A group of 30 top European intellectuals, including Nobel laureates, literary giants and historians have signed a letter declaring that Europe is "coming apart before our eyes.
They cite the arch-right populism as a wave that uses "resentment, hatred and a cortege of sad passions surrounding and submerging it".
They do not name the countries, but it most certainly refers to the arch-right populism in Poland, Italy, the rising AfD - Alternative for Germany - in the Bundestag, Marine Le Pen's rising Front National and the Brexiters.
The text further reads:
"Abandoned from across the Channel and from across the Atlantic by the two great allies who in the previous century save it twice from suicide; vulnerable fo the increasing over manipulations of the master of the Kremlin, Europe as an idea, as will and representation, is coming apart before your eyes".
The infectious disease of destructive populism in the US started the minute when Trump came down the golden escalator in his gaudy Trump Tower on 5th Avenue.
While still campaigning he already stuck his ugly nose into the affairs of the UK - and others -, while egging on the Brexiters from his Turnberry golf resort.
His reason? Money, money, money, and declaring at that time the British Pound would fall to new lows and his golf properties will get tons of more money from American and other foreign tourists.
1
Why is a second referendum necessary, where is the law that says that. Surely if parliament had any courage they could just void the first referendum and move on. This waffling does no one any good.
@mcp
What on earth do you think a referendum is?
Referenda can't be nullified by the UK parliament, nor can US State referenda be nullified by a the respective state's legislature.
End of story.
1
What you get for idiotically chirping "Brexit means Brexit" for two and half years and only trying to really figure it out a few weeks from crash out.
4
Winners and losers? The winner is Putin and non-EU autocrats everywhere and English xenophobes. The losers are Europe, and the rest of the world--economics and ethical governance.
Give trump an assist -if BREXIT and especially a 'no deal' Brexit goes through. It could indeed turn into his 7th bankruptcy. And America could be his 8th. Ethically and in terms of good governance we yanks are already getting close.
6
To Britain. With all your turmoil and angst and fear over the Brexit fiasco, you should, despite that fact, consider yourselves very fortunate indeed, not to have Donald Trump in your government. He would be making it far worse than it is.
3
@Boltar. I think I agree, but let me put it this way, in words I know I understand:
When does “leave” not mean “leave?”
A) When the referendum to leave was infected with fraud?
B) When the terms of withdrawal turn out to be inimical to the to the vital interests of the nation that voted to withdraw?
C) When the citizenry that voted to withdraw changes its mind based on new facts and realities on the ground?
D) All of the above?
E) None of the above?
And the correct answer: D) All of the above.
@Wabi-Sabi:
Democracy is NOT a “joke.” It is a serious, hard, business. Although it can be slow and messy, it is incredibly durable. It is tolerant of different points of view. And it is able to adapt to changing circumstances. Those who seek to sow anarchy and confusion by falsely equating a healthy debate or a change in direction for weakness, do not understand the essence of Democracy. As Churchill aptly put it, Democracy is the worst form of government except for every other known to man.
10
The only value to continued reporting on Brexit is to show how incompetent these “populist” or “nationalist” politicians are.
They all seem very un-prepared to actually govern
8
@Scott Spencer
Indeed, and all of them remind everyone here in the US and abroad of Trump, the populist nationalist.
1
Many times in history, the British political class has fluttered and bumbled into bad consequences. The British people have been lucky, really, that their isolation from Europe has always given them time - for new leaders to emerge, and for the worst of outcomes to be avoided.
But it cannot go on forever. At some point, the moth hits the flame, and that’s that.
4
The whole debate in Britain has an air of unreality to it. Everyone is living in fantasy land. May is living in a fantasy where the EU and its members do what Parliament tells them to. Corbyn is living in a fantasy where the EU will allow Britain to pick and choose pieces of the customs union and single market arrangements once there’s a new government in place (which in itself is a fantasy, there will not be an election before 29 March). The second referendum crowd lives in a fantasy where such a thing can pass parliament.
7
"Prime Minister Theresa May will be under political pressure to follow any proposals that win the backing of a majority of lawmakers."
