POLITICS CORNER

[Stanley]

That's not very helpful China and typical of the sort of stuff that was put out in Project Fear which is what landed us in this hole in the first place. Best to keep quiet and watch what happens I think.

[chinatyke]

That's not very helpful China....

Ah, an inconvenient truth?

What gets me is, how does Mrs May expect to hold another vote on substantially the same thing if it has already been voted out of order to do this?

[Stanley]

No! And please don't try to attribute any such thing to me.

[Stanley]

Later, we are used to rumours swirling round Brexminster but this morning they reach new levels as some sections of the Tory Party appear to be rounding on Theresa May and demanding that she should go immediately. I know she is 'resilient' (just plain bloody stubborn actually) but if something doesn't happen now we are heading for the cliff edge as the chances of a third vote succeeding seem to be very remote.
For God's sake, somebody do something, anything!

[plaques]

What gets me is, how does Mrs May expect to hold another vote on substantially the same thing if it has already been voted out of order to do this?

This ran through my mid as well china. I suppose the conversations run something like this.

Bercow. " You can't re-submit this deal again unless there are substantial changes to it".
EU. "This is the only deal we have agreed on which we will grant a short extension, any substantial changes will require a long extension".
Mrs May. "I'll go for the short extension".
Mrs May to Bercow, " I want to resubmit my deal".
Bercow. "Has there been any substantial changes?".
Mrs May, "Yes. We have been given longer to implement them".
Bercow. "But has the deal itself substantially changed"?
Mrs May. " Listen here cloth ears, beginning to end it has got longer".
Bercow. "But the deal itself hasn't changed".
Mrs May. "I'll write an emergency executive order and get it through that way".
Bercow. "OK Mrs Trump, we will see what the rules and Parliament say about that".

To be continued.

[PanBiker]

Indeed.

[Tripps]

Confusing isn't it?
After Bercow's statement several MP's tried to pin him down as what 'substantially the same' meant. I recall Sir William Cash (Chief Gargoyle) led the charge. Others also. They got him to say that it was the actual detail of the document that had to change - not the background circumstances such as the consequences which seems to be the case here. The actual detail of the Withdrawal Agreement has not changed at all.
So the Speaker shouldn't allow a third attempt.


However - Vernon Bogdanor said that it could come back so long as it was prefaced by the tactical words - 'Not withstanding what had gone before. . etc. He saw it as a simple matter. He sounded convincing - he's an expert - Oxford Professor of constitutional law after all.
So the Speaker should allow a third attempt

Now a Professor of EU law at Cambridge, has just said - forget all that - actually we still leave on 29th March 2019 according to current law. This can only be changed by . . . she lost me there

[Stanley]

That struck me as well David but I'm afraid I am losing the will to live and so never posted.
It has got beyond farce now, why aren't they in the House over the weekend? Nothing important enough to get them there?

[Tizer]

At last I'm hearing more politicians saying what they really think - how can any of the Brexit outcomes be better than what we already have as a member of the EU? How can anyone think it's democratic to carry on with this Brexit process when it has turned out to be so different to what the voters were expecting? And most important of all, `step back and think before you jump' - this decision is so very important, there is so much at stake, that we really must give people a second chance to vote.

[Stanley]

Takes too long Tiz and would not be conclusive. Why not just rescind Article 50? That gives all the time in the world for 'debate'. Cheaper as well.....
Meanwhile in Brexminster I detect a subtle change in Tory actions and statements. I get the feeling that the next Brexit news will be the departure of T May and her place at the despatch box being taken over by a man called Liddington who is her unofficial deputy. He has been attracting interest of late as he makes statements in her absence. A dark horse contender for leadership?

[plaques]

Lots of speculation suggesting various ways of backing Mrs May's deal look to be dependent on some future promised action. Examples are... Promise a second referendum, that you 'Mrs May' will stand down afterwards after a suitable interval. All this is to create the illusion that there will be enough backing for the deal to be voted through on the third offering providing everyone pulls together. Even Tory MPs are not that gullible that they can't see that promises of future actions are not set in stone and that 'soon' has no definite end date. Even if they fall for this packages of promises there is still Bercow to contend with. It looks more like all this bluster of getting the deal through is an attempt to give Mrs May some face saving position where she can say " My deal would have gone through except for Bercow", then stand on the sidelines and watch the ongoing turmoil as though it was nothing to do with her.

[Stanley]

That would fit P. The main driver for all this is fear. The Tories can see what is coming, a General Election, perhaps sooner rather than later and what do they pitch to their constituents? The bottom line is that they have blown it and everything from mow on is aimed at limiting the damage....
On another front, HS2 is under fire again as suspicion mounts that the estimates of an eventual cost of over £100million though rubbished by supporters, are very close to the truth.

[PanBiker]

I think you have missed a few noughts off there Stanley, £100 Billion is the probable cost.

