Why Is Agent Cob In Such A Rush To Vote Down The Brexit Deal?

[ToraToraTora]

https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-cut-mps-christmas-break-short-for-early-vote-on-mays-deal-says-corbyn-11593049
MPs on all sides have said they wont pass the non deal so what does Jezza want? some sort of na na nana na moment to gloat about? we know it won't pass as is and the EUSSR wont budge so what's the point in having a vote?

[Zacs-Master]

He must be bored with the in-laws. Or, more likely, they’re bored with him.

[Khandro]

It is outrageous that the Dec.11th vote was called off by Theresa May, and the sooner it has been done and over with the better - he's quite right i.m.o.
May simply wants to prolong the agony in the hope that MPs will vote for it out of lack of time and exasperation

[Zacs-Master]

How would prolonging the agony make MPs vote the way she wants? You really do have a strange way of thinking, Khandro. I suppose you tip-off leave voter logic, tho.

[Zacs-Master]

Typify

[mushroom25]

//You really do have a strange way of thinking//

no stranger than Mr Corbyn himself, it seems -
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46697749
//Mr Corbyn told the Independent: "What I suspect is that it's a completely cynical manoeuvre to run down the clock and offer MPs the choice of the devil or the deep blue sea."//

[youngmafbog]

"I suppose you tip-off leave voter logic, tho."

At least he has some logic. More can be said for you remainiacs who can only inslut peoples intelligence, produce fear tactics and generally produce no decent argument whatsoever.

I agree with COB on this one, although I suspect he has a GE at the back of his mind. On that one though he wants to be careful since it is highly unlikley, at present, he would win a vote of no confidence.

[Khandro]

Zacs; //You really do have a strange way of thinking, Khandro.//
?????
Answered by mushroom

[jim360]

The less time there is to do anything else, the more likely it becomes that MPs will, eventually, bow to that time pressure and pass through May's Deal (with, perhaps, some piecemeal changes) in order to avoid the No Deal scenario. So in that sense everyone should want the vote sooner rather than later if they want to vote against this deal.

I find myself in agreement with Khandro, then, albeit coming from a radically different viewpoint! Surprised at TTT for the same reason. The sooner the deal is rejected the sooner something else can be sorted out.

[Old_Geezer]

The clock will run down anyway as MPs squabble over whether they respect democracy, or are above it. It'll run down because there is no legitimate alternative other than the choice of May's 'EU trap' or genuinely exiting as decided; so the latter must now occur in any government system that claims to be moral/ethical.

[dannyk13]

Jim //(with, perhaps, some piecemeal changes)//
How can that happen when the EU are adamant that there will not be any further negotiations.

[Old_Geezer]

And the impossibility of any significant changes, even if they did shift fractionally and then hope for an agreement (as that tactic has worked elsewhere for them in the past).

[jim360]

The current most likely scenario -- according to Theresa May, at least -- is presumably that the deal is voted on and rejected, but then that there may be some very tiny and frankly insignificant changes made. Something, anything, that would allow Theresa May to bring the deal back to the House for a second try. I don't know what those changes would be -- probably they would be more about the explanatory notes or some such -- but the idea might be that the first vote is symbolic, a way of saying "we aren't happy with this", before the second vote is taken, when MPs might then say "but we'll take it anyway as there is nothing better.

OG -- like it or not, democracy in the UK rests in Parliament, and therefore in MPs. So they can't sit "above democracy".

[Old_Geezer]

By definition democracy involves all the people (who choose to give their opinion). "Representative democracies" fall short because those elected may consider themselves above democracy.

[cassa333]

So that time isn't wasted while the europhiles can scupper brexit.

[Old_Geezer]

"we'll take it anyway as there is nothing better"
Given the insignificance of any potential changes, only if they wish to prove themselves undemocratic liars, and devastate any remaining public faith.

[jim360]

The purpose of a representative democracy ought to be pretty obvious, because not every decision can be voted on by everybody. That would be a waste of time and money, and would defy common sense. No, representative democracies make much more sense than you give them credit for.

Representatives are accountable to the people for the decisions they make, but are then left free to get on with it while the people are free to live their lives in the meantime.

With respect to the EU vote, then, MPs have been given an instruction, and it is up to them how best to carry it out. That may involve accepting this deal, or it may not; and if they cannot reach consensus, then they may wish to ask the people again. In all cases, democracy survives. It's a complete fallacy to pretend that it dies as soon as MPs start thinking for themselves.

[Old_Geezer]

The true purpose of a representative democracy is pretty obvious. It is to decide on the uncontoversial day to day running of the country, and any larger decisions where time is critical so there's no chance of asking the people. But all go beyond that remit. Power corrupts, or do they say.

Choosing between one lot to lord it over you, that you aren't happy with, and another lot you aren't happy with, is a strange type of freedom.

Trying to change votes they don't like by asking until they get a change is anti-democratic. They have the decision, it's their job to deliver it. Opting for something different isn't delivering it either.

[ToraToraTora]

jim: " find myself in agreement with Khandro, then, albeit coming from a radically different viewpoint! Surprised at TTT for the same reason. The sooner the deal is rejected the sooner something else can be sorted out. " - by all means but what can be sorted out? the EUSSR wont budge so no deal is the default. So vote it down and then wait till after 29/03 but is voting it down necessary at all? I get it that the PM is hoping that delaying will mean that MPs may just pass it to avoid no deal but equally she could be playing chicken with the EUSSR.