What pressure? From Parliamentary tradition? That's a joke. If she is not legally forced to do it, she will do as she pleases, Parliament be damned. It's not even debatable, it's a fact May does what she likes unless a court tells her otherwise.
1
We need to remember that the Brexit vote was influenced by the same forces that infiltrated our media and influenced our own votes in 2016.
Putin is laughing his head off at Britain's withdrawal from the European Union.
The problems with the EU rest with Germany, whose heavy handling of Greece, for example, added insult to injury, encouraging a slack people to amass a debt they could never pay; and, worse, allowing a million economic migrants to come in, collect welfare, refuse to assimilate, and wreak havoc with various nations' housing, economy, environment, and charitable impulses.
Far better to have created safe zones in the migrants' own countries. Patriots fight oppressors; they don't flee. These were no orderly, grateful immigrants like my grandparents, or ordinary refugees, for that matter; these were angry, entitled, demanding young men -- along with some women and children the press photographed all out of proportion to their numbers.
Britain could have found a different way to handle Germany's new mastering of Europe than to break from an alliance.
Mr. Trump encouraged Brexit. That should have told the Brits something.
8
@B. I agree with you that the EU basically ruined Greece by taking a country with zero debt, and low property values, and flooding it with cheap credit on that property. The former Finance Minister Varifakous endorses, like most people, the notion that a united Europe is essential, but strongly condemns the trend that began with monetary union, and hails the danger of a Euro that is basically hedging its bets by ensuring that a decline in the Euro's value hits the countries least able to absorb that loss.
Britain's grievances are not merely xenophobic outbursts from municipalities damaged by globalization. They are strongly rooted in anger over insufficient oversight and control over global trading organizations who are basically exempt from national constitutional law.
1
@Sequel
"Britain's grievances are not merely xenophobic outbursts from municipalities damaged by globalization. They are strongly rooted in anger over insufficient oversight and control over global trading organizations who are basically exempt from national constitutional law."
Or, it's simply borne of ignorance of the magnitude illustrated in this remark.
2
Today's letter by major supermarket and junk food sellers urging voters to tell their member of Parliament to vote down the option for a No Deal Brexit may well backfire.
The clock does indeed appear to be running down, but it is the EU as much as the May Government that is forcing that. For as long as the EU insists that the EU, and not the UK, will govern the final status of the Irish border, the UK is not going to pass a negotiated deal with the EU.
Since May has already arranged to re-confront the EU this week and in February, and to re-open the amendment process in Parliament if the EU won't relent, there is no point in even having another vote on the May Plan (which was defeated), meaning that No Deal Brexit will take place on March 29.
@Sequel
"For as long as the EU insists that the EU, and not the UK, will govern the final status of the Irish border, the UK is not going to pass a negotiated deal with the EU. "
Where do you get your information? The Daily Mail?
Brexit is Brexit. The border with the EU is an EU border, and in the absence of a negotiated agreement the EU will be required to treat it as such, not because it wants to go it alone but only because the UK side is entirely absent from negotiations.
Your various comments remind me of Boris Johnson's "have cake and eat it" doodle.
5
Perhaps any new proposal will include a public flogging of little davie cameron, broadcast to your personal phone, tablet, tv, desktop or additionally in wide screen and IMAX theaters through the isles.
5
So if this turns into a hunt for a majority of votes to pass, the answer is as clear and simple as the rest of this process: Just pass every single amendment and don't worry that the plan has built-in logical contradictions - it hasn't stopped them from charging ahead with it so far.
And don't forget that when she goes back to the EU, they add the obligatory last requirement of their demands "and a pony".
Because from over here, it seems they're basically asking to be separate from the EU, but for the EU to graciously let them keep only the bits the Brexiteers like.
So being able to establish a no-border border between EU member Ireland and UK member Northern Ireland should be exactly as easy and realistic as, oh, having Mexico start funding a wall on our southern border.
5
Parliament is getting multiple chances to vote on Brexit. The people should at least get a second chance.
