The Speaker's ruling to allow the Grieve amendment to be tabled to the Government's Business of the House motion (which has now passed by 308 votes to 297) has two practical impacts:
1⃣ If the Govt loses the MV next week it will have to announce Plan B in Parliament in 3 days 1/
1⃣ If the Govt loses the MV next week it will have to announce Plan B in Parliament in 3 days 1/
2⃣In a hung Parliament, the Speaker effectively becomes the sole arbiter of Parliamentary procedure, able to impart his own interpretation against the advice of qualified and experienced Clerks. 2/
The row all hinges on a technical word 'forthwith'. For non-procedural people, this means in Parliamentary terms that a motion must be put for a decision by the Commons 'without debate or amendment'. Not for the first time, the Speaker decided to reinterpret the rule book 3/
The Speaker argued today that 'precedent does not... bind' him. So he decided to allow an amendment to the Govt's motion, despite the fact that on 4th December the Commons explicitly agreed that no changes could be made to the motion by anyone other than by a Govt minister. 4/
Several MPs raised objections - including by @PeterBoneUK who quite rightly was annoyed that he had been told that it was not possible to table amendments to a forthwith motion. 5/
Most importantly, however, are the implications of the Speaker's decision to reinterpret Erskine May and the Standing Orders. By declaring himself the sole arbiter, he's effectively saying that he can change the rules of debate at any time. 6/
However much Speaker may wish to reinterpret the rules, the legislative fact remains that UK will exit the EU on 29th March unless MPs
1⃣Agree on a Plan B, *and* pass legislation through both the Commons and the Lords before 29.03 OR
2⃣Extend/revoke A50 (with Govt agreement)
7/7
1⃣Agree on a Plan B, *and* pass legislation through both the Commons and the Lords before 29.03 OR
2⃣Extend/revoke A50 (with Govt agreement)
7/7
