Motion F: Public Vote To Prevent No Deal

[mushroom25]

one of the options to be voted on - assuming it gets picked.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47767627
//public to vote on the future of Brexit, but in this case it would only happen if the UK was otherwise going to leave the EU without a deal.//

can anyone explain this to me? a vote to be triggered if "no deal" likely - but any such vote would take 6 months to set up (even assuming parliament could agree on the wording of the question), requiring a 6m exit delay. wouldn't any such exit delay be better exercised by finding a deal, if that's indeed what parliament wants?

[jno]

nothing to stop both processes going on simultaneously?

[Old_Geezer]

Since no-deal can be immediate, sure, do it simultaneously, and get the result after we've gone.

[ToraToraTora]

wont make any difference unless that prevent the default, we drop out on the 12th unless they do something. To do this they'd have to get the EU to extend beyond May 22nd and thus we'd have to take part in the EU elections. They'd have to set up a referendum with some sort of meaningful choice. Simply voting against no deal does not prevent no deal.

[ToraToraTora]

hang on this is another April fools gag isn't it?

[mushroom25]

unless the House of Commons are in on the gag, sadly it isn't.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/ob190401.htm

….and scroll to about halfway down.

[Khandro]

All of this - according to a legal challenge- is illegal anyway; the UK has already left on Friday night.

[Khandro]

[ichkeria]

I don’t fully understand this one either: there already is a motion to hold a referendum on any deal.

[ichkeria]

But voting against “no deal” would prevent it of course.

[ToraToraTora]

ich, how? voting against wont prevent no deal, anymore than voting against gravity will stop things falling, you need to have something in it's place.

[youngmafbog]

I cant see the EU granting an extension that would allow the UK to vote in MEP's. There would be too much risk of anti EU MEP's being elected and disrupting them.

All of these votes in the HoC are just posturing.

[ToraToraTora]

...posturing and pointless.

[Kromovaracun]

I forget which one, but one of the suggestions (I am not sure how to refer to them) being voted on is to replace no-deal as legal default with revocation of A50.

[ToraToraTora]

that need a repeal of the 2018 act kromo. SI is fine for altering the departure date but you cannot change the fundemental act that way.

[ichkeria]

Voting against it in a referendum would kill it.

[ichkeria]

Yes kromo there is a “motion” as they seem to be called now, to have a cote on “no deal” or “revoke” in parliament if no other option emerges. That’s the one would cause the Tory party to implode :-)
Sponsored by an SNP member.

[New Judge]

As I said last week, MPs have a clear choice and all this "indicative voting" is just malarky to get themselves on the telly .

Parliament does not want Mrs May's deal. The EU will not alter it so that effectively kicks it into touch. I doubt very much the EU will agree an extension - they do not want us to participate in their elections. If they do the extension will be lengthy and the conditions will be onerous (mind you, that doesn't mean the idea will be rejected, but I doubt it will succeed).

That leaves MPs either to go with No Deal which they will not countenance, or Withdraw A50. I know where my money would go if I was forced to bet.

[ichkeria]

I can’t see any motion sponsored by the SNP getting many votes. I may be wrong.
I actually agree that it should be Deal No Deal or Revoke. The rest is well intentioned but ultimately a fudge for the sake of trying to get an agreement.
I’d love to think Motion E (confirmatory referendum) would get through and there was a referendum on the deal which I think would then get passed in parliament later in the week. It got most votes last time but there weren’t many abstentions for later harvesting.

[mushroom25]

//I’d love to think Motion E (confirmatory referendum) would get through and there was a referendum on the deal which I think would then get passed in parliament later in the week.//

yeh but that would require the EU to extend to the end of the year - a referendum requires at least 22 weeks to set up, assuming that parliament can agree the wording of the question.

[jim360]

Thanks for the video, Khandro -- an interesting case, but I don't think it stands up. I agree certainly that the government cannot, and should not, try to revoke Article 50 without primary legislation. But I think the EU (Withdrawal) Act 2018 gives, implicitly and explicitly, the permission for the UK government to agree an extension with the EU, provided it was then laid before the House as a Statutory Instrument, and voted on. This was done, and agreed by Parliament.