New Law on Final Brexit Deal

Please treat other members in a constructive and friendly manner: Our Community Guidelines.
  • Parliament is to be given a take-it-or leave-it vote on the final Brexit deal before the UK leaves the EU.


    Brexit Secretary David Davis said the terms of the UK's exit, such as money, citizen rights and any transition must become law via a new Act of Parliament.

    Labour welcomed a "climbdown" but some MPs warned of a "sham" if ministers could not be asked to renegotiate.

    This was unexpected.


    So, it's the 30th March 2019 and it's going down to the wire between the the EU and UK negotiators. Finally, minutes before midnight and the deal is agreed. This, by the way, is a scenario that David Davis has said may happen.


    The clock strikes midnight, it's 31st March 2019, the day the UK leaves the UK! Except one "little" snag, parliament hasn't voted for the deal yet....


    Analysis by Laura Kuensssberg:

    I know this doesn't sound that exciting unless you are as much of a nerd as I am. However, the Brexit secretary's announcement in the House of Commons in the last few minutes really matters.


    It matters because the Brexit deal that shapes the future of the country will now be the subject of a specific new Act of Parliament that MPs and Lords will have to approve in early 2019, before we leave the EU.

    How they hell is this going to work? How could parliament vote on the deal line-by-line as the law will allow, if we have already left the EU? What if parliament says no, they don't like the deal, what happens then?


    I am sure Tony Blair, Cleggy and Gina Miller must have had a good chuckle today.X/

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Remember, the vote is on the leaving terms , either no deal and WTO or whatever the two sides ever come up with , we will still of left the awful, rotten EU.

    I don't see why the terrible trio would be laughing , we will not be in the EU.

  • As I understand it's a take the 'best possible deal' that's been negotiated or leave with ' no deal' which is the only way to do it. We've already voted Leave. The negotiators and their advisors should settle for what they consider to be the best possible deal and once they've got that present it to parliament for a take it or leave it vote and then we should leave regardless since the voters have already decided that's what they want.


    It's all very well parliament being sovereign but surely if it comes down to an individual vote, it is the wishes of the people which should be sovereign as in other countries which hold frequent referendums.




    .

  • I understand all that folks, but don't forget the transition...


    If parliament votes down the deal and at that point we're in the transitional period, will this be a back door by remainers to keep us in the EU?

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • If parliament votes down the deal and at that point we're in the transitional period, will this be a back door by remainers to keep us in the EU?

    I don't like the idea of a "transition" period, which is business as usual, as it's just an excuse to kick the can down the road. You could be sure that towards the end of such a period there would the same cries of woe about stepping off a cliff edge. Better to take the plunge in 2019 than just meander on until a new pro EU govenrment shot us right back in but on really bad terms as Labour would seem to want. You can be sure that re-entering the EU would have our national wallet raped.

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in this colour  it is moderation. Take note.

  • Quote

    Ministers have seen off challenges to their authority on the first of eight days of scrutiny of a key Brexit bill.

    MPs backed plans to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act, which will end the supremacy of EU law in the UK, by 318 votes to 68.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41989084


    It seems the Remainers et al can't seem to be bothered to turn up at the House in large numbers to vote for their case. As at the referendum after which it was claimed that so many were convinced they would win they didn't bother to vote so that meant the result was invalid. I wonder what their excuses will be if this goes on. ;)