Take a second look, Britain's May urges lawmakers before Brexit vote

[webfact]

Take a second look, Britain's May urges lawmakers before Brexit vote

By Kylie MacLellan and Elizabeth Piper

 

Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May leaves from the back of 10 Downing Street in London, Britain, January 14, 2019. REUTERS/Clodagh Kilcoyne

 

LONDON (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Theresa May urged lawmakers on Monday to take a "second look" at her deal to leave the European Union, a last-ditch effort to win over a parliament that looks set to reject the agreement.

 

The fate of the United Kingdom's March 29 exit from the EU is in the balance before Tuesday when parliament is widely expected to vote against May's deal, opening up outcomes ranging from a disorderly divorce to reversing Brexit.

 

In the deepest crisis in British politics for at least half a century, May and EU leaders exchanged letters giving assurances on her withdrawal agreement, though there was little sign of a change of heart among rebel lawmakers.

 

May used a speech at a china factory in the leave-supporting city of Stoke-on-Trent in central England to say that lawmakers blocking Brexit altogether was now a more likely outcome than Britain leaving without a deal.

 

She then returned to parliament, where she asked lawmakers to give her deal a chance, referring to the assurances she secured from Brussels and warning parliament it risked the break up of the United Kingdom if it voted against the agreement.

 

"I say to members on all sides of this House (of Commons) - whatever you may have previously concluded - over these next 24 hours, give this deal a second look," she said.

 

"No it is not perfect. And yes it is a compromise," she said, telling them to think about how any decision will be judged in history books.

 

"I say we should deliver for the British people and get on with building a brighter future for our country by backing this deal tomorrow."

 

May has refused to budge over her deal despite criticism from all quarters. The agreement, which envisages close economic ties with the EU, has united the opposing sides of the debate - pro-EU lawmakers who see it as the worst of all worlds and Brexit supporters who say it will make Britain a vassal state.

 

Turning to her Conservative Party at a private meeting, May again warned lawmakers against fuelling division in Britain over Brexit and against allowing the main opposition Labour Party and its leader Jeremy Corbyn from winning the upper hand.

 

"She said ... I just want you to focus on two things: we have to deliver Brexit ... and two that we've got to keep Jeremy Corbyn as far away from Number 10 (Downing Street) as possible," lawmaker Nadhim Zahawi told reporters after the meeting, adding that May was relaxed.

 

But two Brexit supporters left the meeting early, saying they had not changed their minds on opposing her deal.

 

LETTER FROM EU

As the world's biggest trading bloc tried to brace for an unpredictable ride, Spain said the EU could agree to extend the deadline for Brexit, but not beyond elections for the European Parliament due in May.

 

And as part of the effort to get the deal approved by the British parliament, the EU and May set out some assurances in a choreographed exchange of letters on Monday.

 

The EU told May that it stood by commitments to find ways to avoid triggering the "Irish backstop", an insurance policy to avoid the return of a hard border in Ireland, in their Brexit deal and that this pledge had legal weight.

 

In a joint reply to questions from May, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and European Council President Donald Tusk said the EU stood by its commitment to try to reach a post-Brexit trade deal by the end of next year in order to avoid using the unpopular backstop.

 

While stressing that nothing in their letter could be seen as changing or being inconsistent with the draft treaty agreed with May last month, they said a commitment to a speedy trade deal made by EU leaders had "legal value" which committed the Union "in the most solemn manner".

 

May said the assurances might not go far enough for some lawmakers and the small Northern Irish party that props up her minority government said it was insufficient.

 

Nigel Dodds, deputy leader of the Democratic Unionist Party, said he would not back the deal, but his party's aim to get it renegotiated meant it could also not support any move by Labour to call a vote of no confidence in the government.

 

"PARLIAMENT PLOT"

With a 'no deal' Brexit the default option if May's deal is defeated, some lawmakers are planning to try to pull control of Brexit from the government.

 

But though May is weakened, the executive has significant powers, especially during times of crisis, so it was unclear how parliament would be able to take control of Brexit.

 

If May's deal is defeated and the government is unable to have any amended version passed in the next three weeks, one suggestion is for senior lawmakers who chair parliamentary committees to come up with an alternative Brexit plan.

 

"What we need to do is find the solution," said Nick Boles, one of the Conservative lawmakers behind the plan, who said he would vote for May's deal. "And if the government can't find the solution ... then parliament needs to," he told BBC radio.

