Theresa May to make written Brexit offer to Jeremy Corbyn Letter to include proposal to offer MPs vote on second referendum, source suggests
Theresa May is expected to write to Jeremy Corbyn to set out the government’s offer on Brexit, with negotiations due to resume in Downing Street on Friday. With just five days to go before the prime minister must travel to Brussels to request a further Brexit delay from EU leaders, little progress appears to have been made on finding a compromise deal both Labour and the Conservatives can back. But after the government delegation reported back to May on Thursday, officials began drafting a letter setting out a way forward. One government source suggested that, in accordance with Labour’s demands, it would include the proposal that a confirmatory referendum on any Brexit deal be offered to MPs as an option in any vote next week.
After Thursday’s discussions in Downing Street, Corbyn sent a note to Labour MPs, saying: “Agenda items were customs arrangements, single market alignment including rights and protections, agencies and programmes, internal security, legal underpinning to any agreements and confirmatory vote.”
Brexit to be delayed until next year after parties fail to break deadlock, attorney general warns Geoffrey Cox admits Theresa May will be forced to accept Article 50 extension longer than 'just a few weeks or months' - paving way for new cabinet bust-up
Let Us Vote: New campaign launched to give everyone living in UK the right to vote in elections MPs say existing laws that stop 10 million people voting should 'shame us as a society'
A new campaign has been launched to give everyone living in the UK the right to vote in elections and referendums, with MPs saying current voting laws should "shame us as a society". The major change would see all UK residents, plus British citizens living abroad, allowed to vote in general elections regardless of their citizenship.
Commonwealth and Irish nationals are currently the only non-Britons allowed to vote in general elections and referendums, while EU citizens can vote in local and European elections. UK citizens who have lived abroad for more than 15 years are also not allowed to vote.
Campaigners said current laws mean 10 million UK residents and Britons overseas are disqualified from voting.
The "Let Us Vote" campaign, which has the backing of more than a dozen MPs and peers, is seeking new legislation to extend the voting franchise, which has not changed significantly since the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 in 1969.
Cant wait as people vote on matters that are about this country then frag off back to the villa and the sun.
As C Tate would say "What a load of old shyte"
It depends IMO.
I'm living in Leeds atm and we have a large student population here. A decent % of those are students here for one year of study abroad. While the individuals are only here for a year, they are replaced the following year, so having a % of the population being foreign students is a constant that should be accounted for in some way in local elections IMO.
If you have a constituency that is, some % foreign students (the number isn't really relevant) - They're usually from the same countries in similar numbers each year, they're in the same age range, and so on.
As those variables are all pretty consistent year on year, I'd also expect vote shares to be similar to those in both the years before and after they're in the country if they were able to vote at that moment in time. It seems reasonable to let them vote when their views will be representative of some % of your town/city's population in years to come.
---
Once you start talking about voting for MPs and MEPs, I think it's a lot less clear cut and I'd need to read/think about that more when it's not 3am to work out where I stand on it.
Referenda - Depends on what it's about, judge on a case-by-case basis.
The polls have closed in the Newport West by-election. The seat in south east Wales became vacant following the death of veteran Labour MP Paul Flynn in February. A total of 11 candidates are standing and a result is expected in the early hours of Friday. Labour are defending a 5,658 majority over the Conservatives at the 2017 general election. Mr Flynn had held the seat since 1987.
Labour holds Newport West in Commons by-election as turnout slumps
Labour held on to Newport West in a by-election battle which saw turnout slump. The party’s Ruth Jones took 9,308 votes, giving her a majority of 1,951 over the Tories, with Ukip in third place.
The contest was triggered by the death of veteran MP Paul Flynn and came against the backdrop of Brexit battles at Westminster. The city has long been a Labour stronghold and voted Leave by a margin of 56% to 44% in the 2016 in-out referendum.
Mrs Jones had been the clear favourite to succeed Mr Flynn, who held the Newport West seat for 32 years, winning with a majority of 5,658 and more than half the vote in 2017. Voter turnout was 37.1%, down from 67.5% in the 2017 general election, with parties blaming poor weather including rain and hail on Thursday.
Mrs Jones, who campaigned for Remain in the lead-up to the EU referendum, said the country should not accept a “damaging Tory Brexit” or a no-deal outcome. Ukip’s Neil Hamilton, the highest profile name taking part in the contest, sought a return to the Commons more than two decades after being ousted as an MP in the 1997 general election following his involvement in the cash-for-questions scandal.
The party’s leader in Wales took 2,023 votes, well up on the party’s showing in 2017. Mr Hamilton had hoped to benefit from the Brexit effect in the Leave-voting city and campaigned saying the by-election would provide a chance to send a clear message to Westminster over its handling of the UK’s exit from the EU.
Brexit talks 'productive' as clash over new referendum unfolds
On his way into Thursday's talks at the Cabinet Office, Labour shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer revealed the idea of a "confirmatory" referendum on any agreement was among the issues his party wanted to discuss. The subject of a fresh public vote was also at the centre of a cabinet clash after Chancellor Philip Hammond described it as a "perfectly credible proposition".
The government was represented by Mrs May's deputy David Lidington, Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay, chief whip Julian Smith and Number 10 chief of staff Gavin Barwell. Sir Keir and shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey were joined at the talks by party officials.
The Guardian reports that Downing Street is drafting a letter to Labour that could suggest allowing MPs to decide on whether there should be a confirmatory referendum on any deal struck.
No-deal Brexit may have steep costs for some sectors - WTO chief
MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - If the United Kingdom leaves the European Union without a deal it could have "very significant" costs for some parts of the British economy, Roberto Azevedo, Director-General of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), said on Thursday. The British government is scrambling to find parliamentary consensus over the terms of its departure from the European Union ahead of an April 12 deadline, prompting warnings from some officials that the risk of a no-deal exit is increasing. Azevedo said in Mexico City that economists were best placed to estimate the potential impact of a no-deal Brexit, which would leave the British economy trading on WTO rules. "But I would say there will be costs, and the costs may be very significant in some sectors, and maybe less significant in other sectors. But overall, there will be an impact, we all know that," he told Reuters in an interview.
