Oh Britain, what have you done (part XXIII)?

[NeilR]

Is that right? It would fit with the reports that Farage is angry and spouting bile on the radio. I'll give him bile, the lying piece off sh#t. So if you're right the spectre of the hard Brexit and "We'll show 'em" is exorcised.

Yes, it was all part of the agreement on avoiding hard border with Ireland.

After Davis's backtracking on Marr last Sunday, the EU are now saying it must be enshrined in law before the trade talks can begin. Yet another example of Brexitiers doing damage to their own cause

 

[kendo]

How could anyone trust this ignorant, incompetent and completely out of it's depth government?
Our future in their hands? We are so f*cked.

 

[TheDecameron]

Twelve Tory MPs defy the Whip and vote against the Government, ensuring Parliament is sovereign when the final 'deal' is presented- What will the goons at the DM have to say about it ? -" Hang These TRAITORS!!!"?

Ah, just spotted Nick's DM front page up thread. Let me guess- Dacre will publish the addresses and photographs of the homes of all twelve now.

 

[stephen bennett]

Nadine Dorries appears to be the most unhinged of the Tory hard Brexit mob:

Is she raising her profile for a future leadership bid?

Lest we forget who she is.

Stephen

 

[Tony L]

The Mail front page is actually quite useful in highlighting the tiny minority of thinking people in the Conservative Party. It is a huge shane the hard-right shite that reads that “news” paper will be spending the day sending them all Twitter death threats etc, especially if they have the audacity to be a woman with an opinion.

 

[Joe Hutch]

Nadine Dorries appears to be the most unhinged of the Tory hard Brexit mob:

https://twitter.com/NadineDorries/status/941036751266762752

Her other tweets tonight aren't much saner.

Is she raising her profile for a future leadership bid?

Now, where have we heard this line before:

'They should be deselected and never allowed to stand as a[n] ... MP, ever again'.

 

[TheDecameron]

Now, where have we heard this line before:

'They should be deselected and never allowed to stand as a[n] ... MP, ever again'.

The Daily Express?

The Sun online comments page is bound to have a " who'll run Anna Soubry over for fifty quid?" post (from someone who regards himself as a big UKIP party donor as a consequence).

 

[The Far North]

Compare and contrast with:

They really don't get Parliamentary democracy do they?

Surely the really sinister part is that they've gone out of their way to get photos of them all laughing, rather than just using stock MP headshots or other expressions?

 

[Tony L]

Now, where have we heard this line before:

'They should be deselected and never allowed to stand as a[n] ... MP, ever again'.

At least this more than negates any credible criticism from the Tory benches regarding the infinitely more democratic Labour deselection process. It also marks the Tories out as a self-destructive right-wing party with just 11 moderates in its midst.

 

[timola]

Am I missing something, or is this still a case of Parliament getting a ‘meaningful’ vote where the choice is either accepting the deal the government gets with the EU (likely to be bad for us given the quality of our government) or crashing out of the EU on (even worse) WTO terms? I mean, it’s nice that the government got a bloody nose on this, but not much has changed, has it? I must be missing something.

I don't think you are missing anything.
If the commons reject the deal, DD has to go back and renegotiate that's all, wasting more time and creating uncertainty in the interim.

If there is no deal, there's no meaningful vote required.

All this is a storm in a teacup and amounts to very little....except fun headlines and lots of hot air....changes very little, this amendment was all but offered in written guarantees by the executive anyway.

 

[gingermrkettle]

That would be fine if we had a Brexit minister who always stuck to the principle of what he agreed without having to have it nailed down in writing.

However...

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

I don't think you are missing anything.
If the commons reject the deal, DD has to go back and renegotiate that's all, wasting more time and creating uncertainty in the interim.

If there is no deal, there's no meaningful vote required.

All this is a storm in a teacup and amounts to very little....except fun headlines and lots of hot air....changes very little, this amendment was all but offered in written guarantees by the executive anyway.

If the agreement was all but offered in written guarantees by the executive anyway, why would they have risked Commons defeat on it? Doesn't ring true.

It seems to me that, as the end of year 2 draws to a close with no satisfactory deal in the can (as often occurs in EU deal-making, it all happens at the eleventh hour), a 'meaningful' vote will have to be one in which the outcome of the vote can change the outcome of the negotiations. That means it will have to happen in sufficient time for any changes to be effected. Which means it will have to happen before the eleventh hour. Which means it will have to happen before the final shape of any agreement has been seen. Which means it won't really be a meaningful vote.

I think this suggests that a meaningful vote will (presuming the vote doesn't rubber stamp any agreement reached) require either an extension to the 2 year negotiating period, or the withdrawal of Art50, perhaps 'temporarily' while regrouping can take place.

 

[The Far North]

Compare and contrast with:

They really don't get Parliamentary democracy do they?

As a comparison to what the Mail is feeding its rabid southern audience, here's the more restrained front page from its Scottish edition.

 

[droodzilla]

Timola, what Sue said.

Also, after David Davis' epic lying spree about the impact assessments (all on the public record) would you believe a single word this government said? I wouldn't.

 

[Tony L]

I can’t for the life of me understand why Davis still has a job given he has either lied to the HoC multiple times or lied to a Select Committee once. In any other walk of life gross misconduct of that magnitude would result in a disciplinary procedure and likely sacking. I really want to see some form of accountability as voters should be able to sue a party so disreputable they would accept, cover or excuse such behaviour, or a government institution (the HoC itself) which fails in its duty to police such obvious corruption.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

I think you have to ask, who would he be replaced by. I certainly don't want a rabid brexitier in the job, can't see a remainer taking it on. An incompetent brexitier seems like the least worst option, at the moment.

 

[markvdv]

Yes UK parliament wants to be able to move the Brexit date. They are playing a chess game.

 

[stephen bennett]

Yes UK parliament wants to be able to move the Brexit date. They are playing a chess game.

Or, the elected MPs in a representative democracy don't want the UK to to be forced out of the EU on poor terms just because some random date has been set in the diary. It's not a competition. The only thing that must happen is that we leave the EU—all else is politics.

Why the rush?

Stephen

 

[timola]

If the agreement was all but offered in written guarantees by the executive anyway, why would they have risked Commons defeat on it? Doesn't ring true.

It seems to me that, as the end of year 2 draws to a close with no satisfactory deal in the can (as often occurs in EU deal-making, it all happens at the eleventh hour), a 'meaningful' vote will have to be one in which the outcome of the vote can change the outcome of the negotiations. That means it will have to happen in sufficient time for any changes to be effected. Which means it will have to happen before the eleventh hour. Which means it will have to happen before the final shape of any agreement has been seen. Which means it won't really be a meaningful vote.

I think this suggests that a meaningful vote will (presuming the vote doesn't rubber stamp any agreement reached) require either an extension to the 2 year negotiating period, or the withdrawal of Art50, perhaps 'temporarily' while regrouping can take place.

Oh dear, if you're right then it could get messy near the deadline. Let's hope a way is found around this by then.

Maybe the EU will realise this and give a better deal and sooner than expected as this vote could scupper everything and lead to WTO terms for a couple years while negotiations continue and enough time is available for the meaningful vote to take place.

 

[rbrown]

this amendment was all but offered in written guarantees by the executive anyway.

So what was the problem with enshrining it in law then?