The Last Days of Mrs May?

Bercow overruled the clerks and officers of the HofC's in order to allow the one amendment he agreed with, he didn't allows other amendments on the same basis.

The speaker is supposed to be impartial - Bercow is becoming a joke!!!

The vote that TM lost does not affect Brexit, it merely requires a motion to be tabled not even debated.

Theresa May suffered yet another Brexit defeat in the House of Commons, with MPs backing a rebel amendment forcing her to reveal her new plans within three days of a defeat in the meaningful vote.

I heard Mrs M on the TV yesterday and my heart sank. I realised how wonderful it had been over the Xmas and New Year not to hear her voice!

I deliberately posted an article from the Express which is even more brexit supporting than the Sun or the Daily Mail, but if you prefer, here's a similar report from the Guardian-

Brexit costing Britain £500m a week and rising, says report
Economy 2.5% smaller than it would have been if UK had voted remain, says thinktank

www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/29/britain-bill-brexit-hits-500-million-pounds-a-week

I think if you broaden your reading matter you might find differing opinions.

Oh well, if it’s in The Express it must be true!

By June last year it was clear that, far from saving us money the leave vote has cost us a fortune. In a report in The Express (!!!), we were told-

Brexit is costing the UK £500 million a week - or £26 billion per annum, according to research by the Centre for European Reform.

The UK economy is 2.5 percent smaller than it would be if the UK had voted to remain in the European Union, the thinktank said.

The cost of Brexit is growing, despite Brexiteers promising a dividend of £350m a week for leaving the EU - a campaign promise the Leave side famously declared on a Vote Leave bus.

The analysis found the UK’s deficit would largely have been eliminated in the 2018-19 financial year if Britain had voted to Remain.

The cost of Brexit already exceeds the size of the budget contributions Britain made to the EU.

CER Deputy Director John Springford said: “Two years on from the referendum, we now know that the Brexit vote had seriously damaged the economy.

“We know that the government’s Brexit dividend is a myth: the vote is costing the Treasury 440 million pounds a week, far more than the UK ever contributed to the EU budget.”

www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1045243/Brexit-cost-how-much-has-brexit-cost-uk-june-2018-500-million-pounds-a-week

That simplistic argument was discredited long ago.

We will no longer be sending money to the EU so obviously it is available to be apportioned elsewhere.

Why a lie? Although there will certainly be a divorce deal and we have to pay for things we agreed to, after that, for the future, we won’t be sending ‘vast sums’ to the EU.
There may be a short term economic downturn, but as a country we have to think long term.

Yesterday I watched TM speak at a press conference about NHS funding. She claimed that after brexit we would have more money for the NHS. Laura Kuenssberg (who is usually very pro-brexit) challenged her on this, reminding her that analysis by her own Treasury officials had shown conclusively that brexit would make us worse off and asked her to explain. TM replied that it was "quite simple" - we would not be sending "vast sums" to the EU.

This blatant lie, a repetition of the brexit rhetoric which she knows very well to be untrue, reminded me of Margaret Thatcher telling a bare-faced lie when she was challenged by a caller (Diana someone?) as to why the Argentinian ship Belgrano had been attacked by our navy and sunk when it was sailing away from the Falklands. Thatcher said "no, it was sailing towards the Falklands", which of course she knew to be untrue. The lady did not allow this lie to rest as she was able to quote chapter and verse of the evidence. Margaret Thatcher had been found out lying.

It is high time that Theresa May's lies were challenged, and perhaps even Laura Kuenssberg has finally seen through her.

A minister has likened Tory Brexiteers to "ants" as deep divisions in the Conservative Party continue to be exposed in the wake of a failed vote of no confidence in Theresa May.

Alistair Burt, a foreign office minister who voted Remain, said the only things that will survive an apocalypse would be the insects and "Tory MPs complaining about Europe and their leader."

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/alistair-burt-conservative-party-ants-brexit-tory-erg-brexiteers-remain-theresa-may-a8681581.html

She won the challenge and by a much larger margin than the Brexit referendum , she has got control, the hardliners can do nothing.
Only parliament can stop her and they are in disarray, if there is a second referendum proposal backed by a majority of MPs she will have to comply, that is the only way to defeat the deal.

There are 3 options
The Deal, not palatable, a messy compromise
No Deal Nobody except hardliners want that
No Brexit suddenly becomes attractive

3 options on the second referendum?.

I've heard that she will resign before xmas.

