I'd probably put an extension of Article 50 and a second referendum at about 70%

[Monty92]

at this point.

So, with this knowledge which way do the ERG vote next week?

[Sir C]

at this point.

So, with this knowledge which way do the ERG vote next week?

Robert Peston's thread on twitter 'explaining' the current situation is as confusing as all fúckery. His reading is that parliament now has the power to vote against a hard Brexit and that ERG's only remaining option is to support May's deal. It is, in effect, semi-Brexit or no Brexit at all.

[Monty92]

Robert Peston's thread on twitter 'explaining' the current situation is as confusing as all fúckery. His reading is that parliament now has the power to vote against a hard Brexit and that ERG's only remaining option is to support May's deal. It is, in effect, semi-Brexit or no Brexit at all.

Do we know the numbers on how many non-ERG Tories would need to vote for the deal for it to pass? I mean, could ERG swing it?

I do think there are certain figures who simply can't vote for it regardless - Mogg, Baker, etc.

[Burney]

Do we know the numbers on how many non-ERG Tories would need to vote for the deal for it to pass? I mean, could ERG swing it?

I do think there are certain figures who simply can't vote for it regardless - Mogg, Baker, etc.

It won't pass.The former chief whip reckons it'll lose by about 80 votes as things stand. I don't see that turning around - particularly as the legal advice is likely to make May's deal virtually impossible to vote for.

[Monty92]

It won't pass.The former chief whip reckons it'll lose by about 80 votes as things stand. I don't see that turning around - particularly as the legal advice is likely to make May's deal virtually impossible to vote for.

What happens next, iyo?

[Burney]

Robert Peston's thread on twitter 'explaining' the current situation is as confusing as all fúckery. His reading is that parliament now has the power to vote against a hard Brexit and that ERG's only remaining option is to support May's deal. It is, in effect, semi-Brexit or no Brexit at all.

That all sounds superficially convincing but entirely ignores the question of how exactly Parliament can go about voting against Hard Brexit. Bear in mind that Parliament passed an Act which sets out our leaving the EU on 29/03/19. Unless that Act is repealed by another Act it is good law. Yesterday’s events do not provide a mechanism for repeal.

[Burney]

What happens next, iyo?

Chaos, basically. All this talk of 'voting against hard Brexit' is largely meaningless. How exactly does Parliament go about doing that, given that it has passed an Act saying we will leave the EU on 29 March next year?

[Monty92]

Chaos, basically. All this talk of 'voting against hard Brexit' is largely meaningless. How exactly does Parliament go about doing that, given that it has passed an Act saying we will leave the EU on 29 March next year?

It doesn't, it all just cranks up the pressure on more Cabinet members to resign and in doing so force May to resign to be replaced by someone who will extend Article 50, paving the way for a second referendum.

[Burney]

It doesn't, it all just cranks up the pressure on more Cabinet members to resign and in doing so force May to resign to be replaced by someone who will extend Article 50, paving the way for a second referendum.

Couple of issues there:

a/ There is no public appetite for a second referendum - and absolutely none among Tory voters.
b/ A tory leadership that extends Article 50 and brings in a second referendum will effectively be committing political suicide at the next election - if (and this is not as easy as it sounds) it can actually command a majority for doing so.

[Rich]

Chaos, basically. All this talk of 'voting against hard Brexit' is largely meaningless. How exactly does Parliament go about doing that, given that it has passed an Act saying we will leave the EU on 29 March next year?

I suspect that there will be a referendum between May's Brexit or no Brexit at all. Brexit will have to be pushed back to allow this.

There is absolutely no way that the Parliamentary Commission is going to give Joe Public the option of voting for hard Brexit since no party wants that.

I think suspect we might remain in after all, especially if they allow 16 and 17 year-olds to vote (as they well should, considering it impacts their future prosperity more than others). Also, we now know the best deal the EU will give us. A trade deal with Trump looks unfavourable. Many of the old people that voted leave 2 years ago are now dead. And many youngsters that were too young to vote (and highly likely to vote Remain) are now old enough to take part.

[Monty92]

Couple of issues there:

a/ There is no public appetite for a second referendum - and absolutely none among Tory voters.
b/ A tory leadership that extends Article 50 and brings in a second referendum will effectively be committing political suicide at the next election - if (and this is not as easy as it sounds) it can actually command a majority for doing so.

I know, but ultimately I think Tory MPs outside the ERG would sooner get behind a second ref than a No Deal Brexit.

It's possible that a No Deal Brexit could wipe out the Tories at the next GE, too. Even if an orderly No Deal departure was at a certain point possible, it does seem likely that it hasn't been adequately prepared for, and the economic impact would be substantial.
.