Separately, Azevedo sounded a note of caution on ongoing efforts to resolve a dispute over the future of the WTO's Appellate Body, the top court of global trade. Washington has long argued that WTO judges have routinely broken with procedures and exceeded their mandates, and in a bid to force reforms, the U.S. government has blocked the appointment of judges to the Appellate Body. If continued, the tactic could render the body inoperable by December, when terms end for two of the remaining three judges. Under WTO rules, three judges are required to hear appeals. Azevedo said WTO member states were seeking to find a way around the impasse, noting that it was chiefly a U.S. concern. "The truth is that it's difficult to know if we're advancing or not," he said, "because the Americans haven't been contributing in a very active way to these discussions."
Brexit: EU's Donald Tusk 'suggests 12-month flexible delay'
European Council President Donald Tusk is proposing to offer the UK a 12-month "flexible" extension to its Brexit date, according to a senior EU source. His plan would allow the UK to leave sooner if Parliament ratifies a deal, but it would need to be agreed by EU leaders at a summit next week.
'Brexit stasis' At Westminster, the Daily Telegraph suggests Prime Minister Theresa May is being pushed towards giving MPs a vote on holding another referendum as part of cross-party talks designed to find a way through the Brexit impasse. It claims ministers have discussed the option of including a new referendum in a series of indicative votes, which would be held if Labour and the Tories fail to reach a consensus on a way forward. The Conservative MP, Nigel Evans, is quoted as saying such a move would completely shatter "the little bit of credibility" Mrs May has left.
The Financial Times suggests that even if Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn agree a deal, there's little certainty that MPs would approve it. The problem, as the paper sees it, is that a compromise Brexit agreement would be "too soft" for Eurosceptic Tories, while if it didn't include another referendum it would be too hard for some Labour MPs. The number of potential rebels on both sides, the FT says, means "the parliamentary maths cannot be taken for granted". Meanwhile, the Times says a number of cabinet ministers are plotting to prevent the prime minister agreeing to a long Brexit extension. It says some fear Mrs May could agree to delaying the process by up to a year. The paper reports Brexit-supporting ministers have held two so-called "pizza club" meetings in which they discussed tactics. The paper's policy editor, Oliver Wright, sets out why he thinks the Brexit deadlock could last for months. He says there's deep pessimism that talks between the Tories and Labour can secure a cross-party deal. With European elections being held in May, and the potential of a new European Council president being appointed, he thinks it could be some time before the EU is ready to negotiate again. That, he says, means "we're now looking at a Brexit stasis lasting for months to come".
Drunk on their warped sense of nationalism, now Brexiteers are fighting for no deal ‘just because’ A section of the country believes we can overcome any problem by being Britain. To mention the details of how we’ll do it, is treachery, apparently
This latest move to join forces with the Labour leader suggests the Conservatives are slightly unsure what to do about Brexit. Because for three years they told us Corbyn’s a threat to our existence, if he gets in he’ll make you give your furniture to Hamas; he’ll introduce women-only gravity so men will be forced to float; Diane Abbott will live in your house and taser you if you sing the national anthem; schools will be handed to the IRA and your kids will have to wear a balaclava and fire rockets at the PE teacher or they’ll get detention. He’s a spy, an antisemite; your gran will be forced to become a **** and the next day forced to become an Islamic extremist and arrest herself under sharia law. And now they’ve adjusted this slightly, to decide his input is essential to sort out Britain’s most important issue in 75 years.
If these talks break down, they’ll be even more desperate, and Theresa May will stand in front of her podium to tell us: “This is why I am to hold discussions with the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, to see if they can think of anything. Also, because I’m determined to respect the verdict of the British people, I’ve asked the leaders of Hezbollah and the Women’s Institute if they can help out, maybe with an agreement in which we supply rocket-propelled grenades made of homemade chutney, in return for leaving the EU in an orderly fashion on 22 May.”
It’s perplexing how this can have happened, because the leaders of the Leave campaign assured us the European Union would back down, as it needs us more than we need it. Many Brexiteers are sticking with this and have insisted that if we hold our nerve, the EU will retreat at the last minute as it always leaves it late.
In a few years, we’ll be crawling through the woods, attacking each other with twigs to see who gets to eat a caterpillar, and the ERG will broadcast from a transmitter made of dandelions: “The important thing is to hold our nerve, they’ll back down any day soon because they need us more than we need them.” It’s a mark of our eccentric charm that these people have been allowed to run the place. The group’s deputy-chair is Mark Francois, who clearly isn’t human, as he’s like the robot that gets stabbed at the end of The Stepford Wives and shouts random phrases.
So twice a day he appears on television, is asked for a comment and growls: “A customs union would make all our chickens explode. I could take on Portugal on my own, because when I was in the territorial army I marched three miles round Dorking one Saturday. Denmark is more horrible than an ostrich in your toilet. The only single market I’d vote for is one that sold fruit and veg and every morning shoved a grapefruit up Jean-Claude Juncker’s **** and made him dance the polka.”
This is the attitude that got us here. Many Leavers insist anything other than crashing out without a deal “would betray what 17.4 million people voted for”. But it’s possible that if you look carefully, leaving without a deal isn’t quite what the Leave campaign said before the referendum.
For example, Liam Fox said it would be “the easiest deal in history”. To be fair this is true, as long as the only one you measure it against is Custer’s deal with the Sioux after he was captured at Little Bighorn. The entire campaign insisted a deal would be simple, so it’s not entirely certain that everyone who voted Leave wanted no deal. But I suppose these are just different ways of calculating. Maybe Brexiteers should add in all the people who voted in the Ukrainian election as well, and all the people who voted for Stacey Dooley in Strictly Come Dancing, and say to stay in a customs union would be a betrayal of 53 million people.
