Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Colonel Claptrap

awec wrote: »

Cummings was a Johnson appointment, and was allowed to set the direction by Johnson, but he's only an adviser, and advisers don't decide anything. If he gets the boot, Johnson looks weak.

"Advisers advise, (prime) ministers decide."

briany

If the Lib Dems finished ahead of Labour in a GE, it would have to be the biggest protest vote of all time.

VinLieger

If they don't leave on the 31st the BP will cannibalise the tory vote, the next election will be nothing like anything the UK has seen for quite some time with such a disparate makeup of seats across multiples parties

Zubeneschamali

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

get a quick deal and try force through parliament.

Johnson can't force anything anywhere, he is a lame duck utterly at the mercy of the opposition he created.

Professor Moriarty

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Johnson can't force anything anywhere, he is a lame duck utterly at the mercy of the opposition he created.

But he's generated so much goodwill across the Tory party and the HoC, he's bound to get a sympathetic hearing.

Spanish Eyes

I honestly don't think today's ruling will change things much.

Boris is already out there in NY brazening it out saying Brexit will not be stopped by this, when the SC said their ruling had nothing to do with Brexit.

The Uk (as we know, even if they are in the midst of Stockholm Syndrome), is a basket case now. I don't know what will happen, they don't know, the EU doesn't know, no one knows.

But hopefully the ruling will put the kibosh on any further stunts like this by Johnson.

Zubeneschamali

J Mysterio wrote: »

This ruling has sent Brexiteers into a blind rage.

You hate to see it.

ArmaniJeanss

briany wrote: »

If the Lib Dems finished ahead of Labour in a GE, it would have to be the biggest protest vote of all time.

People overestimate the capability of the Lib Dems in an actual GE.

In many constituencies which they look as if they could win (on the remain/leave figures and demographic/geographical factors), they are very badly organised. As in the local constituency party is 5 or 6 people who meet up once a month for a chin-wag.

Labour/Momentum on the other hand can still count on 100+ volunteers to get the message out and go leaflet dropping/handshaking 24 hours a day for the length of the campaign.
Tories usually have less volunteers but always have the money to run a thorough advertising campaign.

Lib Dems will have to do their usual thing of working out the best 15 or 20 target seats and concentrating their limited resources on them (whilst also holding what they have). Unfortunately this limits their potential upside.

maynooth_rules

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

People overestimate the capability of the Lib Dems in an actual GE.

In many constituencies which they look as if they could win (on the remain/leave figures and demographic/geographical factors), they are very badly organised. As in the local constituency party is 5 or 6 people who meet up once a month for a chin-wag.

Labour/Momentum on the other hand can still count on 100+ volunteers to get the message out and go leaflet dropping/handshaking 24 hours a day for the length of the campaign.
Tories usually have less volunteers but always have the money to run a thorough advertising campaign.

Lib Dems will have to do their usual thing of working out the best 15 or 20 target seats and concentrating their limited resources on them (whilst also holding what they have). Unfortunately this limits their potential upside.

Don't underestimate the damage Corbyn has done with his shambolic Brexit approach

GM228

For the several posters who have asked: the Supreme Court decision is final, it is not possible to appeal to the ECJ.

For anyone wanting to read the judgement it is now available here:-

https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2019/41.html

It's an excellent well reasoned judgement (especially considering the timeframe to deliver).

The first question, therefore, is whether the Prime Minister’s action had the effect of frustrating or preventing the constitutional role of Parliament in holding the Government to account.

The answer is that of course it did.

It is impossible for us to conclude, on the evidence which has been put before us, that there was any reason - let alone a good reason - to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament for five weeks, from 9th or 12th September until 14th October. We cannot speculate, in the absence of further evidence, upon what such reasons might have been. It follows that the decision was unlawful.

Also I think Johnson deserves some recognition, in fairness he has achieved 100% consistency at failing to do or pass anything he has attempted.

Zubeneschamali

GM228 wrote: »

Also I think Johnson deserves some recognition, in fairness he has achieved 100% consistency at failing to do or pass anything he has attempted.

Indeed, legal commentators after the hearings thought the judgement would be split, anything up to 6-5. Johnson managed to lose on justiciability AND on lawfulness AND get an 11-0 unanimous verdict.

Absolutely crushing defeat. I wonder if the men in grey suits will be having a word on his return from the US, he is dragging the Tory party through the absolute depths of public humiliation.

Professor Moriarty

GM228 wrote: »

For the several posters who have asked: the Supreme Court decision is final, it is not possible to appeal to the ECJ.

For anyone wanting to read the judgement it is now available here:-

https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2019/41.html

Also I think Johnson deserves some recognition, in fairness he has achieved 100% consistency at failing to do or pass anything he has attempted.

As Emerson said: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen"

Debub

from Laura Kuenssberg:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49813639

The highest court in the land has just ruled that the serving prime minister broke the law. He gave the Queen advice that was unlawful.
And the scope and strength of this judgement cannot just be dismissed as some pesky judges sticking their noses in.
But the decision to suspend Parliament may just have blown up in Number 10's face.
In his two months in power, Boris Johnson has lost his first six Commons votes, broken the law by suspending Parliament and misled the monarch.
Even for a politician who seems to enjoy breaking the rules, that is a serious charge that, only two months into office, even the most brazen Johnson backer cannot simply shrug off.

briany

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Indeed, legal commentators after the hearings thought the judgement would be split, anything up to 6-5. Johnson managed to lose on justiciability AND on lawfulness AND get an 11-0 unanimous verdict.

