قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / World / Brexit Live Updates: Parliament votes to delay British E.U. Departure

Brexit Live Updates: Parliament votes to delay British E.U. Departure



• With only 15 days left before Britain's exit from the European Union and no consensus on how to do that, Parliament voted on Thursday to postpone the fast approaching departure date.

• With the smallest margins Prime Minister Theresa May struck down a power game by lawmakers seeking to withdraw control of the Brexit process. They also voted against a second referendum on this matter.

• Parliament twice rejected May May's withdrawal agreement by pushing margins higher. They continued to urge them on Wednesday by taking action against any attempt to leave without an agreement.

• Ms. May remains in power, but is seriously endangered. Many conservatives supported the anti-no-deal motion against their will, and some members of their cabinet refused to vote against it, leading to speculation that they had lost control of their party and the process. She plans a third attempt to pass her preferred agreement next week.

Legislators voted 412 to 202 on Thursday to call for a delay in Britain's exit from the European Union, a This means that the country will block is unlikely to leave on 29 March as scheduled.

The decision comes at the end of two years of painful negotiations over a retreat plan that Prime Minister Theresa May has twice failed to push through parliament, leaving the process in motion for only fifteen days.

During this time, Ms. May had insisted that on 29 March she would withdraw her country with or without an agreement from the European Union. Ms May, however, faced a mutiny by her own legislator and finally agreed to offer Parliament the possibility of delay.

In concrete terms, today's vote means that Ms May will request a transfer if she participates in a European meeting. Union leaders next week in Brussels. All 27 other members of the bloc would have to agree to the extension of the exit process.

wife. May has said that if Parliament can agree to an agreement in the next few days, the delay will only be a short two to three months. If this does not happen, it would then have to apply for an extension, possibly by the end of 2020.

The British Parliament voted on Thursday to delay the withdrawal from the European Union. This means that the country will block the bloc on 29 March is unlikely to leave on time.

The decision comes at the end of two years of stubborn negotiations over a retreat plan that Prime Minister Theresa May has twice failed to push Parliament through, the trial was only 15 days away.

During this time, Ms. May had insisted that on 29 March she would withdraw her country with or without an agreement from the European Union. Ms May, however, faced a mutiny by her own legislator and finally agreed to offer Parliament the possibility of delay.

In concrete terms, today's vote implies that Ms May will apply for an inappropriate delay next week attending a meeting of European Union leaders in Brussels. All 27 of the other members of the block must agree to the extension of the exit process.

According to many experts, the European Union is likely to grant an extension, even if its duration is uncertain.

. May has said that if Parliament can agree to an agreement in the next few days, the delay will only be a short two to three months. If this is not the case, it will have to apply for a longer extension, possibly by the end of 2020.

Legislators have taken their best commandment control of the Prime Minister's Brexit process Theresa May failed, however, with a gossamer vote between 314 and 312.

The measure would have led Parliament to issue a series of "indicative votes" on what it wants to see a Brexit deal. Although the votes would not have been politically binding on either the government or Mrs May, who is already trapped between the warring factions, they would have forced her further.

But Ms. May scored only a small number of points of legislative victory this season from setbacks for her government, maintaining control of the government's position in negotiations with the European Union.

For Ms. May, the problem has always been that most legislators generally support the Brexit concept, they vehemently contradict the peculiarities. Twice it has brought Parliament the agreement it has achieved in laborious negotiations with the European Union, and twice has the legislature rejected it by a large margin.

If Parliament had taken control, it would have forced to a softer Brexit and maintained closer ties with it the continent than it demanded in its plan. That would have angered pro-Brexit hardliners in their conservative party, not just the legislature, but the base.

Second referendum on Brexit, which – for the time being – overthrows – some activists hope that the British will turn back and vote for remaining in the European Union.

The amendment seemed destined to fail from the start, as the idea of ​​a second referendum never called for a command of the majority in parliament. It was a heavy blow at the beginning of the day when the biggest voters for a public vote asked MEPs to vote against the measure, saying Thursday had to focus exclusively on the delay in Brexit.

The Labor Party, always suspicious A second referendum quickly announced its opposition, although individual legislators took a careful stance to argue that they support a second referendum in other circumstances.

"Today, it's not about the Labor Party not supporting such a proposed amendment," said Keir Starmer, Labor Secretary for Shadow Brexit, on Thursday afternoon in Parliament. "It's about saying today about enlargement."

The measure failed in a poll of 334 to 85 votes, with more than 200 legislators were wrong.

The selection of voted amendments is the job of John Bercow, the speaker who infuriated the Brexit hardliners by refusing to vote on a measure that would exclude the possibility of a second referendum.

The collapse of discipline in the government of Prime Minister Theresa May has taken place lately, she has been so strict that some of her lawmakers say it's best to leave their home to announce in Downing Street.