34
What I have failed to understand is a process question, namely how such a consequential referendum question was put to the UK voting public without requiring a supermajority for its passage, to prevent the very fever of discord that is now gripping the country. Was there any historical precedent requiring this low threshold, or perhaps even the reverse that was ignored? Was there even a parliamentary discussion on this issue? The U.S.'s belabored Constitutional Amendment process serves as a contrast when democratically considering significant changes of national polity.
18
The referendum was non-binding. It had no constitutional authority. Parliament then passed a statute activating the Article 50 process. That is the legal authority. Parliament does not need another referendum to reverse course. The PM though does need another statute to reverse. She does not have that authority on her own.
8
@John Grillo
Brexit is not entirely rational - see: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/26/brexiters-never-had-a-real-exit-plan-no-wonder-they-avoided-the-issue
and search for:
‘Until 2013, even rightwing politicians accepted that they could not have the best of all possible worlds. Britain was tied into an integrated European economy. No government could wrench it away in a couple of years. Britain would have to stay in the customs union, as Liam Fox said in 2012. The most significant thinker in the Brexit movement went further. Richard North, the advocate of “Flexcit”, warned that, as a sudden departure would wreck people’s lives, Britain would have to be like Norway and stay in the single market, “at least in the medium term”, as it dedicated many years, maybe more than a decade, to flexible negotiations about a future arrangement.
Rationally, a flexible approach made sense. But by the winter of 2013 the market for rational politics was faltering … Electorally, allowing millions to believe that the impossible was possible was perfect post-rational politics’
7
UK has no written constitution. Parliament is supreme. House of lords can only delay. Cameron didn’t bother to write a sensible referendum question because the Tories never thought that it might pass.
14
I understand the distress caused by sharp differences of opinion. What I don't get is the apparent disregard of Conservatives for Europe's position on Ireland. The E.U. have said, in so many words, that they won't throw Ireland under the bus, but they--obviously--couldn't accept a completely porous border between different regulatory and trade regions. What is confusing about this? Tories want to have their cake and eat it.
26
@Blair
Perhaps those Tories think that Ireland will instead rejoin The Empire! You are absolutely right, few in Britain (especially in England) have ever taken the Irish seriously. In fact, while many English people have gone to France or Spain, few of them ever visit Ireland, probably out of some inchoate sense of guilt or the expectation that everyone in Ireland will hate them. That was never true, but it might be after a Hard Brexit!
13
@Julian
Ireland was supposed to be part of the UK itself not the Empire - this was one of the reasons for Catholic Emancipation in 1829 - O'Connell, a Catholic, could not take his seat as the County Member for Clare.
3
@Blair
Boris J actually promised the electorate that they could have their cake and eat it during the referendum. Brexit-supporting politicians, particularly Conservative ones have promised a chimera - this is one of the reasons they were fined by the Electoral Commission and the National Crime Authority is still investigating them.
12
David Cameron and the Tory leadership should be ashamed of themselves. The Labor Party should as well. Nor is the British public blameless. When did a politician's promise that the public can have its cake and eat it too ever come true?
The 2016 debate about Brexit was full of bald-faced lies, dark money and Russian meddling. With a turnout of around 60%, the pro-Brexit vote was 52-48%. A significant portion of the Leave vote had to do with protesting against an uncaring government rather than in favor of true disengagement with the EU. And was there a solitary voice to raise the alarm on how Brexit will affect the Irish border? Did anyone consider the real possibility that Scotland and perhaps Wales will leave the United Kingdom?
So, we've had the party, we've had the hangover. Now is the time for the British people to soberly assess what is at stake. The only way to do that is to have a second referendum.
49
Britain is part of Europe, and should be part of the European Union. The country's political class has shown itself terribly wanting in failing to communicate to the people that in this day and age, it's not practical or even possible to live apart from Europe. The best outcome of this Brexit mess would be for the politicians to finally exhaust themselves trying to square a circle, and take the question back to the nation having explained why Britain outside of Europe makes no sense.
61
@Dave Clemens
Britain is geographically party of Europe, but a majority of people in England do not really consider themselves a part of Europe. The Channel is more than a geographical divide, it's a cultural one.
