It looks like a real possibility at this point that the EU will not unanimously approve the UK's extension request. If that happens, then the UK leaves the EU with no deal on March 29, 2019, ready or not, here we come. It is extremely unlikely that May resigns until some time after March 29, 2019. After the UK leaves the EU, her remaining time as PM will be short.
well the one to not agree with it will have to bear the blame and pressure. So it's not like for example someone small alone like Finland or Bulgaria could do it. And now it also seems like Spain doesn't have anything else to blackmail for Gibraltar. There is still the fishing issue which is major. (Portugal, Netherlands, France ,Spain used a lot of the scottish waters to fish so there can be a blackmail game there) So if the extension isn't allowed, it could be a coalition with some economic interests hardballing the desperate UK, or the second option is the populists. Before Brexit the right populists were campaigning to leave the EU. But after they saw this catastrophe that Brexit has become, they have turned directions instead of leaving, to stay and try to lead the EU from the inside. So Hungary, Italy and Poland as a prelude to EU elections in May, can use it as a show of power perhaps. But it still looks not very likely that they will not be merciful enough to allow it if the extension amendment passes by a wide margin. Now if it passes barely by 10-20 votes then all scenarios are in play.
Don't forget that we are talking about humanitarian issue here. If we have Brexit in only half a month, people will die. No matter if the EU is fed up with the UK's anticts and temper tantrums the people don't want to see their neighbours starve or die without medicine. So it's not so easy to veto an extension
On the other hand, the EU has apparently realized that this could be one of their last chances to extort the UK out of Billions of Euros. Now whether they can get all 27 members to unanimously line up behind that, time will tell. But you never know. Remember the old saying: "Follow the money".
Now you have lost your grip. People will die from Brexit with no deal? What specifically do you believe will be the cause of death in this case?
people in nothern Ireland go to Ireland's hospitals for cancer treatment because they don't have there. Not everyone has the financial ability to travel every month, over the irish sea to go to Scottish or English hospitals for treatment. Then a huge rise in price of food is inevitable, again not everyone has the ability to have stocked food. The ones to be in danger will be the sick and the poor.
Repeat after me: The UK has not found ANY deal that they alone agree to. This has nothing to do with the EU. The EU spent 2 years negotiating a deal with the UK that they then backed out of. The EU has spent millions of dollars preparing on their end for a withdrawal on March 29th. The EU *should* demand something in exchange for all the time and money they've spent negotiating something the UK demanded but can't come up with any specific terms that they'll agree to. No, it's not. You need to find new sources of news so you can stop being wrong every step of the way.
The unamended text of the vote tonight on no deal is as follows: GOVERNMENT MOTION The government statement, which will be the basis of the debate, says two things: 1) That parliament rejects leaving the EU without a deal on March 29 2) notes that leaving without a deal remains the legal default unless a deal is agreed. May told her party that they would be able to vote according to their conscience on this motion, instead of imposing a party instruction to vote for or against it. There were two amendments approved by Speaker Bercow to the original text.MPs will also vote on two amendments The first rejects a no-deal Brexit at any time and the second calls for a delay to Brexit from 29 March to 22 May to give time to leave without a deal https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-politics-parliaments-47529293 However, from the same link, the sponsor of the first amendment, which would reject a no deal Brexit at any time, will not actually be put forward. Spelman no longer backing own amendment Dame Caroline Spelman, a former Conservative party chairwoman, decides she will not push her amendment to a vote. Hers was one of two amendments - the other is the Malthouse Amendment - that were due to be voted on by MPs later today. However, Dame Caroline, the main sponsor of the amendment, has decided not to push for it. It is theoretically possible that someone else could - but that would be unusual.
Here are three articles expressing the positions of EU leaders about extending Brexit: Donald Tusk: UK must have a credible reason to delay Brexit European council president sets out red line for extension to Britain staying in the EU Verhofstadt says NO Brexit extension fearing EU election will be ‘hijacked by Brexiteers' Michel Barnier: Brexit extension ‘for what?’ The EU’s chief negotiator says bloc has gone as far as it could and talks are over. STRASBOURG — The Brexit negotiation is "over" and the U.K. must now tell the EU what relationship it wants before asking for an extension to Article 50, the bloc's negotiator Michel Barnier told MEPs today. Manfred Weber, the leader of the European People's Party in the European Parliament, concurred, saying the bar is set high for the EU to agree to a Brexit delay. “We don’t see any chance for prolongation without clarification from the British side,” he said, adding that “we have to create pressure on the British side to give us a clear idea of what they want to achieve.” Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that there will not be an extension granted by the EU, just observing that their comments leave the impression that they very well might not. Instead, I suspect this is just a negotiating ploy that will likely be mitigated by a very large extortion payment to the EU by the UK, which will then lead to a short extension. That is not a certain outcome, but it does look like the most likely outcome to me, considering the corrupt band of characters that we are dealing with in the EU leadership group.
