What do you mean by "change the political declaration"? Is that another way of saying revoke Brexit (Article 50)? If so, that would not require a delay. In that case, the UK would just continue to be a member of the EU, as has been the case for the last 40 years, and they would need to immediately set up to participate in the May 23-26 EU Parliamentary elections. This is in fact the only alternative action that the UK can take unilaterally, which does not require agreement from the EU. As I posted earlier, it does not appear that even Labour supports this option. Or, when you say "change the political declaration," do you mean voting to participate in a second referendum? That would require a long delay and also participation in the May 23-26 Parliamentary elections. It is not clear to me that even Labour is going to support this option either. And if neither of these two choices "change the political declaration," then what specifically does that even mean?
I don't blame you for not understanding this because most MPs don't get it either. There can be two votes, on the WA (yes or no) and the political declaration (a myriad of options). If the Parliament vote to change the political declaration (i.e we would like to see a Norway style Brexit) then the EU can open new discussions. What they cannot do, is under the framework of MAY's politcal declaration, to offer a different WA. The EU spokeperson Sabinne something has made it clear. Ofc EP elections are a given in any long extension. But a change in political declaration can make the EU offer a 1 year extension. What a waste of time and money! Ineptitude from top to bottom in the British system. And I say this as a Greek citizen who has zero trust in our own political system, but even that is vastly superior to this farce.
I need to add this The Parliament itself can vote whatever it wants, but the political declaration can be made and changed by the government which is what the EU deals and negotiates with. No matter if Parliament votes to turn the sky red, if the PM doesn't agree she/he can ignore it. For the parliament alone to change the political declaration they need to basically strongarm and force the government by some very complex maneuvres. To do that they need to have a stable majority so if their political declaration barely passes it will do nothing.
My answer is simply no because of stupid things like this: The fact that you just take whatever people say (the EU in this case) as the final word and gospel is your failure of imagination. You repeatedly demonstrate you have absolutely zero understanding of what is going on, even after you get repeatedly proven wrong over and over and over again. No one anything has ever said in this process should be taken as an absolute. Ever. Until you grasp that concept, you will continue to have a failure of imagination.
3.30pm update: Eight options chosen for ballot paper for indicative votes Commons Speaker John Bercow has selected the following motions: (B) Leave the EU without a deal on April 12 - moved by Tory MP John Baron; (D) The UK would join the EFTA, remain in the EEA and single market and enter a customs arrangement until a solution to the Irish border is found - moved by Tory MP Nick Boles; (H) Norway model, without a customs union (EEA and EFTA) - moved by Tory MP George Eustace; (J) Leave the EU with a UK-wide customs union - moved by Tory MP Ken Clarke; (K) Permanent customs union, including alignment wit the single market on future EU rights and regulations - moved by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn; (L) Revoke Article 50 if a no deal Brexit is explicitly approved by MPs a day before Britain is due to leave the EU - moved by SNP MP Joanna Cherry; (M) Any withdrawal agreement must be put to the public in a “confirmatory’ second referendum - moved by abour MP Dame Margaret Beckett; (O) If no withdrawal agreement is agreed, to seek a “standstill” agreement with the EU while negotiating a trade deal - moved by Tory MP Marcus Fysh
May first time openly declares she will quit if her deal passes. Puts the carrot infront of the power hungry Brexemists to get them to vote. But without the DUP and smh finding about 15 Labour rebels she won't be able to pass it.
Brexit news - LIVE: John Bercow puts third meaningful vote in doubt Important - John Bercow also says the government should not contemplate bringing forward a third meaningful vote unless it can demonstrate "change" to the Brexit deal. He said: "I understand that the government may be thinking of bringing MV3 either before the House either tomorrow or on Friday if it opts to sit that day. I wish to make clear that I do expect the government to meet the test of change. They should not seek to circumvent my ruling." He says the Table Office has been told not to accept motions that could overturn his ruling last week.
