Bercow - a chance to go down in history

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:36 am

When he selects the amendments if he lets the Government do its job. Or will he side with those determined to overturn/stop a proper Brexit?

It is now pretty obvious that the ERG and DUP are likely to back the Brady amendment re the backstop. If so and only a handful of tory remainers don't, then the HOC could well support a way forward to put to the EU.

Obviously the Speaker should choose the Brady amendment first because it builds on the Government's deal. The Cooper amendment seeks to undermine the Government and would mean that the EU would just wait until 26 Feb before seriously negotiating any further and thus waste further valuable time.

If the Brady amendment is approved it would put pressure on the EU to start being reasonable ( to hold all the cards in the trade discussions is clearly not). However, if he chooses the Cooper or similar amendments first then Bercow would imo be going way beyond his role.

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:38 am

so what does he do? toss a coin? what is the precedent for this?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:45 am

They’re not at odds, it depends how many he calls. But the Brady amendment isn’t likely to get any agreement from the EU. The backstop is there to stop a hard border in Ireland if we fail to negotiate a trade deal during the transition period. The EU are unlikely to agree that a hard border is fine if those trade negotiations haven’t concluded 12 months later.

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:46 am

Any sensible neutral intelligent person would obviously favour Coopers amendment over the Brady bunch so if Bercow continues to act in the truly courageous manor he has done throughout this Brexit fiasco I can't see the Brady bunch getting a look-in and quite rightly so

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:48 am

He should let the Government do it's job. Anything else is out of order.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:49 am

Hi Summit, I'll just leave this article from the Times for your perusal

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/stat ... 0751001600" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BurnleyPaul · Post by **BurnleyPaul** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:49 am

If he doesn’t choose the Brady amendment then there’s strong suggestions that there will be a mass walkout from the chamber. The speaker will have lost the respect of the members and be unable to stay in post therefore.

More than that the speaker will have derailed a democratically elected executive’s attempts at passing legislation which will affect the next 20+ years of this country’s future...its fairly obvious what Parliament doesn’t want but so far the Brady amendment (which is backed by enough people to convince most that its approved of by the government) is the only way forward which might command a majority in the Commons.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:50 am

martin_p wrote:They’re not at odds, it depends how many he calls. But the Brady amendment isn’t likely to get any agreement from the EU. The backstop is there to stop a hard border in Ireland if we fail to negotiate a trade deal during the transition period. The EU are unlikely to agree that a hard border is fine if those trade negotiations haven’t concluded 12 months later.

Sorry wrong amendment. Brady’s is the one that replaces the backstop by some unspecified ‘alternative arrangement to avoid a hard border’, which is pretty meaningless to be honest. Typical ERG really, an ‘idea’ without any substance.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:51 am

The argument that Bercow has to bear in mind is which will bring us forward more.

The porblem with the Brady one is that it relies on the EU folding on the backstop.

Unless the EU drops its demand for the backstop (guess what folks, its not going to), then all this is is wasting more time we haven't got.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:54 am

summitclaret wrote:He should let the Government do it's job. Anything else is out of order.

The government want the WA accepted as is.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:56 am

And the amendment assumes that in less than two months someone will magic up a new idea that hasn’t been rejected during the last two years of negotiation.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:01 am

Loving the idea that a mass walk out because they don't get their own way of wasting yet more time is actually going to be better for democracy than debating or deciding on amendments that actually try to deal with reality.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:19 am

So we should abandon having a level playing field in the trade discussions without trying to get one?

The fact is this country has not agreed a deal with the EU yet as the Government needs HOC consent. Just like the EP needs to consent rather than the EC.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:21 am

martin_p wrote:The government want the WA accepted as is.

Well it won't get that and it knows it.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:23 am

summitclaret wrote:So we should abandon having a level playing field in the trade discussions without trying to get one?

The fact is this country has not agreed a deal with the EU yet as the Government needs HOC consent. Just like the EP needs to consent rather than the EC.

What do you think they’ve been talking about for the last two years? After all the negotiation the PM has said this is the best deal she could get. Without some movement on red lines the EU has said that’s the end of negotiations as far as the Withdrawal Agreement is concerned.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:27 am

As I predicted in november.

