Peoples vote ?

[Confused52]

Obs, I assumed the appeal to the public was to shame MPs to their electorate as being prepared to vote for no deal since she has to appeal to opposition MPs. Hence the Juncker declation that there is no other deal possible (Corbyn). I expect no further referendum. I am blowed if I can see any grounds for striking down the first referendum, which I know you don't want me to explain.

[Observer II]

Don't think it's possible "to shame an MP" Con !    I'll take your legal advice on "no further referendum" and hope your right; but it's apparent since the referendum, that all the forces of the establishment have been trying to scotch the result ever since.

[Observer II]

Seems Macron has let the cat out of the bag over May's deal; by stating that unless the UK allows the EU to fish their waters, the back stop will kick in and we'll be locked into the customs union permanently - so not a good deal.   Meanwhile, if Corbyn votes down May's deal, that leaves us with "no deal", as the EU has said this is their final offer - so maybe Corbyn is secretly for crashing out with no deal - which may help keep his MPs in the provinces.  ?    😉

[Davy51]

It amazes me how this post withdrawal agreement is being touted as a big juicy carrot . That will be the part where the UK is just where the EU wants it & where we will be squeezed  until our pips squeak. To expect any honour from the European junta would be Europhilia at its most extreme.

[Observer II]

Looks like her deal has just been Trumped !   😉

[Confused52]

23 hours ago, Davy51 said:

It amazes me how this post withdrawal agreement is being touted as a big juicy carrot . That will be the part where the UK is just where the EU wants it & where we will be squeezed  until our pips squeak. To expect any honour from the European junta would be Europhilia at its most extreme.

Possibly, but that could result in us welshing on the agreement too, expect fishing to be the last to be agreed if it ever happens

[P J]

in terms of GDP fishing is a lot less important than many other areas to the UK economy but it has become politicised by crass opportunists like Farage.  That piece of work was on the European Parliament Fisheries Committee and instead of standing up for our trawler men he attended 1 out of 43 meetings.  He took the money though the raging hypocrite.

[P J]

On 11/23/2018 at 11:39 PM, asperity said:

The media and establishment have been scaremongering for two and a half years now 

 

at last we can agree

 

 

[Observer II]

Well, given the level of hysteria from the Remoaners has increased since the referendum - I'm now waiting for their trump card - that asteroid heading for the UK, we're all doomed !  😉  Hope they keep it going as no one believes it anymore, just as they didn't believe it at the referendum.

[P J]

5 hours ago, Observer II said:

Well, given the level of hysteria from the Remoaners has increased since the referendum - I'm now waiting for their trump card - that asteroid heading for the UK, we're all doomed !  😉  Hope they keep it going as no one believes it anymore, just as they didn't believe it at the referendum.

So nothing to fear from a third referendum then?  

[Confused52]

Some musings:

My understanding of the constitutional position at the moment is that the "meaningful" vote in the Commons has to be on approval of the deal, I don't believe it can be amended to allow a mention of a referendum because the Withdrawal Act says what the vote should be on. (Nor can they change the Act because it would need Royal Assent to a new Bill and the government would not introduce such a bill or ask Her Majesty to give Assent) The vote has to be taken before the decision of the European Parliament, which is interesting (well to me anyway). If the Government loses the "meaningful" vote it has to say what it intends to do, it is clear that it is not a confidence matter so the government need not resign. They will probably then state that they intend to ratify the withdrawal treaty without the consent of the Commons. The Commons and Lords separately then will have 21 sitting days from the day the treaty was laid before the house which is essentially last Monday to pass a resolution that the treaty not be ratified. If only one house passes such a motion the treaty can be ratified anyway!

The reason the legal advice is being withheld may well be that ratification of a treaty is in any case an exercise of the Royal Prerogative and it does not matter what an Act of Parliament says because the prerogative can always be exercised anyway. It remains to be seen if they will ever actually allow a No Deal Brexit because they just don't have to let it if they truly believe it is in the National Interest not to do so.

So the real battle ground for May is the Lords not the Commons and it is up to their lordships to make the final choice and the clock is already ticking, oh and the government controls the order of business. It is going to be a roller-coaster December.

A new referendum could not be put in place to be lawful under the legislation on referendums in time. We look certain to be leaving the EU and the only question is how painful we are going to make it.

[Observer II]

Like the sports coaches say - "  no pain, no gain"  !    😉