[Rob!]

Omg as if she's making them do a third vote on the same deal

[reece(:]

An old rule means Bercow could take drastic action on Brexit

John Bercow is an unusual speaker in that we know what he thinks. As someone uncharitably once said: "We've never had a speaker who has spoken quite so much."

But on Wednesday, in yet another typically mellifluous performance, something stood out.

In response to a question from senior Labour backbencher Angela Eagle, about whether it is in order within the rules of the House of Commons for a motion to be brought back repeatedly even when it has been rejected, Mr Bercow had something interesting to say.

He told her: "No answer is required now but a ruling will be made about that matter at the appropriate time. I'm grateful to the right honourable lady for reminding me a ruling might be required."

The speaker sounded as if he relished the prospect, and some MPs relish it even more. Because theoretically, John Bercow might be able to prevent yet another vote on the PM's deal, given it has been decisively rejected by the House already.

On paper, the principle is actually quite clear. According to the Commons' rule book "Erskine May", there is a clear precedent that a matter, once decided upon by MPs, cannot be considered again in the same session of parliament (which usually lasts a year - this current session has gone on for longer and will expire in the summer).

Buried deep within on page 397, there lies: "A motion or an amendment which is the same, in substance, as a question which has been decided during a session may not be brought forward again during that same session."

It continues: "Whether the second motion is substantively the same as the first is a matter for the chair."

In principle then, it would be in John Bercow's gift to say that parliament has voted on a matter already and whether a second, third or fourth iteration is sufficiently different to merit further consideration.

As Catherine Haddon of the Institute for Government said: "In the end, it's the speaker's discretion. Though he should follow the will of the House."

There's clearly a scenario where Mr Bercow says the will of the House is not to consider this again.

He could say that he permitted the second vote because, as a result of the renegotiation the government had made on the Irish backstop, the motion was sufficiently different.

If the government has made no further changes (given the EU has said negotiations are completely over, that seems likely) then that would provide the circumstances where Mr Bercow might legitimately refuse.

More: https://news.sky.com/story/amp/an-an...rexit-11664555

[Sticks]

No deal hard brexit it is by default

rejoice!!!!!

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

there's also the option to extend, for 2 months or 2 years
and either get May's deal passed within 2 months or ask for 2 years and either start from scratch and negotiate soft brexit with labour or go for 2nd ref

they can't start from scratch as the EU will not renegotiate the deal, bare in mind this is all a large distraction for them, they want it over.

They could get an extension, but only if it is to achieve something, like another referendum or such.

It's quite possible that the MP's wont want to take the decision to kill article 50 on their own ... and make it the choice of the people, but I think the ref will be accept May's deal or revoke article 50 .... if it gets to that .... so its basically the same choice, made either by the public or by MP's

[Northern Monkey]

It seems that while the majority in Parliament is to remain.We will never leave.Parliament vs the people.Parliament will win.
Unless no extension is granted by the EU and we go to WTO by default.
Can’t see that happening though.The EU however much they play hardball,don’t want no deal.
I do think those MP’s who are going against their own constituents ought to be ashamed of themselves tbh and i’d hope that it’s reflected in the next GE.

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

It seems that while the majority in Parliament is to remain.We will never leave.Parliament vs the people.Parliament will win.
Unless no extension is granted by the EU and we go to WTO by default.
Can’t see that happening though.The EU however much they play hardball,don’t want no deal.
I do think those MP’s who are going against their own constituents ought to be ashamed of themselves tbh and i’d hope that it’s reflected in the next GE.

labour stood up and said it opposed May's deal because of the backstop, because it could allow the UK to be drawn in to a customs union indefinitely. What they want, is labours deal that, guess what, includes membership of the customs union. If that's not playing politics, I don't know what is.

[arista]

The vote today 5PM

SkyNewsHD Live 5pm
Ch5HD 5PM News
BBC2HD 4:45PM Hugh Edwards Live at Westminster
LBC Eddie Mair Live 4PM
Radio 5 Live at Westminster 4PM

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

labour stood up and said it opposed May's deal because of the backstop, because it could allow the UK to be drawn in to a customs union indefinitely. What they want, is labours deal that, guess what, includes membership of the customs union. If that's not playing politics, I don't know what is.

I don’t think Labour have had it’s own position on Brexit.They just seem to be taking whichever position is against the government at the time.
Customs union,general election,second referendum they’ve basically said they want anything other than whatever the government offer.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

I don’t think Labour have had it’s own position on Brexit.They just seem to be taking whichever position is against the government at the time.
Customs union,general election,second referendum they’ve basically said they want anything other than whatever the government offer.