His role has been pivotal and is going to be again.

Mystic McCartney was right...

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:29 am

You are still miles behind Lancaster "Cassandra" Claret though

BurnleyPaul · Post by **BurnleyPaul** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:31 am

The point of these a,endments isn’t to get a deal which is EU friendly; its to figure out what Parliament will vote for!

That then gives May a mandate to go back to the EU and negotiate with. If the EU wants a deal then they know that they have to bend a bit and actually offer something which the British Parliament would accept.

As for Brady’s amendment being light on details- it has to be. We need maximum wiggle room right now. Basically though it is David Davis’ “maximum facilitation” idea about which the EU said was unworkable but which it has been making suspiciously similar sounding comments over the last few days....

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:36 am

Where abouts?

Mala591 · Post by **Mala591** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:37 am

martin_p wrote:What do you think they’ve been talking about for the last two years? After all the negotiation the PM has said this is the best deal she could get. Without some movement on red lines the EU has said that’s the end of negotiations as far as the Withdrawal Agreement is concerned.

BUT, if it isn't passed by parliament then it is a 'dead document' and we will leave on no deal. No reason why a legally binding addendum can't be added to the Withdrawal Agreement which specifies a backstop expiry date in the case of irretrievable breakdown in trade negotiations. It isn't really rocket science is it?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:38 am

BurnleyPaul wrote:The point of these a,endments isn’t to get a deal which is EU friendly; its to figure out what Parliament will vote for!

That then gives May a mandate to go back to the EU and negotiate with. If the EU wants a deal then they know that they have to bend a bit and actually offer something which the British Parliament would accept.

As for Brady’s amendment being light on details- it has to be. We need maximum wiggle room right now. Basically though it is David Davis’ “maximum facilitation” idea about which the EU said was unworkable but which it has been making suspiciously similar sounding comments over the last few days....

But again, we had ‘wiggle room’ for two years and didn’t come up with anything better! ‘Light on detail’ is absolutely useless two months from Brexit Day. We need absolute clarity on exactly what parliament would accept if there’s to be any chance of the EU bending (which seems unlikely anyway). Otherwise we’re in the position where even if May manages to negotiate something different it might come back to parliament and be defeated again as we don’t know what they might or might not agree to.

One of the main reasons we’re in the mess we are is that the EU has consistently asked the U.K. government what exactly it wants and the answer has always been ‘mmmm, not sure, what have you got on offer?’

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:40 am

Mala591 wrote:BUT, if it isn't passed by parliament then it is a 'dead document' and we will leave on no deal. No reason why a legally binding addendum can't be added to the Withdrawal Agreement which specifies a backstop expiry date in the case of irretrievable breakdown in trade negotiations. It isn't really rocket science is it?

But that would create a hard border in Ireland which is what the backstop is there to prevent! The EU won’t agree to something on the backstop that undermines its very reason for being. That really isn’t rocket science!

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:50 am

Worth mentioning as well that is the ERG et al really believed in the tech that would mean frictionless trade without a hard border, then they wouldn't mind about the backstop.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:53 am

martin_p wrote:But again, we had ‘wiggle room’ for two years and didn’t come up with anything better! ‘Light on detail’ is absolutely useless two months from Brexit Day. We need absolute clarity on exactly what parliament would accept if there’s to be any chance of the EU bending (which seems unlikely anyway). Otherwise we’re in the position where even if May manages to negotiate something different it might come back to parliament and be defeated again as we don’t know what they might or might not agree to.

One of the main reasons we’re in the mess we are is that the EU has consistently asked the U.K. government what exactly it wants and the answer has always been ‘mmmm, not sure, what have you got on offer?’

Your last sentence nails the point,but how can the government tell the EU what the UK wants if the cabinet can't even come to a consensus,these votes should have happened in the autumn at the latest,then if the WA was voted down at least there would have been a reasonable time period to negotiate an alternative,May still persists in saying it's my way or no way as many people have commented she doesn't listen,of course there is an obvious solution to the Irish border issue and that's to remain in some form of customs union.this would be the commonsense option,but the rabid brexitters won't accept this.

