The EU/Brexit Blog

Well this week has already been an eventful week. Theresa May has announced that MPs will not only be able to have a final vote on her Brexit deal on the 12th of March, but if her deal is rejected by MPs, MPs will then proceed to vote on how to proceed - with a no deal or extending Article 50. The vote again on Mrs May's deal is slightly irrelevant. It is a vote that we already know the answer to, it will suffer another landslide defeat. However, the vote is a placeholder so that MPs can proceed to vote on the next path that the UK follows, a no deal or extending the process of Article 50. We can hypothesise till the cows come home how these votes will end but what we can do is examine what will  happen if either motion is approved by the Commons. Parliament approves the UK leaving the EU without a deal: The vast majority of small businesses do not have the cash available to prepare for the various outcomes of Brexit. This means there are series of outcomes still possible t

I apologise for my recent lack of posts but there have been many factors in my decision not to post anything on my blog over the last four weeks. Back when Theresa May's Brexit deal was rejected emphatically by Parliament back in mid January, I thought to myself, well at least Mrs May now has a mandate to either remove the backstop or end negotiations. In my mind it was clear, the backstop was an issue of ginormous magnitude for the Commons and one that EU leaders would fail to avoid. Unless the issue could be resolved, there would be no deal. So I waited. I waited for progress to be made to resolve the issue of the backstop. I waited for a compromise, a sensible and reasonable compromise which could see the issue become less volatile or even solved. However, as I waited, I fully noticed the incompetence of both Mrs May and Mr Corbyn who failed to even discuss or resolve the issue. In fact, both were more concerned about keeping their respective parties in tact - something the la

First of all, I apologise for my brief sabbatical. There was a circle of repetitive Brexit-related news found across all mainstream mediums and having addressed them, I felt it unnecessary to further comment on issues and ideas. However, the elephant in the room is that Mrs May has lost her 'meaningful vote' by 230 votes, the largest government defeat in history and the message from the Commons to May could not be clearer. Parliament fundamentally rejects the deal presented and no matter the amendments proposed, the deal is flawed and will never be supported by the Commons. Now, this vote is not legally binding but it would be politically suicidal to pursue with such a deal as fellow parliamentarians would argue the executive is acting independent of Parliament and, no doubt, a successful vote of no confidence would follow. There was talk earlier on Tuesday that May would, if there was a minor loss of her deal, to allows the proposal of amendments and return to the EU and u

Well hasn't this been a turbulent week in the UK. First, we had the vote on Mrs May's deal called off on Monday and then, on Tuesday evening, Sir Graham Brady announced the 48 letters of no confidence had been sent in by Tory MPs. The subsequent vote was then won by Mrs May although not emphatically. Mrs May then announced she would seek further clarification of the deal as a result of her calling of the meaningful vote. Now that is a brief summary of this week in politics and I could've easily surmised these events but I thought it was important to take a minute to let the dust settle and then comment on everything - which is what I intend to do now. First of all, when Mrs May called off the vote, I personally considered that the most politically insensitive move the PM could've executed. Despite there being three full days of debate in the Commons for the deal, the PM, at the last minute, pulled the vote due to the knowledge that she would lose. Quelle suprise.

(Written on Sunday the 9th of December) What a mysterious topic this is. Back in early 2017, the big news was whether the UK could unilaterally revoke Article 50. This was emphatically refuted by both the EU and UK parliament as being both unconstitutional as well as unfeasible. Low and behold, we find ourselves about to enter 2019 with this exact discussion arising yet again. However, one of those limiting factors is being questioned as to whether it is legitimate or not. This would be the feasibility. Let's not get ahead of ourselves, and as much as I dislike the cliche, the phrase 'democratic will of the people' pretty much makes the ability of government to revoke A50 despite having the referendum of 2016 infinitesimal. However, there is a real boredom arising from the general public who are fed up of talking about Brexit and just want to focus on judicial reform, housing reform and, of course, transport reform. These are the issues the public care about and I woul

(Written on Tuesday the 4th of December 2018) As I sit here on a cold Tuesday evening, I remember thinking at 4pm that today had been relatively quiet so far in terms of news - with the headline being the BBC pulling out of a Brexit debate designed to be ahead of the Brexit vote in just one weeks time. Then I chuckled to myself as I remembered that the government would face two further votes in the Commons that would have immense implications for the nation and Brexit. So, whilst the Government had earlier lost a vote asking that the issue of contempt be referred to the Commons Privilege Committee but that had been defeated by MPs earlier today. The issue of contempt is substantial. A vote in the Commons passed on the 13th of November requiring the government to publish the entire legal text regarding Brexit. The way I like to think about this is the Attorney General is the government's lawyer. They have to determine whether legislation is legal and compatible in the UK and