Then everyone can interpret the referendum result in whatever way they fancy. Teenage arsonists should tell the magistrate: “17.4 million people voted for me to burn down the nextdoor neighbour’s shed,” and they’d walk free.
Many of the Leave politicians not only underestimated the problems of leaving, they didn’t even notice them. David Davis was asked around the time of the referendum, how we could deal with the problems it could create in Ireland, and said: “We’re Britain, we know how to sort out Ireland.” It wasn't reported at the time, but very occasionally it pays to have friends who are close to a Belgian MEP who’s been chatting to the former Brexit secretary.
The first point here is the accuracy, as a scholar of British history he’s spotted that over a period of 800 years, Britain hardly heard a peep out of Ireland. But also, perhaps this explains the current predicament. A section of the country believes we can overcome any problem, by being Britain. To mention the details is treachery.
So it would work to leave on WTO rules, even though no one appears to have the slightest clue what they are, any more than anyone understood the problems of leaving the EU. Because then we can spend the next 50 years moaning about the WTO, and complaining its holding us back and we should leave it NOW because we’re BRITAIN. Then we can have a referendum on leaving the laws of physics, because for too long they’ve been holding Britain back, demanding fire warms things up and when it’s dark it’s harder to see things. Let us send particles in the direction WE want to send them and not where Isaac Newton says they should go, and at last our nation will be free.
I shouldnt really reply to your nonsense as it probably gives your comments an air of credibility that they don't deserve. Many people threaten to shoot referees every Saturday, when they have no wish or intent to really harm them. Many people threaten to kill the spouses, family members, and work colleagues, on a daily basis without any thought of carrying out these threats.
Many people have lost all patience with the current bunch of MPs.
I started a thread about the revoke A50 petition.
It was of interest to me, as at the time it was the fastest going petition ever, and became the biggest ever on the site.
I was interested for these reasons.
I was surprised that so many people were in favour of just knocking Brexit on the head. No new referendum, just cancel it.
I had absolutely no interest in the 77 year old, retired lecturer that started it as this was irrelevant to me. Why would she interest me? Ok she arranged the petition, but had no control over the popularity.
This was not the case for you. You had to knock this woman, in an effort to cause an argument.
You pointed out that she had threatened to shoot someone.
She claimed her Facebook account had been hacked, you disputed this, and I didn't care.
All this had no bearing on the petition, which has grown to well over 6million signatures.
This was a surprising number to me as it represents around half the number of people that voted for the Tories in the last election. It is a huge number of people that would like to just stop Brexit.
So you were attempting to divert attention from the number of signatures, by claiming that she wanted to shoot someone. I had no interest because it wasn't a petition in favour of shooting anyone. I made an off the cuff comment regarding shooting politicians, which years ago could have been referees. The only person that has attached any importance to this comment is you. Everyone else has taken it as an off the cuff, light hearted comment.
I have not subsequently shot any politicians, relatives, or referees and have no intention in doing so. This is also true of the woman that started the petition, as far as I know.
To suggest that such an off the cuff comment warrants a police investigation is pathetic.
To even suggest that there is any link between the comment I made and actually murdering a politician is sick.
If you think that I only highlight ifs and maybes then debate them.
Defending JRM with reference to the AFD puts you in a very small minority.
I have posted lots of stories with plenty of substance, on this thread today and have not highlighted or promoted the JRM one in any way. You did that.
I didn't initially make any comments, I just posted the article, with the intention of letting any reader make their own mind up. I made no claims about him supporting the ideology of the AFD. However any British MP that quotes them or shares their comments about anything is making a stupid mistake.
The normally ultra cool JRM only lost it in the interview because he had been caught out and probably realised that it was a stupid mistake.
Your reaction is considerably different from the majority of the press.
Bolded parts addressed in order :
Yes many people do threaten to shoot other people , these are in the main very stupid and immature individuals , who haven't actually taken the time to realise what they are saying is incredibly dumb . These are from the same family of people who make jokes about their luggage having a bomb in it at airports.
On to the woman , who started the waste of time petition : It was Mumsie on the petition thread who first mentioned about her social media activity , and on further delving , it was apparent , Snow white she isn't. If you are going to put yourself up as being a saintly figure who's aim is to save the country from the plights of Brexit , then don't say something as stupid as you would like to shoot the prime minister . The moral high ground is totally lost . As far as her conveniently saying she had been hacked upon being found out , and alleging she had received death threats ...I'm not buying it , simple as . As far as your incredibly misguided comments on that thread , and noone else having any problems with it ..well no great surprise there when you see how many people are interested enough in the propaganda to actually post . Although that said , dragon1964 did say this on the thread , which I totally concur with : " Posting about shooting politicians, metaphorically or otherwise, is in very poor taste and does nothing to help your argument on this subject.
Has the murder of Jo Cox been forgotten so quickly."
As far as my contribution to this thread is concerned ...far too easy to sit back smugly and accuse me of just wanting an argument , when the reality is a) you can't argue with yourself and b) Who the **** do you think you are to be so arrogant as to think your viewpoint is the only one that counts ? . Regarding my contribution to other threads , If i see something that interests me , I will post on it . Despite the occasional village idiot suggesting otherwise , if i disagree with something that is said , then it is because I disagree with it and not because I automatically wish to take the opposite default stance .
I've debated your " ifs and buts" many times on here , and you have a standard blinkered response . If someone was to take out all of the news articles that you had posted on this thread ( articles with a heavy remain slant and based on supposition and general mud slinging) , then out of all your long winded rhetoric , there would probably be less than 5% fact .
The JRM non story isn't something I intend going over and over with you on . I have already stated , that you can reference something from an individual /group without that meaning you are a fully signed up member to their ideology. Should he have thought better of publicly tweeting it , especially in the light of the fact that the press are out to discredit him at every opportunity , obv yes .