As you can see many of the proposals for today are unicorns. Labour's included. Well at least we can be grateful that the unicorns withwings, as the Manhouse compromise were dismissed by Bercow
Bercow today went a step further telling the clerks will dismiss it if they government try to circumvent him. Still there is a legal way to bring it to vote by having it as a motion or something. This is a legal manoevre I don't even understand but there is still ways. But Bercow has clearly overstepped his boundaries.
So for the conditions of Theresa May's proposed resignation to be achieved, the May government and the UK Parliament must first successfully override Bercow's ruling, and then vote to pass Theresa May's deal, even though it has already been voted down by triple-digits on two separate occasions. Do what you like here, but I would not advise holding your breath.
There is a legal beaurocratic way that May can put it on vote, without needing the active cooperation of MPs. So May can put it to vote, even if she hasn't secured a majority. The Torries do NOT have the majority. Even if somehow every single Torry vote for her deal it will not pass. Problems for May's deal to pass: 1)There are still around 10-15 hard line Brexiters who for ideological reasons, won't be tempted. I disagree with them but I respect them. Unlike Rees- Moggs and Boris Johnson they care about their ideals more than power. 2) The DUP. They will vote against May's deal because it goes against the very reason of existence of the DUP. Because the EU is reading the UK's newspapers, they made sure in the summit to render May's bribe of 1.4 bn useless, by putting into watertight wording that any DUP's "consultation" and involvement in the implementation of the WA will not be permitted. 3) Labour rebels. The Labour Brexiters are right in front of the gate now of being able to enforce a soft Brexit they want. So May will get close but wont be able to pass with the way things are now. She is missing around 45 votes at best.
Well who knows. May has tried in the past to bribe Labour MPs as well by promising funding for their counties in the North. Sunderland, Reading etc These counties are very poor and always vote Labour but are of the most Leave areas. Some of the biggest in the country even some 70% Leave. If she starts throwing around 10s of billions of bribes there will be Labour MPs who will rebel. Now even if she doesn't resign , there are ways to make her just a person who occupies the PM seat without any real power, But the Parliament must reach a clear conclusion with these indicative votes, and have a clear majority and unity. Needless to say that any other politician with some dignity and sense of responsibillity would resign at that point but it is too much to assume for someone like May.
The eight indicative votes (non-binding) are scheduled to start in about a half hour. Here is the live video of the UK Parliament: They are apparently going to vote on all eight questions simultaneously, so it will probably be an hour or more before the vote counts are tabulated and announced.
Rees- Mogg changed his tune once again. If the DUP abstain it will be enough for him. However abstaining to faciliate a law that puts in danger their existence as a political party is too much. If they abstain is the same as betraying not only their voters but themselves as unionists. Interesting to see what they will say now. I don't think they will get even 50% of their voters back if they decide to help May.
That's what so confusing about the DUP position. By supporting May, they're also increasing the likelihood of a united Ireland. The alternative to a hard border is either a customs union and regulatory alignment with the EU (which the Tories don't want) or Northern Ireland leaving the UK. We forget that Northern Ireland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU. And Northern Ireland has the right to leave the UK and join Ireland. It's written into the Good Friday Agreement. To me Sinn Fein has to be quietly smiling at the whole stupidity of the DUP position. The DUP will get blamed for reintroducing a hard border and Sinn Fein will happily point out that thanks to the DUP, the only way to open up the border again is for Northern Ireland to leave the UK and join Ireland. And the worst part is the DUP is throwing away a golden opportunity for Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland has the opportunity to be a bridge between the EU and the UK. It'd be the one part of the UK with free movement of goods and services with the rest of the EU.
Funny to see people like Boris Johnson switch to support a deal he said was wretched and a destruction of the UK, just because May agreed to resign. Why would that make a hundred-year decision any better, given that May would have been gone in a few years regardless (or they could have just no-confidenced her away if they really wanted to)? P.S. - Mojoman, this is part of your lack of imagination in thinking that what people say definitively means anything.
