The Guardian reports Theresa May suffers Commons defeat over Brexit plan B.
Theresa May will be obliged to present MPs with a new Brexit plan within three days if her current proposal is voted down next week, after a procedural amendment to the plan’s progress through the Commons was passed amid chaotic scenes.
The amendment to the business motion for the plan, drawn up by the Conservative former attorney general Dominic Grieve, gives May the deadline to put forward new plans if she loses the vote, as many expect, next Tuesday.
The amendment was passed by 308 votes to 297 following stormy scenes in which a series of Conservative MPs castigated the Speaker, John Bercow, for allowing the amendment.
The Financial Times has an interesting series of video clips on what you need to know about the delayed ‘meaningful vote’
May’s Plan Shattered
May’s plan all along was to run down the clock with a binary choice of her deal or no deal.
The vote changes that.
Proceedurally, Bercow did not have to allow that vote and many Tories were upset that he allowed the vote.
Walls Closing In
For Theresa May, still at odds with Parliament, the Brexit Walls Are Closing In.
Prime Minister Theresa May often puts off critical decisions over Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union, or Brexit, hoping to wear down opponents through doggedness and determination. But her room to maneuver is rapidly shrinking.
The problem is that Mrs. May does not appear to have a Plan B, except to continue to talk to the European Union and hope that she can cajole more lawmakers to support Plan A.
In desperation, Mrs. May seems to be reaching out to pro-Brexit lawmakers with the opposition Labour Party by dropping hints that the government might accept amendments to her Brexit plan that would protect workers’ rights and the environment. She also made rare calls to two union bosses, though to no avail. And most Labour lawmakers would require a much bigger shift of policy to consider supporting the government, if they are persuadable at all.
Pritchard Gets it Wrong
Telegraph writer Ambrose Evans-Pritchard says a no-deal Brexit is off the table.
That strikes me as silly, because a no-deal Brexit is the default option.
Hard Math
Under Article 50, the UK leaves the EU, by law, on March 29. The only choices are revocation, May’s EU agreement, no-deal.
Talk of Norway, Canada, and even a second referendum do not change the hard math.
And May’s deal is universally opposed.
No Majority for Anything
Guess what? If no other option gets majority support, then a no-deal Brexit wins.
And bear in mind that any plan B option must be approved by the EU.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
Wow, Mish, you are usually smarter than this, but you have a big blind spot on the Brexit process. In the end, the goal of May and a majority of Parliament is a revocation of the Article 50 notice. This became clear to me the moment May was chosen to be PM. However, the issue has to be carefully threaded so as not to decimate the Tory Party. To that end, May, with the cooperation of the EU, deliberately put together a plan that could not win the support of a majority of Parliament nor a majority of the electorate. This was done so that a second referendum could be sold to the public as a necessary step to “fix” the mess created by May.
Bercow did as he was ordered to do by May and the Remain faction in Parliament, which includes, probably, a majority of even the Tories. The goal is get a referendum that includes 3 choices, not 2- Remain, May Plan Brexit, or No-Deal Brexit. I think they are even audacious enough to not allow a conditional alternate vote, but even if they do, having two Brexit possibles vs Remain will assuredly guarantee Remain wins in either scenario.
If they do that then Conservatives will be destroyed as a party so I would think that pure self preservation instinct from most of the Tories would make them avoid another Brexit referendum.
I think the plan was to get May’s horrible deal accepted and then stay as a non-voting member of EU forever.
In May’s deal there would be NO real Brexit (Brexit-in-name-only) but instead there would be years of additional negotiation about what the new relationship with EU would be like but EU would have final say on when the deal would be acceptable for EU and UK could leave completely but of course it would NEVER be acceptable for EU so UK would stay as non-voting member of EU and Tories could just say “but EU will not allow us to leave” and everyone would just blame May (who would have resigned by then) and UK would stay as a non-voting member in name out of EU but practically a vassal state for EU.
Other option is that May and the bureaucrats are really dumb and had no clue what they were doing and were in an elite bubble where nobody asked difficult questions and they were genuinely surprised how bad the deal they made actually was…
“And May’s deal is universally opposed.”
The term that comes to my mind when i think of May’s deal, is Wrecks-It. It just feels as if it is a back door attempt to over rule what the British people voted for.
Since politicians everywhere are the slimiest creatures, I for one would not put anything beyond them. Ironically it will be sold as being done for us as the alternative would have been worse!
NO deal is the best deal since under NO deal:
1.
There is NO uncertainty since trade will be under WTO rules.
Under May’s deal there would be several years of negotiations for the final deal.
2.
UK will get out of EU.
Under May’s deal UK would be tied to EU until EU decides that they have given EU enough and let’s UK leave fully.
3.
Britain will save 40 billion.