Brexit delay: Theresa May writes to Donald Tusk to ask for further extension to 30 June
Theresa May has written to Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, asking the EU for a further delay to Brexit to 30 June. The prime minister said she was still hopeful of leaving the bloc earlier and asked for the right for the UK to exit if a withdrawal deal is approved by parliament.
She had been expected to seek a longer delay but faced heavy pressure from pro-Brexit cabinet ministers to only seek a short extension.
Spineless cowards. The very reason we needed Brexit was so we were not kow-towing down to the demands of some faceless eurorats and yet it seems we cant even walk out without permission.
So reminiscent of the collaborating Vichy Government that ran France under the occupation. My cousin in America says the average American cannot believe that Britain has allowed itself to become a shambolic laughing stock.
Britain belongs on a shelf in a Pepe la Sal somewhere between the Oxo and the Knor stock pots.
Brexiteer outrage as Brussels demands a 12-month 'flextension': Tusk says moving UK's departure back a YEAR is 'only sensible way out' - as PM 'reluctantly' asks for extension to June 30
Brexiteers have pledged to 'go nuclear' after Theresa May today wrote to the EU asking for permission to delay Brexit until June 30. But Donald Tusk has already said that a 12-month 'flextension' to March 31 2020 is 'the only reasonable way out' of the crisis and will urge leaders of the EU's 27 member states to back him later today. This morning the Prime Minister sent a letter to Mr Tusk to formally request an extension to Article 50 that will delay the UK's departure beyond April 12 to June 30 - but wants a 'termination clause'. This would allow the UK to leave on May 22 - the day before European elections - if a deal can be pushed through the UK Parliament.
Theresa May will write to EU Council President Donald Tusk to request an extension to Article 50 that will delay the UK's departure beyond April 12 Begging the EU for another extension the PM said: 'This impasse cannot be allowed to continue. In the UK it is creating uncertainty and doing damage to faith in politics, while the European Union has a legitimate desire to move on to decisions about its own future'. But Mrs May's letter admits that if she fails Britain would go to the polls to elect MEPs between May 23 and May 26, who would then be paid a £85,000-a-year salary to sit in Brussels from July as the UK tries to leave. Brexit in-depth: All the latest news, analysis and expert opinion EU sources have said they will reject Mrs May's June 30 Brexit date and tell her that a year-long deal is the only option. With No Deal now off the table she would be forced to accept it. Brexiteer Owen Paterson tweeted that Tories should 'go nuclear' and push again for No Deal while Tory ERG chairman Jacob Rees-Mogg said today: 'If a long extension leaves us stuck in the EU we should be as difficult as possible. We could veto any increase in the budget, obstruct the putative EU army and block Mr Macron’s integrationist schemes. Brexiteer Marcus Fysh told MailOnline 'we don't need more time, we need the right approach' and suggested Tory grassroots members might refuse to help elect Conservative candidates if the UK took part in the European elections. He said: 'The EU has the alternative arrangement proposals we worked up and wants to talk about them, but UK has not yet formally tabled them.
‘They don't want an unhelpful and unhappy group in the European Parliament and local Conservative parties will not be working to get Conservatives elected under the circumstances. ‘The way to unite the party and DUP, make a success of Brexit with a good relationship with the EU and heroic legacy for the Prime Minister is to get on with fixing the backstop as the PM's own colleagues have suggested now.’ And ERG deputy chairman Steve Baker added: ‘The PM could get us out with a deal if only she would secure changes to the backstop in line with the Brady amendment which she whipped for. ‘If only the Government would abandon pursuit of a customs union in all but name, this crisis would end.’
Spineless cowards. The very reason we needed Brexit was so we were not kow-towing down to the demands of some faceless eurorats and yet it seems we cant even walk out without permission.
So reminiscent of the collaborating Vichy Government that ran France under the occupation. My cousin in America says the average American cannot believe that Britain has allowed itself to become a shambolic laughing stock.
Britain belongs on a shelf in a Pepe la Sal somewhere between the Oxo and the Knor stock pots.
Edge
We are the ones who can't agree the deal....Europe don't wnat the divorce so why would they make it easy for us to go? One country(us) asking 27 others to agree for an(other) extension
I don't get where this 'kowtowing to EU demands' comes from (other than from The Sun & Daily Mail lies of course). Of the 4000+ rules that have come out of the EU the UK voted no to 2% of them! Oh no, we only have 98% control! (for the huge amount of benefits we get)
I don't get where this 'kowtowing to EU demands' comes from (other than from The Sun & Daily Mail lies of course). Of the 4000+ rules that have come out of the EU the UK voted no to 2% of them! Oh no, we only have 98% control! (for the huge amount of benefits we get)
Patronising sun and daily mail comment ..but to be expected from someone with such a username ....lets get some facts here
Votes are only the tip of the iceberg
First, EU laws pass through several stages of negotiations in the Council and the European Parliament.
So the UK government’s ability to influence policies doesn’t only occur through voting—which is a ‘Yes’ or a ‘No’ situation—but also in negotiations over the actual text of a draft law.
Many accounts have shown that the UK diplomatic service has—at least historically—been very skilled in such negotiations over important laws.
Second, the records only relate to votes on proposed laws that eventually pass.
So we simply do not know how often the UK successfully opposed proposals, or failed to get things it wanted, as these are not mentioned in the official figures.
The UK has been in a losing minority more often over the past few years
In recent years the UK has been more often on the losing side of these votes.
Research by Dr Hagemann and Professor Hix shows that between 2009 and 2015 the UK voted against the majority 12.3% of the time, compared to 2.6% of the time between 2004 and 2009.
More where that come from , if you would like , and guess what not from the sun or Daily mail !
I see where you have cut n pasted that from. https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/ My 'facts' come from the top half of that same article but I've seen it backed up by some guy on twitter too. He listed all 74 laws and analysed then one by one. Exact figures are a grey area I agree, but figures still show that the EU is not the controlling beast it is portrayed as in MSM which a vast of people get their opinion from. I'm not suggesting you.
