BrExit?

[mustang]

kako su se farage i co poigrali, nasiljili narod za buduce haose, pitam se koliko su dosada zaradili. follow the money. sve je ovo sada cista budalastina i gubljenje vremena. 

[Max Morlock]

Da im iznajmimo Terazije za vešanje?

Sent from my SM-N950F

[vememah]

ITV-jev urednik Peston o mogućem raspletu:

 

Quote

 

MPs have one shot this week to avert a no-deal Brexit, say senior government members

 

PESTON'S POLITICS

As you know, I have been banging on about the probability that the UK will leave the EU without a deal on 12 April.

Having talked to very senior members of the government, and also well-placed sources in the EU, it has become clear to me that MPs have one shot to prevent that - and it will almost certainly be this week that MPs will either rise to the challenge or flunk it.

How so?

Well, the prime minister and the EU will be looking at the indicative votes that are due to take place on Tuesday and Wednesday - on Tuesday sponsored by the PM, on Wednesday under the backbench initiative of Sir Oliver Letwin - to see if a majority of MPs can demonstrate their support for a deliverable alternative to a no-deal Brexit.

If they don't, Theresa May's conclusion may well be full steam ahead to a no-deal Brexit, I am told - which will be music to the ears of perhaps a third of the Cabinet and Tory Party.

Before I flesh this out, here is a small sidebar: I would expect at least a couple of ministers to resign in the next 24 hours, to vote for Letwin's motion on Monday that would secure his day of indicative votes on Wednesday.

Given the way that the tectonic plates of politics are shifting and colliding, ministerial resignations represent no more than a modest earth tremor. The bigger earthquake is all about how and whether we leave the EU.

The important point when it comes to the indicative votes is that any plan to get through the Brexit roadblock must be supported by a majority of MPs and be consistent with the EU's red lines for it to be anything but an exercise in our elected representatives' vanity.

Let's take those in turn.

Ministers who are desperate to prevent a no-deal Brexit have been talking to Labour and Tory backbenchers, and are despondent that every senior backbencher is riding a different Brexit hobbyhorse.

"Some want a version of Norway's relationship with the EU, some want this Common Market 2.0 thing, others a referendum - and none seem prepared to compromise," complained one minister.

"And if come Thursday, after the indicative votes, there is no majority for any way forward, the PM will be able to say that her attack on parliament, which got her into so much trouble, will have been proved right - that MPs really can't say what they actually want."

At that point, according to another senior member of the government, MPs will be faced with a very simple choice: leaving without a deal on 12 April, which could well be what the PM signals as her preference, or revoking Article 50 and staying in the EU.

"That will be a full-scale crisis," the minister said.

But it's not plain sailing even if MPs do coalesce around a solution.

"They have to be honest and transparent about what that solution involves, or the PM will rightly reject it," said a source close to her.

What does he mean?

Well, if MPs were to back membership of the customs union and single market, but did not concede it would involve continuing to allow free movement of people to the UK and a prohibition on negotiating trade deals with countries outside the EU, then the PM would simply say MPs were asking for a unicorn - and she would tell them to hop off.

The result again would be a binary choice between leaving the EU without a deal or revoking Article 50.

So those cabinet ministers who see a no-deal Brexit as Kryptonite for the UK and their party - which is not the entire cabinet - are desperate that parliament's most senior MPs come together over the weekend and early next week to ensure that the indicative votes lead to a deliverable outcome.

"It is really important that MPs like Hilary Benn, Chris Bryant and Yvette Cooper [all of Labour] try and work with their equivalents in the Tory Party [MPs such as Letwin, Nicky Morgan, Justine Greening and Ken Clarke] to make sure the indicative votes vindicate the role of the Commons rather than underwriting the PM's attack," said a government source.

There are probably only two practical routes that could command a majority of MPs. They are some form of softish Brexit, which would involve infringing one or other of the PM's immigration and trade-deal-freedom red lines, or the Kyle/Wilson plan to put her own Brexit plan to a confirmatory referendum.

I understand, somewhat to my surprise, that a growing number of influential ministers are sympathetic to Kyle/Wilson's confirmatory referendum.

In fact, I am reliably told that as long ago as October, the Chancellor told the Prime Minister that her Brexit deal would probably be supported by the British people, even if it was rejected (as he expected) by MPs.

But if a majority of MPs decide to back a people's vote - which truthfully I think unlikely, but who can be sure? - the big question is whether the PM would agree to negotiate that with the EU.

