Parliament To Vote On The Brexit Deal Before Christmas.

[Gromit]

It seems to be a deal that no one wants. Will MPs vote for it anyway?
If the Government lose the vote what would happen next. Would May have to resign?

[dannyk13]

I don't think there is any doubt that they will vote against it which will leave a no deal situation.I doubt that May will resign.

[jim360]

Who even knows at this point? If there were a vote tomorrow it would go down in flames. Maybe there'll be two votes: a symbolic rejection, followed a grudging acceptance?

[ToraToraTora]

I've not heard many speak in favour but I think the invertebrates in the house will push this through.

[Gromit]

// The bookmakers suggest May will be gone before the end of the year, with odds of 4/5 on a 2018 exit.
Ahead of any Tory candidate, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is seen as the most likely next prime minister by bookmakers, with odds as low as 4/1 from William Hill and Betfred. //

Not sure how that would play out.
Normally losing a vote such as this would mean the Prime Minister resigning or the calling of a General Election. But we live in strange times. Perhaps after losing a parliamentary vote would be the time for the 1922 committee to deal their ‘No confidence’ card and topple May who would be a lameduck PM.

[dannyk13]

It will take a mighty shove.According to the latest news the DUP, the SNP, ,Labour and many Tory MP's will vote against it.

[ToraToraTora]

Gomit: Even if the PM goes there wont be a GE, the house can't force one without the Tories and they wont play ball. They'll elect a new leader and carry on.

[Gromit]

// the house can't force one without the Tories and they wont play ball //

176 Conservative MPs backed Remain in the Referendum. It would only take few of those to be enough to cause a General Election or a new Referendum, a last ditch attempt to kill Brexit altogether. Some Tory MPs (in safe seats) might be tempted.

[Buenchico]

There's a good analysis of how the numbers stack up here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46239782

[Buenchico]

Also worth a look:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-46311052/could-there-be-a-second-brexit-vote

[ToraToraTora]

gromit: "176 Conservative MPs backed Remain in the Referendum" - yeah they may want to remain but they don't want to be out on their Aprils do they? Why would they risk putting Agent Cob into No 10?

[ToraToraTora]

but more to the point what would a GE achieve? We'd still be heading for no deal brexit. I can't see how a GE makes any difference at all.

[Gromit]

TTT,
If her deal is rejected by Parliament, then her calling a second referendum on accept my brexit deal or stay in, would end the stalemate.

[ToraToraTora]

yes it would but I don't think she'd get that through either. Accept my non deal or stay in would be a betrayal of the 2016 referendum. If she did have a referendum it would have to include no deal brexit. Not sure how a trinary choice would work though, would over 33.3% on on any choice be enough?

[kvalidir]

6/4 on another referendum. Let's be having you :)

[jim360]

A three-way referendum would be a great way to let Remain win (and, in the process, would once again show up FPTP voting systems for the travesty they are). Win-win for me :)

[vetuste_ennemi]

Five years of Corbyn would be better than the permanent vasselage which May's deal will impose.

[Togo]

Best case scenario is that Parliament throws out this dog's breath of a capitulation and that the Conservatives table a motion of no confidence in Treason May and elect a new leader before the Trots table a motion of no confidence(they can) and call for a G.E.

[vetuste_ennemi]

But what if in the second referendum the "people" get it wrong again, as in "we want out, but we don't accept this deal"? Where would we go from there referendum three apart?

I do assume that "out but no to that" would be an option on the ballot paper.

Or do the clever people like Kvalidir and Jim think that's far to dangerous an option given the stupidity of most Brexiteers?

[jim360]

Depends on what you mean by getting it wrong. The people weren't necessarily wrong the first time, but the politicians who put the question did so dishonestly, and had no plan for the answer that was given. What is required is that the same mistake is not made this time, which is to say that government must be ready to carry out the result of the referendum, whatever that is.

In practice, this probably means that "no deal" doesn't belong on the referendum, because the government clearly is not ready for and has no intention of allowing this to happen.

[kvalidir]

Essentially unless Brexiteers really are blithering morons (and I don't happen to think they are by and large), we have a choice; leave and we suffer the consequences of that or we stay and, well, don't.
Europe is not going to change it's stance, it's in self protection mode (quite rightly) and it's naive to think we can leave and have it all our own way.
THAT was never going to happen ( which I think most Remainers saw clearly and by contrast for some reason Brexiteers didn't).