Personally I'm not happy with a potential 8% drop in GDP (BoE, IMF), companies leaving in droves, less safety, lower food standards, medicine shortages etc resulting from a potential no deal. Also having 2 young kids I want them to have the freedom to work and study in Europe should they wish. We had 2 world wars with our neighbours only in the last century and I believe working together as closely as possible with our European neighbours can only be progress, why try to dismantle it? Yes, the EU has it's problems but we are a major player in the EU and can change things, isolating ourselves is a step backwards. Just my 2c.
Comments
Letter to include proposal to offer MPs vote on second referendum, source suggests
Theresa May is expected to write to Jeremy Corbyn to set out the government’s offer on Brexit, with negotiations due to resume in Downing Street on Friday.
With just five days to go before the prime minister must travel to Brussels to request a further Brexit delay from EU leaders, little progress appears to have been made on finding a compromise deal both Labour and the Conservatives can back.
But after the government delegation reported back to May on Thursday, officials began drafting a letter setting out a way forward.
One government source suggested that, in accordance with Labour’s demands, it would include the proposal that a confirmatory referendum on any Brexit deal be offered to MPs as an option in any vote next week.
After Thursday’s discussions in Downing Street, Corbyn sent a note to Labour MPs, saying: “Agenda items were customs arrangements, single market alignment including rights and protections, agencies and programmes, internal security, legal underpinning to any agreements and confirmatory vote.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/04/theresa-may-to-make-written-brexit-offer-to-jeremy-corbyn
Geoffrey Cox admits Theresa May will be forced to accept Article 50 extension longer than 'just a few weeks or months' - paving way for new cabinet bust-up
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-delay-2020-article-50-extension-theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-a8855651.html
MPs say existing laws that stop 10 million people voting should 'shame us as a society'
A new campaign has been launched to give everyone living in the UK the right to vote in elections and referendums, with MPs saying current voting laws should "shame us as a society".
The major change would see all UK residents, plus British citizens living abroad, allowed to vote in general elections regardless of their citizenship.
Commonwealth and Irish nationals are currently the only non-Britons allowed to vote in general elections and referendums, while EU citizens can vote in local and European elections. UK citizens who have lived abroad for more than 15 years are also not allowed to vote.
Campaigners said current laws mean 10 million UK residents and Britons overseas are disqualified from voting.
The "Let Us Vote" campaign, which has the backing of more than a dozen MPs and peers, is seeking new legislation to extend the voting franchise, which has not changed significantly since the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 in 1969.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/let-us-vote-uk-election-eu-citizens-campaign-brexit-a8855576.html
Cant wait as people vote on matters that are about this country then frag off back to the villa and the sun.
As C Tate would say "What a load of old shyte"
I'm living in Leeds atm and we have a large student population here. A decent % of those are students here for one year of study abroad. While the individuals are only here for a year, they are replaced the following year, so having a % of the population being foreign students is a constant that should be accounted for in some way in local elections IMO.
If you have a constituency that is, some % foreign students (the number isn't really relevant) - They're usually from the same countries in similar numbers each year, they're in the same age range, and so on.
As those variables are all pretty consistent year on year, I'd also expect vote shares to be similar to those in both the years before and after they're in the country if they were able to vote at that moment in time. It seems reasonable to let them vote when their views will be representative of some % of your town/city's population in years to come.
---
Once you start talking about voting for MPs and MEPs, I think it's a lot less clear cut and I'd need to read/think about that more when it's not 3am to work out where I stand on it.
Referenda - Depends on what it's about, judge on a case-by-case basis.
Labour holds Newport West in Commons by-election as turnout slumps
Labour held on to Newport West in a by-election battle which saw turnout slump.
The party’s Ruth Jones took 9,308 votes, giving her a majority of 1,951 over the Tories, with Ukip in third place.
The contest was triggered by the death of veteran MP Paul Flynn and came against the backdrop of Brexit battles at Westminster.
The city has long been a Labour stronghold and voted Leave by a margin of 56% to 44% in the 2016 in-out referendum.
Mrs Jones had been the clear favourite to succeed Mr Flynn, who held the Newport West seat for 32 years, winning with a majority of 5,658 and more than half the vote in 2017.
Voter turnout was 37.1%, down from 67.5% in the 2017 general election, with parties blaming poor weather including rain and hail on Thursday.
Mrs Jones, who campaigned for Remain in the lead-up to the EU referendum, said the country should not accept a “damaging Tory Brexit” or a no-deal outcome.
Ukip’s Neil Hamilton, the highest profile name taking part in the contest, sought a return to the Commons more than two decades after being ousted as an MP in the 1997 general election following his involvement in the cash-for-questions scandal.
The party’s leader in Wales took 2,023 votes, well up on the party’s showing in 2017.
Mr Hamilton had hoped to benefit from the Brexit effect in the Leave-voting city and campaigned saying the by-election would provide a chance to send a clear message to Westminster over its handling of the UK’s exit from the EU.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/labour-holds-newport-west-in-commons-by-election-as-turnout-slumps/ar-BBVDoN0?ocid=spartandhp
On his way into Thursday's talks at the Cabinet Office, Labour shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer revealed the idea of a "confirmatory" referendum on any agreement was among the issues his party wanted to discuss.
The subject of a fresh public vote was also at the centre of a cabinet clash after Chancellor Philip Hammond described it as a "perfectly credible proposition".
The government was represented by Mrs May's deputy David Lidington, Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay, chief whip Julian Smith and Number 10 chief of staff Gavin Barwell.
Sir Keir and shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey were joined at the talks by party officials.
The Guardian reports that Downing Street is drafting a letter to Labour that could suggest allowing MPs to decide on whether there should be a confirmatory referendum on any deal struck.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexit/brexit-talks-productive-as-clash-over-new-referendum-unfolds/ar-BBVCJ1h?ocid=spartandhp
MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - If the United Kingdom leaves the European Union without a deal it could have "very significant" costs for some parts of the British economy, Roberto Azevedo, Director-General of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), said on Thursday.
