Follow TV Tropes
Yeah, this so-called deal is less "dead on arrival" and more "it's had the funeral service, been cremated, has been placed in situ and has had the plaque for the memorial wall already installed".
Edited by Euodiachloris on Oct 17th 2019 at 1:52:32 PM
Yeah, amendments come before the final reading. There's no shenanigans that can be pulled to get a vote on an amendmentless version of the bill.
The closest is that nonsense on the Benn act about the government not opposing an amendment at all which wouldn't help it get voted through fully.
Edited by RainehDaze on Oct 17th 2019 at 1:33:35 PM
Geez, things are bad over here and bound to get worse but do you guys even have a functioning government at this point?
In the sense that things are still being run, yes. In the sense that the government is completely unable to pass legislation, no.
Technically, yes. Its only purpose now is to fail in front of everyone so that the Opposition can point to it and say "look, we've given them all the chances they needed to get a decent deal, they didn't, so time for an extension and a General Election pronto and get a functioning Government in".
The Government is bleeding out on the floor, but until the danger of No Deal is gone, the Opposition won't put the dying beast down.
But yeah, they have no chance of getting anything done that doesn't have to do with Brexit.
But if you want to talk about not having a functioning government, spare a tear for Northern Ireland. Standstill since 2017 - still nothing gets done.
Edited by GoldenKaos on Oct 17th 2019 at 1:49:16 PM
Doesn't look like they can do much about Brexit either.
Ideally, they wouldn't have to.
Well, no. They could negotiate and actual decent deal that pass Labour's five tests, but they don't want to do that, so they won't. We're going through the motions now, get Boris to get a deal, vote it into oblivion, Boris asks for extension, trigger the VONC and get an election in.
I wonder what historians will end up naming this 2017-2019 Parliament.
Edited by kkhohoho on Oct 17th 2019 at 9:28:37 AM
That's not guaranteed. The SNP and most of Labour seem to be opposed to it. However, Jo Swinson has been saying that she'll whip the Lib Dems to support it if Johnson promises to put it back to the people in referendum with a Remain option. Swinson's been heavily criticised for this position, but Labour's going to try the same thing — yes, Swinson is hypocritical for attacking Corbyn for doing this sort of thing but being fine with it when she's the one doing it, but the people criticising her are being hypocritical for the same reason.
The 19 Labour MPs who said they'd support the deal if Johnson guaranteed workers rights and environmental protections. However, the workers rights and environmental protections have been moved into the political declaration, which is not legally binding. So, now, there's a question mark over how many of them will support it given that makes it easy for the Tories to rip up later on.
Meanwhile, Farage is so invested in No Deal that he's now supporting a extension and GE, and slamming the EU for trying to 'sabotage' the 'Benn Act' (yes, he is now defending the very 'Surrender Act' he has spent the past few weeks trying to destroy). It's Junker's 'no extension' comments that have pissed him off this time. Junker doesn't have the power to grant or deny extensions but he's probably verbalising exactly how the EU27 is feeling at this point. On top of this, Brexiteers are cheering Junker for this comment after years of painting him as the demonic symbol of all things EU.
And people thought things couldn't get any more topsy-turvey. That said, Farage's position makes complete sense for someone who wants No Deal and knows he can destroy the Tory Party in a GE that happens in the aftermath of an extension.
Anyway, onto what's being voted on...
The vote to sit on Saturday occurred without division. However, Amendment (a) was close (287 to 275), but these things often are in a hung parliament. The Amendment allows the House to sit for longer on Saturday and was passed before the vote to sit on Saturday was agreed. For the record, this result means that the opposition won and the government lost — the length of the sitting now allows for amendments to be made to the EU Bill. The government wanted to pass it in a short amount of time with no amendments possible.
