May's Brexit deal in chaos as Speaker sparks 'constitutional crisis'

[webfact]

May's Brexit deal in chaos as Speaker sparks 'constitutional crisis'

By Elizabeth Piper and Kylie MacLellan

 

Speaker of the House John Bercow speaks in Parliament, following the vote on Brexit in London, Britain, March 13, 2019, in this screen grab taken from video. Reuters TV via REUTERS

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit plans were thrown into further turmoil on Monday when the speaker of parliament ruled that she could not put her divorce deal to a new vote unless it was re-submitted in fundamentally different form.

 

In comments that blindsided May's office, Speaker John Bercow said the government could not bring forward proposals for a vote in parliament that were substantially the same as had been defeated twice before, in January and last week.

 

Brexiteers seeking a complete break from the European Union saw a "no-deal" exit as now more likely, but the government made clear it would seek to put off Brexitbeyond the March 29 departure date, if the EU approves.

 

One of the government's senior law officers, Solicitor General Robert Buckland, said: "We're in a major constitutional crisis here."

 

He told the BBC one way to bring May's deal back for a vote in the House of Commons could be prorogation - ending the parliament session prematurely and starting a new one.

 

According to precedents stretching back to 1604, parliamentary rules say that substantially similar proposals cannot be voted on in the House of Commons more than once during the same session of parliament.

 

Bercow said his ruling should not be considered his last word and the government could bring forward a new proposition that was not the same as those already voted upon.

 

The pound fell to its day's low against the euro and the dollar on Bercow's statement, before recovering when the government said negotiations on a deal were continuing with lawmakers from Northern Ireland, who prop up May's minority government and have opposed her withdrawal accord so far.

 

"This is my conclusion: if the government wishes to bring forward a new proposition that is neither the same, nor substantially the same, as that disposed of by the House on the 12th of March, this would be entirely in order," Bercow said.

 

"What the government cannot legitimately do is to resubmit to the House the same proposition or substantially the same proposition as that of last week which was rejected by 149 votes."

 

The ruling was welcomed by eurosceptic lawmakers in May's Conservative Party because it appeared to increase the likelihood of Britain leaving the EU without a deal.

 

May's Withdrawal Agreement negotiated with the EU last year was seen by Brexiteers as leaving Britain too closely aligned to the EU while depriving it of voting rights in the bloc.

 

"May I say how delighted I am that you have decided to follow precedent, which is something I am greatly in favour of," said Jacob Rees-Mogg, chairman of the European Research Group of eurosceptics in parliament.

 

However Kwasi Kwarteng, a Brexit minister, told parliament the government intended to seek an extension to the Brexit departure deadline, which he expected the EU to decide on at a summit this week.

 

The head of the 2016 referendum campaign to leave the EU, Matthew Elliott, said he expected lawmakers to "see sense" and pass May's deal by March 29.

 

SURPRISE

Bercow's pronouncement appeared to take May's Downing Street office by surprise.

 

May's spokesman said her office had not been warned the statement was coming. Nor could Downing Street say anything about plans for a new Brexit vote or when it might be held.

 

"Now the government will have to come back with substantial changes (which is literally impossible) in relation to the deal, otherwise it means a prolonged Brexitdelay," said Naeem Aslam, chief market analyst at retail broker Think Forex.

 

EU leaders have ruled out renegotiating the exit deal.

 

"The chances of the UK crashing out of the EU have increased once again because the EU needs a clear plan and a strategy before they grant an extension," Aslam added.

 

Earlier on Monday it had appeared that May was winning support for her deal from erstwhile opponents but Bercow's decision will leave the prime minister scrambling for options.

 

Asked by a lawmaker whether further changes to the deal would be needed, Bercow said, "in all likelihood, the answer ... is yes", adding that a change in opinion would not constitute a change in the deal on offer.

 

"Fundamentally, for something to be different, it has to be by definition, fundamentally different. Not different in terms of wording, but difference in terms of substance and this is in the context of a negotiation with others outside the United Kingdom," Bercow said.

 

Britain is due to leave the EU by default in 11 days. But parliament voted last week for a delay and May is expected to seek an extension to that deadline when she meets EU leaders at their summit.

