The british prime minister appreciated submit the agreement to the Brexit agreed with Brussels to a double vote to achieve that is approved in the Parliament
A hundred members of his own party will vote against
May ensures that Spain “did not succeed” what I wanted on Gibraltar in the negotiation of a Brexit
the future of The Brexit less bad
Theresa May considers the possibility of submitting the agreement of the Brexit to a double vote in the House of Commons, against the initial opposition of at least 100 of the 315 conservative mps to the text agreed with Brussels. Despite the warning released yesterday by the president of the European Council, Donald Tusk -“if the Parliament votes against the agreement, we will have ‘no deal’ or not Brexit” – everything seems to indicate that Brussels would be willing to give more time to the ‘premier’ to achieve the back-end, or even to extend three months, the article 50 to negotiate a text that could achieve the support of a parliamentary majority.
To the direct question about whether there will be a second vote in the case of losing the first one, made yesterday by the BBC, May left the door open: “I’m focused on the vote that will take place on the 11th of December and what I want is that all those who are going to participate, all members of the Parliament, to focus also on what that vote means.”
The possibility of double voting carries circulating since several weeks ago, fueled, among others, by Rupert Harrison, a former advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury. According to Harrison, who now works in the ‘City’ for the firm’s investment management BlackRock, the inspiration of the Government May in the final phase of the Brexit could be the so-called “scenario-TARP” (in reference to the Relief Program troubled Assets driven by president George W. Bush after the financial meltdown of 2008).
In a first round of voting, Congress voted against the financial rescue of 700,000 million dollars. The vote resulted in a 7% drop on Wall Street, the largest in a single day. The congressmen got the message from investors and supported the end with the TARP in a second vote.
If Westminster voted against the agreement of the Brexit, it is expected that the London stock exchange experience a bump at the prospect of ‘no deal’ (some experts predict a fall flare of 15% in the quotation of the pound). The reaction of the markets would force then to british mps to follow the precedent of the american congressmen, and to think better at the time of a second vote.
“The vote meaningful”, which is scheduled in the Parliament on December 11 has no precedent, which leaves a relative capacity of manoeuvre of the Government, relying ultimately on the discretion of the president of the House of Commons, the conservative John Bercow -who came to boast in his day to have voted in favour of staying in the EU).
The same text can not be voted twice in a matter of days in the Parliament, but the ‘speaker’ may retain the last word on the content and the date of a possible second vote on an agreement which could be touch-ups.
The other key man for May to take forward the agreement in Westminster is the speaker in parliament of the’ tories’ Julian Smith. Their 47 years of age, known as ‘the boss’, Smith is obliged to prove these days, his condition of value upward in the Conservative Party, trying to call up the deputies rebels and practicing what some have denounced as “emotional blackmail”.
Others of the trickery used by the Government has been to allow the debate and voting of a series of amendments, 11-D, with the hope that they will be defeated one after the other, and that the agreement May be able to emerge at the end as the only possible option. Of all the amendments announced in advance there is however one that has the prospect of going forward: the sponsored by the labour opposition to prevent at all costs a ‘no deal’ (although this vote would not be binding).
In full countdown to the voting both London and Brussels are playing to confuse. May also denied yesterday the possibility of a ‘plan B’ with a Brexit soft in the style of Norway (permanence in the Economic Space), backed by a third of the members of his cabinet in the case of the Parliament to block the current covenant.
“Our plans for the future business relationship with Brussels go beyond the model or Canada’s model Norway”, said May to the journalists, the way of the G-20 in Buenos Aires. “The model of Norway, in addition, would not allow us to regain control of the borders”.
The ‘premier’ corrected even partially his statements the previous day before a parliamentary committee, when it came to imply that the EU would be ready to an extension of article 50 if needed to renegotiate. “The agreement to protect jobs and the future of the british is that we have negotiated and that is on the table,” added May.
In the same scenario, Tusk launched a similar warning, with sights set on the 11 December, and not in a possible vote later: “The EU has agreed to a divorce ordered. It is becoming increasingly clear that it is the best agreement possible and the only possible one”. “If the agreement is rejected by the Commons, there will be more alternatives, or a non-agreement or no Brexit,” said Tusk.
According to the criteria of
Learn more
