Regret it Brexit Part 2

...for the simply reason, that both Government and Opposition stood in the General Election on a Pro Brexit platform written into their mandates.

That's as maybe, Ally. I think it is a trifle disingenuous to suggest that every voter carefully studied the party manifestos and voted on the strength of them, but that's another debate altogether.

However, since the 2017 GE we have had the publication (reluctantly conceded by the government when forced to publish them) of the impact assessments which clearly showed that any variety of Brexit will damage the UK's economy. AS MPs have a duty to consider the good of the country as a whole they have every right to disregard the manifesto and put the interests of the country (i.e the UK) first when considering legislation.

To persist in a course of action despite serious warnings that it will inevitably lead to a dangerous situation seems to me to be highly irresponsible.

Of course, it might be that the threat of civil unrest should Brexit not happen is playing some part in influencing MPs but to give in to such threats is not only cowardly but also completely inimical to our system of government. That truly would be opening the gates to mob rule... I'm not terribly sure that people would like the experience...

Mostlyharmles. Thanks I know what your talking about, although I think it is just a discussion on an internal Conservative party amendment. But as you say, it will be a deal to ensure more support during this Lords amendment debate and votes.

Fennel you can also watch it on TV BBC Parliament channel.Which is what I have been doing all afternoon.

Can't agree with you Maizie on "party before Country", for the simply reason, that both Government and Opposition stood in the General Election on a Pro Brexit platform written into their mandates. Therefore all MP's who stood on that mandate which would be all of them, accepted that that is what they promised the electorate that voted for them. Therefore as far as I am concerned any issues of 'conscience' should have been at that stage, they should simply not have stood for re-election or election if they did not intend to uphold the promises in their party manifesto's.
Crisis of conscience now, is just not acceptable, they deceived their electorate if they now have decided not to support Brexit on that pretext. Shameful, hypocrisy.
Well done those many MP's who voted remain who then stood for re-election or election on a Pro Brexit party mandate and are now upholding that promise. Honourable and trustworthy MP's.

You can watch the current proceedings live on here:
www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/live/bbcparliament

allyg the New Government Amendment has been promised for next week.

Robert Peston:

Theresa May has won today's Brexit battle but may have lost the war.

What do I mean?

We have confirmation that MPs will (narrowly) reject the Lords' amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill, that would give parliament the power to force the PM back into negotiations with Brussels if MPs and Lords reject whatever Brexit deal she ultimately negotiates (phew - that was a mouthful).

But the price she is paying for that victory, the price she is paying to Tory Remainer rebels led by Dominic Grieve, is that she has agreed to redraft the Bill, when it returns to the Lords, to take account of the substance of Grieve's own latterly drafted amendent to the bill.

The wheeler-dealing happened in fraught and dramatic negotiations involving Grieve, the chief whip Smith and the solicitor general Buckland, some hugger mugger in corridors, some (unusually) on the floor of the Commons.

May is conceding

1) that within seven days of May agreeing a Brexit deal, a motion to approve said deal must go to the Commons

2) that if there is no Brexit deal agreed by 30 November this year, the government must seek approval for its next course of action from MPs,

and 3) May will consider how to capture Grieve's other demand that MPs and Lords must be able to instruct the government on how to proceed should there be no Brexit deal by 15 Feb 2019.

Arguably this transfers considerable power to MPs over the shape of a future Brexit deal. And it probably means that a no-deal Brexit is no longer any kind of realistic prospect.

It means that if May really believes she was able to put negotiating pressure on the rest of the EU by threatening to Brexit without a deal, she has lost that leverage.

In other words, one of her favourite catchphrases - that no deal is better than a bad deal - is dead. And that will be official in just a few days, when the bill returns to the Lords

The Conservative Party lost seats at the General Election but gained share of vote. In fact their share of vote was greater than it had been since 1980's

Mostly, which amendment is that?

I disagree allyg
It is a very confusing system, but the Government has just agreed on a new amendment (in lieu of Amendment 19) which ensures that there WILL BE A MEANINGFUL VOTE. This new offer from May was to bring the Tory rebels back on board.

Robert Peston, ITV’s political editor, has put a good post about the government concession on his Facebook page. Here is an extract.

Arguably this transfers considerable power to MPs over the shape of a future Brexit deal. And it probably means that a no-deal Brexit is no longer any kind of realistic prospect.

It means that if May really believes she was able to put negotiating pressure on the rest of the EU by threatening to Brexit without a deal, she has lost that leverage.

In other words, one of her favourite catchphrases - that no deal is better than a bad deal - is dead. And that will be official in just a few days, when the bill returns to the Lords

In a parliamentary democracy, MPs are elected in proportion to the votes their party gets in an election.

Then when they are elected they vote in parliament in accordance with their true beliefs about what is best for the country.

Most MP's do not sincerely believe that leaving the EU will be good for our country. If they had been elected by PR, that would be an even greater majority.

Who failed? If brexit actually has to happen then we will certainly know who failed - the culprits who failed our country, failed our children and grandchildren and did not follow their consciences and those who believed their lies.

Varian. The system doesn't do what you want so it becomes undemocratic. All I can say is I hope you are never in a position of power.

Varian, it looks like they failed!

In the 2017 General Election the Conservatives won 42.4% of the vote and the DUP 0.9% of the vote - yet this undemocratic FPTP system of elections resulted in a combined majority for these two parties.

Those Conservatives elected under this undemocratic system, even though they know that their duty is to act in the best interests of their constituents and the country, are put under enormous pressure by their party whips to vote for this minority government. It is about time that we had electoral reform so we could become a genuine democracy.

Most MP's have just voted to leave the EU with or without a deal, by rejecting the Lords amendment 19.

This country voted in two elections, one an advisory one to leave the EU and another General Election when the two main party's now in Government and Oppositions stood on a pro Brexit mandate.

So twice by majority the country made it known that we are to Brexit.

It can be wrapped up anyway people wish, that is the reality, and it looks now that that is going to happen deal or no deal.

MP's will not have a final say (vote) to stop the UK leaving the EU without a deal. So hard brexit is possible now as far as I see it.

EU Withdrawell bill. "Lords amendment 19 on "meaningful vote" gives MP's the power to stop the UK from leaving the EU without a deal."

The Aye's have it!

The “majority of the country” did not vote for Brexit btw.

Tom Brake (Libdem MP) said just now in Parliament that the ONLY reason for Brexit was “the will of the people”. No other valid reason exists. So why not check the “will of the people” in a new People’s vote?
If Brexiteers are so confident in the will.... then another vote would prove them right.
What is there to lose?

The 'good of the country', smileless, by every rational assessment, would be best served by remaining in the EU. Most MPs know that. The tragedy is that a large number are putting party before country.

A plebiscite also is supposed to follow clear rules which the EU one failed on all fronts.

Definition of plebiscite 'The direct vote of all members of an electorate on an important question eg. a change in the constitution.'

Yes Welshwife I wish as much effort that's going into derail Brexit would go into making it a success. If only our MP's were behaving "for the good of the country and not for party or personal gain".

I don’t think a lot of people understand properly what a Parliamentary democracy is and how people such as MPs are supposed to behave for the good of the country and not for party or personal gain.