EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

Classic.

1 Attachment

Ignoring that odious creature is about the first sensible thing she's done this week.

In the case of no deal as the other scenario? Absolutely they would not.

"We have today voted down May's disaster of a deal, but we have not betrayed the will of the people so we have abstained on the withdrawal of Article 50. This, above all else, shows that the UK must have a GE before Brexit day so that Labour can negotiate a fresh deal for the people of the UK".

That's a great piece of role-playing, but Labour have been explicit about the risk of a no deal brexit.

AS I have said before, what can labour do. They are a bit fucked. Great Tory plan tho.

That's a great piece of role-playing, but Labour have been explicit about the risk of a no deal brexit.

They've also been explicit about their priorities - GE above absolutely everything else.

If they can force May out via no-deal with the belief that they can then extend the negotiations to get a "jobs first Brexit" they'll take it.

Last GE tories still won.

What was the turn out for the election compared to the referendum?

Remember it would be extremely difficult for the government to pursue a no deal Brexit without the support of Parliament. For no deal to happen there has to be further legislation, which has to be approved by Parliament. So the Commons could block the legislation required for no deal.

Parliament is not going to support a no deal Brexit, however you read the numbers, because almost nobody thinks it's a good idea.

If May can't come up with something else and get it through a second referendum is looking more and more likely.

No deal happens by itself, it's avoiding it that takes legislation.

Jobs-first brexit is a myth though innit. The only scenario that meets Labours 6 tests is remain. That's why they just talk about the tests, because the only conclusion is to stay without actually saying it. They can make an election promise that sounds like leave, but they're not saying that.

Jobs-first brexit is a myth though innit.

Problem is, it's a myth that Labour's top brass believe in - vide Barry Gardiner on the tellybox last night.

For no deal to happen there has to be further legislation, which has to be approved by Parliament.

Is that so? I mean, 'no deal' would also happen if there was just nothing at all done until the deadline. It's not something people need to agree upon, it's the absence of any agreement.

it's the absence of any agreement.

It's the foot of the cliff, that we hit unless we take steps to avoid it.

No, that's not true.

From today's Indy:

“In the absence of a withdrawal agreement the UK Parliament cannot unilaterally prevent a no deal in strict legal terms,” says Dr Jack Simson Caird, a senior research fellow in Parliaments at the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law.

“The Government would find it very difficult to pursue a no deal outcome without the support of the House of Commons. The Commons doesn’t have to approve a no deal but the Government has said in order for it to work, there would have to be a further legislation which would have to be approved by the Commons.

“If the Government decided as a response to the Commons rejecting the Brexit deal it was going to pursue a no deal, the Commons could attempt to block no deal legislation or seek to amend it to require the Government to change its position,” Dr Caird said.

They just said the same thing on PM too.

It seems to be a common misconception that no deal will just magically happen if the government doesn't do anything. I suspect mainly because politicians and the media have explained it very badly.

He may be odious but it was a fair and valid question and again she does not give an answer....May is truly turning the UK into a dictatorship...the fiefdom of May.

No, this is not true. It's very dangerous to spread this sort of misinformation, also.

By automatic operation of law we are out on the 29th.

If we don't ratify the (a) WA by then, then we get no deal.

This situation (barring A50 revocation) is, and has been for almost two years, not controllable by the UK.

In your version, what happens on the 29th? Parliament declare that there are 365 more days in March?

You're technically right, in that if revocation doesn't happen and nothing else happens a hard Brexit will happen, but there's no way Parliament will actually let it happen. Or the government, as the government themselves have said that for no deal to happen they'll need to pass further legislation.

Barring complete dissolution of Parliament it's not going to happen, but it suits May and the Brexiters if people think it could.

Or the government, as the government themselves have said that for no deal to happen they'll need to pass further legislation.

Again, this is untrue.

We've clearly got slightly different viewpoints but I think you have to concede that most people think a hard Brexit involves the government doing nothing, not passing further legislation once they've decided a hard Brexit is the best option.

I'm going to believe a senior research fellow in Parliaments over you on that one unless you can provide evidence.

Also listen to tonight's PM because they also said that.

Edit: This is the first I've heard of this today too though so I'm not exactly sure.

(Railway tunnel triple-post)

I concede his question was valid. But his very mention makes me recoil.

#evencuntscanhaveapointonoccasion

(Sorry)

The legislation you're talking about is part of the "no deal" preparation everyone has been bleating on about.

Every government department has prepared statutory instruments that fix all our laws that rely on provisions from the EU.

They are not required for a no deal to occur. But they are required to prevent the country ceasing to operate pretty much over night.

I think the idea with this legislation is to lay it as late as possible, and then, if a deal or some form of transition / cancelling of brexit occurs, it can be pulled.

There are loads of the these SIs that need to go through on everything you can imagine. Non are needed if we get to a transition period or better.

'In the absence of a withdrawal agreement the UK Parliament cannot unilaterally prevent a no deal in strict legal terms'

That supports what @Dammit is saying, it doesn't contradict it. If there's no withdrawal agreement, then the UK Parliament cannot prevent a no deal exit, because unless Article 50 is extended then without a withdrawal agreement there is, by definition, a no deal exit. It doesn't matter what the Government or the UK Parliament does or doesn't do. If the Article 50 process isn't extended, and there's no withdrawal agreement and so no transition period, then by definition we have a no deal exit on 29th March, regardless of bellyaching by the government or Parliament.

No deal is the default situation. To avoid it, you need either an extension or a deal. At present, we have neither, and the UK cannot unilaterally create either.