Based on what she said on Wednesday, that she could not be PM if the UK is still in the EU on 30 June, which would be the case if there is a referendum, surely she would have to quit if MPs say they want the Kyle/Wilson gambit?

What is more, there are a half dozen members of the cabinet - and notably Penny Mordaunt, Chris Grayling, Andrea Leadsom and Liam Fox - who have made clear they would quit rather than authorise a so-called people's vote.

And of course Tory ERG Brexiters would go nuts if a referendum is the chosen answer.

At which point therefore the government could well collapse, leading to a general election.

But the EU have made it clear they would not force a no-deal Brexit on 12 April if the UK was holding either a general election, or a referendum or both.

There is one other rarely discussed alternative: MPs creating a temporary government of national unity under a caretaker prime minister. "It could come to that," said a minister, "though I think it's unlikely."

In other words, if MPs unite around single alternative to a no-deal Brexit this week, this at the very least delays a no-deal Brexit for many months - but it does not prevent weeks and weeks and weeks of turmoil and uncertainty.

Ain't we lucky.

PS: I have a second sidebar, about how and why the PM launched her attack on the irresponsibility of MPs on Wednesday night.

"She has been working round the clock and is totally exhausted," said one of her allies. "Somebody else wrote those words and put them in front of her. She did not know what she reading."

On this version of what happened, and you can believe it or not, her voice was hijacked by that faction in the government that wants a no-deal Brexit, and felt their dream was in sight when they persuaded the PM to rule out a long Brexit delay.

"Fortunately, within hours, the PM recognised her mistake and did her pivot back to a more consensual approach," said a minister.

"But it may be too late, because her intransigence has alienated too many colleagues and has made it impossible for her deal ever to pass."

 

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-23/mps-have-one-shot-this-week-to-avert-a-no-deal-brexit-say-senior-government-members/

Edited March 23, 2019 by vememah

[vememah]

A evo i šta se dešava kod laburista.

Quote

Corbyn’s cabinet set for another huge rift over Brexit

Commons votes will force Labour to decide between a soft Brexit or second referendum

Michael Savage and Toby Helm
Sat 23 Mar 2019 19.00 GMT

Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow cabinet is set to clash again over Brexit this week, with supporters of a second referendum concerned that Labour’s leadership will opt to facilitate a soft Brexit.

With senior Labour figures openly calling for another public vote at the anti-Brexit march in London yesterday, other influential MPs believe Corbyn’s inner circle is actually warming to a Norway-style Brexit that would see Britain leave the EU, but remain closely aligned to it.

Tensions between Labour and its pro-Remain activists are already high after the party released a tweet on Friday evening asking if supporters had any “big weekend plans” and called on them to go out leafleting for May’s local elections.

The party’s official position is to explore all possibilities to resolve the Brexit impasse, including a public vote if other avenues prove impossible. The position has allowed Labour to keep its options open amid widespread support for a second referendum among party members. However, a plan to hold a series of indicative Commons votes this week on possible Brexit options is set to force Labour to decide whether it can allow its MPs to back a soft Brexit.

A previous Commons vote over a Norway-style soft Brexit last year resulted in a huge row within Labour. Jeremy Corbyn told his MPs to abstain, but 75 MPs voted for the idea, while 15 voted against. Six quit their Labour roles as a result of the vote.

But several Labour sources believed the party leadership was now warming to a Norway-style Brexit, dubbed “Common Market 2.0”, which would see Britain remain inside a customs union with the EU and part of its single market. Customs union membership would stop Britain signing its own trade deals, while single market membership would force Britain to adhere to the EU’s free movement rules on immigration.

Corbyn had seemed to be edging to the idea of backing a “confirmatory referendum”, which would see May’s deal put to the people. That idea has been drawn up by Labour backbenchers Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson, and will be voted on when May puts her Brexit deal to a third vote in the Commons, expected this week.

That option is still the preference of some in Corbyn’s team, said to include shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer. Tom Watson, the party’s deputy leader, appeared at yesterday’s march for a second vote and said he would back May’s deal if she put it to a public vote, with an option to Remain. “When the deal fails this week we are going to face the prospect of a huge delay to the process – I don’t think the people that voted Leave want that and I don’t think people who voted Remain want that,” he said. “So I have an explicit message for Theresa May.

“I will support your deal going through parliament or a revised deal you can agree with my party. I will help you get it over the line to prevent a disastrous no deal exit. But I can only vote for a deal if you let the people have a vote on it too.”

The rally was also addressed by London mayor Sadiq Khan, who said it was “time to withdraw article 50”. Speaking from the stage in Parliament Square, he said he was “a proud European”.

