Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Water John

Looks like LB won't facilitate a GE until after Oct 19th (Starmer). This would force Johnson to go to the EU Summit and request the Ext.
From LK BBC, so carries a health warning.

prawnsambo

Christy42 wrote: »

I more meant meetings where the PM needs to claim parliamentary support without a vote having been held in parliament (like Boris did). Weekly meetings don't have this. Nor do laws that have been passed as they have had a vote generally.

I mean Blair passed bills with respect to the Iraq war (thanks to the Tory's) so he had parliamentary support on it. So it isn't the same.

Had Boris passed a bill for him shutting down parliament with labour support I would not have an issue. I don't need a clear majority, just pass a vote saying the parliament supports him, whatever parties are required to get it across the line.

None of what happened last night equates to a VoNC, and won't until one is actually held. How many times was May defeated in parliament and yet went on to win VoNCs? Yes he removed the whip from 21 MPs last night, but that doesn't actually mean that they'd automatically vote against him in a VoNC. You seem to be applying hindsight to his position when he went to see the Queen. Even if he thought he might have a few rebels from it, at that point, he was the PM and nobody was saying that they wouldn't continue to support him in that position. It's quite different now and he's likely to lose a VoNC, but he's still PM until that happens and even until a new PM is chosen with or without an election.

prawnsambo

trellheim wrote: »

Question.

If Vote of No Confidence passed there is a provision in FTPA for it to be brought back to a vote within 14 days ; possibly resulting in a change to a Labour Govt without a GE.

Has anyone advised on this ?

The actual stipulation is a vote of confidence within 14 days. I think that's read to be a VoC for ANY possible PM and government as well as the current one. But the problem is that the 14 days lands in the middle of the prorogation and (I think) it's suspended until after the prorogation ends. But I stand to be corrected on this. But the 'within' clause implies that this can happen before prorogation.

Strazdas

Water John wrote: »

Looks like LB won't facilitate a GE until after Oct 19th (Starmer). This would force Johnson to go to the EU Summit and request the Ext.
From LK BBC, so carries a health warning.

That's pretty much what Corbyn said yesterday.

Sierra Oscar

Looks like the SNP may be on for a mid-October election.

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1169239194784415744

54and56

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

How is he a member of the Conservative Party?

He is no longer a member of the parliamentary party but is nevertheless a member of the party same as 160,000 other members.

Seth Brundle

VinLieger wrote: »

No fvcking ****...... its not like this wasn't massively telegraphed prior to the referendum or for the entirety of the last 3 years but of course thats all project fear, these fvcking people.......

We know it but 17.4 million people in the UK didn't!
Interesting to hear both the threat of sectarianism and the breakup of the UK come from a ratings agency though

FrancieBrady

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Looks like the SNP may be on for a mid-October election.

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1169239194784415744

I thought that was factored into the numbers last night. What is the count for and against now?

Pedro K

Does anybody know what time, there or thereabouts, the vote on the no deal amendment will be tonight?

gooch2k9

Pedro K wrote: »

Does anybody know what time, there or thereabouts, the vote on the no deal amendment will be tonight?

First vote @ 1700. Second @ 1900. According to BBC.


Government election motion @ 2030 potentially.

Christy42

prawnsambo wrote: »

None of what happened last night equates to a VoNC, and won't until one is actually held. How many times was May defeated in parliament and yet went on to win VoNCs? Yes he removed the whip from 21 MPs last night, but that doesn't actually mean that they'd automatically vote against him in a VoNC. You seem to be applying hindsight to his position when he went to see the Queen. Even if he thought he might have a few rebels from it, at that point, he was the PM and nobody was saying that they wouldn't continue to support him in that position. It's quite different now and he's likely to lose a VoNC, but he's still PM until that happens and even until a new PM is chosen with or without an election.

Sure he might have won but he definitely was unsure of that at the time since everyone else would have been. I mean I think it would be a better system if the pm had to show support. This could have been the vote for the laws the Queen is about to sign or a vonc if it is extraordinary business. Heck maybe even just start off by voting in the pm like in Ireland. Then he goes to the Queen with evidence of support and it can be assumed till he loses a vonc (that someone else has to call) to have the support.

I am aware that last night was not a VoNC. Maybe he would have won one a week ago. He didn't know that and it seems like it would easy fix by doing it like the vast majority of parliments around the world.

Here we have a ridiculous situation with someone suspending parliament without the parliments even sitting to be able to show or not show support.

Yes it is partially hindsight but a bit of foresight in making the system could avoid situations like this. Certainly he might have still won but then parliment can't say they didn't support him in his prorogue. Or he loses and we avoid the situation.

prawnsambo

Christy42 wrote: »

Sure he might have won but he definitely was unsure of that at the time since everyone else would have been. I mean I think it would be a better system if the pm had to show support. This could have been the vote for the laws the Queen is about to sign or a vonc if it is extraordinary business. Heck maybe even just start off by voting in the pm like in Ireland. Then he goes to the Queen with evidence of support and it can be assumed till he loses a vonc (that someone else has to call) to have the support.