The Continent has always been foreign, filled with foreigners who have tried for centuries to rule England by force--the Nordics, the French, the Germans. The EU has foreigners dictating UK laws, and a majority of people in England feel the country is ruled by Brussels law.
Please note that England is not the UK in general, as Scotland is wholeheartedly part of Europe. London, which has become Europe's financial capital, loves being part of Europe. But the man on the high street in the towns and villages of England (and probably Wales) was and is not happy and voted to leave. The man on the street wants that vote to be honored.
No matter what.
4
@Dave Clemens
But would the people believe the politicians? After he mess of Parliament, recently, I'm not sure they would. The ugly spirits are out of the bottle, I fear, and cannot be returned there.
6
@frugalfish This is not 1066 And All That. The EU is not William the Conqueror. I have spent considerable time both in Britain and on the Continent, and I know that while there is still an Up Yours Delors sentiment among certain segments of the British population, there is also a widespread realization that Britain's economy and way of life is intertwined with that of continental Europe. The "man on the high street" was fooled into voting Yes by unscrupulous politicians who claimed Britain could have the benefits of Europe without opening its doors to nasty foreigners. Now that same man, and woman, are starting to understand what they have wrought, and I bet you they would not again vote Yes in their majority.
25
I'm in my 60s. I have never British politics in such a shamefully incompetent mess.
The single issue of Brexit has paralysed government and consumed the electorate. No other decisions are being taken - all available bandwith is occupied.
Parliament has become insane - futile point scoring and wild, hysterical fantasy, futile, doomed plans. Animal noises, literally.
I'm no longer optimistic about any rescue referendum to reverse Brexit. I really now do fear that we're going over the cliff with our entire assembly of representatives asleep at the wheel.
It's like a very bad dream.
18
@nolongeradoc
'Animal noises, literally.'
Not much more rational a lot of the time but not literally.
There are exactly two rational exit paths: hard Brexit or cancel Brexit. Any reasonably well -informed person would choose cancel Brexit. But in the UK they did not have reasonable leadership. Holding a referendum to be decided by simple majority, in the face of years of political science research findings on these, testifies to an ignorance and lack of skill that is incompatible with any form of higher education or experience in management of politics. What May does is reckless and irresponsible and simply shamelessly exploitative and manipulative, toward the EU as well as the UK. Canceling Brexit can also mean that you promise to revote in 10 years, giving the UK enough time to educate its leaders on political science research, so that future debacles can be contained. The lack of competence around the original Brexit vote and its aftermath are just appalling aka a textbook case of management incompetence.
5
The UK will first vote to delay Brexit.
Next will be the People's Vote to stay in the EU.
The rich will never allow Brexit to happen. They will spread fear until they get what they want. Democracy is a joke.
3
@Wabi-Sabi
I suspect the rich rather like the idea of Brexit - the main Brexiteers are all well-off men who have avowed their dislike of the Welfare State, supported selling the NHS, and said that Brexit would be an opportunity to limit workers' rights.
3
Forget Brexit. Britain has a bleak future going it alone. They now have a chance to fix the Brexit mistake by putting forth another referendum to their citizenry, this one, hopefully, unencumbered by Russian interference. Call it “Brain,” as in right minded Brits using their brains to remain in the European Union. The EU has its shortcomings but Britain is much better off working within the system to address them than bailing out without an adequate substitute plan.
7
@Jeffrey Zuckerman
Leave means Leave.
This fear mongering reminds me of the Great Y2K Disaster that never happened.
Oh really? “Leave” was an utterly unconditional demand, even though it was a command made in complete unawareness of the actual terms of withdrawal? So Europe should set the most draconian possible of terms, and since the Brits said “leave”, they should be forced to live with the consequences, up to and including dissolution of their nation and obliteration of the economy, because … it’s so difficult to ask the people to confirm the specific terms of withdrawal? Sorry, that’s utterly irrational.
3
@Wab-Sabi
Screaming "leave means leave" from Montana is even more ridiculous than those folks in West Virginia screaming to "build that wall" on a border over a thousand miles removed from there.