[Burney]

I know, but ultimately I think Tory MPs outside the ERG would sooner get behind a second ref than a No Deal Brexit.

It's possible that a No Deal Brexit could wipe out the Tories at the next GE, too. Even if an orderly No Deal departure was at a certain point possible, it does seem likely that it hasn't been adequately prepared for, and the economic impact would be substantial.
.

No Deal might damage them in the short term (but, btw, the UK electorate doesn't vote Labour when the economy's in serious trouble - Labour govts are an indulgence set aside for good economic - or at least optimistic - times. Voting Labour during an economic storm would be like a shipwrecked sailor choosing to cling to the anchor rather than the wreckage).

By contrast, extending Article 50 and a second vote would betray their base destroy them forever. Which would you choose?

[Arsenal Alcoholic Review]

It's time for Batten to deploy Tommy and the Boys to the Beer Hall.

[Monty92]

It's time for Batten to deploy Tommy and the Boys to the Beer Hall.

UKIP with no Farage :hehe:

[Arsenal Alcoholic Review]

UKIP with no Farage :hehe:

They were finished as a party once the people (sort of) voted out of the EU. That was proven at the last election. But Batten has played a blinder recently. The ranks are swelling with Dankula, Sargon, Tommy and PJW added. They're on the march.

[Pokster]

Couple of issues there:

a/ There is no public appetite for a second referendum - and absolutely none among Tory voters.
b/ A tory leadership that extends Article 50 and brings in a second referendum will effectively be committing political suicide at the next election - if (and this is not as easy as it sounds) it can actually command a majority for doing so.

No public appetite??? I would suggest the remainers would quite gladly have a second one, so that is nearly 50% of the people that voted last time

[Burney]

No public appetite??? I would suggest the remainers would quite gladly have a second one, so that is nearly 50% of the people that voted last time

Currently, polling is at 50:40 against with 10% don't knows. That simply isn't enough to justify a second referendum.

Also, among Tory voters, those numbers stand at 74-18 against. So, the question is: what Tory government in its right mind would choose to pursue a course of action so profoundly contrary to its voters' wishes?

[Pokster]

Currently, polling is at 50:40 against with 10% don't knows. That simply isn't enough to justify a second referendum.

Also, among Tory voters, those numbers stand at 74-18 against. So, the question is: what Tory government in its right mind would choose to pursue a course of action so profoundly contrary to its voters' wishes?

I would suggest that all remainers would jump on a second vote.. and all depends how it was worded, I can't see another yes or no vote as that got us into the mess we are now, it would have to be remain or a yes for whatever the proposal May agreed with the EU is

[Burney]

I would suggest that all remainers would jump on a second vote.. and all depends how it was worded, I can't see another yes or no vote as that got us into the mess we are now, it would have to be remain or a yes for whatever the proposal May agreed with the EU is

Anything other than a Yes/No vote would mean essentially gerrymandering the vote to ensure there is no outcome other than one Remainers like, so I'm not sure that'll fly. As Rees-Mogg put it to Caroline Lucas, that choice would in effect mean having everything on the ballot except what was voted for in June 2016.

[Monty92]

Currently, polling is at 50:40 against with 10% don't knows. That simply isn't enough to justify a second referendum.

Also, among Tory voters, those numbers stand at 74-18 against. So, the question is: what Tory government in its right mind would choose to pursue a course of action so profoundly contrary to its voters' wishes?

What's to stop a new law being put forward to avoid No Deal, by the way?

[Burney]

What's to stop a new law being put forward to avoid No Deal, by the way?

Well there is the nice legal question of what 'No Deal' would actually mean for a start and how one defines that in law. Then there is the fact that, constitutionally, Parliament may not bind its successors, so you cannot make it perpetually impossible to leave the EU on whatever terms you choose.
And finally, there's time. It would require an Act of Parliament that repealed the existing EU Withdrawal Act. That would take months to achieve - since it's unthinkable that such a significant Act of Parliament would be accelerated in such a way as to skip the committee stages.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

No Deal might damage them in the short term (but, btw, the UK electorate doesn't vote Labour when the economy's in serious trouble - Labour govts are an indulgence set aside for good economic - or at least optimistic - times. Voting Labour during an economic storm would be like a shipwrecked sailor choosing to cling to the anchor rather than the wreckage).

By contrast, extending Article 50 and a second vote would betray their base destroy them forever. Which would you choose?

. . . . . . . . .

[Burney]

. . . . . . . . .

Our economy is currently outperforming the rest of Europe, h. We're talking about a hypothetical scenario whereby No Deal wreaks short-term economic damage.