I am aware that last night was not a VoNC. Maybe he would have won one a week ago. He didn't know that and it seems like it would easy fix by doing it like the vast majority of parliments around the world.

Here we have a ridiculous situation with someone suspending parliament without the parliments even sitting to be able to show or not show support.

Yes it is partially hindsight but a bit of foresight in making the system could avoid situations like this. Certainly he might have still won but then parliment can't say they didn't support him in his prorogue. Or he loses and we avoid the situation.

I agree it's a mad situation. And one (among many now) that prove not having a written constitution is a bad idea. But you're asking a lot of the Queen (I know, who cares ) to basically interrogate the PM as to whether he continues to have the support of his party and government. What if he says he does? Is she going to call him a liar?
Realistically, he was actually making the request BECAUSE he didn't think he could control a majority. That's how far through the looking glass they've travelled.

Professor Moriarty

No Deal odds out to 9/4 from evens last week.

Water John

If people want to hear a true parliamentarian in action, listen to Hilary Benn, on now, with his Bill.

MadYaker

This guy should be PM

VinLieger

If this bill does pass what is the likelihood an extension is granted by the EU?

First Up

VinLieger wrote:

If this bill does pass what is the likelihood an extension is granted by the EU?

The UK would have to ask for one and Bojo says he won't so it would need a few other things to happen as well.

Bigus

VinLieger wrote: »

If this bill does pass what is the likelihood an extension is granted by the EU?

The E.U. will grant an extension under these genuine circumstances, it’s not personal like a divorce.

Tell me how

This is in keeping with the clueless amateurishness of the whole Brexit debacle to this point.

https://twitter.com/DawnHFoster/status/1169192794289856512

If you are a political journalist live from outside Westminster, there are some things you really should know.
He saw the opening, and nailed it.

is_that_so

VinLieger wrote: »

If this bill does pass what is the likelihood an extension is granted by the EU?

Boris has to ask for one and there needs to be a good reason. A new parliament with Brexiteers in the minority might be one scenario. Some real alternatives is another but that's probably a complete no-hoper.

Dytalus

Tell me how wrote: »

This is in keeping with the clueless amateurishness of the whole Brexit debacle to this point.

https://twitter.com/DawnHFoster/status/1169192794289856512

If you are a political journalist live from outside Westminster, there are some things you really should know.
He saw the opening, and nailed it.

Well, that must have been embarrassing. But it's not the first time over the course of the Brexit debacle that journalists (and politicians for that matter) covering it in the UK have fallen for soundbites and 'alternative facts' simply because some high profile members of parliament repeat them ad nauseum. The "Sinn Féin take their pay but not their seats" talking point has been around for years, and yet is painfully easy to disprove.

trellheim

Another Superb report from Peter Foster

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1169255491211595777

Rising to Tony Connelly levels of excellence here.

ShooterSF

The EU need to wait until after any election before looking at an extension. No point unless one side or the other come back with a strong majority.

ToBeFrank123

Can Johnson simply ignore the request for an extension?

gmisk

Tell me how wrote: »

This is in keeping with the clueless amateurishness of the whole Brexit debacle to this point.

https://twitter.com/DawnHFoster/status/1169192794289856512

If you are a political journalist live from outside Westminster, there are some things you really should know.
He saw the opening, and nailed it.

That kind of shows you how clueless the UK media in general is when it comes to politics in northern ireland.


There shock when they had to do some digging into the DUP and their policies etc....lol

Joe_ Public

Bigus wrote: »

The E.U. will grant an extension under these genuine circumstances, it’s not personal like a divorce.

Issue as i see it is, though, that even assuming the EU grants an extension, what would likely change in that period if Boris Johnson remained as PM? Isn't getting Johnson out of Downing St a necessary part of that strategy? But that in turn entails getting Corbyn into Downing St so therein lies the crux.... Saw the headline on Danny Finkelstein's piece in the Times this morning: it's either No Deal or Jeremy Corbyn. That seems a fair summation from what i can see.

trellheim

I suspect that if the Bill passes then some delaying tactic to Royal Assent is next. But it has to get through the House and the Lords tonight

MadYaker

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Can Johnson simply ignore the request for an extension?

If the bill gets passed tonight (it will) and he fails to secure a deal by 2 days after the next euro summit (oct 19th) he is compelled to ask for an extension until january 2020, as far as I understand it. Once the bill passes no deal brexit is no longer an option unless the EU refuse the extension. In which case the UK would crash out on oct 31st.

Johnson has no choice but to obey the instructions of parliament.

It's a well constructed bill and gives Johnson a chance to get the deal he claims he wants and claims he has been working towards, if you believe his lies.

is_that_so

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Can Johnson simply ignore the request for an extension?

Yes. If he gets the numbers on the 15th October he'll repeal what they're doing today and most likely go for No Deal. If he doesn't others will.

An Ciarraioch

Yes, Gerald Howlin was a spin doctor himself, but his visceration of Cummings here is masterly:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/views/columnists/gerard-howlin/advisers-would-be-well-warned-not-to-stick-their-necks-out-too-far-948160.html