 

(Additional reporting by Jan Strupczewski in Brussels and William James in London; Writing by Guy Faulconbridge and Elizabeth Piper; Editing by Janet Lawrence)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-01-15

[Laughing Gravy]

Desperate TM doing the bidding for the EU. Hopefully this will be the end of her finally and we can get a brexiteer in to do the job properly. It is the same rubbish she has been spouting for a while. Expect a huge defeat today and I have no sympathy, as she has brought it on her self], ignoring cabinet ministers and listening to the likes of Ollie Robbins.

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Desperate TM doing the bidding for the EU. Hopefully this will be the end of her finally and we can get a brexiteer in to do the job properly. It is the same rubbish she has been spouting for a while. Expect a huge defeat today and I have no sympathy, as she has brought it on her self], ignoring cabinet ministers and listening to the likes of Ollie Robbins.

So then, same rubbish from the Hard Brexiteers.

[jesimps]

22 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

So then, same rubbish from the Hard Brexiteers.

No such thing as "Hard Brexiteers", just people who want the government to deliver what they voted for and won. You people just want to muddy the waters to sabotage Brexit, the choice was "Remain" or "Leave", and leave won. Now where's the "rubbish" in that?

[Scott]

Post reported and removed.  

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, jesimps said:

No such thing as "Hard Brexiteers", just people who want the government to deliver what they voted for and won. You people just want to muddy the waters to sabotage Brexit, the choice was "Remain" or "Leave", and leave won. Now where's the "rubbish" in that?

The rubbish is in the know-nothing difference between soft and hard Brexit.

[Bluespunk]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

British Prime Minister Theresa May urged lawmakers on Monday to take a "second look" at her deal to leave the European Union, 

No matter how many times you look, a stinking pile of feces is still a stinking pile of feces. 

[SheungWan]

4 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

No matter how many times you look, a stinking pile of feces is still a stinking pile of feces. 

If they come from a civet cat then can generate very expensive coffee.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kopi_Luwak

 

[Bluespunk]

7 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

If they come from a civet cat then can generate very expensive coffee.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kopi_Luwak

 

The fecal matter produced by May is nowhere near as useful. 

[evadgib]

2 hours ago, SheungWan said:

So then, same rubbish from the Hard Brexiteers.

Not to mention the 'stuck record' persistently peddled by you.

[evadgib]

51 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

The rubbish is in the know-nothing difference between soft and hard Brexit.

The rubbish is the claim that there might be anything other than the orderly departure secured in a referendum by 17.4M voters that will shortly be delivered.

 

Here's the latest from Ferage for the casual observer:

 

Edited January 15, 2019 by evadgib

[sammieuk1]

Just the I to dot and the t to cross of this is shit in or out now its been a total calamity of the rich trying to get super rich at the county's expense ????

[Thingamabob]

In the end it may well come down to a second referendum. Choice should be May's Deal or No Deal. Remain already eliminated in the first referendum.

[SheungWan]

2 minutes ago, evadgib said:

The rubbish is the claim that there might be anything other than the orderly departure secured in a referendum by 17.4M voters that will shortly be delivered.

Hard Brexit = Orderly departure: 

[SheungWan]

9 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Not to mention the 'stuck record' persistently peddled by you.

The stuck record is the Hard Brexiteer childish repetitive denial of any alternative to 'er.... Hard Brexit.

[SheungWan]

21 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

The fecal matter produced by May is nowhere near as useful. 

The Hard Brexiteers and Jeremy Corbyn supporters can be comrades in arms on that.

[evadgib]

15 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

The stuck record is the Hard Brexiteer childish repetitive denial of any alternative to 'er.... Hard Brexit.

The 'Cuckoo' agenda explained (Ridding the boards of any opposition) ????

 

1. Attack posters while ignoring their content.

2. Report any to the headmaster that dare to retaliate.

3. (If the above fails) Persist until the opposition tires and vacates the board/website.

4. Their 'tsunami' is then free to flood the boards uninterrupted.

 

Guilty parties know who they are and in most cases know they've been well and truly rumbled. Humour and banter are perfectly acceptable but in the main are noticeably absent in favour of abuse.

 

HTH

Edited January 15, 2019 by evadgib

[johnnybangkok]

2 hours ago, jesimps said:

No such thing as "Hard Brexiteers", just people who want the government to deliver what they voted for and won. You people just want to muddy the waters to sabotage Brexit, the choice was "Remain" or "Leave", and leave won. Now where's the "rubbish" in that?

'Leave means leave' - 'remoaners' - 'we won, you lost' - blah, blah, blah. 

I've noticed a VERY common denominator with you Leave lot in that you are all up for the brain dead slogans but very short on the ideas of how to handle the immense problems that Brexit has thrown up.

