Many wanted to move on to the next stage. A stage in which more scrutiny could be given and amendments made. To suggest they all approved of the bill as it currently reads is beyond disingenuous.
-
-
Replying to @ElJeppy @NickBoles
They approved enough... Enough to ensure it got to the next stage of the normal legislative process. Amendments may happen. They may lose of gain support. There may be aspects the Gov don't like, but they'll have to sick it up. That's Democracy.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @omnisophos @NickBoles
Most of the Labour MPs, who voted to move to the next stage, have made it quite clear they don't support the bill as is. If that weren't the case they'd have voted for the business motion.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ElJeppy @NickBoles
So? That is how all legislation works. It might not affect the EU side of the deal, but amending it can alter UK legislation for the interim period on rights and our requirements for a future relationship.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @omnisophos @NickBoles
Any suggestions that the majority vote was in anyway an endorsement of the deal as is is disingenuous. It's that simple.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ElJeppy @NickBoles
Yes. It was indeed a simple instruction. Leave the EU. How is up to Parliament. They are a bit hamstrung by divisions, but no more than populace. The risk of another Ref... Divisive, inconclusive, legitimate? They need an equitable, workable option that will settle things, EFTA
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @omnisophos @NickBoles
You have just shown "leave" is far from a simple choice as it comes in many different flavours. The binary referendum in 2016 was simply not adequate for the complexities involved. Given that and the clear gulf between the leave campaign and reality a 2nd vote is essential.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ElJeppy @NickBoles
The Ref was binary in nature. Which room to stand in? Now it's about where we ALL stand in THAT room. My side has a lovely view of the SM and FoM etc...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @omnisophos @NickBoles
I certainly wouldn't disagree with you regarding your views on a future relationship with the EU. The fact is though this current deal and the PD is no path to any of that. I suspect you'd want it amended substantially given the opportunity.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ElJeppy @NickBoles
Absolutely. No EFTA separation clauses etc. Read this:https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/02/20/michael-james-clifton-the-uks-creative-ambiguity-towards-the-eea-immediate-and-future-relationship-problems/amp/?__twitter_impression=true …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I shall indeed 
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.