قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / World / Brexit Live Updates: Britain Debates Delaying E.U. Departure

Brexit Live Updates: Britain Debates Delaying E.U. Departure



• With a rapid deadline of 29 March and no consensus in Britain on an agreement, Parliament will vote around 17:00. Thursday on the opportunity to reject the planned departure date for the country from the European Union.

• Legislators have twice rejected the withdrawal contract proposed by Prime Minister Theresa May with sensational margins. Wednesday they surrounded her further by passing a measure against any attempt to leave without an agreement.

• Ms. May remains in power but is seriously compromised. Many conservatives supported the anti-deal deal against his wishes, and several members of his cabinet refused to vote against, leading to speculation that he lost control of his party and the trial.

• Parliament could try to take control of the Brexit process by voting for a series of amendments, one of which would schedule the swift votes to determine which type of plan could support a majority. Another amendment would require time for a second referendum, but it is not expected to get approval.

After months of bravado and grandeur, of threats and stabs in political backs, the Parliament is paralyzed, which means that lawmakers are now able to try to stop the ; clock before the March 29 deadline. Parliament will return Thursday for a third consecutive day of Brexit voting, and it is widely assumed that lawmakers will support a measure to look for a delay.

But if the vote for a postponement postpones the deadline, it also creates new problems [19659002] Firstly, any delay would require the approval of the other 27 member states of the European Union. And the big question is what kind of delay would be granted, and what would it accomplish.

Many experts say that the European Union is likely to grant an extension, even if how long it would last is less certain. Some Brexit advocates fear that extending the deadline too far in the future may mean that the departure never happens. But a short delay would bring his problems.

The elections for the European Parliament should begin on May 23, so if the deadline is postponed beyond that date, Britain will be required to elect European legislators, even if it has tried to finalize its departure from the blockade. Awakward.

Furthermore, it took more than two years for Mrs. May's government to negotiate its agreement with Brussels. If a majority emerges in some way for a new exit agreement, such a proposal should be negotiated with Brussels, and nobody thinks that a new agreement could be completed by the end of May, assuming that Brussels could even play ball.

For now, the European Union, despite some changes at the beginning of this week, has basically told Britain that its offer is take-it-or-leave-it. Many European leaders have suggested that Britain would need to explain what it should have done differently – and how the new plan would have approved Parliament – before granting an extension.

the so-called indicative votes will take place the day before Ms. May is scheduled to attend a summit of EU leaders, and – if legislators ask for it – request a postponement of Brexit.

C & # 39; is another amendment that calls for the Brexit extension process to allow Parliament to find the majority for a different approach, but is less likely to pass because it was officially proposed by the Labor opposition party .

Also in the mix is ​​an amendment by Sarah Wollaston, an independent legislator, who asks for an extension to ask for time for a second referendum, even if it is not expected to command a majority.

And another amendment by a Labor lawmaker, Chris Bryant, discusses that Mrs. May should not be allowed to re-submit her agreement to the House of Commons

. This was designed to try to destroy Ms. May's plans to return with her unpopular plan to Parliament for the third time next week, before Parliament could potentially have a chance to consider alternatives.

The selection of the amendments is the task of the speaker, John Bercow, who infuriated the extremists of Brexit by declining to plan a vote on an amendment intended to exclude the possibility of a second referendum.

Prime Minister Theresa May insisted that the possibility of a Brexit without agreement should remain an option, arguing that removing him from his negotiating arsenal would deny his influence in dealing with the European Union.

However, when Parliament met on Wednesday, it supported the motion asking lawmakers to declare that they are against leaving the European Union on 29 March unless an agreement was signed [19659002] Parliament he took a step further and voted against exiting the block without agreement under any circumstances, at any time – a harsh rebuke to Mrs. May.

It was not the first time that Mrs. May's party members have mistrust, and there is no reason to suspect that it will be the last.

On Tuesday the legislators decisively rejected, 391 votes against 242, the agreement that Mrs. May had negotiated with the officials of the European Union, including the last minute modifications intended to persuade recalcitrant and pro-Brexit legislators who were worried that Britain might be subjected indefinitely to some of the economic rules of the blockade.

Speaks to the uphill struggle of Mrs. May that there was a thin coating of silver in that 149- defeat of the vote: it was less emphatic than the first vote on the agreement, in January, which it lost 230 votes, a surprising margin in a 650-seat Parliament.

British governments rarely lose significant parliamentary votes, but Ms. May has survived some Brexit-related setbacks – and a flow of government resignations – that would ordinarily mean the end of the prime minister's mandate.

In the swirl of constitutional nerdiness that followed, it emerged that the last employee of the House of Commons had thrown cold water on this idea back in October.

"That rule is not designed to obstruct the will of the House", said the employee, Sir David Natzler. In other words, Mr. Bercow – a coherent supporter of the rights of backbenchers – would hardly hinder a third vote if legislators really wanted the chance to vote on it.

"It would be ridiculous for him to apply a rule, a literal construction of a rule, if he frustrated what the House wants," said Jack Simson Caird, a former House of Commons scholar, senior researcher at the Bingham Center for the state of law.

The question was the subject Thursday morning many debates concluded that Mr. Bercow – who had opposed Brexit in the referendum, and demonstrated his willingness to frustrate Mrs. May's agenda – is unlikely to launch this particular grenade

That said, we are in strange constitutional periods, with the Parliament looking for a way to play a role while the countdown to the Brexit reaches the last stage. "It's totally unprecedented," Caird said. "The system cannot really cope with what is required."

Wednesday's vote to reject a Brexit no-deal pushed the pound to its highest level since June 2018. The value of the pound is expected to decrease if the Gran Brittany leaves without an agreement, and the vote reflects concerns on the part of legislators and their desire to try to prevent it.

However, the continued uncertainty could lead to greater volatility in the British currency, as members of Parliament have canceled the Brexit delay. The pound equalized its earnings after Wednesday night's vote and was around $ 1.32 Thursday morning.

"Overall, this week's Brexit developments have argued that the direction of the journey is towards a late and potentially weaker Brexit that has sustained a stronger pound," Mitsubishi UFG Bank analysts wrote this morning a note. But they warned: "Even political developments are becoming increasingly uncertain."


Source link