Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[Hacker Khan]

I very much doubt there will be a second vote, it will probably be a soft Brexit of some form eventually. But I would not completely rule out us leaving with no deal by accident. Which would be a fitting epitaph to this process, we end up with the worst option and we did not even consciously go for it.

 

[spongebob59]

John Bercow has cooked up yet another Speaker’s Stitch-Up Special with his selections for tonight’s second batch of indicative votes tonight. Bercow selected only four Remainer motions for MPs to vote on tonight. They are more or less identical to the ones which were all rejected just five days ago:

• C (Clarke) – Customs Union – already rejected 272-264
• D (Boles) – Common Market 2.0 – already rejected 283-188
• E (Kyle) – Second referendum – already rejected 295-268
• G (Cherry) – Revoke Article 50 – already rejected 293-184

Bercow refused to allow any Brexiteer motions including John Baron’s Motion A on a unilateral right of exit from the backstop. Despite this previously securing a majority in the Commons in the form of the Brady Amendment.
To be fair Joanna Cherry’s is slightly different from the one rejected last time. It now also contains the bonkers provisions of launching a formal public inquiry to come up with a new kind of Brexit, which might then be put to the public in a second referendum to give the Government permission to re-trigger Article 50 and try to re-negotiate it with the EU months or even years down the line. If it sounds mad it’s because it is – it was literally written by Jolyon Maugham…
Bercow is now busy tying himself in knots trying to explain why he refused to allow the Government to use a secondary motion to bring back a Meaningful Vote, but will allow Hilary Benn and Oliver Letwin’s secondary motion to bring back identical Indicative Votes twice in just four sitting days. Of all the institutions which have lost the public’s trust over their attempts to subvert Brexit, none have been damaged more than the Office of the Speaker…

 

[ColchesterFC]

I very much doubt there will be a second vote, it will probably be a soft Brexit of some form eventually. But I would not completely rule out us leaving with no deal by accident. Which would be a fitting epitaph to this process, we end up with the worst option and we did not even consciously go for it.

That's not the worst option. Surely you remember "No Deal is better than a bad deal". Theresa May said so which means it must be true.

 

[Foxholer]

If there is a second vote I'd hope that expats would be allowed to vote. What happens with Brexit has an economic impact on expats abroad and their families in the UK.

I'm ambivalent about this. But I'd suggest that those that became ex-pats after Ref 1 (which I believe incluydes you) shouldn't get a say - as they made their (your) choice based on UK leaving. Those that became ex-pats prior to Ref 1 might have an argument for consideration though.

I have to also say, following watching quite a lot of the parliamentary debate, Huw Merriman speaks a lot of sense about the having a 'confirmatory vote'! His point that Parliament hasn't been able to establish a consensus is the major reason. Nothing about the likely benefits/disadvantages of either of the options.

 

[Hacker Khan]

John Bercow has cooked up yet another Speaker’s Stitch-Up Special with his selections for tonight’s second batch of indicative votes tonight. Bercow selected only four Remainer motions for MPs to vote on tonight. They are more or less identical to the ones which were all rejected just five days ago:

• C (Clarke) – Customs Union – already rejected 272-264
• D (Boles) – Common Market 2.0 – already rejected 283-188
• E (Kyle) – Second referendum – already rejected 295-268
• G (Cherry) – Revoke Article 50 – already rejected 293-184

Bercow refused to allow any Brexiteer motions including John Baron’s Motion A on a unilateral right of exit from the backstop. Despite this previously securing a majority in the Commons in the form of the Brady Amendment.
To be fair Joanna Cherry’s is slightly different from the one rejected last time. It now also contains the bonkers provisions of launching a formal public inquiry to come up with a new kind of Brexit, which might then be put to the public in a second referendum to give the Government permission to re-trigger Article 50 and try to re-negotiate it with the EU months or even years down the line. If it sounds mad it’s because it is – it was literally written by Jolyon Maugham…
Bercow is now busy tying himself in knots trying to explain why he refused to allow the Government to use a secondary motion to bring back a Meaningful Vote, but will allow Hilary Benn and Oliver Letwin’s secondary motion to bring back identical Indicative Votes twice in just four sitting days. Of all the institutions which have lost the public’s trust over their attempts to subvert Brexit, none have been damaged more than the Office of the Speaker…

Haven't seen what the Brexiteers motions were but if they are talking about revoking backstops then isn't that just pointless as the EU have said they are not renegotiating on that? So we can pass it 650 to 0 and it will not make any difference? It is pretty clear to me that if any compromise will be found it will be found around a softer brexit so doesn't it make sense to see if there is a consensus to be found that the EU will accept?

 

[Hacker Khan]

That's not the worst option. Surely you remember "No Deal is better than a bad deal". Theresa May said so which means it must be true.

She has said a lot of things......

 

[Papas1982]

Interesting point of view, but, imo, undemocratic!

For a start... Do you actually know that the 'couldn't be bothered? And so what if they 'couldn't be bothered' last time. The fact that they CAN be bothered next time (which I fundamentally object to anyway) surely gives them the right to do so!

I’m sure a small percentage had ligitimate reasons, illness etc but the rest imo will have been apathy. But as it’s just my opinion, I don’t need to justify its merits at such. I just feel if you can’t be bothered for whatever reason then you’ve given up your right.

Totally accept it won’t happen, just don’t like the idea on something so important people who didn’t care last time are now going to vote. I’d question their motives that’s all.

 

[Foxholer]

I’m sure a small percentage had ligitimate reasons, illness etc but the rest imo will have been apathy. But as it’s just my opinion, I don’t need to justify its merits at such. I just feel if you can’t be bothered for whatever reason then you’ve given up your right.