 

To compound her problems, May appeared unlikely to reach agreement this week on her Brexit plans with the Democratic Unionists, the small Northern Irish party whose support is vital if she is to get her EU departure deal through parliament.

 

May's spokesman said talks were continuing with the DUP.

 

May had earlier warned lawmakers that unless they approve her Brexit divorce blueprint, Britain's exit from the EU could face a long delay which many Brexiteers fear would mean Britain may never leave.

 

After two-and-a-half years of negotiations with the EU, the outcome remains uncertain - with options including a long postponement, exiting with May's deal, a economically disruptive exit without a deal, or even another EU membership referendum.

 

May's blueprint, an attempt to retain close trading and security ties with the EU while leaving the bloc's formal political structures, was defeated by 230 votes in parliament on Jan. 15 and by 149 votes on March 12.

 

(Writing by Guy Faulconbridge and Giles Elgood, Editing by William Maclean and Janet Lawrence)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-03-19

[Samui Bodoh]

"...After two-and-a-half years of negotiations with the EU, the outcome remains uncertain - with options including a long postponement, exiting with May's deal, a economically disruptive exit without a deal, or even another EU membership referendum..."

 

What a ClusterF**k.

 

I said it before and I will say it again;

 

Never before have I seen a country so utterly determined to shoot itself in the crotch.

 

 

[nauseus]

Just another chaotic variable.

[Basil B]

Up a creak without a paddle.

 

Looks like they need to paddle with their hands in shark infested waters.

[helpisgood]

43 minutes ago, webfact said:

In comments that blindsided May's office, Speaker John Bercow said the government could not bring forward proposals for a vote in parliament that were substantially the same as had been defeated twice before, in January and last week.

 

43 minutes ago, webfact said:

According to precedents stretching back to 1604, parliamentary rules say that substantially similar proposals cannot be voted on in the House of Commons more than once during the same session of parliament.  [Bold added.]

 

Help me out here.  Really!  I am not a Brit.

 

How was May's office "blindsided" by this?  Does not anyone there know Parliament's rules and procedure, or whatever it may be called?  

 

Or, is there something more to the story that the OP's article has left out?  Has this old precedent been normally ignored or interpreted generously in favor of the govt. or something like that?  I did notice that they did vote on the proposal twice before.  If not, it makes me wonder if May's team knows what they are doing.  

[Basil B]

28 minutes ago, helpisgood said:

How was May's office "blindsided" by this?  Does not anyone there know Parliament's rules and procedure, or whatever it may be called?

Though they could bend the rules...

 

I suppose we will have to wait many years before a top civil servant/government advise sheds some light on this in their memoirs

[vogie]

31 minutes ago, helpisgood said:

 

 

Help me out here.  Really!  I am not a Brit.

 

How was May's office "blindsided" by this?  Does not anyone there know Parliament's rules and procedure, or whatever it may be called?  

 

Or, is there something more to the story that the OP's article has left out?  Has this old precedent been normally ignored or interpreted generously in favor of the govt. or something like that?  I did notice that they did vote on the proposal twice before.  If not, it makes me wonder if May's team knows what they are doing.  

John Bercow knows the rules, but he only uses them for his own agenda. He is an europhile with 'blox to brexit' on his car. The speaker should remain impartial, but he is anything but. In his defence he knows many big words, so may be better suited chairing 'The Good Old Days'

[Basil B]

13 minutes ago, vogie said:

John Bercow knows the rules, but he only uses them for his own agenda. He is an europhile with 'blox to brexit' on his car. The speaker should remain impartial, but he is anything but. In his defence he knows many big words, so may be better suited chairing 'The Good Old Days'

so what rules has he ignored?

Got picture of his car with blox to brexit on it?

[Thairealist]

46 minutes ago, helpisgood said:

 

 

Help me out here.  Really!  I am not a Brit.

 

How was May's office "blindsided" by this?  Does not anyone there know Parliament's rules and procedure, or whatever it may be called?  

 

Or, is there something more to the story that the OP's article has left out?  Has this old precedent been normally ignored or interpreted generously in favor of the govt. or something like that?  I did notice that they did vote on the proposal twice before.  If not, it makes me wonder if May's team knows what they are doing.  

