Tygre, you'll have to launch another COMMONS MATHEMATICS episode soon!
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
BREXIT |OT| ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Thread starter theaface
- Start date
- Status
Tygre, you'll have to launch another COMMONS MATHEMATICS episode soon!
This one.
*Amendment (i)
Hilary Benn
Sir Oliver Letwin
Yvette Cooper
Mr Dominic Grieve
Norman Lamb
Stewart Hosie
Line 4, leave out from "Article 50 (3)" to end and add:
"to enable the House of Commons to find a way forward that can command majority support;
2. orders accordingly that on Wednesday 20 March
(a) Standing Order No. 14(1) (which provides that government business shall have precedence at every sitting save as provided in that order) shall not apply;
(b) precedence shall be given to the motion specified in paragraph 3;
(c) the Speaker shall interrupt proceedings on any business before the motion specified in paragraph 3 at 1.30 pm and call a Member to move that motion;
(d) debate on that motion may continue until 7.00 pm at which time the Speaker shall put the questions necessary to dispose of proceedings on that motion including the questions on amendments selected by the Speaker which may then be moved;
(e) any proceedings interrupted or superseded by this order may be resumed or (as the case may be) entered upon and proceeded with after the moment of interruption; and 3. the motion specified in this paragraph is a motion in the name of at least 25 Members, including at least five Members elected to the House as members of at least five different parties, relating to the Business of the House on a future day or days in connection with matters relating to the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union.
I have to guess it was voted down - twice - by massive majorities - mainly because of the substance of the deal, and not because people wanted May to leave? I don't see how that fundamentally changes anything.
Its all fragmented.
Those against no deal quite a lot still want some deal - but not May's deal. Not sure what deal. But something. And not a second ref - oh no. They know what they want better than the public. They just don't know it.. yet. but they'll get there. Probably
I thought the timetable this week was
- MV2
- if that fails, vote on no deal
- if that passes, time to review alternatives?
Where did MV3 even come from - wasn't in the original timetable put down this week?
4 amendments up for the vote, one on a second referendum, one on indicative votes, one on Labour's motion saying Article 50 should be extended to allow MPs time to find a majority, and Chris Bryant's that politely points out that Parliamentary rules don't allow you to submit a motion that's already been discussed twice, which is the greatest bit of trolling I've seen in ages.
Savage. We're in the wild west and Bercow is the sheriff in town!
Aww, poor Francois. Maybe he'll spend the rest of the day wearing a nearly crying face like Liam Fox had last night.
Well if you're going to be undemocratic, you can't really complain when you let one person then decide which amendments get put through :P
I suppose the idea is that there shoudl be discussions about options, not ruling things out? then you can have an indicative vote for which you want - which is where you'd actually reject 2nd ref by not voting for it?
I love how much Bercow pisses off the Brextremists but I'm not really sure there's good justification for not selecting that amendment albeit I'm not that familiar with the process.
Okay, inevitable question about about the intricacies of how the UK Parliament works:
What are the arcane and/or absurd age-old conventions that the Speaker should/ought/must adhere to (or not) when selecting amendments?
I mean it's rather pointless having an amendment voting for a second referendum and one voting against a second referendum. Just having one is perfectly adequate and allows the brexiteers to make their opinions known.
So a long extension and Farage goes to back European Parliament. Things are looking pretty good.gif
Makes sense, they have already voted that they dont want No Deal so you cant really take away one of the only options available left (2nd ref).
There's going to be a vote on a second referendum. If the ERG don't want one, as their amendment would indicate, they can vote against it.
Having a vote on every amendment would just waste loads of time, so the Speaker does have to consolidate similar amendments into one.
Like anyone knows. It's Britain, so I'm sure there's a dusty 400-page tome somewhere in the library at Hogwarts explaining it.
I'm totally okay with Bercow being completely partisan and not choosing it because he didn't feel like it if it boils down to that. Like ANYONE ELSE inside that chamber is doing things properly, orderly and by the books when the Prime Minister herself is laughing at the democratic process and trying to hold Parliament to ransom with her goddam deal.
It's on the timetable for next week. May put it forwards after no deal got hamstrung last night.
She's still trying to force her Hobson's choice vote.
I guess that makes sense but not voting for a second referendum is not necessarily the same as ruling it out in the future.
You could argue that we could come to a consensus through process of elimination though. Eliminating no deal and no second referendum would give the house incentive to work on a deal that can get through. As above, the selection of the amendment in favour of another referendum does make a little more sense though.
I mean... I'm glad they don't just have their heads in the sand anymore. But I'm starting to suspect that these folks don't have the intellect to get this done in time.
It's finally happening! grab your bats
That and what happens if we rule out a second referendum but postpone Brexit until after the next set of EU elections? (So another 5 years)
7.5 years after the original vote and they expect all those Boomers to still be kicking around?
That shows exactly what they are all about. They are using May to blame all this mess on and then hoping to reinvent themselves after.
Why? They'll have to participate in the elections then. Is the tactic just to stall forever?
Just let it end, please. Please.
I can understand the frustration but the UK can't leave with no deal and they're not going to withdrawal their exit from the EU, so what other option is there?
They can leave with No Deal, it's in the legislation passed to leave the EU. It's the default ending come March 29th.
They'd be better off convincing the UK to revoke article 50 and selling people on the idea of revisiting it again further down the line when proper preparations and solutions can be made for it, it might actually allow the government to go through enough changes and elections to quietly brush it under the carpet. The way things have gone in the last few years that's never going to happen though.
Yeah, this has been clear. Either the UK figures out what it wants to do and the EU will give them a little more time to get it done, or we're talking in terms of a year or more, so that seating MEPs isn't a giant waste of time.
The only reason I can think for the EU to force an exit on the 29th is to send a message to other members what happens if you try to leave, but after witnessing what the UK has gone through I don't think that option is really necessary.
I think it's pretty obvious the UK isn't really prepared to leave on the 29th, just letting them leave isn't the best option given the absolute chaos it would produce, I don't think the economy on both sides is prepared for that.
A long extension would make the most sense but of course this comes down to the voters who were promised an exit
It's clear that the UK isn't really prepared to leave at the end of the month... But what's not clear is what an extension would change, and how everything wouldn't wind up in this exact same situation regardless. There's no assurances that even if an extension is granted that May wouldn't keep using the same exact stalling tactics leading to the exact same situation no matter how much time how granted. Especially since the only reason the UK is now in the situation of not being prepared is because of May's stalling tactics and trying to force a situation of either accepting her deal or be forced into no deal by default. Nothing's changed, so I can't think of any reason of granting an extension because if the UK isn't prepared that's on them/May and no one else, not for lack of time but May deliberately forcing this kind of situation to be in place in the first place with no sign of her not just continuing those same old tactics (especially with another meaningful vote scheduled) even if one's granted.
That all being the case, I see no reason for the EU to not force an exit. The UK is not coming at this in good faith, nowhere close, and that's ultimately their/May's problem and no one else's.
The actual reason the EU want us out before the elections is because the current centre coalition is going to lose ground to the Right and we sent more right wingers than centrists and most of them hate the EU.
Even people wanting a 2nd Referendum are split. It truly is chaos right now, everyone's out for their own interests.
- Status