“No matter how you voted in the referendum, no matter what political party you support, we can all agree that Brexit has been a complete and utter mess,” he said. “With days to go we’re in danger of falling off the cliff, which will have catastrophic consequences... it’s time to give us, the British people, a final say on Brexit.”

Writing in the Observer today, shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey said parliament should now “consider the other options – including our alternative plan, the Common Market 2.0 proposal, a customs union, and a public vote”.

“Labour’s starting point is our alternative plan based around a new customs union and a close alignment to the single market. It abides by the result of the referendum without wrecking our economy. And it will work for the whole country, not just those at the top,” she said.

“Unlike the prime minister, Labour is willing to be flexible to find a way through. But we will not vote for Theresa May’s terrible deal, and we’ll never countenance a disastrous no-deal crash.”

Some Labour MPs are also backing an amendment that would order May not to back a no-deal Brexit. It would give parliament the chance to block a no-deal outcome, a week before departure is set to take place.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/23/corbyns-cabinet-set-for-another-huge-rift-michael-savage-toby-helm

Edited March 23, 2019 by vememah

[Max Morlock]

Još manje od 15,000 pa (#1od)5 miliona potpisa.

Ovde je zanimljivo gledati kako uživo raste broj: Lineker [emoji12]

Sent from my SM-N950F

[jms_uk]

[adam]

evo resenja!  

 

Uri Geller promises to stop Brexit using telepathy 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/22/uri-geller-promises-to-stop-brexit-using-telepathy?CMP=fb_gu&fbclid=IwAR1C209VTs5ZkBT19DrqAEB66X_0nO9C0f9aseU3QOsRO4bGYhZWsOLukdU

 

 

dosta je interesantno da ovo deluje razumnije od premijerkinog ludjenja.  

[vememah]

Nastavlja se: 

 

Tereza Mej izgleda ide taktikom: ako moj dil ne prolazi, neće vala nijedan pošto nije u skladu s mojim izbornim programom (koji sam sama napisala u pola kampanje i na kojem nisam dobila većinu već je pravim s DUP-om), već ćemo na izbore. U tom smislu najavljeno je da će pokušati da aktivno spreči svoje poslanike da podrže Letvinov amandman koji predviđa da se glasa o svim mogućim ishodima.

 

Quote

 

The Government today discussed forcing a General Election if MPs try to seize control of Brexit and make it softer than Theresa May's deal.

Ministers including Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay are said to have raised the prospect at Cabinet this morning ahead of a Parliamentary votes this evening to wrestle control of the withdrawal process.

The Commons will tonight vote on a series of amendments to a Government motion that would pave the way to so-called indicative votes taking place on Wednesday.

These would allow MPs to show what sort of Brexit they wish to push through if a majority cannot be found for Mrs May's twice-defeated deal.

The talk of forcing a General Election come despite an Opinium poll from two months ago finding that only 12 per cent of Britons would welcome another one, just two years after the last resulted in a hung Parliament. 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6848113/We-call-election-MPs-force-soft-Brexit-claim-ministers.html

 

Letvinov amandman će izgleda biti usvojen, tvrdi Huff Post.

 

Quote

 

Following an emergency cabinet meeting, a senior government source said MPs led by Tory Sir Oliver Letwin “have the numbers” to pass their amendment, paving the way for indicative votes on Wednesday.

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/may-resigned-to-losing-control-of-commons-for-votes-on-brexit-alternatives_uk_5c98e20de4b01ebeef12409b

[hazard]

https://www.ft.com/content/5f3df8bc-4c03-11e9-bde6-79eaea5acb64

 

Quote

Opinion Brexit
The Brexit farce is about to turn to tragedy
Britain is paying for its ignorance of how the EU actually works
ROBERT COOPER

    Welcome to Disneyland. Leading Brexiter Jacob Rees-Mogg is playing Mickey Mouse as the sorcerer’s apprentice from Fantasia; Theresa May is the wicked witch from Snow White — though she is short on magic. Across the pond, an evil ogre known as Donald Trump is waiting to eat us all up.

 

It’s grim; but it’s a great learning experience. Has anyone learnt? Has former Brexit secretary David Davis worked out that his plan to leave the EU while retaining “the exact same benefits” as staying in the single market, was a little ambitious? Or that the Germans actually care more about the integrity of the EU than about selling Brits BMWs? Has Michael Gove finally noticed that we did not after all “hold all the cards” the day after we voted to leave? Has anyone worked out that frictionless trade is quite complicated, and that the dreary Brussels machinery does a good job for us?

