The ones who would seriously consider starting civil unrest over this would I imagine fall into those category. Particularly 'extreme right-wing nutjobs', who are incredibly dangerous people.

 

The first reason a civil war is unlikely is simple geographic maths. Remainers live alongside Leavers for the most part. While several areas were 60-40, there's no real battle lines to be drawn anywhere. Now you could imagine perhaps a great insurgency against the government for putting their livelihoods at risk that bypasses geographic lines and becomes more of a guerilla action, but then you have to consider who is capable of being in such a war and how many of the population are willing to die over this issue.

 

Then you have to imagine what the starting point is and which side. I'm going to use the recent protests from each one to help measure this. In the event of a hard Brexit, perhaps a huge Remain protest like the one last week could go awry? Possibly but all reports of that one say that it was good-natured, I don't think Remain has anywhere near the critical mass of people who would get violent outside of an actual apocalypse caused by Leave. And as much as I'm a dirty EU-loving firebrand, I don't think leaving will be so disastrous that society breaks down. On the other hand, would Leavers do it on a protest that turns violent on revocation? Probably... not. The... much smaller March for Brexit also was from some accounts, mostly peaceful and those who did disturb the peace by being racist were told to stop by the more sane Leave attendees.

We have the hardcore leavers, who are fewer in number, and then those who voted Leave to 'stick it to the government' out of desperation at their situation being shit. The former would really care about a revocation, but like Rooney said, they don't have the numbers. The latter meet the desperate requirement to actually start a war, but I don't believe they are unified by any cause and it's certainly not Brexit right now. While they may yet pose a more serious problem for the government if it doesn't start helping the poorest in society, I don't think cancelling Brexit would be the catalyst that sets them off.

 

In summary, unlikely. Britain's common people have no history of revolution to use as a precedent either.

 

You'd have to go back to the 1640s at any rate

I signed it 10 times from different accounts :lol:

 

So it's not just Leavers who 'cheat' in votes... ;)

So it's not just Leavers who 'cheat' in votes... ;)

 

Looks like not, though in this case it's not against the law and it doesn't amount to anything except Parliament having to talk about it for 20 minutes. It's not victimising whistle blowers, ruining their career and calling them liars, slandering their name, only to admit everything 2 years later having quite possibly subverted the democratic process along the way and plunged the nation into crisis.

 

So, a fairly wide chasm in morality then....

So the House of Commons really need to vote for something quickly (Wednesday) before the EU lose their patience completely...

Well.

 

No to everything again. Beautiful.

What a surprise, the public is pretty much 50-50 on Brexit and so is the House, anyone sane would think Brexit is the problem here...

 

I can't see May's deal winning, if anything I think this just makes it worse as clearly a lot of the Tories are not willing to compromise, think we need a long extension and then a GE. Where is the Prime Minister in all of this? No leadership, no direction - absolute joke.

It's incredibly disappointing the Customs Union option failed when it came so close yet again. Let Leadsom, Gove and the like resign Cabinet and just back a bloody Customs Union already :/

Customs Union motion would have passed had Change UK (formerly TIG) not voted against and abstained.

Nick Boles has resigned from the Tory Party over what he sees as the party's inability to compromise. Let's see if any other party picks him up on a free transfer.

Customs Union motion would have passed had Change UK (formerly TIG) not voted against and abstained.

 

CUK are ideologically opposed to anything other than the UK leaving the EU, so that's to be expected. They probably believe that the longer this whole charade goes on without some arrangement, the more likely it is that the public will want the UK to remain in the EU. They're right, to some extent.

Nick Boles has resigned from the Tory Party over what he sees as the party's inability to compromise. Let's see if any other party picks him up on a free transfer.

 

He has a point. This is how the Tories voted:

 

15 for confirmatory referendum (253 against)

 

33 for Norway+ (228 against)

 

10 for Revoke to prevent no-deal (260 against)

 

37 for customs union (236 against)

 

The majority of votes against tonight were cast by the Conservatives to save the Conservatives.

