Constitutional Crisis?

[mushroom25]

Brexit Advice: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46419790

is this as serious as labour are painting it?

[Jackdaw33]

It all depends on who leads the Tories into an election. Anyone but May and I would put money on them winning a healthy majority.

[ichkeria]

A no confidence vote does not automatically lead to a general election. There would be two weeks for the Tories to try to form a new government or form a government of national unity (no laughing at the back please) which process would corrrspond with the height of the Christmas panto season (oh yes it would!)

[vetuste_ennemi]

A GE means Corbyn. The half of the Tory vote which wanted Brexit will not vote except for honest (who dat den da) pro-Brexit MPs.

A Corbyn government will do far more harm to me and Britain's youngsters than any no-deal Brexit. But at least we can get rid of Chavez in five years and start unpicking the harm caused by his version of Socialism.

If he gets us out of the EU it's a price worth paying.

[Jackdaw33]

A vote of no confidence in the government will not pass. An internal vote in the Tory party regarding no confidence in the leader is a different matter.

[jim360]

Pretty optimistic there -- there are only a few rabble-rousers against May at the moment and they can't even get to 15% against her, let alone 50%+1...

[vetuste_ennemi]

But sadly he won't.

Still, Jim and his ilk will be be happy with promises and policies which sound good.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Dear me...rabble? Let's not bother ourselves with arousal type metaphors, innit.

[jim360]

Why wouldn't Corbyn get us out of the EU? Ironically, he believes in Brexit rather more than Theresa May does!

Beyond that, of course, Corbyn is leaving in some dreamland himself, since he seems currently to be convinced that within about three months he can renegotiate everything...

[vetuste_ennemi]

Where's the Pedant when you need him?

[ichkeria]

A no confidence vote WILL pass if the DUP support it. Quite simply. The government goes not have the numbers otherwise. Of course they’ll do their best to use this threat as leverage, maybe successfully. They do not have to worry about elections or the fact that their position on Brexit is at odds with the majority in NI.

[gulliver1]

" Another Referendum may be the PMs only option" loved reading that bit.

[Old_Geezer]

One doesn't wish to get rid of MPs that vote against the deal, and little likelihood, after May's last GE and her actions since, of removing callers for further referendums on the same issue, or worse. The Tories failed so far to replace her and install someone willing to go in a non-subservient direction. Best one can hope for is the House bins the deal, sees through any attempt to ask the same question again, and removes her afterwards, possibly after, or before preferably, we leave without an agreed deal.

[Gromit]

Why on earth should the advice be confidential?
If MPs are to vote on whether to accept May’s deal, they should be informed of all the available facts and that includes the legal ramifications.
To expect MPs to support the deal while being excluded from seeing the legal advice is both disingenuous, and will encourage themeven more to reject it.
ALL the opposition parties (not just Labour) are putting on pressure to see the legal advice, so I expect May will have to publish it, or the vote (against) will be a foregone conclusion.

[ichkeria]

Gromit: as a general principle govt legal advice is kept confidential as otherwise lawyers might be inhibited from offering full and frank and therefore more useful advice. It’s the same principle Assange threatened by his release of US diplomatic cables. However in this instance an exception ought probably to be made: its hard to see what the govt would have to hide that we don’t know anyway: that we’d be tied to a backstop permanently if no alternative is negotiated? We know that anyway. The backstop actually is a very good arrangement for the U.K. : closed borders and tariff free trade. The PM cannot shout about this of course as it offends the idea of sovereignty and most of all would infuriate the DUP. But it’s a scenario the EU has every incentive to negotiate away in due course.

[vetuste_ennemi]

The legal advice would probably be that the "deal" after the extension would bind ourselves permanently to the EU regulatory and tariff regime, because withdrawal from the backstop would require mutual agreement between May and the Liechtenstein drunk, or between one of her successors and the same sot, or an unelected similar.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Difficult to see why there's no sign of self-respect in the Remain group.

[ichkeria]

Like I say, we know that anyway (deciphering the crude bits). The backstop is there until something replaces it. And if nothing replaces it, it stays. That is what a backstop is for :-)

[vetuste_ennemi]

Decent Leavers (I hope that's most) never wanted to quit and say "Yah boo" to the Kraut's.(Goodbye and thanks for keeping our fish" perhaps.)

It's in our mutual interest to carry on trading on good terms, but we disagree with are unwilling to co-operate in your political aspirations.

[jim360]

If only you could be so generous to the motivations of Remainers.

[ichkeria]

I think a more likely inhibition would be in the small print of the lawyers’ arguments which one can have no doubt would be pored over extensively. The ultimate nightmare would be: “this is not strictly legal, but ... “ :-)