 

We shouldn’t count on it. It is easier to blame others. Britain triggered Article 50 without having a clue what we wanted or how we were going to get it. The European Commission, by contrast, knew exactly what it was doing: the diplomats in Brussels are masters of negotiation. After all, they have been doing it for years — for us, and for the rest of the EU. Notice that they take direction from their political masters at the start, consult them as they go along, and return to them at the end. The commission is dealing with sovereign states. Our government might consider doing the same with its sovereign parliament.

 

Another lesson: the EU is bigger than Britain. If we leave without an agreement, that is a nuisance for the EU — about 10 per cent of their trade is with us. For us, they represent 49 per cent and no deal risks being a catastrophe. The idea that this is an important bargaining chip is ridiculous. One day — we cannot ignore our neighbours forever — we will be back at the table, helpless on our side, furious on theirs.

 

Why is the EU being so nasty? We thought we were friends. So we were: in the EU you do business with each other every day, no matter what. In the days when we were hardly speaking to the Germans about Iraq, we still worked together to stop other members cheating on milk quotas. You never break up completely. The EU is a system of compulsory friendships.

 

But, with apologies to Shakespeare, take that bond away, “untune that string, and hark, what discord follows”. When you choose to be an outsider, you are treated as one. The smallest insiders (Dublin in the case of Brexit) matter more than the biggest outsider (us). The systems we have helped build up over the years must be defended against outsiders seeking special privileges. There is no way of being half in and half out, no having cake and eating it. The dish turns out to be humble pie, anyway.

 

It is late to be learning lessons. Why did the UK not bring in those who learnt them long ago? John Major, Chris Patten and Jonathan Hill, for example. What foolishness to lose Ivan Rogers, who presumably resigned as the UK’s permanent representative to the EU because he told the truth. Why did the government not make use of John Kerr, who drafted Article 50 and Stephen Wall who wrote the history of Britain and the EU? Now a new volume is needed. The ignorance of Westminster about Europe is appalling — we have some good MEPs who could help, but they don’t have security passes for the House of Commons.

 

How remarkable that 27 sovereign states have worked so well together when the UK is so divided. Mrs May talks about delivering for the 17m who voted to Leave. What about the others? Wouldn’t the government be in a stronger position if it had built a bipartisan consensus?

 

There are two big lessons. First we are paying the price of our failure for years to explain the EU. What is it for? Security. It delivers good political relations among neighbours — the best guarantee of security you can get. We have benefited very directly from this. Being in the EU together meant that for the first time we worked with Dublin as equals. That, and the open border, enabled peace in Ireland. In Britain, no one noticed. The EU is a political project: the customs union and the single market are means to an end. Why did no one tell us?

 

The second lesson is that we are governed by the parties for the parties. The system would never get past a decent competition regulator. Most people know that it makes no difference how they vote. We are the oldest parliamentary democracy, and it shows.

 

Government by slogan does not work. Are we taking back control or handing it over to Brussels? By the time we find out, it will be too late. If the UK prime minister had a sense of humour, she would set up the committee of inquiry now, so it could take evidence in real time, as the tragedy unfolds.

The writer is a former diplomat for the UK and the EU
 

 

[jms_uk]

Cirkus se nastavlja

 

MPs vote to take control of Commons business in unprecedented move to try to find majority for any Brexit option

[Marvin (Paranoid Android)]

Baš zanimljivo ovo udaranje na sva zvona kako poslanici i parlament preuzimaju kontrolu, kad Mejova nije u zakonskoj obavezi da ih usliši, kao što je i već rekla da neće preuzeti bilo koji predlog koji nije njen.

[jms_uk]

Ako joj ostane dovoljno ministara da vlada




Sent from my iTelephone using Tapatalk

[Marvin (Paranoid Android)]

Na Newsnightu su Nick Watt, i ono važnije, sam Letwin, rekli da ako Parlament nađe jasnu većinu, a Mejova, kao što se da i očekivati, kaže "Jok, ne uzimam to", da Parlament može legalno da je natera na to sledeće srede, tako što će postaviti zakonodavni Parliament bill, ali ne mogu da nađem nigde na Bibisiju ili Gardijanu potvrdu toga crno na belo.

[jezovuk]

Jel ja dobro kontam da se tu ne zna tačno ko je glavni u kom slučaju (vlada vs parlament [vs kraljica])?

[vememah]

 

 

https://twitter.com/326Pols

Edited March 26, 2019 by vememah