Under May’s deal Britain would have paid 40 billion to EU.
4.
UK can make it’s own trade deals straight away.
Under May’s deal UK would have been tied to EU until EU says OK you can go and during this time UK could not have made their own trade deals.
5.
UK gets control of it’s fishing waters.
Under May’s deal UK was supposed to get control of it’s fishing waters but Macron already stated that France wants access to UK fishing waters otherwise France will not agree to UK leaving EU permanently from negotiation prison (where EU would have final say when UK can go) where May’s deal would have put UK.
6.
There will be NO hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland since both UK and Ireland have already promised there will be NO hard border.
May’s deal was based on the faulty and incompetent assumption that there will be a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland unless UK agrees to a backstop where EU could have kept UK or at least Northern Ireland tied to EU indefinitely even after another several years of negotiation-prison to reach the permanent deal that would follow May’s deal Brexit.
7.
UK can decide their own laws and standards immediately so they can lower the amount of bureaucracy UK business has to have immediately and also they can allow UK companies to produce products for UK market with lighter regulations giving UK business a price and productivity advantage over EU products in UK internal market and UK can still allow products made to EU specifications enter the UK market.
Under May’s deal UK would have been tied to EU laws and directives.
8.
UK can immediately drop the amount of bureaucracy UK farmers are required to complete making their life easier and making UK farm products more competitive in the internal UK market.
EU has massive regulations for farms.
UK can also continue paying UK farmers the current level of subsidies since UK was a NET-payer to EU budget and UK will save billions and billions a year in EU costs even if they continue to pay UK farmers EU level of subsidies.
9.
UK will get massive tax revenues from IT/Tech/Hosting/Internet etc. products provided by UK firms that UK currently collects as VAT and gives to those EU countries where their clients are based.
10.
UK will be free to import products where ever they want.
Under EU rules UK has been tied to quotas of imports decided by EU.
11.
Ireland is also out of the free movement Schengen treaty like UK so there will be no massive movement of migrants to UK either directly or through Ireland.
12.
France used to allow migrants camp out in Calais and try to hide in trucks coming to UK but France seems to have realized that France by allowing migrants to try to reach UK is actually attracting lots of migrants to France that end-up staying in France when they do NOT get to UK so France has tightened policies and tries to stop migrants coming to France in the first place by making it harder to reach UK.
Hundreds of migrants have tried to get to UK through English Channel by boat recently and France has been arresting them on France’s side and deporting them and France’s coast guard is stopping some of the boats.
Many have got through to UK but this lead to UK interior minister saying for the first time publicly that these are FAKE-refugees since France is a SAFE country so it is clear they are NOT fleeing anything they are just trying to get to UK to get welfare benefits.
This was a common sense statement but it was the first time UK Interior Minister stated that publicly.
Also since EU exports much more products to UK than UK exports to EU this means that:
A.
UK will earn lots of money from tariffs so UK can lower UK firms taxation with the amount that they have to pay in tariffs to export to EU and UK will still be left with billions in extra revenue to fund whatever government services they want or lower Value Added Tax lower than the EU specified VAT minimum.
(Yes, EU decides the minimum and maximum VAT tax rates that EU countries can charge)
B.
Since EU exports much more products to UK than the other way around France and Germany and Belgium and Netherlands etc. would be hurting their own economies if products would not move quickly to UK and from UK to EU so they are all incentivized to make sure there are no trade disruptions and there are no slowdown in the movement of products from UK to EU and from EU to UK.
In the Project Fear part 2 worst case scenarios Brits were scared with nightmarish claims that movement of products would slow to a crawl and UK fish and UK agricultural products would rot in customs and food brought from EU to UK would also rot in customs and there would be a food scarcity and product scarcity in UK unless May’s incompetent deal was agreed to.
This is clearly just Project Fear part 2 where EU supporters try to stop Brexit (and get either May’s incompetent deal accepted or get another Brexit vote called “People’s vote” that would reverse Brexit) with crazy claims that have no basis in fact just like in the original Project Fear Brits were blasted with propaganda to vote against Brexit and to stay in EU otherwise UK would fall of the map and there would be calamity after calamity and UK economy would crash and there would be huge unemployment etc. if Brits voted for Brexit.
Revocation. The Deep State will not be denied.
And….it’s gone.
Britian should get some true free trade agreements with Russia and America in place…like pronto
And a military commitment from the US is case Juncker wants to invade the UK.
Better yet, quit pretending politicians are useful for anything, including “trade deals.” Just leave each Briton to make up his own “trade deal,” with whomever he can. “Negotiations”, “deals” and the rest of it, rarely ever amount to more than makework for idle mediocrities. Whom nobody benefit from having around inserting themselves their grubby fists into value chains way above their braingrade.