Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

First Up · 04-09-2019 09:36AM

Patser wrote: »

Rory Stewart on Sky news just there, being asked about Rees-Mogg's lounging around last night

'Yes, it is a strangely 18th century attitude to have, but then again he is a representative of the period'

Nice one.

trellheim · 04-09-2019 09:44AM

Catching up here. Any chance they will use the Parliament act to ram it through the Lords

pauldla · 04-09-2019 09:47AM

Sorry to interrupt the flow of the thread, just leaving this here for reference...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom_by_length_of_tenure

seamus · 04-09-2019 09:58AM

He'll be defeated on his call for an election. He needs two-thirds of actual seats to approve, not just two-thirds of members present.

As pointed out on that thread though, if the Withdrawal Bill is approved, Johnson can still advise the Queen not to sign it. Which seems like a possible avenue for him, Johnson and his paymasters aren't too concerned with democratic mandates.

It might be the case that the UK parliament could be literally frozen with a PM who can't dissolve his parliament and who refuses to allow any new legislation to be signed. Does Johnson have the neck to sit it out for 58 days and let the UK leave with no deal?

murphaph · 04-09-2019 10:00AM

seamus wrote: »

It might be the case that the UK parliament could be literally frozen with a PM who can't dissolve his parliament and who refuses to allow any new legislation to be signed. Does Johnson have the neck to sit it out for 58 days and let the UK leave with no deal?

Labour would need to call VonC and propose government of national unity in that scenario surely.

robinph · 04-09-2019 10:03AM

pauldla wrote: »

Sorry to interrupt the flow of the thread, just leaving this here for reference...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom_by_length_of_tenure

Surprising that the majority of that list all have "The" same first name, and that only stopped happening just over 100 years ago. Bit of a reminder of how recent it is for normal people to even have a vote, democracy has not been around for as long as you'd think.

trellheim · 04-09-2019 10:08AM

In that case Labour might agree to an early GE as it would be the only road out

or VONC 14 days to form a new Government before dissolution, so technically the rebel alliance could form a government without a GE, under the FTPA provisions

CelticRambler · 04-09-2019 10:08AM

Anyone know if, having taken back control, Parliament can vote to postpone the start-date of prorogation, or even instruct the Queen to revoke her decision?

Alternatively, and I know this would be a very long shot (but still ...), prior to facilitating Johnson's GE, could Parliament award themselves the power to revoke Article 50 to allow heads to cool and/or the establishment of an independent Brexit Commission, and do so before prorogation and the EU summit?

ArmaniJeanss · 04-09-2019 10:12AM

CelticRambler wrote: »

Anyone know if, having taken back control, Parliament can vote to postpone the start-date of prorogation, or even instruct the Queen to revoke her decision?

Without answering your question, but as an aside we should get the result of the Scottish court case on prorogation today.

Panrich · 04-09-2019 10:14AM

It really needs to be hammered home that a no deal does not put this issue to bed.

So many ordinary people in the UK seem to think that if they leave with a no deal then it’s all over and everyone can get back to normal and won’t have to mention Brexit or the EU ever again.

Enzokk · 04-09-2019 10:24AM

Labour could get back a lot of the vote they have lost to the Lib Dems if they are able to get legislation passed to avoid no-deal in law and then call for a general election. I think it is clear now that Johnson has no workable majority so an election is inevitable, but it is imperative to ensure no-deal is avoided.

Then it will be down to the manifestos and the Tories are in trouble as they will have to defend their record for the last 9 years. Brexit will play a role but as with the 2017 election it will be one of many issues for voters.

CelticRambler · 04-09-2019 10:26AM

Panrich wrote: »

So many ordinary people in the UK seem to think that if they leave with a no deal then it’s all over and everyone can get back to normal and won’t have to mention Brexit or the EU ever again.

I was thinking that earlier when I caught a bit of a CNN vox-pop. Even if posters such as cryptocurrency annoy us with their insistence that Britain will be great on the outside, it's way too easy for every news channel - even the French media looking for opinions amongst the ex-pat community - to find True Believers who share that same undentable assurance that Brexit day is (simultaneously) the End of All This and a glorious New Beginnning.

