Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Imreoir2

joe40 wrote: »

If the following happens: extension followed by election and a conservative majority government.
Will Boris not simply undo the Benn act with another law and then leave with "No deal"

He could certainly undo the Benn Act and leave with no-deal, though it is hard to see why he would choose to leave with no deal when that will clearly be a disaster for the UK.

Would he be compelled to wait out any EU extension (if one was granted)

I have not seen a clear answer to this question, I think it would be possible for the UK to leave earlier than the end of any extension period if Parliament voted for that to happen.

In an election will all the tory candidates run on a manifesto of "no deal" since it is patently obvious now they can't negotiate a deal, without major concessions from their hardline stance.

Probably not, they will probably run on a manifesto promising a unicorn deal, while also stating that they will leave with no-deal if it comes to it.

Retr0gamer

The DUP are real scum. Would let NI be destroyed just to see an end to the GFA. This is a real power grab by them and should be rejected for the fact it gives these crazy fundamentalists any kind of extra power.

GM228

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Tusk unequivocal today when speaking to Johnson and Varadkar:

Told Varadkar: We stand fully behind Ireland.
Told Johnson: We remain open but still unconvinced.

Indeed, but my point was in relation to the European Parliament.

farmchoice

Imreoir2 wrote: »

He could certainly undo the Benn Act and leave with no-deal, though it is hard to see why he would choose to leave with no deal when that will clearly be a disaster for the UK.


how could he? and i'm not being aggressive or questioning your claim i'm curious to know what method he could use to undo it




I have not seen a clear answer to this question, I think it would be possible for the UK to leave earlier than the end of any extension period if Parliament voted for that to happen.



the uk can leave today if they want or any other day, just without a deal.




Probably not, they will probably run on a manifesto promising a unicorn deal, while also stating that they will leave with no-deal if it comes to it.

yup, rinse and repeat.

Zubeneschamali

Imreoir2 wrote: »

He could certainly undo the Benn Act and leave with no-deal, though it is hard to see why he would choose to leave with no deal when that will clearly be a disaster for the UK.

Because a large chunk of the Tory party will vote down a Hard Brexit deal like May's because it is not hard enough. The EU will not agree to a harder deal.

So it's No Deal or No Brexit.

votecounts

So Boris thinks it is ok to give the fate of Northern Irland trading conditions every 4 years to the DUP, He really is a clown. The fact that this is even being discussed is idiotic and Leo and Simon should say so in the bluntest of terms to Boris and his DUP cohorts. Screw being polite anymore

An Claidheamh

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The DUP are real scum. Would let NI be destroyed just to see an end to the GFA. This is a real power grab by them and should be rejected for the fact it gives these crazy fundamentalists any kind of extra power.

I saw them all wide-eyed when Johnson addressed their wee stage at the Tory conference.

They look so pathetic, like children, they think they're with the big kids.

They'll swallow up any platitudes if they think it makes them look British.

mickmac76

joe40 wrote: »

If the following happens: extension followed by election and a conservative majority government.
Will Boris not simply undo the Benn act with another law and then leave with "No deal"

Would he be compelled to wait out any EU extension (if one was granted)

Also in an election will all the tory candidates now run on a manifesto of "no deal" since it is patently obvious now they can't negotiate a deal, without major concessions from their hardline stance.
Surely this will be a major problem for some. One would imagine, but maybe I'm giving them too much credit.

So much uncertainty

Does anyone know how the Benn act operates?

If Boris seeks and is granted a delay followed by a general election what happens to the Benn act if a conservative majority is elected. Does the act simply mean a single extension must be sought or does it require that multiple extensions are sought until a deal is agreed. If the act only means one extension then surely there is no need to repeal the law and he can go with a no deal brexit.

quokula

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Because a large chunk of the Tory party will vote down a Hard Brexit deal like May's because it is not hard enough. The EU will not agree to a harder deal.

So it's No Deal or No Brexit.

There's still a very large part of parliament, possibly even a majority, including the opposition parties and the more moderate tories, who would vote for a softer deal.

For example, the vote to stay in the Customs Union only lost by 3 votes. That was despite the cabinet of the time abstaining under Theresa May's instructions (including people like Grieve, Rudd and Hammond who would surely have voted for it), and despite the SNP abstaining and the Lib Dems voting against it as they wanted to hold out for a second referendum.

A softer Brexit could still very much be a possibility if the current government falls and parliament were to be given a chance to vote on it again. Or if there's an election and parliament make up changes slightly.

GM228

V26 of the Brexit Diagram updated today taking account of new prorogation and Queens Speech:-

quokula

mickmac76 wrote: »

Does anyone know how the Benn act operates?

If Boris seeks and is granted a delay followed by a general election what happens to the Benn act if a conservative majority is elected. Does the act simply mean a single extension must be sought or does it require that multiple extensions are sought until a deal is agreed. If the act only means one extension then surely there is no need to repeal the law and he can go with a no deal brexit.

It only means one extension, so once they extend past October and have an election anything goes.

J Mysterio

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

As David McWilliams pointed out today, who the **** is going to invest in a country where the trading rules can change in four years? Whole thing is a disaster for NI.

This is all a blame game and designed to fail, when you see the ERG positioning themselves behind it, it tells you everything. Extension and a GE is the next step, not that a GE solved anything the last time.

That's a great point.

Of course the DUP are behind it also.

ERG/ DUP have obviously been advised on this by HMG.

Professor Moriarty

GM228 wrote: »

V26 of the Brexit Diagram updated today taking account of new prorogation and Queens Speech:-

15% chance of Revoke by 31st October? Can't see that at all. 1.5% perhaps.

quokula

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

15% chance of Revoke by 31st October? Can't see that at all. 1.5% perhaps.