Theresa May is back holding talks with EU leaders about the chances of improving her Brexit deal sufficiently that it will pass through Parliament. After yesterday's dramatic hiatus in the Prime Minister's last-ditch attempts to improve the offer on the backstop in particular, May confirmed as she arrived in Brussels that she will step down before the next election, saying: 'I've said that in my heart I would love to be able to lead the Conservative party into the next general election, but I think it is right that the party feels it would prefer to go into that election with a new leader.'

She refused to set a departure date, though, and that question about when May wants her last day to be will crop up at every opportunity from now on. The leadership contest to replace her has been underway for several months, but expect it to ramp up significantly once everyone is back from the Christmas recess.

She may have faced down a confidence vote but 117 of her MPs are not certain to support her. She's more trapped by the nutters than ever, IMO.

Winning the leadership challenge strengthened TMs grip immensely, she can now ignore the extreme leavers, they can't touch her.

She will not get any substantial concessions from EU just words, she will string that out as long as she can certainly into the New Year. Will she hold a vote at all?, how long can she face them down

JC cannot try to get a GE he has not got the numbers, he may call for a second vote, and get it, but when?. If MPs oppose a second vote she will get the deal through.

Second vote for certain, result, anyone's guess.

I don’t think Corbyn has ever ‘played a blinder’ in his entire life.

I think you are wrong actually Grandad ( although both on your part and mine is a great deal of supposition anyway).
I think it more likely that in the end, not being able to get the deal passed in Parliament, another referendum will be held, accept T May’s deal, leave without a deal or remain in the EU. Not a GE.
It would be wrong to hold another referendum but there will be no other way as Parliament have shown they cannot agree on anything at all.

We should revoke Article 50, with no intention of re-invoking it, and abjectly apologise to our partners in the EU for the time and money they have had to spend on this UK fools' errand.

Of course we will lose faith and credibility but, thanks to the brexiters, that has long since gone. At least we would be able to avoid economic catastrophe.

MaizieD, you are correct in stating that article fifty cannot formally be put on hold, but I feel a "request" to suspend Britains leaving would be granted.

The European Union seem to be prepared to consider any proposals in regard to the withdraw agreement and a trade deal, provided that those proposals do not breach current agreements and treaties to which all members have freely signed up to, including Britain

There would then be also no alternative but to place Article fifty on hold (as the EU have stated Britain can)

Slight error there, I'm afraid, Grandad.

The ECJ ruled that the UK can unilaterally withdraw A50. Which would mean that we could return to full membership of the EU on our current terms.

Placing A50 'on hold' would mean asking for an extension to the two wasted years and would need the approval of the EU27.

If we withdrew A50 it would be an act of appallingly bad faith if we did it with the intention of invoking it again once we'd got our political situation sorted out (and a proper plan for leaving)

lemongrove, Quote [ Well, they won’t be wasting a month now, as T May is safe for another year.
JC can’t count his chickens for quite a while yet, as it’s unlikely there will be a GE.] End Quote

Lemongrove, I feel that your above post could not be further from what is the actual situation. In that, Theresa May still has to obtain significant concessions from the European Union if the withdrawal agreement is to have any chance of being passed by the House of Commons. We already know that the EU are unable to grant the above concessions without breaking their rules and treaties, so, that will not happen.

Therefore I believe that the agreement will be put before parliament in January and will be rejected. Jeremy Corbyn will then I feel bring forward a motion of no confidence in this shambles of a government, and with the threat of Britain crashing out of the EU in a "no deal" situation, that motion will be carried by the House of Commons.

In the above situation, the Conservative party will not be able to form a new government due to the huge rifts within that party. In that, no alternative to a General Election will then be at hand, which would be exactly what Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party have wanted throughout this whole crisis.

There would then be also no alternative but to place Article fifty on hold (as the EU have stated Britain can) while that Election is organised and held, in which the Tory party would continue to rip itself apart over Brexit, making them unelectable.

I have to say that I feel that Jeremy Corbyn has played "a blinder" for the Labour Party in the last few weeks, and longstanding grassroots members of the broader Labour movement must be "over the moon" with his leadership of the parliamentary party throughout this crisis.

I’d say that two years have been wasted, not just two months. Two years, and a proposed deal that satisfies neither Leavers nor Remainers. To which we add the extra month which is unlikely to achieve anything and which will result in it being proclaimed too late for any amendments... Machiavelli himself would have been pleased.

Well, they won’t be wasting a month now, as T May is safe for another year.
JC can’t count his chickens for quite a while yet, as it’s unlikely there will be a GE.