2
Most of the time that I read the NYT’s reports of British politics, and the comments thereon, I feel I am getting the insightful views of a well-informed and (reasonably) well-disposed group of people in the Great Republic across the Atlantic, however - no names mentioned - there is sometimes a small number of Americans who post on here or on other websites concerning British politics, who lack genuine knowledge, sometimes relying on outdated clichés about the British and the Empire and confusing England and the UK, or the UK and the Empire et cetera.
I realise that a lot of the British Brexiteers seem reliant on outdated clichés about the Europeans but that is no justification for sophisticated cosmopolitan Yankees to do the same about the British.
15
What a mess.
5
Alas, the original sin was not to require a supermajority in the 2016 referendum called by prime minister David Cameron in his ill-advised gamble to neutralize Eurosceptics in his own Tory party. As several commentators have already pointed out, any national referendum on an issue of such high-consequence affecting a nation's sovereignty and place in the world should require at least a two-thirds majority, especially if the result cannot be undone - or if there is the risk of a protest vote or outside interference which could affect the outcome. In the event, there was only a narrow 52 to 48 majority who voted Leave. Opinion polls in recent months now suggest that a larger majority would vote to Remain. The only way out of this catastrophe is for British MPs to be allowed a free vote on all the amendments put forward tomorrow in the House of Commons. On this occasion, MPs must vote not in the interest of their party but in the interest of the country.
8
@Peter Hale
With respect, I think you are wrong. The original sin was to propose the referendum. A supermajority requirement would not have solved anything, as you might well have had a majority of people still voting Leave and then all the instability that we have now. Don't muddle the issue, Cameron screwed up when he gambled his country for his party and lost!
16
@Julian
With respect this makes poor sense - if a supermajority had been required beforehand, and comparisons had been made with constitutional amendments in the US beforehand, the small majority for Brexit would not have won ‘victory’ and the supporters of Brexit could not say that Brexit means Brexit and anything less is Treason and / or the frustration of the democratic mandate of the British people.
I sometimes point out to people that you cannot change the constitution of a typical golf club on the basis of a majority of less than two per cent.
8
There is one amendment that would be sure to get virtually unanimous support in the House of Commons. It is this: Release the UK from the tax obligations to, and the regulatory oversight from, the EU. In exchange, the UK would be allowed remain in the common market and trade under the EU tariff scheme.
The only problem with this amendment is that it would never receive approval from the EU as it view it as a precursor to many other nations of the EU seeking the same terms and conditions.
Thus, the UK has no practical way to extricate itself from the EU on terms that are reasonably favorable or acceptable to the UK.
2
@Schneiderman What tax obligations are you talking about? And are you aware that the UK always got a special treatment and exceptions from the EU rules?
5
England and Wales are the only countries in the EU (except for Sweden, I suppose) that were never invaded, occupied, ruled by a dictator, or rent apart by war in the 20th Century. Even Scotland has a military presence in Edinburgh Castle that feels much like an occupation, and English tanks rolled through the streets of Glasgow in 1919.
Even now, most Britons see WW2 as a simple clash of good-vs-evil, and have little sense of the messiness and catastrophe it caused in societies across the continent. As a result, I don't think most Britons can imagine how bad things can get.
I hope to goodness they don't find out.
5
@Julian English tanks? Are there such a thing? The British armed forces are neither English or Scottish, but British. Referring to them as English is a bit like referring to the Alaskan army or the Idaho Navy.
4
@AM
And the Welsh have been invaded by the English as well. The London-based educational authorities as late as the 19th and early 20th century attempted to suppress the Welsh language.
Julian in Madison seems well-disposed but ill-informed. I hope his wish in the last sentence of his post is satisfied and we don't find out how bad things can be.
3
@Julian
‘ … a military presence in Edinburgh Castle that feels much like an occupation, and English tanks rolled through the streets of Glasgow in 1919.’
Does the ‘military presence’ in Windsor or London – much photographed in their uniforms by tourists - feel like an occupation? Troops were called out in other parts of the UK to suppress disorder / protests in the run up to the First World War and the aftermath – they were called out all over th UK in the 19th Century at times of discontent, partly because the police force was too small to deal with such situations – a magistrate would ‘read the Riot Act ’ telling people to disperse in the presence of troops.
