265

No, hadn't seen that. Yes, there are strong parallels obviously.

I think many of the points in the article are spot on - especially on how May fundamentally misunderstands how the EU works.  It's almost unbelievable to me how much of the mess we are in is because people who you assume are at least basing their opinions and decisions on expert advice actually don't understand even the basics.  

There's a basic test for this.  If you are a policy-maker or politician and 'Craig and de Burca' means nothing to you, then you need to check with someone who does understand how things work before expressing an opinion, much less proposing a policy.   

At the end of the day it is only the ability to compromise on these subtle nuances that will see us through this mess.

Sadly I think that Labour have been driven by their desire to force a general election throughout the entire process 

It's small wonder that some of us think that party politics is a shabby system.

WAAAAAAAAAAAAHH!: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47756122 

If she linked it to a confirmatory referendum it probably would succeed. That's what I predicted before Christmas and I still hope it will - belatedly - come to pass.

Fixed that for you.

Problem is they're treating a ratification ref as a form of brexit in its own right assuming it results in no-brexit which is far from a foregone conclusion. All the talk seems to be of pitting Mays deal against the IV winner which makes no sense if the ref wins since to choose the ref you have to reject the deal but without a deal there can be no ratification ref.

jk

Its more driven by tour leadership challenges. That is what the whole process is about.

Then on top there's labour but Corbyn is also anti-EU so the country is faced with a shit choice. If labour had got themselves in Order 2 years ago they'd walk into power.