I'm not sure how to explain to them that (a) signing the WA is not "a deal" - the deal still has to be done; and (b) "no deal" isn't a return to the 80s or the 70s or the 60s, but a step forward into unknown territory where everything they want to do will need a deal.

Stop moaning ffs · 04-09-2019 10:27AM

Court in Scotland has found Prorogue is legal and can go ahead.

Peregrinus · 04-09-2019 10:30AM

CelticRambler wrote: »

Anyone know if, having taken back control, Parliament can vote to postpone the start-date of prorogation, or even instruct the Queen to revoke her decision?

No. Monarch acts on the advice of ministers, not parliament. If parliament wants monarch to be given certain advice, needs to vote out ministers who won't give that advice and replace them with more biddable ministers.

CelticRambler wrote: »

Alternatively, and I know this would be a very long shot (but still ...), prior to facilitating Johnson's GE, could Parliament award themselves the power to revoke Article 50 to allow heads to cool and/or the establishment of an independent Brexit Commission, and do so before prorogation and the EU summit?

In principle, Parliament can do anything.

In practice, they'd need to agree among themselves to do that, they'd need to draft some quite complex legislation (without the assistance of the professional drafters who work for the government and who draft nearly all UK legislation) and they'd need to get it passed through all stages in both the Commons and the Lords, and signed by the Queen. Realistically, there isn't enough time for all this.

robinph · 04-09-2019 10:31AM

The success of last night, and the expected success of later today, in taking control and preventing a no-deal exit on the 31st of October is all completely pointless the moment they agree to a general election. They need to block no deal at the end of October, and also change it from being the default option at the end of any extension or in X months time we'll just be back in exactly the same place again.

Zubeneschamali · 04-09-2019 10:32AM

pauldla wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom_by_length_of_tenure

So Boris has to survive 77 days from today to Nov 20 in order to get off off the bottom rung, and he would still be the shortest serving PM in 180 years.

Cameron has over 6 years and is at #22 in the chart.

Even May at 3 years 11 days looks out of reach.

Peregrinus · 04-09-2019 10:33AM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Court in Scotland has found Prorogue is legal and can go ahead.

I smell an appeal to the Supreme Court!

Zubeneschamali · 04-09-2019 10:34AM

murphaph wrote: »

Labour would need to call VonC and propose government of national unity in that scenario surely.

Yes, and Corbyn did himself no harm yesterday as a candidate for caretaker PM.

Mind you, Ken Clarke was even better, and is no longer a Tory MP, so...

Peregrinus · 04-09-2019 10:34AM

robinph wrote: »

The success of last night, and the expected success of later today, in taking control and preventing a no-deal exit on the 31st of October is all completely pointless the moment they agree to a general election. They need to block no deal at the end of October, and also change it from being the default option at the end of any extension or in X months time we'll just be back in exactly the same place again.

They can't change it as the default option; it's the default option under Article 50, and the UK can't amend Article 50 unilaterally.

There are only two ways to irrevocably avoid a no-deal Brexit; ratify a deal, or revoke the Article 50 notification (thereby cancelling Brexit entirely). Everything else is just buying time.

Loafing Oaf · 04-09-2019 10:36AM

robinph wrote: »

The success of last night, and the expected success of later today, in taking control and preventing a no-deal exit on the 31st of October is all completely pointless the moment they agree to a general election. They need to block no deal at the end of October, and also change it from being the default option at the end of any extension or in X months time we'll just be back in exactly the same place again.

Presumably the 'rebels' believe a GE will produce a majority in favour of another referendum or a different deal or whatever

CrabRevolution · 04-09-2019 10:36AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Ah, but the Cummings fanclub have convinced themselves that no matter what happens, everything is proceeding as he has foreseen.

Rebel Alliance attacking the Death Star Government's control of Parliament? All part of the plan.

No Deal ruled out? That was what Boris wanted, he just couldn't do it himself!