But far from planning her resignation, Ms. May is not yet ready to abandon the Brexit plan alone, whatever the parliament does on Thursday.

She was defeated twice before – and bad – but it's not impossible that she's lucky for the third time.

If an important change is passed on Thursday, this would make lawmakers do quick-fire indicative "votes on alternative Brexit plans on Wednesday. But Ms. May had time Monday or Tuesday to anticipate her and bring her unpopular plan back to parliament.

The followers of the Ardent Brexit now know that Parliament is against a levy without consent, something they would like to see. They will also fear that if Parliament receives preliminary votes on Wednesday, a consensus could be reached on a plan that keeps relations with the European Union much closer than they would like.

May turned the screw this week by bluntly saying that she will be forced to request a long delay in Brexit if there is no support before the EU summit next week.

This would be the prospect for a second referendum and could mean that a Brexit may never occur.

Not all hardliners, however, see something that they fear because of a long delay. Some believe that Ms. May's days are numbered, and that a pro-Brexit successor – perhaps Boris Johnson, the former foreign minister – would control the next event.

The comments will give weight to Ms. May's threat to politicians who are Brexit politicians: If they do not support their vote in a third vote next week, this will be the case. Brexit faces a long delay in which could shift their minds to a deal with closer ties to the bloc or even to another referendum.

Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney said that even a 21-month extension would be possible until Britain's country was abandoned by the end of 2020.

Prime Minister Theresa May has insisted that the possibility of a no-deal Brexit should remain an option should she argue that she would abolish her influence in dealing with the European Union, if she were taken out of her arsenal.

However, when the parliament met on Wednesday, it supported the motion requesting the legislature to leave EU membership on 29 March, unless an agreement was reached.

The Parliament went one step further and under no circumstances voted at any time to block the block – a sharp rebuke to Mrs. May.

The View of the White House

President Trump was allied with some of the most zealous proponents of a no-deal Brexit such as Nigel Farage. Brexit supporters have maintained a trade agreement with the United States as one of the prizes for a comprehensive break with the European Union.

The decisions of British legislators in recent days have made this kind of tough Brexit – and something – far-reaching trade deals – much less likely. On Thursday morning, Mr. Trump posted an optimistic note on Twitter.

Later, however, at a photo session of the Oval Office with Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, his tone on the subject was less sunny.

I will not comment on Brexit. I can tell you that this is a very complex thing going on right now, "he said, adding," It is ripping apart many countries. And it's a shame it has to be that way. I think we will stay in our lane.

On Thursday afternoon, in the ranks of the advocates for a second Brexit referendum, a Kerfuffle broke out of the pro-European cause.

The cause of the tension was an amendment that was to be voted on Thursday evening, stating that Brexit should be postponed for the country to vote again.

But the biggest activists for a second The referendum, as it turns out, is not based on the amendment of a second referendum. And that gave the Labor leaders the fence again and again when it came to Brexit, with so much coverage they did not have to.

The reason was alleged that Thursday's focus should be on Brexit's delay. Anti-Brexit activists want to stop voting for a second referendum in parliament until it is one of the last options.

However, this was the fact that a second referendum does not have a parliamentary majority at the moment, and its donors did not want a lost vote.

Still, some activists want pro-European politicians to take a page from Mrs May's book about the value of repeat votes. Instead of holding off until the last moment, politicians should keep voting for a second referendum until it wins.

Between the Curves Thrown in the House of Commons On Wednesday it was claimed that the spokesman John Bercow had the right to prevent the government from holding the resignation agreement, which was rejected twice by a large majority had to hold back for a third vote.

The legal basis for this proposal lies deep within Parliament's Rules of Procedure, the work of a 19th-century employee named Erskine May. On page 397, the rules state that applications or amendments are "essentially the same are like a question that was decided during a meeting, may not be reconsidered in the same session. "

Constitutional nerdiness that followed, it turned out that the youngest clerk of the House of Commons had this thought already in October had thrown cold water.

"This rule is not intended to obstruct the will of the House," said the clerk, Sir David Natzler. In other words, Mr Bercow – a consistent advocate of the rights of the backquake – would hardly hinder a third vote if the legislature really had a chance to vote on it.

"It would be ridiculous to use a rule, a literal construction of a rule, when what the house wants is frustrated," said Jack Simson Caird, a former scholar of the House of Commons, a senior research fellow At the Bingham Center on Rule of Law.

The issue was much debated Thursday morning, with most commentators concluding that Mr. Bercow – who spoke out against Brexit in the referendum and showed his willingness to back Mrs. May's agenda but it was unlikely that he was going to struggle with this particular hand grenade. We are in a weird constitutional period when Parliament is looking for a way to play a role, as the Brexit countdown is taking its final step. " is completely unprecedented, "Mr. Caird said." The system really can not cope with what is required of it. "


Source link