The British government is scrambling to find parliamentary consensus over the terms of its departure from the European Union ahead of an April 12 deadline, prompting warnings from some officials that the risk of a no-deal exit is increasing.
Azevedo said in Mexico City that economists were best placed to estimate the potential impact of a no-deal Brexit, which would leave the British economy trading on WTO rules.
"But I would say there will be costs, and the costs may be very significant in some sectors, and maybe less significant in other sectors. But overall, there will be an impact, we all know that," he told Reuters in an interview.
Separately, Azevedo sounded a note of caution on ongoing efforts to resolve a dispute over the future of the WTO's Appellate Body, the top court of global trade.
Washington has long argued that WTO judges have routinely broken with procedures and exceeded their mandates, and in a bid to force reforms, the U.S. government has blocked the appointment of judges to the Appellate Body.
If continued, the tactic could render the body inoperable by December, when terms end for two of the remaining three judges. Under WTO rules, three judges are required to hear appeals.
Azevedo said WTO member states were seeking to find a way around the impasse, noting that it was chiefly a U.S. concern.
"The truth is that it's difficult to know if we're advancing or not," he said, "because the Americans haven't been contributing in a very active way to these discussions."
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/no-deal-brexit-may-steep-costs-sectors-wto-023452504--finance.html
European Council President Donald Tusk is proposing to offer the UK a 12-month "flexible" extension to its Brexit date, according to a senior EU source.
His plan would allow the UK to leave sooner if Parliament ratifies a deal, but it would need to be agreed by EU leaders at a summit next week.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47821646
At Westminster, the Daily Telegraph suggests Prime Minister Theresa May is being pushed towards giving MPs a vote on holding another referendum as part of cross-party talks designed to find a way through the Brexit impasse.
It claims ministers have discussed the option of including a new referendum in a series of indicative votes, which would be held if Labour and the Tories fail to reach a consensus on a way forward.
The Conservative MP, Nigel Evans, is quoted as saying such a move would completely shatter "the little bit of credibility" Mrs May has left.
The Financial Times suggests that even if Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn agree a deal, there's little certainty that MPs would approve it.
The problem, as the paper sees it, is that a compromise Brexit agreement would be "too soft" for Eurosceptic Tories, while if it didn't include another referendum it would be too hard for some Labour MPs.
The number of potential rebels on both sides, the FT says, means "the parliamentary maths cannot be taken for granted".
Meanwhile, the Times says a number of cabinet ministers are plotting to prevent the prime minister agreeing to a long Brexit extension.
It says some fear Mrs May could agree to delaying the process by up to a year.
The paper reports Brexit-supporting ministers have held two so-called "pizza club" meetings in which they discussed tactics.
The paper's policy editor, Oliver Wright, sets out why he thinks the Brexit deadlock could last for months.
He says there's deep pessimism that talks between the Tories and Labour can secure a cross-party deal.
With European elections being held in May, and the potential of a new European Council president being appointed, he thinks it could be some time before the EU is ready to negotiate again.
That, he says, means "we're now looking at a Brexit stasis lasting for months to come".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-47822624
Drunk on their warped sense of nationalism, now Brexiteers are fighting for no deal ‘just because’
A section of the country believes we can overcome any problem by being Britain. To mention the details of how we’ll do it, is treachery, apparently
This latest move to join forces with the Labour leader suggests the Conservatives are slightly unsure what to do about Brexit. Because for three years they told us Corbyn’s a threat to our existence, if he gets in he’ll make you give your furniture to Hamas; he’ll introduce women-only gravity so men will be forced to float; Diane Abbott will live in your house and taser you if you sing the national anthem; schools will be handed to the IRA and your kids will have to wear a balaclava and fire rockets at the PE teacher or they’ll get detention. He’s a spy, an antisemite; your gran will be forced to become a **** and the next day forced to become an Islamic extremist and arrest herself under sharia law.
And now they’ve adjusted this slightly, to decide his input is essential to sort out Britain’s most important issue in 75 years.
If these talks break down, they’ll be even more desperate, and Theresa May will stand in front of her podium to tell us: “This is why I am to hold discussions with the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, to see if they can think of anything. Also, because I’m determined to respect the verdict of the British people, I’ve asked the leaders of Hezbollah and the Women’s Institute if they can help out, maybe with an agreement in which we supply rocket-propelled grenades made of homemade chutney, in return for leaving the EU in an orderly fashion on 22 May.”
It’s perplexing how this can have happened, because the leaders of the Leave campaign assured us the European Union would back down, as it needs us more than we need it. Many Brexiteers are sticking with this and have insisted that if we hold our nerve, the EU will retreat at the last minute as it always leaves it late.
In a few years, we’ll be crawling through the woods, attacking each other with twigs to see who gets to eat a caterpillar, and the ERG will broadcast from a transmitter made of dandelions: “The important thing is to hold our nerve, they’ll back down any day soon because they need us more than we need them.”
It’s a mark of our eccentric charm that these people have been allowed to run the place. The group’s deputy-chair is Mark Francois, who clearly isn’t human, as he’s like the robot that gets stabbed at the end of The Stepford Wives and shouts random phrases.
So twice a day he appears on television, is asked for a comment and growls: “A customs union would make all our chickens explode. I could take on Portugal on my own, because when I was in the territorial army I marched three miles round Dorking one Saturday. Denmark is more horrible than an ostrich in your toilet. The only single market I’d vote for is one that sold fruit and veg and every morning shoved a grapefruit up Jean-Claude Juncker’s **** and made him dance the polka.”
This is the attitude that got us here. Many Leavers insist anything other than crashing out without a deal “would betray what 17.4 million people voted for”. But it’s possible that if you look carefully, leaving without a deal isn’t quite what the Leave campaign said before the referendum.