Mala591 · Post by **Mala591** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:55 am

The EU have only TWO choices:

1. Accept addendum to the withdrawal agreement
2. No deal Brexit with a hard border at one second past midnight on March 30th

The ball will soon be in their court and they will need to make the decision however difficult it might be for them.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:56 am

There's no guarantee that Bercow will act on advice from the Parliamentary Clerks, but I would imagine that they would not be very enthusiastic about this amendment, because it simply puts the Parliamentary Brexit timetable even further back. It prevents Parliament finding a solution and hands the initiative back to the EU, who will have no option but to send it back to the UK parliament, because they can't sign off a Withdrawal Agreement that could lead to a breach of the Belfast Agreement. (Like it and agree with it or not: backstop is there to protect this).
I suspect the clerks will not want to see any further delays.
Brexiteers should also be worried about wasting more time, since if we run out of time, there are no adequate preparations for "no deal" and therefore no Parliamentary majority for it.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:57 am

The draft political agreement is deliberately vague and leaves open Norway and canada type type deals for discussions after we leave. That IS the compromise for now. If there is an unlimited backstop then Canada would never happen and the EU win and we dont get a proper Brexit imo. Norway is not worth giving up what we have for, but canada is.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:59 am

The EU have only TWO choices:

1. Accept addendum to the withdrawal agreement
2. No deal Brexit with a hard border at one second past midnight on March 30th

The ball will soon be in their court and they will need to make the decision however difficult it might be for them.

Not at all, there is scope for trying to come up with a solution, but its pretty crucial that the PM understands that hoping for give on the backstop isn' the way to do it.

And it hurts us more than it hurts them. You have to keep that in mind.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:59 am

Mala591 wrote:The EU have only TWO choices:

1. Accept addendum to the withdrawal agreement
2. No deal Brexit with a hard border at one second past midnight on March 30th
.

Except the firmest of May's red lines is NO hard border and upholding the Belfast Agreement, and they know this.

DocFoster · Post by **DocFoster** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 11:25 am

Anyone who believes the backstop is to prevent a Hard border is fooling themselves. It's the EU's lever in all future trade talks.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... n-brussels" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This article refers to Macron using it to get a fishing deal. They can and will use it for any and all future negotiations and that's why it needs to go.

"As the 27 EU heads of state and government took a decisive step towards sealing the terms of Britain’s split from Brussels after 45 years of membership, the French president laid down his red lines in the talks over the future relationship.
Macron said the EU’s demands on fisheries needed swift resolution after 29 March 2019 or the talks on a wider trade deal would fail leaving the UK in the “backstop” customs union envisioned in the withdrawal agreement."

Could it be made any clearer?

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 11:34 am

No it could not be clearer. It is so important that i would rather not leave atm than be tied to the EU like that.

We have to try and get a limit to the backstop. If the HOC allow May to do that and the EU wont play ball, then I'd be pretty sure leave would increase its majority in any 2nd referendum.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 11:38 am

Could I make it even clearer

The EU will not negotiate the backstop, and its **** all to do with fish.

Even a basic knowledge of the subject would tell you that. But you are not interested in anything that challenges the dream brexit scenario you've had in your heads for god knows how long.

We are going to crash out with a "No Deal", and it will be people like me and you who take the brunt of it.

NOT the people who are telling you its nothing to worry about.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 11:45 am

This is the sort of stuff you are listening to, and seeing on your tv screen.

This is two minutes of made up stuff designed fully for you to swallow wholesale without worrying about the actual details.

https://twitter.com/RidgeOnSunday/statu ... 1301272577" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

She's treating you all like idiots. Don't fall for it.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 11:46 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:
We are going to crash out with a "No Deal", and it will be people like me and you who take the brunt of it.

And if the last 2 Question times are anything to go by ( the BBC says the audience is representative of the nation) a WTO brexit would be just fine by the majority of people , who are increasingly saying , "We voted to Leave, just bloody get on with it"

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 11:50 am

I rest my case Ringo.

And if our democratic decisions are based on who shouts the most and the loudest, then we are in real trouble

(we did not vote in 2016 for No Deal. You all know this.)

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 11:50 am

The reality is that if she can't get DUP support its the end of her government. The backstop is a tool to keep the EU in charge and Ireland will getting an increased subsidy if it does as it been told.