Treacherous May certainly knows what she’s doing. She’s a fully fledged remainer intent on keeping the U.K in the E.U. Even though the majority of her fellow citizens voted to leave. 

 

 

[sammieuk1]

Our best bet now rests on Boris striding though the door of the house of commons clad in a full suit of medieval armour and clutching his better deal out than in deal that  was instrumental in leading the gullible up the garden path to the pot of gold land????

[OneMoreFarang]

May and other politician insist that there can't be a 2nd referendum because the people decided already to leave.

But she wants to repeat the "meaningful vote" as often as necessary to get the result she wants.

Pathetic!

 

It's good that at least one grown up was in the room and stopped her from doing it again.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, helpisgood said:

 

 

Help me out here.  Really!  I am not a Brit.

 

How was May's office "blindsided" by this?  Does not anyone there know Parliament's rules and procedure, or whatever it may be called?  

 

Or, is there something more to the story that the OP's article has left out?  Has this old precedent been normally ignored or interpreted generously in favor of the govt. or something like that?  I did notice that they did vote on the proposal twice before.  If not, it makes me wonder if May's team knows what they are doing.  

Interestingly, Bercow said that although this procedure was last enacted in 1910, this was because governments had respected the precedent outline in Erskine May.

[vogie]

1 minute ago, OneMoreFarang said:

And it was already all over the press that this is his wife's car.

He said it was his wifes car, I havn't seen the log book, have you, do you believe everything thing you read. He is the one with personalised Bercow number plates, he is the one driving around flaunting his impartiality. You would think someone of his neutrality (????) would have enough nous to show more sense.

[welovesundaysatspace]

15 minutes ago, vogie said:

He said it was his wifes car, I havn't seen the log book,

So you don’t know whether it’s his car, but still accuse him it’s his? That’s a bit like saying “vogie likes fat ladyboys. He says he likes girls; I haven’t seen him with any girls, have you? Do you believe everything he says?”

 

15 minutes ago, vogie said:

He is the one with personalised Bercow number plates, he is the one driving around flaunting his impartiality.

You just admitted you don’t don’t know whether it’s his car. 

 

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

John Bercow knows the rules, but he only uses them for his own agenda. He is an europhile with 'blox to brexit' on his car. The speaker should remain impartial, but he is anything but. In his defence he knows many big words, so may be better suited chairing 'The Good Old Days'

I agree, which is why I was suprised to hear that he'd put his foot down re. a third vote - especially as it appeared as if more MPs were prepared to vote for her deal next time round?

 

As posted by Basil B - "I suppose we will have to wait many years before a top civil servant/government advise sheds some light on this in their memoirs".

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

Just another chaotic variable.

More Brexit chaos arising from failing to plan, planning to fail.

[nontabury]

 

  Go to 41mins of this video, maybe Bercow the pompous remainer, has in fact unwittingly done the British people a mighty favour.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

39 minutes ago, vogie said:

He said it was his wifes car, I havn't seen the log book, have you, do you believe everything thing you read. He is the one with personalised Bercow number plates, he is the one driving around flaunting his impartiality. You would think someone of his neutrality (????) would have enough nous to show more sense.

Caught out posting fake hogwash.

 

I can’t say I’m at all surprised.

[vogie]

5 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 

  Go to 41mins of this video, maybe Bercow the pompous remainer, has in fact unwittingly done the British people a mighty favour.

 

 

I think the problem we have with Bercow is that he not accountable to anyone, he can, and is doing anything, he feels like doing. Bercow is running the show.

[Scott]

Post and reply reported and removed.  

 

[tomacht8]

Mays Days are numbered in:

Mayday, Mayday

[vogie]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Caught out posting fake hogwash.

 

I can’t say I’m at all surprised.

You think, watch Bercow try and wriggle out of the accusation in the HoC, he is like a rabbit caught in the headlights, keep digging Bercow, hopefully we'll lose sight of you.

 

 

[Basil B]

46 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I agree, which is why I was suprised to hear that he'd put his foot down re. a third vote - especially as it appeared as if more MPs were prepared to vote for her deal next time round?