For example, Liam Fox said it would be “the easiest deal in history”. To be fair this is true, as long as the only one you measure it against is Custer’s deal with the Sioux after he was captured at Little Bighorn.
The entire campaign insisted a deal would be simple, so it’s not entirely certain that everyone who voted Leave wanted no deal. But I suppose these are just different ways of calculating. Maybe Brexiteers should add in all the people who voted in the Ukrainian election as well, and all the people who voted for Stacey Dooley in Strictly Come Dancing, and say to stay in a customs union would be a betrayal of 53 million people.
Then everyone can interpret the referendum result in whatever way they fancy. Teenage arsonists should tell the magistrate: “17.4 million people voted for me to burn down the nextdoor neighbour’s shed,” and they’d walk free.
Many of the Leave politicians not only underestimated the problems of leaving, they didn’t even notice them. David Davis was asked around the time of the referendum, how we could deal with the problems it could create in Ireland, and said: “We’re Britain, we know how to sort out Ireland.” It wasn't reported at the time, but very occasionally it pays to have friends who are close to a Belgian MEP who’s been chatting to the former Brexit secretary.
The first point here is the accuracy, as a scholar of British history he’s spotted that over a period of 800 years, Britain hardly heard a peep out of Ireland.
But also, perhaps this explains the current predicament. A section of the country believes we can overcome any problem, by being Britain. To mention the details is treachery.
So it would work to leave on WTO rules, even though no one appears to have the slightest clue what they are, any more than anyone understood the problems of leaving the EU. Because then we can spend the next 50 years moaning about the WTO, and complaining its holding us back and we should leave it NOW because we’re BRITAIN.
Then we can have a referendum on leaving the laws of physics, because for too long they’ve been holding Britain back, demanding fire warms things up and when it’s dark it’s harder to see things. Let us send particles in the direction WE want to send them and not where Isaac Newton says they should go, and at last our nation will be free.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-no-deal-talks-votes-labour-theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-a8855011.html
Many people threaten to shoot referees every Saturday, when they have no wish or intent to really harm them.
Many people threaten to kill the spouses, family members, and work colleagues, on a daily basis without any thought of carrying out these threats.
Many people have lost all patience with the current bunch of MPs.
I started a thread about the revoke A50 petition.
It was of interest to me, as at the time it was the fastest going petition ever, and became the biggest ever on the site.
I was interested for these reasons.
I was surprised that so many people were in favour of just knocking Brexit on the head. No new referendum, just cancel it.
I had absolutely no interest in the 77 year old, retired lecturer that started it as this was irrelevant to me. Why would she interest me? Ok she arranged the petition, but had no control over the popularity.
This was not the case for you. You had to knock this woman, in an effort to cause an argument.
You pointed out that she had threatened to shoot someone.
She claimed her Facebook account had been hacked, you disputed this, and I didn't care.
All this had no bearing on the petition, which has grown to well over 6million signatures.
This was a surprising number to me as it represents around half the number of people that voted for the Tories in the last election. It is a huge number of people that would like to just stop Brexit.
So you were attempting to divert attention from the number of signatures, by claiming that she wanted to shoot someone. I had no interest because it wasn't a petition in favour of shooting anyone. I made an off the cuff comment regarding shooting politicians, which years ago could have been referees. The only person that has attached any importance to this comment is you. Everyone else has taken it as an off the cuff, light hearted comment.
I have not subsequently shot any politicians, relatives, or referees and have no intention in doing so. This is also true of the woman that started the petition, as far as I know.
To suggest that such an off the cuff comment warrants a police investigation is pathetic.
To even suggest that there is any link between the comment I made and actually murdering a politician is sick.
If you think that I only highlight ifs and maybes then debate them.
Defending JRM with reference to the AFD puts you in a very small minority.
I have posted lots of stories with plenty of substance, on this thread today and have not highlighted or promoted the JRM one in any way. You did that.
I didn't initially make any comments, I just posted the article, with the intention of letting any reader make their own mind up. I made no claims about him supporting the ideology of the AFD. However any British MP that quotes them or shares their comments about anything is making a stupid mistake.
The normally ultra cool JRM only lost it in the interview because he had been caught out and probably realised that it was a stupid mistake.
Your reaction is considerably different from the majority of the press.
Bolded parts addressed in order :
Yes many people do threaten to shoot other people , these are in the main very stupid and immature individuals , who haven't actually taken the time to realise what they are saying is incredibly dumb . These are from the same family of people who make jokes about their luggage having a bomb in it at airports.
On to the woman , who started the waste of time petition : It was Mumsie on the petition thread who first mentioned about her social media activity , and on further delving , it was apparent , Snow white she isn't. If you are going to put yourself up as being a saintly figure who's aim is to save the country from the plights of Brexit , then don't say something as stupid as you would like to shoot the prime minister . The moral high ground is totally lost .
As far as her conveniently saying she had been hacked upon being found out , and alleging she had received death threats ...I'm not buying it , simple as .
As far as your incredibly misguided comments on that thread , and noone else having any problems with it ..well no great surprise there when you see how many people are interested enough in the propaganda to actually post . Although that said , dragon1964 did say this on the thread , which I totally concur with : " Posting about shooting politicians, metaphorically or otherwise, is in very poor taste and does nothing to help your argument on this subject.
Has the murder of Jo Cox been forgotten so quickly."
As far as my contribution to this thread is concerned ...far too easy to sit back smugly and accuse me of just wanting an argument , when the reality is a) you can't argue with yourself and b) Who the **** do you think you are to be so arrogant as to think your viewpoint is the only one that counts ? .
Regarding my contribution to other threads , If i see something that interests me , I will post on it . Despite the occasional village idiot suggesting otherwise , if i disagree with something that is said , then it is because I disagree with it and not because I automatically wish to take the opposite default stance .
I've debated your " ifs and buts" many times on here , and you have a standard blinkered response . If someone was to take out all of the news articles that you had posted on this thread ( articles with a heavy remain slant and based on supposition and general mud slinging) , then out of all your long winded rhetoric , there would probably be less than 5% fact .