Maybe we need to bribe them as well.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 11:50 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:And if the last 2 Question times are anything to go by ( the BBC says the audience is representative of the nation) a WTO brexit would be just fine by the majority of people , who are increasingly saying , "We voted to Leave, just bloody get on with it"

Yes, let's just scrap our sovereignty and centuries of Parliamentary democracy and from now on determine our future based on who shouts loudest on a TV show.
Ringo you often make good points, (even when we happen to disagree), but at times you leave yourself wide-open to your critics.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 12:23 pm

James O'Brien nails it again

"For the millionth time: the people claiming that the issue of the British border in Ireland is easy to resolve are *exactly the same people* objecting furiously to the insistence that things stay as they are until that solution is delivered."

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 12:35 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Could I make it even clearer

The EU will not negotiate the backstop, and its **** all to do with fish.

Even a basic knowledge of the subject would tell you that. But you are not interested in anything that challenges the dream brexit scenario you've had in your heads for god knows how long.

We are going to crash out with a "No Deal", and it will be people like me and you who take the brunt of it.

NOT the people who are telling you its nothing to worry about.

A famous saying is if someone suggests something odd you say "and whats that got to do with the price of fish"....

Well in these pages we have found something "thats got to do with the price of fish"....

Oh dontcha just love these ****ing Brexit debates

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 12:38 pm

People were taking the **** two years ago about fish and blue passports being the only benefits.

We are going around in circles in which reality and evidence crashes against.......well, belief and some very, very, very strongly held opinions based on nothing that I'd base anything at all on.

Right_winger · Post by **Right_winger** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 12:52 pm

The talk of a hard border is coming from the EU. They clearly want to hold all the ace cards in negotiations and the backstop is a mechanism for this. If we enter the backstop we are bent over a barrel, the thought of the EU acting in good faith is a mere fantasy.

Clearly it’s all double standards anyway as the Cyprus situation clearly demonstrates.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 1:09 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:As I predicted in november.

His role has been pivotal and is going to be again.

Mystic McCartney was right...

I must have missed that second referendum that Bercow forced.

Spike · Post by **Spike** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 1:14 pm

if its the Robbie Brady agreement then it will be fragile

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 1:18 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Yes, let's just scrap our sovereignty and centuries of Parliamentary democracy and from now on determine our future based on who shouts loudest on a TV show.
Ringo you often make good points, (even when we happen to disagree), but at times you leave yourself wide-open to your critics.

I stand by my claim that the majority of people just want it to happen and get it over with.

Chobulous · Post by **Chobulous** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 1:21 pm

aggi wrote:I must have missed that second referendum that Bercow forced.

I think the key part of Ringo's point is "His role has been pivotal and is going to be again.".

Something else you obviously missed.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 1:24 pm

The votes of the MPs will be more pivotal one would think.

Is there are chance that Bercow will accept all the amendments? or even none of them?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 1:25 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:I stand by my claim that the majority of people just want it to happen and get it over with.

None of the polling that doesn’t involve people shouting in a tv studio shows majority support for a no deal Brexit.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 1:26 pm

Chobulous wrote:I think the key part of Ringo's point is "His role has been pivotal and is going to be again.".

Something else you obviously missed.

Ringo spent a long time repeatedly stating that Bercow was able to force a second referendum which, as we all know, wasn't the case.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 1:27 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:The votes of the MPs will be more pivotal one would think.

Is there are chance that Bercow will accept all the amendments? or even none of them?

There’s 16 amendments tabled, with the prospect of more today. Opinion is that he’ll allow five or six.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Mon Jan 28, 2019 1:30 pm

aggi wrote:I must have missed that second referendum that Bercow forced.

I didn't say that. And you know it.

I said that margaret Becket and Emily Thornbury had openly admitted he had to be kept in place in order to "stop Brexit " because "bad behaviour is trumped by brexit" following a QC lead independent parliamentary inquiry into bullying and inappropriate behaviour in Westminster, which called for a root and branch reform and change in culture. Which was understood to be a call for Bercow to lose his job. But saw so called feminists come running to defend him, and through their principles out of the window cos of the "pivotal role" he would play. Has played, and will play.

My prediction was bang on.