The eu don't want us to leave cos there's a 10% hole in the budget. They'll do as much as possible to prevent no deal. However they won't budge one millimetre from the deal imo. They know who is twisting in the wind
Sorry I misunderstood your post then, as I thought you said that the EU wanted a no deal outcome They won’t change it in any dramatic manner but there could be some clarification around the requirements for exiting the backstop. The backstop that the Unicornists are crying about, that only comes into being if their ‘simple technological solution’ to the border issue, is shown to be yet more horseshit. Quite how they can simultaneously hold both of those positions and not be called out on it, is utterly bonkers.
You know this brexit stuff 100 times better than me but one thing I do know is that all Acts of Parliament [once passed] become laws. The Withdrawal Act became a law on 26 June. Am I missing something?
Yes. The withdrawal deal is what they’re voting on, and the withdrawal deal needs a separate bill to be passed for it to be implemented. The point being discussed was the timeframe that May had to come back to the House once her deal was rejected. MITO said that was originally 7 days - by law. It wasn’t, it was 21 days, hence the importance of the amendment which caused all the furore, as that’s now seen that timeframe reduced to 3 Parliamentary days.
Again I don't understand. Isn't the Withdrawal Act and the deal you mention all the same thing? The Act sets out what has to happen by or on 29 March and everything they're debating now is in accordance with the procedures set out in the Act? I need help with this - The problem seems to be that the withdrawal terms that the gov. have come up with can't be agreed and there's a time frame surrounding that but if an agreement is reached then withdrawal happens and that's it. Why would there be a separate bill and what would it say?
there is a clear set of actions that was put into law for this process. the date of 28th March is written into law as is the deadline of 21st January. there is a clear timeframe to return to parliament with statement of intent should a vote fail (the meaningful vote government were taken to courts to ensure it happens) the deal tjat is now in front of parliament was agreed by eu first then sent to UK parliament for debate. it is in fact the binding agreement and treat between eu and UK. if parliament ratify it then the process moves to eu where 27 countries then must agree (20 there of as written into eu law when article 50 was created)
It dates back to the meaningful vote controversy, in order for the vote on a proposed deal to be meaningful the Withdrawal act contained an amendment which required the Executive to gain approval from the House and the agreement needs a separate act of Parliament. The Withdrawal act says we leave on the 29th March. Hence Mays attempt at blackmailing the House.
It’s been made more complex by the legal challenges / multiple amendments etc. I doubt most of our representatives at Westminster understand the full intricacies of it, if their knowledge of the U.K. and EU’s legal relationship is anything to go by. My ‘favourite’ Brexiter story was the hapless Nadine Dorries asking on an ERG WhatsApp group, what the single market was, as she kept losing arguments as to why leaving it was a crap idea. Then you have Andrew Bridgeon saying that he could have an Irish passport due to the fact that he was English The wilful ignorance is truly shocking.
I just find the whole politics thing frustrating made worse by the fact that most politicians seem so detached from 'real' life. Granted it's a very complex, difficult job but I'm convinced they make stuff up as they go along
Think it is only the EU Parl for the withdrawal agreement but all the National Parls & the EU Parl if we ever agree a trade deal. My view for nearly a year is that the most likely outcome is that we will not agree the withdrawal agreement and nothing i've seen changes my view on that . The problem with an A50 extension is to what end since there is no evidence Parliament can agree on anything but what they don't like
"The EU parliament, including the MEPs from the UK, must consent by simple majority to the Withdrawal Agreement – but does not have the power to amend it. In this case, the Council of the EU needs to adopt it by super-qualified majority. This means it needs to get support of 72% of the 27 participating member states (or 20 member states), and the support must also represent 65% of the population of the 27 member states. Although the UK is still a full member of the EU with full rights in the Council of the EU, it is not participating or taking part in the council’s decisions concerning Brexit"
How many of you guys are frustrated with the Labour party? I mean we have the same situation here.... the right wing evangelical bigots that are trying to use their usual props to cling on out of absolutely petrified paranoia.... which I believe will result in most of us here going "You know what .... it isn't worth being part of the UK if you keep being our reps"... well apart from the proper trumpy loyalists obviously. But.... like Corbyn... the republicans are silent .... they 1) don't want a strengthened republic because the hate it. (It's not the version they want 2) they hate the EU.... because they come from the same stock as Corbyn. From an England perspective .... what should be happening right now if the name meant anything.... is a Labour party saying.... being in the EU is the best thing the UK can do.... and if what we keep hearing is true that should mean a landslide election.... because loafs have changed their mind from the lemming run... Honestly? One you have Corbyn.... 2 I don't think the party is actually that sure enough have changed their minds....
no it doesn't. UK parliament only gets a simple majority vote. no power to amend the deal. qualified majority of eu council required. you said it was just eu parliament. it's not.
