StefanAVFC Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 Corbyn wants Brexit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 A request for an extension has to come from the government, not from Parliament, so as I understand it McGovern's vote is merely phatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 3 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: Corbyn wants Brexit Might that lead to some more resignations of the Labour whip? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 20, 2019 Moderator Share Posted March 20, 2019 Has it really taken him three plus years to understand that the EEA is no barrier to his nationalisation plans. He's been told it since the day he first mentioned it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 7 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: Corbyn wants Brexit 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: However... Unicorn chasing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 On 15/03/2019 at 18:04, snowychap said: @HanoiVillan This is the written statement submitted by the PM today on the next steps: Quote ... In accordance with the motion the House approved on Thursday 14 March 2019 the Government will now seek to agree an extension with the EU. The European Council has to approve any extension by unanimity, meaning it would require all the leaders of the other 27 EU Member States to agree the UK’s request. As the motion stated, if the House has passed a resolution approving the negotiated withdrawal agreement and the framework for the future relationship by Wednesday 20 March 2019, then the Government will seek to agree with the European Union a one-off extension of the period specified in Article 50(3) for a period ending on 30 June 2019 for the purpose of passing the necessary legislation to implement the Withdrawal Agreement into our domestic law and complete the ratification process. However, if the House has not reached such agreement by the 20 March 2019 then it is highly likely that the European Council at its meeting the following day would require a clear purpose for any extension, not least to determine its length, and that any extension beyond 30 June 2019 would require the United Kingdom to hold European Parliament elections in May 2019. ... It's pretty much the motion of yesterday fleshed out a bit but I can't see in there anything that 'clearly' states when they intend to ask for the extension (or seek to agree as per the terminology) or that they would actually do it if they lost the next MV try. I could see from reading it that, if they lost the next MV, they might just go along half-heartedly and say, "Yes, Parliament does want an extension but we have no idea what they/we propose to use it for." Thus opening the door to the EU saying no to the request, the government painting the EU as the bad guy (again) and another attempt to pass the WA the following week. May has just confirmed at PMQs her intention not to ask for an extension beyond the 30th June even though the house has not passed a resolution approving the negotiated withdrawal agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 'It remains my intention to bring the deal dack to the House.' Sounds like they might well be looking seriously at the proroguing option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 20, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted March 20, 2019 9 minutes ago, snowychap said: Sounds like they might well be looking seriously at the proroguing option. That won't work, I don't think, with only a short extension. It's like rebooting your computer without saving your work. - everything "in progress" is lost and has to be done again from scratch. Any legislation going through Lower or upper parliament - lost.One of the ongoing, never mentioned things is all the laws that have to be passed so Britain works post Brexit. There wasn't time to do that by the end of march, and I'm not sure there is by the end of June, even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 She's so gross, urgh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted March 20, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted March 20, 2019 Her brass neck is astounding. She's moaned that the Commons has spent too much time navel gazing, rather than, you know, just doing what she wants. She'd rip your hand off if given the power to be a outright dictator. Vile, vile word removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, blandy said: everything "in progress" is lost and has to be done again from scratch Standing Orders 80a & 80b - Carry-over procedures. Quote ... Subject to the following provisions of this order, a Minister of the Crown may give notice of a motion (a ‘carryover motion’) that proceedings on a public bill not completed before the end of the Session shall be resumed in the next Session of Parliament ... Edited March 20, 2019 by snowychap Added in link and some text from Parliament website 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 After the amendment for indicative votes next week is neutered because the government promised to have them. Today she states that the house has had enough chances to vote on what they want. He's vile. Absolutely vile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 20, 2019 Moderator Share Posted March 20, 2019 EU says non Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 20, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted March 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, bickster said: EU says non Good. That needed to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 So Deal or No Deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 not seen anything concrete on it but what i did see was a suggestion they wont extend it beyond the election dates, so an extension to mid may is still on the table not sure why May asked for June, before the elections is painfully obvious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 20, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted March 20, 2019 46 minutes ago, snowychap said: Standing Orders 80a & 80b - Carry-over procedures. Reading it, it doesn't seem to be a given. It would all have to be voted on, case by case. Quote The decision whether to carry over a bill is ultimately a political judgment. Bills to be carried over from one session to the next are discussed between the “usual channels” (representatives of the major parties). Bills that have undergone pre-legislative scrutiny are thought to be better suited to gaining agreement in the usual channels, although the government can bring forward any bill for carry-over. 4 4. Even if a bill is not carried over, the government could still introduce a new bill in the same terms in the following session, although proceedings on the bill would have to start from scratch. The main features of the procedure under SO No. 80A are that— • a carry-over motion may only be made on notice given by a Minister;9 • the motion may only be made in respect of a bill presented by a Minister (so a private member’s bill cannot be carried over);10 • a separate motion is required for each bill to be carried over;11 • if moved on the same day as second reading, the motion is not debated;12 • if moved at any other time, debate on the motion is limited to 90 minutes;13 • a bill may be subject to the carry-over procedure only once;14 and • proceedings on a carried-over bill lapse (unless extended) “on the expiry of the period of twelve months from the date of its first reading in this House” (that is, the first reading of the bill in the Session in which it was originally introduced).15 The main features of the procedure under SO No. 80A are that— • a carry-over motion may only be made on notice given by a Minister;9 • the motion may only be made in respect of a bill presented by a Minister (so a private member’s bill cannot be carried over);10 • a separate motion is required for each bill to be carried over;11 • if moved on the same day as second reading, the motion is not debated;12 • if moved at any other time, debate on the motion is limited to 90 minutes;13 • a bill may be subject to the carry-over procedure only once;14 and • proceedings on a carried-over bill lapse (unless extended) “on the expiry of the period of twelve months from the date of its first reading in this House” (that is, the first reading of the bill in the Session in which it was originally introduced).15.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 1 minute ago, blandy said: Reading it, it doesn't seem to be a given. It would all have to be voted on, case by case. No, it's not a given. There is, however a process for carrying over Public Bills. The motions are taken without debate if moved on the same day as second reading, in other cases they are debateable. That does not necessarily mean the motion is put to a vote (if there are no cries of 'no' then it would pass without need for a division, I'd have thought). The point was not that it might be either an easy or sensible decision. It was described by someone on the TV as a 'nuclear' option and that was probably being kind. The point was that Public Bills can be carried over between sessions and that they don't necessarily fall. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts