Will she come up with a good reason for there to be an extension?
What could it possibly be… I mean, if you have taken it to the wire with parliament before and failed dismally to get an agreement, what can you possibly do that will please MPs enough to make them vote for essentially the same deal with a few minor tweaks?
The backstop is non-negotiable and won’t be any different in 3 months. What else is there?
Still, never mind, Farage’s great march is ca’in’ awa bra! Eh?
He hasn’t been seen for a few days now. He can’t have spent all that time in the pub… can he?
One of the Tory Party’s dimmer lights, she didn’t hold enough of an opinion on Brexit to actually vote in the referendum… and then, as soon as Mrs May’s whips told her what she thought, she tumbled to it… and indeed is probably sure that she knew it all along.
Commons Speaker John Bercow says Theresa May cannot hold a third vote on her Brexit deal if her motion is the same, or very similar to, the one that was heavily defeated last week, citing 'convention' dating back to 1604. pic.twitter.com/nyk7ulPtbZ
According to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, one government minister (unnamed) says that Mr Bercow is ‘breaking the constitution’ by stopping May calling yet another vote on her deal.
Given that there is no written constitution (Britain being too important to need one, obviously), and everything appears to be decided by custom and practice, and given that (not in this clip, but elsewhere) Channel Four news, a more reliable source than the BBC, dates this custom, or “convention” back to a time before the United Kingdom existed, 1604, I think that the unnamed government minister was probably wise to demand anonymity.
As the Speaker said, this is not his final ruling on the subject. Presumably, it will be for him and his team of legal and constitutional experts to say whether Mrs May’s proposals for the next “meaningful vote” are sufficiently “substantially different” from those previously rejected twice, to be acceptable in custom. But it’s surely yet another humiliation for the Maybot that she even had to be told this.
Either she is very badly advised by the legal people at No 10 or, and I suspect this is more likely, she stubbornly refuses to accept advice from anyone.
Even if a prime or first minister were very clever and had a good grounding in constitutional law, he or she would be ill-advised not to listen to learned advice. Mrs May who has neither of these attributes seems to be very foolish to trust her own and Philip’s judgement.
She also seems to have a very thick skin.
I just saw this on Miguel’s timeline.
No policies, no plan to get us out of the horrific mess we are in what with Brexit and austerity.
But we bloody well HATE the SNP and that should be enough.
We might have had a deal like he’s managed with China or North Korea…
After all, he did “write” a book called “The Art of the Deal”, didn’t he?
[Note from Munguin: Well, no. He didn’t. According to Chapter 2 of “Fire and Fury” (Michael Wolff, 2018) the author claims that Trump’s co-author, Tony Schwartz said that Trump hardly wrote any of the book and it is doubtful if he’s even read it all!]
Seriously though, Trump wouldn’t have been out of place in the cast list of the Whitehall Farce that is Brexit, along with the other main cartoon characters:
The porcine posh boy; the posh but tasteless haystack who never grew up; the vicar’s cornfield destroying daughter; the disgraced DOCTOR; the lazy tosser; the flocconaucinihilphilicating faux aristo; the drunken ashtray … and the orange knob.
Extraordinary last-minute statement from @SteveBarclay in reply to planted question from @Jacob_Rees_Mogg, Brexit sec seemed to argue that in circumstances where the EU was effectively at war with us we could rip up the Withdrawal Agreement. Absolutely bonkers stuff. Desperate
May has almost lost her voice but any sympathy should be tempered by the reflection that because of her policies many have lost everything, even in some cases their lives. #Commons#WithdrawalAgreement#BrexitVote
‘We’re not having a 2nd referendum. The will of the people is clear. You can’t just keep have referendums until you’re happy with the result,’ says Theresa May as she submits her deal for the 3rd time. #BrexitVote
Just read this: “9 countries with smaller population than Scotland will have a legal veto on whether Scotland (& UK) leave the EU on March 29th, but Scotland’s Gov will have no power over that decision. That’s the difference between the European Union & the British Union.”
Theresa May 'should be out of office tonight', says Nicola Sturgeon, after the Prime Minister's revised #Brexit deal was defeated.
The backstop is the backstop is the backstop. Because legally it has to be. And no matter how you play the legal language, there is no way around it.
It is impossible to have a backstop that one side can walk away from without consultation. If there is no trade deal after December 2020, and that is, given the painfully slow progress of the current government in the withdrawal phase, more than likely, the backstop will have to come into force.
Interesting to note that last night the leadership of the DUP was consulted on the outcome of the talks. The first ministers Scotland and Wales were not. Almost like we didn’t matter.
So, how will they vote tonight?
Will the bribes of vast amounts of our money to Labour MPs’ constituencies in England work?
Will the DUP be satisfied? If so, will Rees Mogg take his line from them, as he has said he would?
Will May still be prime minister this time next week?