Brexit: May writes to EU requesting another article 50 extension, but only until 30 June - live news
Source: The Guardian
(snip)
The current deadline for a no-deal Brexit is a week today, Theresa May has not even scheduled yet another vote on her deal and neither the House of Commons nor the House of Lords are sitting. But, away from parliament, there are important developments happening.
May has written to Donald Tusk, president of the European council, formally asking for another article 50 extension - but only until 30 June. The letter has just been released by Number 10. Here it is.
((go to link to see the letter, dated 5 April))
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2019/apr/05/brexit-latest-news-developments-live-theresa-may-writes-to-eu-requesting-another-article-50-extension-but-only-until-30-june-live-news
Again, May is asking for something other than what Tusk and other EU people are willing to grant.
brooklynite
(94,598 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,321 posts)30 June gives her more time to get some kind of deal with Corbyn, but not enough time for a confirmatory referendum ("The minimum 10-week referendum period is specified in PPERA", and that's after you've set it up in parliament and decided the question - "A fair estimate is that the whole process would take a minimum of 21 weeks", " the minimum time for these combined processes would be around 22 weeks" ).
So a new referendum needs an extension to the end of August at the minimum. Corbyn himself may be OK with that - he's resisted attempts by most of Labour to insist on a new referendum. He may let her do this.
See:
Labours deputy leader, Tom Watson, has suggested there could be a party rebellion if Jeremy Corbyn does not insist on a second referendum in continuing Brexit talks with the government.
Watson insisted Labour had entered the talks, which will continue for a third day on Friday, with an open mind.
But speaking to BBC Radio 4s Today programme, he said: We went into the discussions with the idea that there would be a confirmatory ballot. We need to see whether Keir Starmer and David Lidington can reach a creative accommodation that builds a consensus. But if it comes out of that process without the idea of a confirmatory ballot then I think we would have a bit of difficulty in our parliament party, but lets see.
Watson added: We are bound by our conference policy. The people need to be part of that process 80% of our MPs supported a confirmatory ballot.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/05/labour-revolt-possible-if-corbyn-doesnt-press-for-public-vote-watson-brexit
Caroline Lucas, Green Party MP (proper Green, not the dodgy version the USA has):
Link to tweet
"PM is at odds with reality.
EU rejected this proposal just weeks ago. We're now at the mercy of their decision.
She's also undermined talks with Labour by effectively ruling out #PeoplesVote.
Corbyn and May must deliver the time we need for the people to decide our future."
muriel_volestrangler
(101,321 posts)May does not try to address the EUs concerns about a 30 June extension, suggesting that her offer may not be a serious one. May does not want the UK to take part in the European elections on 23 May, and there is an argument that it would be acceptable for the UK not to take part provided it was out of the EU before the new parliament convened on 2 July. That would make an extension until 30 June acceptable. However, some senior EU figures were worried the UK might not take part in the elections, but then revoke article 50 in June - plunging the EU institutions into legal chaos (because the UK would be a member without representation in the parliament). If May really wanted the EU to agree to 30 June, she would have addressed this point in her letter. She doesnt.
May explains the process she is engaged in with Labour to try to find a compromise - but with a few new clues as to her thinking. Part of what is in the letter repeats what May said in her statement from No 10 on Tuesday after the seven-hour cabinet meeting about what to do next. May said if she and Corbyn could not agree on a compromise solution, the government and Labour would agree a number of options for the future relationship that we could put to the house in a series of votes to determine which course to pursue. In todays letter that has become a small number of clear options (my italics), suggesting indicative votes on perhaps just three choices?
May insists the government will only sign up to this sort of binding indicative votes process if Labour agrees to be bound by it too. May also made this point in her speech on Tuesday, but today she is more explicit. She says:
The government stands ready to abide by the decision of the house, if the opposition will commit to doing the same.
In saying this, May is using her letter to put pressure on the opposition, implying Corbyn will be partly to blame if there is no agreement. This marks a departure from May's letter to Tusk last month, which barely mentioned the opposition.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2019/apr/05/brexit-latest-news-developments-live-theresa-may-writes-to-eu-requesting-another-article-50-extension-but-only-until-30-june-live-news?page=with:block-5ca70f5a8f081da83cc09e05#block-5ca70f5a8f081da83cc09e05
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)There are elections for the European Parliament coming soon. The parties there are not beholden to countries but represent people from all over Europe, regardless of their country.