May is trying to save face by saying that she will not present the deal if she hasn't got the support. I reckons she knows damn well that JB cant really allow another go at it when he disallowed it only last week. Nothing has changed as she has only been crawling over in Belgium for an extension and that can not be construed as a change to the substance of the deal. She's stuffed and she knows it, it's not a question now of if it's when. Very little has been said about Jeremy and Kier's visit and what they have been discussing with the EU.

[Tizer]

Takes too long Tiz and would not be conclusive. Why not just rescind Article 50? That gives all the time in the world for 'debate'. Cheaper as well.....

As you know, from the outset I've been wanting the government to do a U-turn but whenever it's mentioned it gets the responses `It's undemocratic' and `There'll be rioting in the streets'.

[Tripps]

The whole thing is now such a complete mess that I think it is time to press Ctrl-Alt-delete, and start all over again. Revoke Article 50 (I think we can do that) and have a General Election.

I just heard that Jacob Rees Mogg and Boris Johnson are going to Chequers this afternoon for 'tea'. That should help.

[Stanley]

Dead right David, then the Tories can have a real cat fight!
It looks as though the 'talks' at Chequers resulted in agreement that nobody wanted May's job at the moment and ditching her now would be a mistake. They are leaving it until later.... Handy to have someone to blame for everything. (I'll bet it was a fun day out.....)

[plaques]

So here we go again. Parliament to have an Indicative vote which again is only advisory and may take place before or after Mrs May's third attempt, that is if she has enough support or if Bercow allows her to table it. Indicative vote.
Some of the proposals being suggested are..

the current deal;
revoking Article 50;
holding a second referendum;
the current deal with continued membership of the Customs Union;
the current with continued membership of both the Customs Union and the Single Market;
a Free Trade Agreement; a no-deal Brexit.

Even if one of the above was to receive a majority vote the result is only advisory and Mrs May could totally ignore it. On her past form she has done this several times even when other Prime Ministers would have resigned.

The clock ticks and the can get kicked.

[Tizer]

I just heard that Jacob Rees Mogg and Boris Johnson are going to Chequers this afternoon for 'tea'. That should help.

And I see from the newspaper front pages today that Mogg took mini-Mogg with him (perhaps as his advisor?), IDS arrived in a Morgan sports car with the top down (the aggressive Top Gear approach) and Boris drove in with no seat belt on (what else do you expect of him?).

[Tripps]

If you're wondering where Jeremy Corbyn has been for the last couple of days - due to the fact that google thinks I live in Barrow in Furness (at the moment), I get the news for that area.

In fact he was in Morecambe yesterday electioneering for the local elections which it seems are due shortly, and are very important. Covered fully in the Lancashire Post

"He joined local Labour candidates in launching their manifesto on Saturday with pledges to tackle poverty, act on climate change and invest in housing."

[Stanley]

He attacked T May in PMQs yesterday..... Perhaps he has a double.....
Odds on No Deal crash out? I note that May has learned nothing, she laid out yet another 'red line' when she said that she would not necessarily endorse any proposal put forward by Parliament.
Later.... Leaving aside the vote last night, THIS caught my eye this morning. The Commons Human Rights Committee has flagged up this potential unintended consequence of the current chaos. Apart from the effects on migrants resident in the UK, it raises questions about any reciprocal arrangements for UK citizens living in the EU. This important matter is getting lost in the general chaos and one wonders how many other 'arrangements' are in similar danger.
Is this government crumbling before our eyes?

[Big Kev]

I predict a second referendum, that is all I have to say on the matter.

I'm still predicting a second referendum

[Stanley]

And HERE is an indication of what the result might be. It would appear that attitudes are changing.....

[plaques]

Mrs May opened yesterday's debate with some very telling statements.
1. only her own deal will be put forward.
2. She would not allow a second referendum.
3. Whatever the outcome of the indicative vote she would not allow it to go forward.

Remember she has full confidence of the Tory Party behind her so she can't be challenged in Parliament for another year.
She had control of the Parliamentary agenda and can dictate what comes up for debate. Only amendments to these debates can come up for discussion and then they are only advisory and can be totally ignored.
Any real changes like second referendums and revoking Article 50 would require legislation to pass through the commons before they can take place.
Only the Government can raise new legislation.
On the face of it Mrs May holds all the cards and unless something really drastic happens like all the Cabinet resigning in effect saying we haven't a viable Government, which raising the prospects of a General Election, there is nothing the opposition can do.

A strong and unstable very difficult woman.

[Tripps]

I'm trying to understand (and not succeeding) why with just 4 days to the promised Brexit day to go - MP''s will tomorrow fill in a 'pink slip' to show in what order their preferences for the process would be. I can't stop thinking this perhaps should have been done at the beginning of the whole affair?

[PanBiker]

Not wrong there Tripps. Whole process flawed from the get go. Once we had decided to leave (like it or not), parliament should have been dissolved in favour of a coalition to determine the future of the country. This with the proviso that once we had left there would be an immediate General Election at the earliest opportunity.