So I'll give you all a chance. Please let me know what YOU would suggest to sort out the following:-

 

1. The Northern Ireland border.

2. Britain's financial obligations to the EU?

3. The EU single market & customs union and the subsequent insistence from the EU that entry to the single market/customs union also comes with free movement of EU nationals?

5. The drop in the number of EU immigrants and it's effect (already being felt) on the NHS, social care and construction?  

6. Security - once EU law has no more effect on the UK, how do you handle things like Europol and the European Arrest Warrants that both require EU law to work?  

 

That's only 6 of then many, many, many problems.

I'm all ears.

[evadgib]

19 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

'Leave means leave' - 'remoaners' - 'we won, you lost' - blah, blah, blah. 

I've noticed a VERY common denominator with you Leave lot in that you are all up for the brain dead slogans but very short on the ideas of how to handle the immense problems that Brexit has thrown up.

So I'll give you all a chance. Please let me know what YOU would suggest to sort out the following:-

 

1. The Northern Ireland border.

2. Britain's financial obligations to the EU?

3. The EU single market & customs union and the subsequent insistence from the EU that entry to the single market/customs union also comes with free movement of EU nationals?

5. The drop in the number of EU immigrants and it's effect (already being felt) on the NHS, social care and construction?  

6. Security - once EU law has no more effect on the UK, how do you handle things like Europol and the European Arrest Warrants that both require EU law to work?  

 

That's only 6 of then many, many, many problems.

I'm all ears.

- Leave on 29 March as planned.

- Accept the Canada +++ Davis was working on & had been agreed by Barnier & Co until May & Ollie Wotsit undermined him in July which will almost certainly come our way as explained in this clip posted yesterday (the world won't stop revolving if it doesn't!) :

 

Edited January 15, 2019 by evadgib

[johnnybangkok]

6 minutes ago, evadgib said:

- Leave on 29 March as planned.

- Accept the Canada +++ Davis was working on & had been agreed by Barnier & Co until May & Ollie Wotsit undermined him in July which will almost certainly come our way as explained in this clip posted yesterday (the world won't stop revolving if it doesn't) :

 

So as I guessed, no real solutions then.

[Basil B]

3 hours ago, jesimps said:

No such thing as "Hard Brexiteers", just people who want the government to deliver what they voted for and won. You people just want to muddy the waters to sabotage Brexit, the choice was "Remain" or "Leave", and leave won. Now where's the "rubbish" in that?

Some people may want to sleep in the bed that Brexiteers pissed in but I do not.

[evadgib]

10 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

So as I guessed, no real solutions then.

Not any that you like it seems, but the speed of your reply indicates that you didn't bother watching the clip therefore I wasted my time anyway.

 

Here's a slow burner for the more articulate:

 

Edited January 15, 2019 by evadgib

[SheungWan]

45 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

So as I guessed, no real solutions then.

But at least one good joke that David Davis was doing any work at all.

[Kadilo]

51 minutes ago, evadgib said:

- Leave on 29 March as planned.

- Accept the Canada +++ Davis was working on & had been agreed by Barnier & Co until May & Ollie Wotsit undermined him in July which will almost certainly come our way as explained in this clip posted yesterday (the world won't stop revolving if it doesn't!) :

 

He called it re the letter. Spot on. He repeated virtually the same thing last night in the Commons and yet the PM still fudged around it and kept spouting how it had legal weight. 

 

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

'Leave means leave' - 'remoaners' - 'we won, you lost' - blah, blah, blah. 

I've noticed a VERY common denominator with you Leave lot in that you are all up for the brain dead slogans but very short on the ideas of how to handle the immense problems that Brexit has thrown up.

So I'll give you all a chance. Please let me know what YOU would suggest to sort out the following:-

 

1. The Northern Ireland border.

2. Britain's financial obligations to the EU?

3. The EU single market & customs union and the subsequent insistence from the EU that entry to the single market/customs union also comes with free movement of EU nationals?

5. The drop in the number of EU immigrants and it's effect (already being felt) on the NHS, social care and construction?  

6. Security - once EU law has no more effect on the UK, how do you handle things like Europol and the European Arrest Warrants that both require EU law to work?  

 

That's only 6 of then many, many, many problems.

I'm all ears.

Didn't you post this on another thread?

 

I'm pretty sure I've already replied on another thread ????.

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, jesimps said:

No such thing as "Hard Brexiteers", just people who want the government to deliver what they voted for and won. You people just want to muddy the waters to sabotage Brexit, the choice was "Remain" or "Leave", and leave won. Now where's the "rubbish" in that?

 

That's right. The advisory referendum advised the government that a small majority of the people who chose to vote wanted to leave whilst the large minority wanted to stay.