If Britain is still a EU-member by the time of the election, the British get to vote whom to send to the European Parliament, even though they won't be constituents anymore shortly therafter.
ripcord
(5,409 posts)padah513
(2,503 posts)Question. What would happen if they just decided to forget the whole thing and went back to the way things were? Is it too late for that?
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Yes, there were lies, misinformation and dirty tricks, but this is what they voted to do.
Denzil_DC
(7,242 posts)The European Court of Justice ruled that the UK can revoke Article 50 (as long as it was done in good faith, i.e. not as a bargaining manoeuvre) at any time before the deadline runs out without incurring any penalties.
As for the reply above this one, the government has ignored referendums in the past (about Scottish devolution way back, for instance) and this was a non-binding - a.k.a. advisory - referendum, so the only cost would be political, and the way public opinion's shifting at the moment it might even be a net positive for MPs in Parliament as a whole, though May & Co. would be humiliated and their party might never recover. It likely won't recover from all this whatever happens anyway.
It was a non-binding referendum. A court found that if it had been a legally binding referendum, it should have been declared invalid because of all the irregularities. It's a weird twist on Catch-22.
As for revisiting the subject with a second referendum, here's one of Brexit's leading lights:
padah513
(2,503 posts)It just seems like a lot of trouble to put a country through without having all the t's and i's crossed and dotted before taking the vote. Maybe it'll get better once everything is resolved. I hope so.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,321 posts)but whoever did it would get voted out, probably with ERG/Farage/UKIPers taking over. Who'd make things even worse. Just ignoring the referendum would be a recipe for the furthest right government we've ever seen. A referendum is needed to say "yes, we got it wrong". People don't appreciate being told they got it wrong.
Denzil_DC
(7,242 posts)of those who dared to predict what might happen with Brexit.
Cant about "ignoring the referendum" is right out of the same kennel as "will of the people" and "there'll be blood on the streets", and is predicated on the idea that if you give the right wing what it wants, it'll just quieten down. History doesn't bear that out.
Your prediction about "the furthest right government we've ever seen" assumes there isn't a backlash against the wholesale pandering to the right-wing Leavers over the past few years. Look how far it's gotten us - along the road to Brexit, let alone a prosperous national future.
Any claim those in the Tory Party's Leave wing had to pursue Brexit has been forfeited because they didn't plan ahead, didn't do the work when they held all the cards, and have shown themselves utterly unfit to deliver on what they presented noisily and insistently as the simplest process in the world, let alone govern.
A second referendum wouldn't answer your objection about "being told they got it wrong". To change their vote, a certain proportion of the electorate would have to accept "yes, we got it wrong". Hell, even some among the DUP leadership are saying they'd rather Remain than risk the hallowed Union (which, like the Tories - and Labour if it doesn't give itself a good shake real soon - may be done for in any case).
muriel_volestrangler
(101,321 posts)...
Responding to Mays letter, Frances secretary of state for European affairs, Amélie de Montchalin, told the Guardian in a statement: The European council took a clear decision on 21 March Another extension requires the UK to put forward a plan with clear and credible political backing.
The council would then have to define the necessary conditions attached to that extension, she said. In the absence of such a plan, we would have to acknowledge that the UK chose to leave the EU in a disorderly manner.
...
De Montchalin said Paris had read with interest Theresa Mays letter to President Tusk. As the prime minister rightly wrote, the current impasse is not in the best interest of either the UK nor the EU. It cannot be allowed to continue.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/05/france-maintains-hardline-stance-on-no-deal-brexit
It is a difficult situation. There are I think many questions still to clarify in London ...
We will come together with our European colleagues at the next council meeting and come to an opinion over the question of an extension and how long such an extension should be.
Maas also said protecting the legitimacy of the European elections would be a priority. He said:
The European elections are an important point in time and it is very important that they proceed in an orderly fashion. Therefore, we need great legal security and we should not endanger the legitimacy of the EU elections.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2019/apr/05/brexit-latest-news-developments-live-theresa-may-writes-to-eu-requesting-another-article-50-extension-but-only-until-30-june-live-news?page=with:block-5ca766158f0872231f4ac17e#block-5ca766158f0872231f4ac17e
Rutte:
...
We hope London will provide more clarity before Wednesday ...
The ball is not here in The Netherlands, or in Paris or Berlin. The ball really is in London.
Yavin4
(35,442 posts)She's the Queen dammit.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Stop hanging on to something the public clearly doesn't want.