Election? Ha ha! Boris eats elections for breakfast!

Of course, the same people already have a narrative ready if the opposite happens - Rebel Alliance fails, Boris wins! No Deal crashout likely - that was the plan all along, Boris only pretended to want a deal! Election blocked - Ha! Ha! Boris is still PM!

7 dimensional chess, people!

The fact is that Boris is the first PM to lose his first Commons vote in over a hundred and twenty years. He is on course to be the shortest serving PM ever. His performance yesterday made Theresa May look strong and stable and Cameron look clever.

He is really bad at this Prime Ministering thing, just as he was a disastrous Foreign Secretary and a hopeless Mayor. He wasn't even a good MP, and was fired from his first journamalism job for literally making sh!t up.

If he wasn't an Eton/Oxford posh boy we would never have heard of him in any capacity, but that is the UK class system for you.

It reminds me of Conor McGregor fans at his height a few years ago. Everything he said or did was proclaimed to be an act of pure genius which left everyone else for dust. No matter what it was, how little it achieved and how much it contradicted things he said or did both before or after, it was always a masterstroke. According to them, nothing ever went wrong for him and the consequences both positive or negative were always what he had intended all along.

Zubeneschamali · 04-09-2019 10:41AM

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Presumably the 'rebels' believe a GE will produce a majority in favour of another referendum or a different deal or whatever

After all we have seen, if the Tories (with or without the Brexit Party) get an overall majority, then there really would be a case for Brexit to go ahead.

robinph · 04-09-2019 10:42AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

They can't change it as the default option; it's the default option under Article 50, and the UK can't amend Article 50 unilaterally.

There are only two ways to irrevocably avoid a no-deal Brexit; ratify a deal, or revoke the Article 50 notification (thereby cancelling Brexit entirely). Everything else is just buying time.

I thought the default being no deal was the part that the UK added on themselves when implementing Article 50 into the UK's own laws, not that Article 50 made any mention of deals or their lack of?

Article 50 just being that you have 2 years to come up with something, but the UK's version of it being 2 years to come up with something and then leave regardless.

Peregrinus · 04-09-2019 10:44AM

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Presumably the 'rebels' believe a GE will produce a majority in favour of another referendum or a different deal or whatever

They may hope that, but they don't have to believe it, and it's not essential for their strategy that this should happen. A general election in which hard brexiters do not win a majority is a good outcome for the rebels, even if there's no majority in favour of any other course.

Basically Johnson has to win a majority or he's stuffed.

Mr.Wemmick · 04-09-2019 10:44AM

Enzokk wrote: »

Labour could get back a lot of the vote they have lost to the Lib Dems if they are able to get legislation passed to avoid no-deal in law and then call for a general election. I think it is clear now that Johnson has no workable majority so an election is inevitable, but it is imperative to ensure no-deal is avoided.

Then it will be down to the manifestos and the Tories are in trouble as they will have to defend their record for the last 9 years. Brexit will play a role but as with the 2017 election it will be one of many issues for voters.

You made this point a good few pages back and you're the only one who nailed down this fact correctly. Everyone seems to have forgotten how 10 years of austerity has floored and impacted services, professions, jobs everywhere. Many teachers, doctors, care professionals, families, elderly.. hell, even tory councils workers/local authorities will vote for change. May said she would alter it, supports the JAMs, she didn't.. the trust is not there and the tories have to come to natural end on this run anyway.

Folks are not going to vote for Corbyn per se, but they will vote for change. In a GE, I will vote labour. Easy.

Enzokk · 04-09-2019 10:44AM

robinph wrote: »

The success of last night, and the expected success of later today, in taking control and preventing a no-deal exit on the 31st of October is all completely pointless the moment they agree to a general election. They need to block no deal at the end of October, and also change it from being the default option at the end of any extension or in X months time we'll just be back in exactly the same place again.