I heard a very good summation of Labour the other day

Corbyn is leave in the North and remain in the South

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Rob!

Omg as if she's making them do a third vote on the same deal

So she gets 3 votes and the public only get one

[bitontheslide]

The amendments for todays vote ... note item h, which is on a new ref

Amendment (h) – Cross-party Remainers

This amendment requests an extension of Article 50 in order to have another referendum.

Amendment (i) – Benn/Cooper

This amendment, which has lots of cross party support, would allow MPs to take control of parliamentary business next Wednesday (20 March).

They would use the time to debate a Brexit motion that could lead to Parliament holding a series of indicative votes on different Brexit options, possibly the following week.

He adds that there has been a 'manuscript' amendment tabled to this, which will be published shortly.

Amendment (e) – Labour frontbench

This amendment rejects the PM’s deal and the idea of leaving without a deal.

It also calls for an extension to Brexit talks to “provide parliamentary time for this House to find a majority for a different approach”.

Amendment (j) – Bryant/Brake

This amendment orders the government not to put its Brexit deal to another vote, citing parliamentary rules.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Smithy

So she gets 3 votes and the public only get one

[reece(:]

Hope they all pass

[Northern Monkey]

Is Bercow being biased again?

12:18

Bercow challenged over blocking vote on ruling out another referendum

Tory Brexiteer Mark Francois had just stood up to complain about which amendments Bercow has picked - and which he hasn't.

He wants Amendment B - which would block a Brexit delay being sought so another referendum could be held - to be voted on later too.

Francois says it has "far more signatories" than most of the others and is cross-party

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Smithy

So she gets 3 votes and the public only get one

what a joke

[arista]

Originally Posted by Smithy

So she gets 3 votes and the public only get one

You Forget Smithy
we were Told over and over again
that it was a once in a lifetime vote in 2016
Once only.


Fecking Cameron
even dragged in the USA then President
telling him what to say



FACT

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

Is Bercow being biased again?

12:18

Bercow challenged over blocking vote on ruling out another referendum

Tory Brexiteer Mark Francois had just stood up to complain about which amendments Bercow has picked - and which he hasn't.

He wants Amendment B - which would block a Brexit delay being sought so another referendum could be held - to be voted on later too.

Francois says it has "far more signatories" than most of the others and is cross-party

it had more signatures associated with it than all the other amendments combined.

However, the governments default is to not have another ref so it is actually the status quo at the present time (14th March 13:26 )

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

they can't start from scratch as the EU will not renegotiate the deal, bare in mind this is all a large distraction for them, they want it over.

They could get an extension, but only if it is to achieve something, like another referendum or such.

It's quite possible that the MP's wont want to take the decision to kill article 50 on their own ... and make it the choice of the people, but I think the ref will be accept May's deal or revoke article 50 .... if it gets to that .... so its basically the same choice, made either by the public or by MP's

oh yes they can start from scratch if they requested a soft brexit (in agreement with corbyn); that's a completely different proposition and would be favoured by the eu too
all the economic issues including Irish border would not apply as we'd remain in the single market and the customs union

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

oh yes they can start from scratch if they requested a soft brexit (in agreement with corbyn); that's a completely different proposition and would be favoured by the eu too

it wouldn't get support in parliament, because it ties us to the EU in so many areas. We would be better not leaving.

There is no consensus in this, that's the problem, and there never will be

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

it wouldn't get support in parliament, because it ties us to the EU in so many areas. We would be better not leaving.

There is no consensus in this, that's the problem, and there never will be

it would: a good chunk of tories and most of labour and snp would vote for it

that's been the problem from the start for May: she chose to appease hard brexiteers rather than seek consensus with the opposition which would give her the numbers
the downside of that for her is that tories would probably split as a party bc of that
so again she chose the party over the country
that's why she deserves no sympathy

[reece(:]

[Scarlett.]

Originally Posted by Sticks

No deal hard brexit it is by default

rejoice!!!!!

Bring on them medicine and food shortages Can't wait for that social unrest

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by reece(:

neither labour or the tories can enforce their sides to do anything, so while it may seem like a non starter ... who knows

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by reece(:

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

Is Bercow being biased again?

12:18

Bercow challenged over blocking vote on ruling out another referendum

Tory Brexiteer Mark Francois had just stood up to complain about which amendments Bercow has picked - and which he hasn't.

He wants Amendment B - which would block a Brexit delay being sought so another referendum could be held - to be voted on later too.

Francois says it has "far more signatories" than most of the others and is cross-party

Is he still cucking his wife out to Paddy Doherty?