The JRM non story isn't something I intend going over and over with you on . I have already stated , that you can reference something from an individual /group without that meaning you are a fully signed up member to their ideology. Should he have thought better of publicly tweeting it , especially in the light of the fact that the press are out to discredit him at every opportunity , obv yes .
Happy Friday.
Theresa May has written to Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, asking the EU for a further delay to Brexit to 30 June.
The prime minister said she was still hopeful of leaving the bloc earlier and asked for the right for the UK to exit if a withdrawal deal is approved by parliament.
She had been expected to seek a longer delay but faced heavy pressure from pro-Brexit cabinet ministers to only seek a short extension.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-delay-extension-june-may-letter-tusk-a8856041.html
So reminiscent of the collaborating Vichy Government that ran France under the occupation. My cousin in America says the average American cannot believe that Britain has allowed itself to become a shambolic laughing stock.
Britain belongs on a shelf in a Pepe la Sal somewhere between the Oxo and the Knor stock pots.
Brexiteers have pledged to 'go nuclear' after Theresa May today wrote to the EU asking for permission to delay Brexit until June 30.
But Donald Tusk has already said that a 12-month 'flextension' to March 31 2020 is 'the only reasonable way out' of the crisis and will urge leaders of the EU's 27 member states to back him later today.
This morning the Prime Minister sent a letter to Mr Tusk to formally request an extension to Article 50 that will delay the UK's departure beyond April 12 to June 30 - but wants a 'termination clause'.
This would allow the UK to leave on May 22 - the day before European elections - if a deal can be pushed through the UK Parliament.
Theresa May will write to EU Council President Donald Tusk to request an extension to Article 50 that will delay the UK's departure beyond April 12
Begging the EU for another extension the PM said: 'This impasse cannot be allowed to continue. In the UK it is creating uncertainty and doing damage to faith in politics, while the European Union has a legitimate desire to move on to decisions about its own future'.
But Mrs May's letter admits that if she fails Britain would go to the polls to elect MEPs between May 23 and May 26, who would then be paid a £85,000-a-year salary to sit in Brussels from July as the UK tries to leave.
Brexit in-depth: All the latest news, analysis and expert opinion
EU sources have said they will reject Mrs May's June 30 Brexit date and tell her that a year-long deal is the only option. With No Deal now off the table she would be forced to accept it.
Brexiteer Owen Paterson tweeted that Tories should 'go nuclear' and push again for No Deal while Tory ERG chairman Jacob Rees-Mogg said today: 'If a long extension leaves us stuck in the EU we should be as difficult as possible. We could veto any increase in the budget, obstruct the putative EU army and block Mr Macron’s integrationist schemes.
Brexiteer Marcus Fysh told MailOnline 'we don't need more time, we need the right approach' and suggested Tory grassroots members might refuse to help elect Conservative candidates if the UK took part in the European elections.
He said: 'The EU has the alternative arrangement proposals we worked up and wants to talk about them, but UK has not yet formally tabled them.
‘They don't want an unhelpful and unhappy group in the European Parliament and local Conservative parties will not be working to get Conservatives elected under the circumstances.
‘The way to unite the party and DUP, make a success of Brexit with a good relationship with the EU and heroic legacy for the Prime Minister is to get on with fixing the backstop as the PM's own colleagues have suggested now.’
And ERG deputy chairman Steve Baker added: ‘The PM could get us out with a deal if only she would secure changes to the backstop in line with the Brady amendment which she whipped for.
‘If only the Government would abandon pursuit of a customs union in all but name, this crisis would end.’
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/brexiteer-outrage-as-brussels-demands-a-12-month-flextension-tusk-says-moving-uks-departure-back-a-year-is-only-sensible-way-out-as-pm-reluctantly-asks-for-extension-to-june-30/ar-BBVDPTK?ocid=spartandhp
We are the ones who can't agree the deal....Europe don't wnat the divorce so why would they make it easy for us to go? One country(us) asking 27 others to agree for an(other) extension
Votes are only the tip of the iceberg
First, EU laws pass through several stages of negotiations in the Council and the European Parliament.
So the UK government’s ability to influence policies doesn’t only occur through voting—which is a ‘Yes’ or a ‘No’ situation—but also in negotiations over the actual text of a draft law.
Many accounts have shown that the UK diplomatic service has—at least historically—been very skilled in such negotiations over important laws.
Second, the records only relate to votes on proposed laws that eventually pass.
So we simply do not know how often the UK successfully opposed proposals, or failed to get things it wanted, as these are not mentioned in the official figures.
The UK has been in a losing minority more often over the past few years
In recent years the UK has been more often on the losing side of these votes.
Research by Dr Hagemann and Professor Hix shows that between 2009 and 2015 the UK voted against the majority 12.3% of the time, compared to 2.6% of the time between 2004 and 2009.
More where that come from , if you would like , and guess what not from the sun or Daily mail !
I see where you have cut n pasted that from.
https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/
My 'facts' come from the top half of that same article but I've seen it backed up by some guy on twitter too. He listed all 74 laws and analysed then one by one.
Exact figures are a grey area I agree, but figures still show that the EU is not the controlling beast it is portrayed as in MSM which a vast of people get their opinion from. I'm not suggesting you.
Personally I'm not happy with a potential 8% drop in GDP (BoE, IMF), companies leaving in droves, less safety, lower food standards, medicine shortages etc resulting from a potential no deal. Also having 2 young kids I want them to have the freedom to work and study in Europe should they wish.
We had 2 world wars with our neighbours only in the last century and I believe working together as closely as possible with our European neighbours can only be progress, why try to dismantle it? Yes, the EU has it's problems but we are a major player in the EU and can change things, isolating ourselves is a step backwards.
Just my 2c.
I like your 2c @Remainer, and good to see some fresh blood in the debate and on the forum generally.