‘Even now, most Britons see WW2 as a simple clash of good-vs-evil’.
There ARE crudely simplistic interpretations of World War II (on both sides of the Atlantic) but where do you get that FROM?
4
Regarding "The Brexit Amendment Process That Could Reshape Britain’s Future"
This article compares the British process for the amendment of a bill to the American and in the process mis-characterizes the latter.
The article states, "At the beginning, at least, the amendment process is similar to that in the United States Congress. Bills are brought before the legislative body — by the government in Britain, by majority parties in the United States"
But there is nothing in the US Constitution defining or regarding "majority parties."
For instance, nothing has prevented Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent socialist, from bringing bills forward as he has done, and continues to do.
5
Britain, birthplace of democracy....sure...
2
@Brian Prioleau
I thought that was Greece.
5
@Brian Prioleau I think you are thinking of Athens
3
@Brian Prioleau.
No one ever said the UK is the birthplace of democracy.
With many people have said is that the House of Commons is the mother of all parliaments
6
"... At the very least, however, by Tuesday night Parliament should have a better idea of the support for some of the plans, whether hard, soft or, in the case of Mrs. May’s Plan B, somewhere in between.... "
After reading the whole story - I am not persuaded that the last paragraph is really the right conclusion.
This speaker - reminds me of our Madame Speaker - in that during this shutdown - she has single hadedly vetoed any compromises.
I think our amendment process is cleaner in that floor votes are required and not at the whim of one person. Admittedly, our speaker decides what comes to the floor.
To me, all these members suddenly waking up and "aghast" at Brexit cost - where have they been for the past two years.
Or for that matter - when they voted on referendum and Article 50.
This is worse than a buyer's remorse.
And if I were a betting man - Wednesday morning is going to be no more clearer than all mornings combined over Brexit.
This is a paralysis of power - afraid to cast a vote that says and means Brexit is Brexit.
1
And another vote apparently affected by Russian interference. Interesting that no one is looking into this across the pond.
3
@George Thomas
The Russians were likely involved in the referendum (as, it seems, in the 2016 election here in the US), but the UK is still deeply divided, and my sense from traveling to Leave-voting areas was that they were heartfelt in their commitment (even though I would have voted Remain).
Surely the real issue is the magnitude of the divide, of the inequalities in a nation where London overwhelms the other regions in its quest for resources, and where class divisions still fester. John Harris's excellent journalism in the Guardian helped me understand the Brexit vote more than any other reporting.
2
@George Thomas
Some people ARE looking at it. We don't know yet where the National Crime Agency investigation is going to lead us.
People may end up in gaol in the end although by that time they may have accomplished their (and Mr Putin’s) ambitions.
(I can see Arron Banks – bad boy of Brexit - publishing a jokey, ghost-written, volume in ten years’ time about how he helped get Britain out of the EU from his luxury retirement home on the Black Sea.)
1
Britain's own devices are once again afoot and things are sure to be messy. Mrs. May shot her cannon fodder and is naked to the elements of Parliament chaos. Unfortunately, UK politics are famous for shooting in circles instead of at the target. Mathematically, UK citizenry cannot afford to leave the Union and everyone in London will end up poorer.
2
@terry brady
...and people in the rest of the country might say that London getting poorer is how it should be. The inequalities in the UK are astonishing. Wales is poorer than Greece, for goodness sake! Britain is (or was) perhaps the richest city in Europe, but no other major UK city featured in the top 20 or so.
@Julian
I meant to write, "LONDON is (or was) perhaps the richest city in Europe, but no other major UK city featured in the top 20 or so."
1
@terry brady
'Britain's own devices are once again afoot and things are sure to be messy. Mrs. May shot her cannon fodder and is naked to the elements of Parliament chaos.'
What does that mean - was it translated from a foreign language by a computer program?
'Unfortunately, UK politics are famous for shooting in circles instead of at the target.'