Nick Boles has resigned from the Tory Party over what he sees as the party's inability to compromise. Let's see if any other party picks him up on a free transfer.

The Tories + DUP (which as we know is already an incredibly fraught relationship but not actually in No Confidence territory unless the deal passes) now have 323 MPs between them. 321 gives you a majority.

 

Antoinette Sandbach, Dominic Grieve and allies - fancy bringing down a government?

The Tories + DUP (which as we know is already an incredibly fraught relationship but not actually in No Confidence territory unless the deal passes) now have 323 MPs between them. 321 gives you a majority.

 

Antoinette Sandbach, Dominic Grieve and allies - fancy bringing down a government?

 

I actually had to look her up to see if she was a real person and not just a name you made up that sounded somewhat Conservative-y. Good to know that even now there's some high-profile MPs who I don't know.

 

Nick Boles has confirmed that he won't join CUK, and will sit as an independent.

The Tories + DUP (which as we know is already an incredibly fraught relationship but not actually in No Confidence territory unless the deal passes) now have 323 MPs between them. 321 gives you a majority.

 

Antoinette Sandbach, Dominic Grieve and allies - fancy bringing down a government?

 

Depending on what (if anything) Cabinet decide tomorrow as the way forward, any group within the Tories could split away and bring them down...

One of the big issues is that none of these votes mean anything unless the withdrawal agreement passes parliament as trade arrangements can only be made after the UK officially leaves the EU (and enters the transition period). It's very unlikely the EU will compromise anymore on the withdrawal agreement. It's pretty much guarenteed a long delay to brexit is going to occur (or no deal if the EU allow it), unless Article 50 is revoked.

 

The only real way forward is another leave/remain referendum given that MPs cannot agree on anything. If remain were to win, then Article 50 can be revoked quite easily. If leave wins again, then MPs need to really get their act together and try to agree on something.

 

EFTA membership is the only option given how split everyone is IMO. It gives most people some of what they want; remain in the single market/freedom of movement/Common Fisheries Policy no longer applies to the UK/The UK has more freedom in making its own trade deals/Not all EU law applies to the UK/Less political ties/union with the EU/Lower budget contributions to the EU etc.

Customs Union motion would have passed had Change UK (formerly TIG) not voted against and abstained.

 

or alternatively it would have passed if 10 Labour MPs had not voted against. Very selective view of a voting procedure when pointing the finger. Why not praise 37 Tories who voted FOR it? why not slag off the SNP for abstaining? Or the DUP for voting against? Or Caroline Lucas? Only needed 2 to switch....

One of the big issues is that none of these votes mean anything unless the withdrawal agreement passes parliament as trade arrangements can only be made after the UK officially leaves the EU (and enters the transition period).

 

Most MPs aren't that opposed to the withdrawal agreement. The reason it was rightly voted down on Friday is that it's incredibly problematic in law to vote through the withdrawal agreement without the framework for the future relationship. You're essentially waving through Brexit itself without any framework for how the future negotiations will be conducted and that's what most MPs (such as Labour) had an issue with. There was a real danger of enabling Brexit and then Theresa making way for potentially an even Brexitier PM who may do something no one in Parliament wants as there's no framework, which gives them the blank cheque to negotiate a future relationship that suits whichever Tory takes over from Theresa May. We may have also had the chaos where the confidence and supply arrangement collapsed and the government wasn't able to get through any enabling legislation following the withdrawal agreement itself.

 

MPs very rightly avoided complete chaos by voting down an irresponsible vote from Theresa May.

EFTA membership is the only option given how split everyone is IMO. It gives most people some of what they want; remain in the single market/freedom of movement/Common Fisheries Policy no longer applies to the UK/The UK has more freedom in making its own trade deals/Not all EU law applies to the UK/Less political ties/union with the EU/Lower budget contributions to the EU etc.