It seems to imply that if Boris doesn't comply with the Benn act then parliament would step in and force revoke. I don't understand why parliament could force that but couldn't force an extension?

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

15% chance of Revoke by 31st October? Can't see that at all. 1.5% perhaps.

From a strategic point of view, if a caretaker Gov is formed, then the best route would be revoke with a promise for a new Ref within 6 months - remain or May's deal (or a soft deal) followed by a GE. That would get Brexit Done - forever.

One way or an other, it has to be ended to end the uncertainty.

A GE in any form before a new Ref would allow a low percentage vote for a Brexit Gov to get a majority and allow a no deal. It would be too dangerous (and undemocratic).

J Mysterio

I don't really have a comment on this... Speaks for itself.

https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1179778418679963649

Professor Moriarty

quokula wrote: »

It seems to imply that if Boris doesn't comply with the Benn act then parliament would step in and force revoke. I don't understand why parliament could force that but couldn't force an extension?

I can't see that happening at all. Too many Labour MPs are in Leave constituencies an/or are committed to Brexit - albeit not a Hard Brexit. Plus I don't think that Johnson will allow himself to be painted into that particular corner. Not least because it would mean he'll end up dead in a ditch.

54and56

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The DUP are real scum. Would let NI be destroyed just to see an end to the GFA. This is a real power grab by them and should be rejected for the fact it gives these crazy fundamentalists any kind of extra power.

You know what? Arlene Foster reminds me Eugène Terre'Blanche in South Africa.
As their country woke up to civilisation and equal rights etc Terre'Blanche led his party to a harder and harder position until eventually he went so far he'd lost all support.

If Arlene was successful with this move or facilitated a no deal it wouldn't surprise me in the least if moderate unionists returned to the UUP or moved to the Alliance Party thus accelerating a border poll and a UI, the very thing she exists to prevent.

How sweet would that be? (In theory only!! RoI couldn't afford to prop up the basket case that is NI for many a year.)

54and56

Stolen from an article in the Irish Independent on Leo's trip to Sweden:-

"Mr Varadkar also also identified five ways that the Brexit border conundrum could be resolved: a united Ireland; Ireland rejoining the UK, the UK staying in the EU, the UK staying in the EU's Customs Union and the Single Market, and the backstop. He said four of those five options, including a united Ireland - but not Ireland rejoining the UK - would be acceptable to the Irish government."

Good to see a sense of humour is prevailing as everyone in Westminster are losing their collective heads

Professor Moriarty

And we're off:

Daily Mail main headline:
Leo Taunts Boris: Irish PM Leo Varadkar sparks fury by accusing Boris Johnson of defying the will of the British people 'who want to stay in the EU' - as he REJECTS the Prime Minister's five-point Brexit blueprint

The Express main headline:
Varadkar says Britain must have a SECOND Brexit vote as he destroys Boris Johnson's deal

The Telegraph main headline:
Leo Varadkar claims Britain wants to stay in the EU

lawred2

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

And we're off:

Daily Mail main headline:
Leo Taunts Boris: Irish PM Leo Varadkar sparks fury by accusing Boris Johnson of defying the will of the British people 'who want to stay in the EU' - as he REJECTS the Prime Minister's five-point Brexit blueprint

The Express main headline:
Varadkar says Britain must have a SECOND Brexit vote as he destroys Boris Johnson's deal

The Telegraph main headline:
Leo Varadkar claims Britain wants to stay in the EU

what deal?

Professor Moriarty

lawred2 wrote: »

what deal?

That's not important. Just blame. Blame is good.

josip

I'm surprised the tabloids haven't said that Varadkar wants to invade NI to reunite the island.

Professor Moriarty

josip wrote: »

I'm surprised the tabloids haven't said that Varadkar wants to invade NI to reunite the island.

Meghan will wear a new dress and they'll move on.

Sparko

Arlene Foster accuses Ireland of being intransigent, among other things.

https://twitter.com/DUPleader/status/1179775945311490048?s=19

Winters

Would it make more sense if England and Wales just left the UK?

Scotland wouldn't have to reapply for the EU then...

54and56

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Telegraph main headline:
Leo Varadkar claims Britain wants to stay in the EU

I dismissed the other headlines as being the usual factless fodder they serve up to their readers (which I think might be a misuse of the word) but I'm curious if you know whether the Telegraph are quoting any source for or statement Leo make about Britain wanting to stay in the EU? Have they now started trawling statement like the "five options" I quoted above and given themselves licence to re-arrange the words he actually said into what they wished he'd said?

Strazdas

The Taoiseach making the same point Coveney did on Tuesday : Ireland grudgingly accepting No Deal and border checks is nothing like voluntarily signing up to border checks forever under Johnson's plans

briany

I'd just like to say I question the opinion of any paper that frequently uses capitalisation for emphasis. And it's just an annoying trend in general. Either they're trying to very un-subtly manipulate my reading of the headline, they have no faith in my own in-built ability to emphasise, or they've never heard of italics. In any case, no good.

Professor Moriarty

54and56 wrote: »

I dismissed the other headlines as being the usual factless fodder they serve up to their readers (which I think might be a misuse of the word) but I'm curious if you know whether the Telegraph are quoting any source for or statement Leo make about Britain wanting to stay in the EU? Have they now started trawling statement like the "five options" I quoted above and given themselves licence to re-arrange the words he actually said into what they wished he'd said?

He said this during his press conference while talking a bout a second referendum:

“All the polls since Prime Minister Johnson became prime minister suggest that's what the British people actually want, but their political system isn't able to give them that choice.”