Absolutely crushing defeat. I wonder if the men in grey suits will be having a word on his return from the US, he is dragging the Tory party through the absolute depths of public humiliation.

When you're going through hell, keep going. I don't think there's any depth Johnson would be unwilling to sink to, now that he's already fallen so far, in order to get Brexit across the line.

Professor Moriarty

briany wrote: »

When you're going through hell, keep going. I don't think there's any depth Johnson would be unwilling to sink to, now that he's already fallen so far, in order to get Brexit across the line.

Ironically, that's a quote from Churchill.

BorneTobyWilde

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Tories and Brexit Party?

Tories are split though,

woohoo!!!

Johnson will just brazen it out. His whole GE campaign is simply blame whoever else and so on.

As regards Brexit, nothing has changed. This do nothing parliament will only stop crash out for sure by getting a new PM in and actually agreeing a Brexit position besides we don't like it. Given Labour infighting and Lib Dems sniping at Labour, the chances of doing the necessary are zero. A GE will solve nothing, just shift the deck chairs around a bit. Still little reason to grant an extension imo.

Zubeneschamali

briany wrote: »

When you're going through hell, keep going. I don't think there's any depth Johnson would be unwilling to sink to, now that he's already fallen so far, in order to get Brexit across the line.

Johnson, sure.

But what of the 1922 committee?

robinph

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Still little reason to grant an extension imo.

Agreed, but the EU can't be seen to be trying to be vindictive against one of their major members (which the UK still is until they finally pick a direction to jump in).

Despite many just wanting it over and done with from every side, I can't see the EU ever refusing an extension that is asked for.

briany

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Still little reason to grant an extension imo.

I, for one, would still prefer another 3 months of no change at the border. A GE could be a mere reshuffling of the cards, but if delivering more of the same is the worst it could do, why not try, and grant an extension on that basis? The only people who would find a downside in it are those who want the UK out by hook or by crook.

Zubeneschamali

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Still little reason to grant an extension imo.

The EU Parliament has already voted to approve any extension request in principle:

provided it is justified and has a specific purpose, such as avoiding a “no-deal” departure, holding general elections or a referendum, revoking Article 50, or approving the Withdrawal Agreement. They also add that an extension should not affect the work and functioning of the EU institutions.

irishproduce

Harry Palmr wrote: »

If Johnson attempts to suspend parliament again I can see a barricade being mounted in the Palace of Westminster and I'm not joking at all. This could be the most dramatic period for the Houses since the Long Parliament era

And if the remainers continue to find myriad of ways to block the exit from EU I trust and hope you'll see an awful lot worse.

briany

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Johnson, sure.

But what of the 1922 committee?

The 1922 is hardly a unified college of thought when it comes to Brexit or even how far the party should go to deliver it. There are surely enough raving Brexiteers on the backbenches of the Cons.

robinph

irishproduce wrote: »

And if the remainers continue to find myriad of ways to block the exit from EU I trust and hope you'll see an awful lot worse.

It is not remainers blocking brexit, it is leavers failing to come up with a decent version of leave to leave with.

listermint

irishproduce wrote: »

And if the remainers continue to find myriad of ways to block the exit from EU I trust and hope you'll see an awful lot worse.

By whom farage? The myriad of pensioners who support ukip?

Whom exactly because they haven't shown themselves in any number to date.

Kermit.de.frog

Jennifer Rankin of the Guardian is saying to watch if Johnson goes for the NI only backstop now as the only hope to meet the Oct 31st deadline.

Dumping the DUP at this point is path of least resistance (even if it may not work with parliament).

woohoo!!!

briany wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Still little reason to grant an extension imo.

I, for one, would still prefer another 3 months of no change at the border. A GE could be a mere reshuffling of the cards, but if delivering more of the same is the worst it could do, why not try, and grant an extension on that basis? The only people who would find a downside in it are those who want the UK out by hook or by crook.

Oh I believe we've seen ample evidence that they need to be out. And they're too far gone with their unicorns wish list on all sides to reasonably see how any sort of WA, nevermind an actual future deal can be got.

Varta

robinph wrote: »

Agreed, but the EU can't be seen to be trying to be vindictive against one of their major members (which the UK still is until they finally pick a direction to jump in).

Despite many just wanting it over and done with from every side, I can't see the EU ever refusing an extension that is asked for.

The EU can't be seen to be vindictive against ANY member. This false notion of certain members being more important than others is only heard out of the UK.

woohoo!!!

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Still little reason to grant an extension imo.

The EU Parliament has already voted to approve any extension request in principle:

provided it is justified and has a specific purpose, such as avoiding a “no-deal” departure, holding general elections or a referendum, revoking Article 50, or approving the Withdrawal Agreement. They also add that an extension should not affect the work and functioning of the EU institutions.

Very true of course. But an extension, if forthcoming, has to be agreed by all the EU27 and the last 6 months have proven Macron was absolutely spot on last time out. Simply put, the various positions put forth from the UK body politic are not credible.

briany

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Jennifer Rankin of the Guardian is saying to watch if Johnson goes for the NI only backstop now as the only hope to meet the Oct 31st deadline.

Dumping the DUP at this point is path of least resistance (even if it may not work with parliament).

The mindset of the average English Brexiteer is that they don't really care if Scotland leaves the UK, or if the backstop becomes enforced. They just want themselves to be out of the thing. So, the NI-only backstop would meet widespread approval among the Brexit-voting public, and it's only game-playing among the political class that's currently stopping it.