 

EFTA means a border in Ireland as we’d be out of the EU Customs area. So I’m not sure that it works from that perspective. EFTA & CU is the ultimate compromise but at that point why even bother

or alternatively it would have passed if 10 Labour MPs had not voted against. Very selective view of a voting procedure when pointing the finger. Why not praise 37 Tories who voted FOR it? why not slag off the SNP for abstaining? Or the DUP for voting against? Or Caroline Lucas? Only needed 2 to switch....

The SNP explained their abstention last night. Their primary aim is to stop this whole farce from happening, as every single one of them represent remain constituents from a remain country. They backed common market 2.0 as a “if we absolutely must, this is the least shite option”. They have been clear since 24/06/16 that brexiteers must honour what they said in the referendum and we must remain in the single market. The SNP won’t vote to take us out of the SM

MPs very rightly avoided complete chaos by voting down an irresponsible vote from Theresa May.

 

That could be cut/pasted almost every day. :P

 

The SNP explained their abstention last night. Their primary aim is to stop this whole farce from happening, as every single one of them represent remain constituents from a remain country. They backed common market 2.0 as a “if we absolutely must, this is the least shite option”. They have been clear since 24/06/16 that brexiteers must honour what they said in the referendum and we must remain in the single market. The SNP won’t vote to take us out of the SM

 

The SNP are in a Catch-22 situation : as long as Scotland is in the UK they are bound by the UK parliaments Leave vote, but if they become independant they will be out of the EU anyway and have to apply to join the EU as a seperate country... :lol:

 

A big complaint about last night was that Second Referendumers didn't necessarily compromise by accepting Common Market 2.0 or the Custom's Union as an option. So I did some maths to see what would happen if they did:

 

Customs Union amendment:

273 For

276 Against

 

Second Referendumers who voted against this:

11 TIG

5 Lab

5 Lib Dems

Lady Hermon

Fiona Onasanya

Caroline Lucas

3 Tories

Total: 27

 

And abstainers:

37 SNP/Plaid

3 Lab

5 LD

John Woodcock

4 Tories

Total: 50

 

Result of Customs Union amendment if the above all voted in favour:

350 For

249 Against

Majority: 101 (without cabinet votes)

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Common Market 2.0 amendment (just to be clear, this is my preferred option):

261 For

282 Against

 

Second Referendumers who voted against this:

11 TIG

7 Lab

4 Lib Dems

Lady Hermon

Caroline Lucas

1 Tory

Total: 25

 

And abstainers:

3 SNP

31 Lab

5 LD

John Woodcock

6 Tories

Total: 46

 

Result of Common Market 2.0 amendment if the above all voted in favour:

332 For

257 Against

Majority: 75 (without cabinet votes)

 

There are some odd cases - Second Referendumers aren't necessarily hardcore Remainers. Lady Hermon voted for the PM's deal, and there were some surprising Labour Eurosceptics who are seemingly fine with a second referendum, but not a softer Brexit, such as Dennis Skinner. So it's dangerous to categorise them as all the same - for some, CM2 is more radical than a second referendum, but for others it's the opposite. Likewise some have a huge problem with revoking but are fine with a second referendum.

 

But I do believe that there is a parliamentary majority for both options, and that's the crucial thing. Even if the entire cabinet voted against these options, they wouldn't be able to defeat the majority. Of course, if the government are unwilling to carry out what is acceptable to parliament, then that's another issue entirely....

 

The votes are laid out quite nicely here. There's lots more data to analyse that I haven't really considered here - for example, plenty of Tories who mysteriously abstained on either the Customs Union, CM2 or the Second Referendum, while voting against everything else. Are they saying that they can be persuaded?

 

Finally, note that I haven't considered what would happen if pro Common Market 2.0 MPs suddenly got behind a second referendum/revoke (I'm sure the hardcore Remainers are asking this question), as I feel that for most, this is a bigger ask than the other way around. In any case, the Customs Union and CM2 feel most plausible.