Yeah but Mrs May and her cabinet set the timetable and the main objective wasn't to have a vote on a deal before March 29th. The objective was to have the best possible Brexit for the country set in law in advance of the 29th of March.Lurcher300b wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:41 amDespite volting for no no deal, not voting for a extension will lead to a no deal as there is nothing else in place in law. There has clearly been a huge cock up, but May tried to force the issue by the threat of a no deal, hoping that would make her deal the best worst option. So she did meet the deadline, its just what she came up with was no good. She handed in her essay on time, but it was marked as a F.Lindsayt wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:46 amSo, what happens if the House of Commons doesn't pass the vote for a no deal Brexit and doesn't pass the vote for an Article 50 extension? Now that it has voted twice to reject May's proposed deal?
And if Article 50 get's extended, doesn't that just mean that there's been a huge cock-up on May's part by not working to the deadline?
We should have been at the stage we're at now 6 months ago. And then we could have moved onto a No Deal vote in the Commons, followed by a 2nd referendum on the nature of Brexit in good time to make it happen.
Tabling a proposed deal was only half the job. The other half was to get it, or something else agreed in UK law. So no, I don't accept that May has met the deadline.