Maybe, maybe no. It just strikes me to see mostly Americans hoping for one outcome or another, while being mostly insulated from the consequences.
Despite an attempt by Caroline Spelman to withdraw Amendment A, that withdrawal was overruled by Speaker Bercow and the vote to never leave with no deal is now being completed. Ayes to the right - 312 Noes to the left - 308 The amendment is agreed to. Of course this does not change no deal being the current default scenario that will occur on March 29, unless some other agreement is reached with support of both the UK parliament and a unanimous vote of the EU27, or unless the UK Parliament votes to revoke their Article 50 notice of departure. In fact, this vote was not legally binding.
Now the main motion, as amended. It seems to me that this is effectively the same vote as the first amendment vote. Ayes to the right - 321 Noes to the left - 278 The UK Parliament is opposed to leaving the EU without a deal, ever, with the recognition that the only way a no deal Brexit can be stopped is to either agree a deal with the EU27, or to revoke Article 50 and therefore revoke Brexit. So that went about as expected. Next will be the extension request vote tomorrow.
It's not legally binding - nor was the original Brexit referendum - but it firmly establishes that there was and is no way Brexit is happening without a deal. Most of us knew that already, but for anyone still hoping for a no-deal Brexit, it's not happening. They went way beyond the simply "no Brexit this month" to "no Brexit EVER" despite May being against that. The UK and EU will agree to an extension. If, for some crazy reason, the EU rejects it, then parliament will ultimately agree to the deal on the table - because the people that voted YES today will have to vote yes for that. Or they could just unilaterally withdraw A50 and end Brexit entirely, but that also seems unlikely. But more importantly, next week, we'll get votes on Labour's version of Brexit (gonna fail), a 2nd referendum (would fail today), and whatever other options they can come up with. I still say ultimately they are going to either take the deal on the table or go with a 2nd referendum, with the latter being the scenario no one wants but they will agree to because nothing else works. Plus, for supporters of the first referendum who argued this is what the people want, it's hard to argue that the people don't deserve a say today now that we know what the specifics look like.
Well, let's follow it together and see if any of that actually happens, shall we? 16 days left until March 29. Tick tock.
The UK Parliament will vote in a few hours on whether to request an extension of the Article 50 exit date from the EU. Whatever the final form of that motion, it is expected to pass. The UK government is initially proposing the extension until June 30, 2019, which is the latest that the extension could be granted without the UK being required to participate in the May elections for the EU Parliament. Currently no plans are in place for the UK to participate in the May EU Parliamentary elections. For such an election to be carried out, a majority of the UK Parliament would have to vote in favor of that happening, which they clearly do not appear to support doing. Of course the EU has made it clear that there has to be a reason for granting an extension, if one is to be granted, and that reason cannot be negotiating an exit deal, as the EU believes they have already done that and that the UK Parliament has voted it down decisively on two separate occasions. So the reasons that would apparently suffice in the minds of the EU to justify the granting of an extension include: The deal has been agreed to and more time is needed to handle the technicalities associated with implementing the deal. Again, this deal has already been voted down decisively twice and the EU is apparently not open to renegotiating any further. A second referendum has been agreed to and long extension is needed to carry out that referendum. Technical preparations for a no-deal Brexit need a bit more time, which is what the June 30 proposal is apparently designed to accommodate. It is not entirely clear that the EU will agree to this as an adequate reason, but it is my sense that for a large enough extortion payment, they will agree to it. These are the reasons an extension could plausibly be granted. Without an extension, these are the options: The UK exits the EU with no deal on March 29, 2019 The UK Parliament votes to unilaterally revoke article 50, which is the only thing that they have the power to change on their own, without the agreement of the EU. So these are the options, summarized below. Failure to positively pass one of options 2-4 before March 29, 2019 (15 days from now) will result in option 1. Brexit with no deal Brexit with the already negotiated deal Long delay for a second referendum Revocation of Brexit (Article 50)