Can you give us an example of this famous circularity being commented on elsewhere?
Most of the readers writing comments are convinced that Brexit will be a disaster.
I would recommend https://www.nytimes,com/2017/03/28/opinion/why-brexit-is-best-for-britain-the-left-wing-case
You might be surprised at the decency and intelligence of some of us who disagree.
3
@laurence
Thanks for the suggestion. Looks interesting.
Theresa May would be out of a job if anyone else wanted to step into her shoes at this inauspicious time. No one does.
6
Nothing good will be achieved as long as Theresa May remains as PM.
1
If the amendments yield a result of forcing May to go back and ask the EU to renegotiate, Barnier and Juncker should tell her to go jump in a lake. Let the UK live with its lousy decision.
9
This is just so dispiriting. May is prepared to destroy our financial stability to keep her party together. It is as simple as that. She is a dreadful politician with bad judgement (look at her record) and no matter what now transpires the country will remain hopelessly divided. When the economy goes south with no deal it will only add to the pressure for another independence referendum in Scotland which quite conceivably could finally rupture the UK this time round. If we think that Brexit is a disaster just wait for Scexit from the UK. We know that nationalism is poison and we have it in spades in the UK fuelled, ironically, by the Leave win. Let's hope the more courageous politicians like Cooper and Grieve and their supporters with the help of Bercow can bring some sense to the proceedings; arrange a delay however that may be achieved; hold a second referendum now that the truth is out for all to see; so that we may remain in the EU.
44
@Hopeoverexperience
One of the reasons the Brexiteers are so firm in their insistence we follow the 'democratic mandate' for Brexit, I suspect, is that they want us out the door before too many people realise they have been sold a mirage.
Recent opinion sounding suggest there may be a majority for Remaining, though as John Grillo says above it's baffling: 'how such a consequential referendum question was put to the UK voting public without requiring a supermajority for its passage'. My golf club has much more elaborate procedures and conditions to be conformed to in cases like this.
7
I do not understand the source of reluctance to put Brexit to another popular vote. The first vote was based on lies; now, presumably, the information on which a vote could be based would be better. Moreover, the people of the UK can now see what Brexit will do to them. So they would have accurate information and information about what Brexit will actually do to them. Clearly, the only possible way forward is another vote.
Putin would be disappointed that his efforts to destroy Western economies would be stymied in the UK. That is its own reason for a new vote. The UK has an opportunity for redemption in the form of a new vote on whether Brexit should happen at all. I only with the US had a similar opportunity for a do-over on the Presidency.
30
@Barbara8101
We have a do-over for the Presidency... 2020!
2
The EU benefits Germany and France and the
countless EU Bureaucrats in Brussels.
It does not benefit the Lower Middle Class of
Great Britain at all.
The EU expanded too far and too quickly
so why should the non-Elites of England have to suffer for it ?
4
@John Brown Oh yes it does. The education benefits alone make up for everything. The real suffering is the persevering myopic moan-a-lots in the UK (and elsewhere) griping about a bureaucracy that really is benefitting mot, including the UK. If anything, the Germans and French should be complaining about Britain treating them like dish rags. And they are not.
9
Why does it support all of germany and france and not the lower class of the uk you think? Hint: national politics. Where the legislative branch in germany and france is working for the whole of the country, westminster is only working to support the upper class. Brexit is much more about uk political struggles mirrored on the eu than it is about the eu.
8
@John Smith
If the Germans and the French are so
beneficially inclined toward the British why
do they want to penalise England for wanting to
leave, or at least a better deal ?
Explain how the Education Benefits make up
for everything, please.
1
I thought they discovered Russian meddling in this vote? So why follow through? Oh right, conservatives.
34
The only amendment I want to see is one that cans the whole process entirely.
That would be the best outcome for Britain, Ireland, the EU, and in reality, for America as well.
Russia (and Trump) would be disappointed though.
72
@Allan B
No one seems ready to propose such an amendment, to simply cancel Article 50. Perhaps someone will, though... if not tomorrow then in the weeks to come.
1
@Julian
It might be the result of a second referendum.
