Extension of Art 50. What would it take?

Would it need UK legislation?

Or just a phone call to Tusk and a unanimous vote at a meeting of the Council?

Dunno about a vote,  but for an extension any longer than June/July the EU and the UK would have to settle on a common view on whether the UK would participate in the European elections in May, and be ready to take a common line in defending the litigation that would surely be brought. Some litigation would be nuisance/ political but there is also a legitimate interest for  candidates and political parties in other member states in the effect on their pro rata representation.

 In the great scheme of things it ought not matter, reasonable options are feasible even within the treaties, like running elections and MEPs not taking their seats, but it is too visible and symbolic not to be used, by some interest, to protest against extension.

Look, nothing remotely sensible is going to happen.

We’re utterly fucked.

Apparently may isnt going to present the “new” deal to parliament until late March.  If this is confirmed there should be an outcry and a push for an extension.  Absolutely shameful to balckmail parliament with the threat of no deal.  This is politics pure and simple.  

What new deal? She isn't going to get a new deal that she could present. 

In order to extend Art. 50 UK would have to come up with something like a workable plan. The government hasn't managed that in the last two years and won't in the next few weeks. 

they should just withdraw it

nobody can straightfacedly say that's not the best plan

Supplementary question:

’Given the constitutional importance and political complexity of the EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill, what is the minimum amount of time that Parliament will need to discharge its responsibility for thorough scrutiny through all the stages in both houses before it can be given Royal Assent?’

Kimmy she cannot wait until then, the time will be up. She can present this supposed new deal to parliament next week. Negotiations have finished . 

It will take someone sensible and responsible to be in charge.

Unfortunately we haven’t got any of those.

nobody can straightfacedly say that's not the best plan

Have you seen Jacob Rees Mogg's face?

I keep thinking about my tax driver from last week. I wonder if I should have told him about euratom and the cancer treatment. But no he would probably have chucked me out on the side of the m8.

Kimmy this is unforgivable. EU have said a billion times no amendments to the WA.further may still hasn’t told them what she wants so there is nothing to consider. So what  was the point of her trip this week and the cross party discussions . What is she going to say to the house next week. The public and parliament need a concrete statement not just soft Weasley words .

Is he? I think he looks perpetually dour. Assume in his case it is down to never having smiled and so his facial muscles not actually knowing how to do it, rather than botox.

jrm looks like a 11-yo who has a premature aging disease. 

Ebitda, I know - it's beyond crazy and is downright wicked imo.

​​​​​the parliamentary vote is later thhis month, isnt it? Has something changed?

Speculation that May might postpone it to March (or effectively postpone it and go back to Brussels again after losing it, to "try again" and have yet another vote in March). Basically run down the clock and tell the Commons c. 20 March that it's her deal or no-deal and if they don't pass her deal, they will have to explain to their voters why *they* caused a no-deal hard Brexit and the chaos that follows. 


TBH, it could work politically - it's probably May's best bet of passing her deal. 

I think if she does that, someone would be more than justified in shooting her tbh.

BBC news just now suggesting EU wont be deciding on any amendments until”after more voting in Parliament next week”.

i do not know to which vote(s) this refers but leaving that aside this would suggest surely it is now the EU running down the clock??

Struan, I fear that you are right about May postponing until March.

More precisely, I suspect that she has the EU’s agreement that they will only extend Art 50 if it is to legislate for her Withdrawal Agreement, or to hold a referendum with the choice on the ballot between a) her Withdrawal Agreement, or b) Remain.

The House of Commons is dead set against No Deal, and so it would seem that they will have to choose between 1). May’s Withdrawal Agreement and 2). Going for the referendum.

But if they choose 1)., the DUP will join Labour in a vote of no confidence bringing down the Government, and with insufficient time to pass the EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill before Government is prorogued we’d leave with no Deal.  

Hence they’ll choose 2).  In the referendum the Leavers will abstain in their millions, the Remainers will campaign against the Withdrawal Agreement, and we will end up Remaining.  Which the DUP are quite happy with.

Don't they need  statutory instrument to be effected if they wish to extend it?  Call me mr picky but I suspect they may face a few issues....

From the Guardian today:

’Teresa May could win parliament’s approval for her controversial Brexit deal in return for guaranteeing another referendum, under a new plan being drawn up by a cross-party group of MPs. The new vote would give the British people a simple choice: to confirm the decision or stay in the EU.

The initiative, aimed at breaking the political impasse, is being advanced by Labour MPs Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson and has won the support of prominent Remainers in the Tory party including Sarah Wollaston, Dominic Grieve and Anna Soubry.

Kyle says the idea, which is likely to be put forward as an amendment to the EU withdrawal bill, is also being taken seriously by “people at a high level in government” as a potential way to resolve the Brexit crisis.

The amendment would offer all MPs the chance to support, or abstain on, the withdrawal bill and would specify that, if passed, the decision would be implemented on the condition it was put to the public for approval in a second referendum.

If the amendment passed through parliament but the deal was rejected in the subsequent referendum, the UK would stay in the EU under current arrangements.

If, however, the British people confirmed the decision of MPs to leave the EU under the terms of May’s deal, Brexit on these terms would immediately come into effect without any need for it to return to parliament. 

“The beauty of this plan is that it holds attractions for both Leavers and Remainers. For Leavers, if the deal is confirmed by the British people, it offers a definitive end to the withdrawal process with Brexit sealed once and for all. For Remainers, on the other hand, it offers the chance to make the case to stay in the EU to the public, based on facts not promises as before,” said Kyle.’

Just as I feared


“I’ve never predicted anything like this, but now I’m going to pretend I have to cover all bases.”

Oh, wait a minute!

Reading the Fixed Term Parliament Act, and allowing for May’s willingness to ignore Parliament, it seems that even if May loses a vote of no confidence, she can delay calling a General Election for as long as she likes! So there could be enough time to pass the EU Withdrawal Agreement Act before holding the General Election.

‘If a parliamentary general election is to take place as provided for by subsection (1) or (3), the polling day for the election is to be the day appointed by Her Majesty by proclamation on the recommendation of the Prime Minister’

I like the Kyle/Wilson plan

if only because it will really fuck off the headbangers

what has happened is that the more sensible wing of the Tory party has got cold feet and putting their careers and party ahead of the national interest - this means May madness can continue unchecked- no doubt the plan she will announce on Thurdsay, perhaps even with a straight face, will be to go back to the EU and obtain concessions on the backstop, exactly the same plan she has announced 3 times before.  You couldn't make this up, really you couldn't.