So, Parliament will sit on a Saturday for the first time since the Falklands vote in 1982, it will be the fourth time since the outbreak of WW2, and amendments will be voted on for the Bill:
The government are trying to force a do-or-die vote with a stark choice between voting for Johnson's deal or for No Deal Brexit. That's it. That's the choice. It's an attempt to scupper the Benn Act (in the sense that the Act only requires Johnson to send an extension request if MPs fail to vote for a deal) by basically making it an either/or choice — the only protest possible here is an abstention, which doesn't stop one or the other from happening.
Letwin, who brought Amendment (a), has possibly damaged that plan. By allowing amendments to be slapped onto the Bill, the House now has the opportunity to create an amendment that would (just to throw out an option from the top of my head) force Johnson's deal, if passed by Parliament, to be put to the people in a referendum consisting of a choice between Johnson's Deal and Remain — effectively scuppering No Deal Brexit and a near-future GE, and giving the EU a constructive reason for an extension: a referendum between Johnson's deal (a defined Brexit) and Remain.
In circumstances such as this, Parliament may well vote for Johnson's deal. However, this would require the Speaker to select the amendment (he would be likely to), the amendment to be successfully passed and then for the Bill itself to be passed.
We would then be facing a second (technically, third) referendum subject to convincing the EU to permit a long enough extension for a referendum to be set up and run.
There are a lot of big ifs here.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Oct 17th 2019 at 7:28:19 PM
Though one would hope that if an extension is requested for the purpose of the specific deal OR remain it would be agreed to (and not force the headache of having to redo laws immediately after to comply with exit dates and a parliament that still doesn't want the options...)
Well, that's the Letwin Amendment backed—e.g. any vote to approve the deal is tied to the legislation that would enable it to be passed beforehand. That is, no "now we have approved a deal, we will not vote for the deal, and this nullifies the requirement to seek an extension" brexiteer loophole.
Boris is still openly stating he will not request Extension though.
If the extension letter hasn't been sent by midnight, the court is supposed to reconvene on Monday to discuss the nobile officium case further, and also whether contempt of court proceedings are appropriate.
He also gave a legally binding oath to the courts saying that he would comply with the law, so not sending the letter at this point puts him in personal legal trouble.
Hm, I don't think we've ever had a PM arrested before.
The Prime Minster isn't getting arrested,if he does it will be all for show and theatrics,it's simply an unthinkable scenario for people in positions of power
Its like President Trump being arrested,won't ever happen
At worst Boris will be yelled at in the house of commons
He’s apparently sending the letter but also sending a second letter telling the EU to ignore the first one.
Because trying to ignore the spirit of the law is going to work.
Though where is that coming from? All I've seen is "I'm not going to send a letter."
Edited by RainehDaze on Oct 19th 2019 at 5:18:04 PM
He'll send an email instead,genius!
Hence the contempt of court discussions.
That was discussed in court at the time because this threat has been around for a couple of weeks. The legally-binding promise to the court is that the letter requesting an extension will be sent and there will be no attempt made to frustrate the requirements of the Benn Act.
Sending a second letter telling people to either ignore the first one or advising them to deny extension anyway, will definitely be regarded as an attempt to frustrate the Benn Act.
As will his claim earlier today to simply refuse to send the letter at all.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Oct 19th 2019 at 6:00:58 PM
Well, he has six hours. And this is not going to be difficult for the court to rule on after the previous hearings.
The long nightmare continues. Anyone here have any estimates for when Johnson's deal will actually be put to a vote? The press really had me believing this was the day when everything would be decided.
The government wants to try again either on Monday or Tuesday.
Monday, I think, but I could be wrong. JRM made a weird point of order implying the government is going to another vote to circumvent the Letwin amendment. I only half-heard it because I wasn't expecting it, so I'm not completely certain what he said. Judging by the responses from other MPs seeking clarification (and JRM's refusal to answer any questions put to him), the rest of the House was confused, too.
Bercow stated that JRM has used the point of order in a very irregular way and he will be seeking further advice on the matter.
> The government wants to try again either on Monday or Tuesday.
if at first you dont succeed..
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?