(Lawrence shivers and holds a crucifix and garlic clove in front of him on behalf of the Brexiteers.)
2
Want to watch Parliament in action? Couldn't be easier! Go to:
https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Commons
Parliament has its own streaming website, choice of Commons or Lords, live, Greenwich time, with an event schedule. There's a choice of audio-only or picture with sound, with a chyron identifier of each speaker--unless, of course, they're all speaking at once. In that case, you will see the inimitable Speaker of the House, John Bercow, demanding "Order, order!" Just be warned: it's addictive. (I've lost entire days.)
7
@Robbie
Watch it and you'll think you are watching some arcane Medieval (or, at least, Victorian) world, where voting is done by plodding through a lobby, and where the members howl and jeer like overgrown private schoolboys (which most of them are)!
3
@Julian
A bit harsh! The Debating Chamber of the HoC is purely for show-business.
The real Parliamentary work is supposedly done by the many behind the scenes Standing Committees. Some of which are televised but are much more boring to watch.
The voting is a bit old fashioned, true. But at least we know that our MPs have actually turned up and are not voting electronically from their villas in the Caribbean.
2
@Robbie
is there translation?
May's whole strategy and strength is that the threat of a no-deal exit will drive members to vote for her squishy deal one. If the amendment against a no-deal passes, I don't see that she has any recall but a second referendum. Of course, Labor's biggest strength is the mess of Brexit. If the mess is cleared up by a referendum, it's not clear voters will reward them. British voters thought Churchill was definitely the man to win the war, but not one to win the peace. The same thinking might apply here.
3
I hope there is finally some resolution that comes out of tomorrow's debates. As things stand, it seems far from clear that amendments on either side will pass, so no extension of Article 50 (to avoid a hard Brexit), and no movement on the backstop (which could bring the Brexiteers behind May's deal).
March 29th is just two months away, and there is plenty of other legislation that will need to pass, whichever way things go. This is all looking very worrying.
The UK political system is completely hopeless, with strong parties clearly concerned more for their own survival than for the country at large. In addition, while Bercow's antics as Speaker lean in the direction I favor, I worry that his freewheeling approach will damage the nation in the long run, as we have found over here in the US.
Wake up, Britain! This needs to be fixed now.
5
Thank you Benjamin for the article. There is much chatter here in DisUnited Kingdom regarding taking the No Deal Brexit off the table, as you mentioned in the article. However the current voting is to pass or not to pass the Withdrawal Agreement, a mutually negotiated and agreed Agreement between UK and EU which clearly states in relation to Lisbon Treaty Article 50, unless the Withdrawal Agreement is ratified, ALL Treaty’s and Agreements shall end at the end of March. The UK Government has signed this, and it is sadly the default situation. There may be political expediency in conning the Nation into believing any Amendment can remove the so called No Deal, in reality though it is THE default. Which is why Brexit is such a mess.
6
@Alan Harvey Brexit is such a mess because British voters unwisely -- led by a few demagogues -- decided to ignore reality and pretend that Britain could exist outside of Europe. The Conservatives could have stood up against that tide of fantasy and perhaps defeated the referendum, but they didn't. Now reality is sinking in, and the British political class is freaking out and thrashing about in all directions. Serves them right, I say.
19
@Dave Clemens
I agree with all you say except the last sentence - we don't ALL deserve what the British political class is doing - they won't suffer anyway - their wealth will shield them.
2
It seems so simple.Just hold a second referendum.If the voters,now that they have a better comprehension of what leaving the E.U. entails,vote again to leave,then so be it.But if they vote to stay throw the whole thing out and stop all this wrangling.
40
It’s difficult... we had a Government Minister on TV the other day saying we couldn’t hold a Second Referendum in case the Right Wing Fascists didn’t like it! It really has become so divisive.
11
@Lazarus Long Indeed. In the referendum, demagogues managed to induce a mass fantasy in voters that Britain could leave the EU and continue to enjoy its benefits. I don't think this would happen again. Voters in a second referendum would be forced to take into account facts that they ignored the first time.
17
@Dave Clemens Exactly!!! And why not?
3