 

No where in the legislation did it say the result had any legal force to be implemented; and clown Cameron had not authority to decide on his own it would be.

 

Parliament were duty bound to debate the result of the referendum and vote on whether to implement it or not. That is their job, their responsibility and the procedure in Britain's parliamentary democracy and constitution. Britain is not an absolute democracy where votes are put to the electorate and every decision is taken on the first past the post basis. A parliamentary democracy is designed to protect all interests and prevent knee jerk swings on decisions among other things.

 

But the then majority Tories were scared to do that as they knew the likely result would be to remain. So the pretended it wasn't necessary, and even tried to further ignore due parliamentary process by wrongly claiming the referendum result could be simply carried out by the Executive using the Royal Prerogative. May did this because she knew any deal would likely be crap and opposed by just about every one, as it now is. That's why she went all the way to the Supreme Court to try and get her way. Had she won, she would have made the deal she fancied, like it or not. Corbyn never fought for a parliamentary debate as he wants to leave the EU and also saw a way to weaken the Tories and get into the government role he craves. He doesn't give shit about the UK - he hates it.

 

The current crop of MP's, well almost all, have shown what a spineless self interested bunch of numpties they are. It's so ironic that some keep spouting on about protecting our democracy and constitution, presumably to gain favor with their electorate, whilst actively ignoring parliamentary procedure and their duty to the constitution they claim to want to protect.

 

I would accept Leave or Remain - providing the correct constitutional parliamentary process had been followed. And it wasn't and hasn't and neither the Tories or Commie Corbyn's clique are brave enough to say so and demand it.

[dick dasterdly]

55 minutes ago, evadgib said:

- Leave on 29 March as planned.

- Accept the Canada +++ Davis was working on & had been agreed by Barnier & Co until May & Ollie Wotsit undermined him in July which will almost certainly come our way as explained in this clip posted yesterday (the world won't stop revolving if it doesn't!) :

 

Agree, but this has also been pointed out on another thread - although in this case it's probably the 'right' thread'!

[Grouse]

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/parliament-meaningful-vote-brexit

 

This gives details of all the amendments currently tabled. Just popping out for another litre of Monkey Shoulder as its going to be a long and interesting night!

[Baerboxer]

8 minutes ago, Kadilo said:

He called it re the letter. Spot on. He repeated virtually the same thing last night in the Commons and yet the PM still fudged around it and kept spouting how it had legal weight. 

 

 

He's a Reece-Mogg crony.

 

Just to put him into perspective.

[dick dasterdly]

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

That's right. The advisory referendum advised the government that a small majority of the people who chose to vote wanted to leave whilst the large minority wanted to stay.

 

No where in the legislation did it say the result had any legal force to be implemented; and clown Cameron had not authority to decide on his own it would be.

 

Parliament were duty bound to debate the result of the referendum and vote on whether to implement it or not. That is their job, their responsibility and the procedure in Britain's parliamentary democracy and constitution. Britain is not an absolute democracy where votes are put to the electorate and every decision is taken on the first past the post basis. A parliamentary democracy is designed to protect all interests and prevent knee jerk swings on decisions among other things.

 

But the then majority Tories were scared to do that as they knew the likely result would be to remain. So the pretended it wasn't necessary, and even tried to further ignore due parliamentary process by wrongly claiming the referendum result could be simply carried out by the Executive using the Royal Prerogative. May did this because she knew any deal would likely be crap and opposed by just about every one, as it now is. That's why she went all the way to the Supreme Court to try and get her way. Had she won, she would have made the deal she fancied, like it or not. Corbyn never fought for a parliamentary debate as he wants to leave the EU and also saw a way to weaken the Tories and get into the government role he craves. He doesn't give shit about the UK - he hates it.

 

The current crop of MP's, well almost all, have shown what a spineless self interested bunch of numpties they are. It's so ironic that some keep spouting on about protecting our democracy and constitution, presumably to gain favor with their electorate, whilst actively ignoring parliamentary procedure and their duty to the constitution they claim to want to protect.

 

I would accept Leave or Remain - providing the correct constitutional parliamentary process had been followed. And it wasn't and hasn't and neither the Tories or Commie Corbyn's clique are brave enough to say so and demand it.

"That's right. The advisory referendum advised the government that a small majority of the people who chose to vote wanted to leave whilst the large minority wanted to stay.

No where in the legislation did it say the result had any legal force to be implemented; and clown Cameron had not authority to decide on his own it would be."

 

I stopped reading after this as it is, yet again, trying to go round in circles re. "advisory referendum" etc. ☹️.