Totally accept it won’t happen, just don’t like the idea on something so important people who didn’t care last time are now going to vote. I’d question their motives that’s all.

Surely they are entitled to change their mind and vote one way or the other - I don't care which way. Are you also suggesting that any MP that has abstained on a vote shouldn't be allowed to vote on subsequent related votes?

 

[Hacker Khan]

I’m sure a small percentage had ligitimate reasons, illness etc but the rest imo will have been apathy. But as it’s just my opinion, I don’t need to justify its merits at such. I just feel if you can’t be bothered for whatever reason then you’ve given up your right.

Totally accept it won’t happen, just don’t like the idea on something so important people who didn’t care last time are now going to vote. I’d question their motives that’s all.

You could apply that logic to general elections and we'd there would hardly anyone voting in them anymore as most of the population would be disqualified.

 

[Papas1982]

Surely they are entitled to change their mind and vote one way or the other - I don't care which way. Are you also suggesting that any MP that has abstained on a vote shouldn't be allowed to vote on subsequent related votes?

My understanding of abstaining is that the vote is still done with them present? I Could be wrong. For me, that’s the same as spoiling. That I have no problem with at all, In fact I respect it. I wouldn’t want them excluded.

 

[Foxholer]

My understanding of abstaining is that the vote is still done with them present? I Could be wrong. For me, that’s the same as spoiling. That I have no problem with at all, In fact I respect it. I wouldn’t want them excluded.

To me, the effect is the same. If you can somehow identify those that considered 'not voting' the same as abstaining and re-enfranchising them (only) then you might have a point. Personaly, I think it would be a new vote, so all previous (non-)activity is ignored!

 

[Foxholer]

My understanding of abstaining is that the vote is still done with them present? I Could be wrong. For me, that’s the same as spoiling. That I have no problem with at all, In fact I respect it. I wouldn’t want them excluded.

Abstaining members may or may not be present. Those not present obviously abstain. Those present who abstain simply don't vote one way or the other - by not going through either (Aye or No) lobby. No difference between that and a voter who decides not to vote - for whatever reason!

 

[Blue in Munich]

I'm ambivalent about this. But I'd suggest that those that became ex-pats after Ref 1 (which I believe incluydes you) shouldn't get a say - as they made their (your) choice based on UK leaving. Those that became ex-pats prior to Ref 1 might have an argument for consideration though.

I have to also say, following watching quite a lot of the parliamentary debate, Huw Merriman speaks a lot of sense about the having a 'confirmatory vote'! His point that Parliament hasn't been able to establish a consensus is the major reason. Nothing about the likely benefits/disadvantages of either of the options.

Not entirely sure about Brian’s position but in my case should I choose to leave to live abroad my work related pension would still be subject to PAYE taxation here. That means I’m paying for this shower so as far as I’m concerned wherever I am in the world I’m entitled to a vote. If they want to stop taxing me I’ll happily give up my voting rights.

 

[Slime]

WARNING .............................. BAD LANGUAGE!
IF YOU'RE EASILY OFFENDED, LOOK AWAY.
It did make me laugh though.

https://imgur.com/RItRSP7

 

[Hobbit]

Not entirely sure about Brian’s position but in my case should I choose to leave to live abroad my work related pension would still be subject to PAYE taxation here. That means I’m paying for this shower so as far as I’m concerned wherever I am in the world I’m entitled to a vote. If they want to stop taxing me I’ll happily give up my voting rights.

If only it was that simple... yes I'm taxed as PAYE as a chunk of it is an NHS pension. However, there's also the healthcare issue. As part of the EU there is reciprocal healthcare. And then there's the freedom of movement and driving licences.

For example, if I decide to do a road trip tomorrow, through Spain and France to the UK, my driving licence and healthcare is covered for the entirety of the trip. Post-Brexit my healthcare would have to be via a private scheme and I would need 2 different driving permits.

Irrespective of where other expats pay their taxes, Brexit impacts on them and costs them money. Why can't they vote on it?

 

[robinthehood]

If only it was that simple... yes I'm taxed as PAYE as a chunk of it is an NHS pension. However, there's also the healthcare issue. As part of the EU there is reciprocal healthcare. And then there's the freedom of movement and driving licences.

For example, if I decide to do a road trip tomorrow, through Spain and France to the UK, my driving licence and healthcare is covered for the entirety of the trip. Post-Brexit my healthcare would have to be via a private scheme and I would need 2 different driving permits.

Irrespective of where other expats pay their taxes, Brexit impacts on them and costs them money. Why can't they vote on it?

on the bright side you can do it with a blue passport

 

[Blue in Munich]

Looking at the last 2 videos posted about the European politicians wanting us to stay, why are we only seeming to see this side of Europe now (or have I not been looking hard enough?) ?

 

[Deleted member 18121]

I see some speeches Thatcher gave in 1992ish have sprung up over recent days.... Have others seen these?

Honestly it's like she had a crystal ball and is describing the exact situation we're in..... I have never and will never vote Tory in my life time, but she really was speaking sense on this subject.

 

[spongebob59]

Love this tweet !

Whatever the outcome of #IndicativeVotes2, if a referendum on Scottish independence ever won by anything like 52:48, I look forward to the #SNP talking about the need to respect the will of the 48, and about it was a vote for not-quite-independence and so staying in the Union.

 

[Tashyboy]

We'll that's another four options kicked out again. Seeing as all of them were remain options one way or another. I think it could of kicked off if any of them had been voted on.