Why not?

It was pointed out in the news media that returning to the same issue without substantial change was in breach of parliamentary rules, this must have been pointed out two him, biased or not he can not ignore it.

 

seems to me it is the Brexiteers who are undemocratic, may can ask the same question as may times as she likes until it is voted through but but hell no to another referendum.

[Spidey]

8 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Why not?

It was pointed out in the news media that returning to the same issue without substantial change was in breach of parliamentary rules, this must have been pointed out two him, biased or not he can not ignore it.

 

seems to me it is the Brexiteers who are undemocratic, may can ask the same question as may times as she likes until it is voted through but but hell no to another referendum.

Unfortunately, the current proposal for a second referendum is "May's deal Yes/No". If it's "No", back to where we are now. Madness. I don't think that the British public are going to be given the chance to say "May's deal/remain" which is what the majority want on a ballot paper. So much for democracy.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, helpisgood said:

 

 

Help me out here.  Really!  I am not a Brit.

 

How was May's office "blindsided" by this?  Does not anyone there know Parliament's rules and procedure, or whatever it may be called?  

 

Or, is there something more to the story that the OP's article has left out?  Has this old precedent been normally ignored or interpreted generously in favor of the govt. or something like that?  I did notice that they did vote on the proposal twice before.  If not, it makes me wonder if May's team knows what they are doing.  

Arrogance and stupidity and contempt towards Parliament.

 

From the get go, May has done her level best to manage Brexit by executive order. 

She had to be dragged back before Parliament by court order after ‘enemies of the people’ and ‘traitors’ won a legal challenge to prevent her power grab. 

 

She he was utterly useless as Home Secretary, she is utterly useless as PM.

 

She is however a useful idiot.

 

Brexiteers failed to pla, planned to fail. May kept her office by means of the glass cliff, while the Brexiteers in her party sat back and refused to take the lead.

 

Brexit lies could never be made true, the Brexit promises could never be met.

 

In PM May Brexiteers have what they need most, someone else to blame for their own failings.

 

Sound familiar?

 

 

[dick dasterdly]

49 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 

  Go to 41mins of this video, maybe Bercow the pompous remainer, has in fact unwittingly done the British people a mighty favour.

 

 

Thanks for posting that video as I couldn't see how Bercow's decision could possibly help remain.  (In my defense, it was very early in the a.m. when I read about it....).

 

It now makes a bit more sense, but it relies on the eu granting a long extension (in the hope that uk leave sentiment will be worn down by the end of that extension) - or that MPs will vote to enact legislation ensuring that no deal is not a possibility.

 

A huge gamble, that I hope he has misjudged.

[pedro01]

I am pro-Brexit

 

And I agree 100% with Bercow. 

 

I found it quite disgraceful that May could basically keep bringing the same deal back to parliament for a vote. She was just relying on the fact that as we edged closer to the 29th, people would just throw their hands in the air and accept the deal she's put on the table.

 

I also agree with other comments. How can May say no to a 2nd referendum, yet keep on bringing this deal to the table to be voted on till she gets the result she wants?

 

She's basically fluffed Brexit.

[Basil B]

I do not think she can reword it and vote on it this week as I think she needs to give 3 sitting days notice.

 

That means she is going to the summit empty handed to ask for an extension, I think I know the answer, leave on the 29th or revoke article 50.

 

It will probably be an executive decision to revoke article 50 and she will retire gracefully. 

[Bluespunk]

2 hours ago, helpisgood said:

 

 

Help me out here.  Really!  I am not a Brit.

 

How was May's office "blindsided" by this?  Does not anyone there know Parliament's rules and procedure, or whatever it may be called?  

 

Or, is there something more to the story that the OP's article has left out?  Has this old precedent been normally ignored or interpreted generously in favor of the govt. or something like that?  I did notice that they did vote on the proposal twice before.  If not, it makes me wonder if May's team knows what they are doing.  

Of course may’s team doesn’t know what they’re doing. Their whole brexit negotiations debacle proves that.  

[champers]

2 hours ago, Basil B said:

so what rules has he ignored?

Got picture of his car with blox to brexit on it?

He says it is his wife's car.