The problem I believe as mentioned before by Peregrinus, is that the opposition doesn't have the backing of those writing legislation so any complicated bill they propose could be so confusing as to do nothing. The best they can do is have as simple as possible legislation and then there will need to be a general election as there is no majority for anyone and no coalitions that will do so either. So I guess the plan for Labour is to get the extension from the 31st October secured, and then go for an election and see where the dice may fall.

Peregrinus wrote: »

I smell an appeal to the Supreme Court!

You are right,

https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1169179774616555520?s=20

So it looks like the initial judgement on whether the UK could unilaterally withdraw article 50 notice was also defeated at the first court, but later overturned and confirmed by the ECJ.

Peregrinus · 04-09-2019 10:47AM

robinph wrote: »

I thought the default being no deal was the part that the UK added on themselves when implementing Article 50 into the UK's own laws, not that Article 50 made any mention of deals or their lack of?

Article 50 just being that you have 2 years to come up with something, but the UK's version of it being 2 years to come up with something and then leave regardless.

No. Article 50 says you have 2 years to come up with a deal but, deal or no deal, at the end of 2 years you're out, unless an extension is unanimously agreed. (And the same rule applies at the end of any extension.)

Zubeneschamali · 04-09-2019 10:54AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

No. Article 50 says you have 2 years to come up with a deal but, deal or no deal, at the end of 2 years you're out, unless an extension is unanimously agreed.

Or you revoke A50, which the courts have determined can be done unilaterally by the Leaving/not leaving country.

But if an election is coming, there is little point in passing a law that says if no deal is in place the PM must revoke rather than crash out on Brexit day, because the next government (or parliamentary rabble) resulting from the election can just change that.

So if the extension secured gives enough time for a campaign, election and formation of a coalition if necessary, that is all the current parliament can really achieve to stop Brexit, they must hope that the next Parliament does the rest.

Stop moaning ffs · 04-09-2019 10:54AM

A very drunk Dominic Cummings went up to Corbyn last night and challenged him to an election ‘come on Corbyn don’t be afraid of us’. Apparently he was locked and wandering around HOC lost too at one stage

ancapailldorcha · 04-09-2019 10:56AM

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

You made this point a good few pages back and you're the only one who nailed down this fact correctly. Everyone seems to have forgotten how 10 years of austerity has floored and impacted services, professions, jobs everywhere. Many teachers, doctors, care professionals, families, elderly.. hell, even tory councils workers/local authorities will vote for change. May said she would alter it, supports the JAMs, she didn't.. the trust is not there and the tories have to come to natural end on this run anyway.

Folks are not going to vote for Corbyn per se, but they will vote for change. In a GE, I will vote labour. Easy.

I made the perhaps retrospectively poor choice of heading to the pub after a long day at work last night so my ability to follow proceedings was hampered. Therefore, I can't judge Corbyn's performance properly.

However, there is still the issue of the splintered Remain vote in a GE. The Brexit party will probably stand down, at least for some Tories or even all if certain troublemakers don't run or are deselected. I'm not sure there is enough cohesion in the "Remain alliance" for it to yield sufficient results.

I think we could see a repeat of 2017 in that both sides face somewhat open goals though this time Labour has the advantage, particularly if Jeremy Corbyn can be coerced (and that seems to be what is required) into advocating a People's Vote. Johnson will weaponise hard Brexit to this effect so trying to play moderate will backfire in my opinion.

For Johnson, I have no idea what he will run on. For the first time in living memory, the Tories can't realistically claim to be the party of prudent economics and sound government. I'm not saying that they embodies either of these, simply that this is how they run and win election campaigns. In addition, they have the baggage of the NHS, austerity, inequality, appalling gaffes with Brexit, etc. Crucially, Johnson will have alienated business this time around which might flock to the Lib Dems if Jo Swinson can play her hand properly. If Corbyn doesn't repulse liberals then he has a strong chance, especially if the remain parties coordinate properly. His base in the north of England might be alienated but southern Brexiters see him as a remainer anyway. It would make sense for him to occupy that vacuum.

I can't see the Brexit party making any sort of gains due to FPTP and them splitting the Tory vote.

Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Comments