,
67 tweets,
7 min read
Read on Twitter
MPs are currently... deep sigh... debating some seriously full on weird shit in the Commons parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/9e…
It's simultaneously extremely unusual, historic and deeply boring.
This is the third day of MPs taking control of parliamentary business. They are using it push through Yvette Cooper's bill on extending Article 50.
Currently debating the business motion, which will define how it is debated and voted on. If all goes to plan, they will go through the first three readings of the bill today. Second reading by 7pm, third by 10pm publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cm…
That would clear the Commons business today. Then Lords look at it tomorrow. They will then bat around amendments to each other - bill needs some clearing up - and could be on track for royal assent Friday, or failing that Monday.
There's a bit of a legal debate about whether it needs a money resolution - ie whether it requires spending. that would change the way it goes through parliament.
Brexiters claiming it does, because that holds it up. I don't really see why extension would require extra spending, but there is legal debate on this.
Govt is going to whip against the business motion, which they will vote on at 5pm. But it's possible that if the business motion passes - it probably will - then the govt might even adopt the bill itself.
And that's kind of what makes it boring. After PM's statement yesterday, it's clear govt is going to extend A50. Cooper bill doesn't make much difference therefore.
It would, however, impose parliamentary control on extensions and, more importantly I think, given where we are politically, give MPs a say over the duration.
Still, I won't lie. It is wonkery of the highest order. Everest level. All the real action today is in the prime minister's office with Jeremy Corbyn, where, alas, there are no cameras.
I'll keep it on in the background, but no intensive coverage because I'm knackered.
Letwin coming under fire for bring forward the bill given May announced she'd pursue an extension anyway. His reply is quite useful in seeing the function of the bill.
"The PM has made a commitment to seek an extension. I trust her on that. She has not made a commitment to a given length of extension and she has not given a commitment to seek the approval of the House for the length of extension."
In other words: it gives parliament a say over length. Tory MP Charlie Elphicke, who, it must be said, is not the sharpest tool in the box, responds by saying that the bill does not designate a date for the extension. This is of course completely irrelevant.
Btw there is an amendment to the business motion by Hilary Benn specifying another MPs-take-over day for Monday. Not clear why they are securing this via an amendment rather than in main body of business motion as before - probably got distracted by Cooper bill.
If reports are true, the voting on the Benn amendment - which would create another MPs-take-control day next week - is a tie. That would give Bercow deciding vote.
Would also suggest MPs are tiring of the indicative votes process, after it threw up no results and PM adopted it as a back-up in her statement last night.
My understanding of procedure - someone cleverer than me correct me if I'm wrong - was that in the event of a tie Speaker had to go with status quo option.
Health warning on that. It is one of the things in my head that I am not sure how it got in there.
Point of order from Patrick McLoughlin. "Perhaps Mr Speaker you could possibly inform the House as to what is happening."
Bercow: "There was a degree of uncertainty." He asked chief whips to confer. Indicated it should be brief.
Yes, so precedent, which is not what it used to be in these things, suggests Speaker should vote against an amendment if he has deciding vote.
Ayes 310 Noes 310
That's so indicative vote.
Bercow casts vote with Noes.
That was a big moment. It means MPs *do not* take control of parliament on Monday.
Bercow says the last time this happened was an amendment on Maastricht in 1993.
Funny thing about what just happened. On last two occasions, Letwin put the next day of parliamentary control in the business motion.
If he had done that here, instead of relying on Benn amendment, it's possible vote would have gone another way, or that Bercow's precedent would have gone another way.
This is a bit depressing. But it does not mean that indicative votes led by MPs are dead. There can be other opportunities to secure them.
It absolutely does not stop MPs not taking control today to start pushing through Cooper's bill on extending Article 50. That is provided for in the business motion, which MPs are about to vote for.
Division. They're voting on it now.
This vote must now be considered tighter than it was before. We presumed there was enough momentum on MPs taking control that they would keep giving themselves the right to do so. The amendment failing suggests they may have started to tire of it.
That's doubly the case because the PM has promised both to extend Article 50, as this bill demands, and potentially hold indicative votes, as the amendment demanded.
One last thing on this: That endless gibbering bullshit about Bercow being an undercover Remainer. Funny how they're not saying today isn't it. But I bet they'll say it again the next time one of his decisions goes against them.
Fucking hell. Busines motion passes by 312 votes to 311.
So that's it. MPs are tasking control today. They will use it to push through Yvette Cooper's bill on extending Article 50.
But it was tight. Literally as tight as it gets.
Like I said, these tight numbers are partly a product of a bit of exasperation about the MPs-take-control process.
But they are also partly because control is being taken to do things the PM has very clearly said she'd do anyway. So not necessarily a fair test of how bored of it all MPs are. They could just be sitting it out for a bit to see how all the Corbyn stuff goes.
Anyway Bill Cash now launching guerrilla tactic to hold up the bill. He insists the bill "could amount to £36bn of taxpayers money". This is clown-car level bullshit.
The amount is absurd. But the pertinent point, of whether the law requires spending, is a live topic. If it does, it'll be harder for MPs to get it through quickly.
Bercow is ruling on this now.
He says clerk of legislation was that there was no financial resolution required. Sounds like the Brexiter rearguard defence has failed.
Bercow says financial measures already passed due to Article 50 cover any extension of it. Cooper bill "does not require either a ways or means motion or a money resolution".
So Brexiter opposition to the bill fails. MPs are pressing ahead.
Cooper up to argue for her bill. Reminder: The PM has already said she will request an Article 50 extension. But this bill would give MPs the power to control how long the requested extension is.
(Chances are it won't matter, because whatever the UK asks for, the EU is likely to give a take-it-or-leave-it response of a particular date)
Cooper has already given way several times and every single one was to an MP talking the most tedious godawful vacuous gibberish.
Brexit secretary Stephen Barclay says the govt will oppose the bill. Bizarre and nonsensical, given it is basically govt policy. There was a murmur earlier they might support it.
He says it constrains ability of govt to "negotiate in national interest".
Because they've been great at that so far.
God he's dreary.
Division. MPs are now voting on second reading of the bill. If it passes they'll then debate it some more before a vote on third reading at 10pm.
Yes that's right, because it must be all work, all the time now. No-one can ever relax again.
Passes second reading by 315 to 310
Blimey. It'll probably get through, but it's all very tight.
The bill now goes to committee stage. It;s like a speeded up version of normal life, this. Shit that takes days, just barraging through.
Bill Cash raises a point of order and says the bill is experiencing a "malfunction" - I'm not making this up - and he therefore cannot get a copy of it.
Apparently it was just the amendment paper, and that is now there. Sounds like Cash spaffing off his usual desperate nonsense.
'The bill was malfunctioning.' Good grief.
Apparently the printers have actually broken down
No-one knows what the fuck's going on.
Now the amendments are by the wrong names.
The consequence of legislating at speed: extreme vulnerability to technological hiccups.
There's going to be lots of votes on lots of amendments tonight. I'll do a catch up piece tomorrow morning. But in the mean time follow @ParlyApp for goings-on in the Commons.
