Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Leroy42

Panrich wrote: »

The plan to comply with the Benn act AND to still exit on 31st October has been well finalised before yesterdays meeting with the Hungarians. There is a smugness to the way that cabinet ministers say that they will comply with the law and leave on the 31st, that leads me to believe that they have a trick up their sleeve that nobody else has considered yet.

This is so utterly out of the character of this government though. They have shown no ability to out think anyone.

Johnson has lost at everything he has put his name to.

The myth of their genius is currently their best weapon. The amount of people you hear saying something like "I have no idea how they will do it, but I know Johnson has a plan up his sleeve" is amazing.

Panrich

Leroy42 wrote: »

This is so utterly out of the character of this government though. They have shown no ability to out think anyone.

Johnson has lost at everything he has put his name to.

The myth of their genius is currently their best weapon. The amount of people you hear saying something like "I have no idea how they will do it, but I know Johnson has a plan up his sleeve" is amazing.

I have a huge worry that all these ads about leaving on 31st October and the 'Get Brexit Done' slogans seen everywhere, they MUST have a genuine certainty in their plan.

I suppose we'll see what transpires but the court case revelations today add nothing that they haven't been saying for ages anyway.

is_that_so

He seems to be playing both sides now, although an extension would be desirable.

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit-countdown/2019/1004/1081083-brexit-politics/

Charles Babbage

joeysoap wrote: »

The American panelist on QT understands the Irish perspective better than the majority of English people.

Very true, here she is.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1179986543018201088

An Ciarraioch

The NI Secretary is open to the petition of concern being scrapped specifically for votes on regulatory alignment:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/04/stormont-party-veto-could-be-ditched-for-brexit-says-minister

Tea Shock

Panrich wrote: »

The plan to comply with the Benn act AND to still exit on 31st October has been well finalised before yesterdays meeting with the Hungarians. There is a smugness to the way that cabinet ministers say that they will comply with the law and leave on the 31st, that leads me to believe that they have a trick up their sleeve that nobody else has considered yet.

The only thing the Benn act obliges them to do is to send a letter asking for an extension.

- They don't have to back that up in their verbal exchanges,

- they don't have to reappoint a commissioner

- As John Major has speculated, they could pass an Order of Council to suspend the Benn Act until November

- They could disapply the Benn Act by recourse to the Civil Contingencies Act allowing existing legislation to be suspended in the event of a national emergency.

Tea Shock

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Very true, here she is.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1179986543018201088

She lost a bit of credibility when she said the EU were one of those that sat down to make the GFA happen

farmchoice

Tea Shock wrote: »

The only thing the Benn act obliges them to do is to send a letter asking for an extension.

- They don't have to back that up in their verbal exchanges,

- they don't have to reappoint a commissioner

- As John Major has speculated, they could pass an Order of Council to suspend the Benn Act until November

- They could disapply the Benn Act by recourse to the Civil Contingencies Act allowing existing legislation to be suspended in the event of a national emergency.

i think most of those options have been discounted by legal experts with the exception of not appointing a commissioner but whilst that would in theory lead to the uk being in effect thrown out of the eu it would not happen quickly.

funkey_monkey

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The NI Secretary is open to the petition of concern being scrapped specifically for votes on regulatory alignment:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/04/stormont-party-veto-could-be-ditched-for-brexit-says-minister

Doesn't matter. The will be no security for businesses to undertake any form of medium to long term planning when this voted on every 4 years.
Also, it becomes a proxy for an independence referendum meaning that it will be a sh1t show with people not voting on the actual subject matter.

How long until Boris pushes everything out to the E-W sea border - which in itself will rise the loyalists as much (if not more) than the land border will rise the republicans.

Kermit.de.frog

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The NI Secretary is open to the petition of concern being scrapped specifically for votes on regulatory alignment:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/04/stormont-party-veto-could-be-ditched-for-brexit-says-minister

Single market and customs union with a vote every 4 years not subject to a single community veto is a deal I think would work.

It's still daft for NI economically though to have that uncertainty every 4 years.

VinLieger

Tea Shock wrote: »

She lost a bit of credibility when she said the EU were one of those that sat down to make the GFA happen

She really didn't

FrancieBrady

Tea Shock wrote: »

She lost a bit of credibility when she said the EU were one of those that sat down to make the GFA happen

The EU was involved with the GFA. When the ceasefires happened in 1994 they immediately responded with the Peace Programmes.

Here is Geroge Mitchell's view:

George Mitchell wrote:

"I don't think the European Union was essential in the [Good Friday Agreement] talks themselves, but I believe the talks would never have occurred had there not been a European Union."

GM228

Tea Shock wrote: »

The only thing the Benn act obliges them to do is to send a letter asking for an extension.

- They don't have to back that up in their verbal exchanges,

- they don't have to reappoint a commissioner

- As John Major has speculated, they could pass an Order of Council to suspend the Benn Act until November

- They could disapply the Benn Act by recourse to the Civil Contingencies Act allowing existing legislation to be suspended in the event of a national emergency.

According to the incoming president Ursula von der Leyen in her 10th September speech they do if an extension is granted.

Ursula wrote:

If the U.K. were to ask for an extension, and if that were granted, then according to the rules of the treaty, then yes, a commissioner would have to be appointed and that person would receive a portfolio

brick tamland

Dont think much has changed over the last few weeks. Despite all Boris's bluster, I still his plan is overall majority and a NI only sea border. Throw the DUP under the bus. Its the only workable scenario.

All the current bull**** is to try and stave of Farrage. He'll extend at last second as "he has to" and its not his fault.

Tea Shock

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The EU was involved with the GFA. When the ceasefires happened in 1994 they immediately responded with the Peace Programmes.

Here is Geroge Mitchell's view:

That isn't the part she claimed the EU took!

Tea Shock

GM228 wrote: »

According to the incoming president Ursula von der Leyen in her 10th September speech they do if an extension is granted.

I think you're missing the point - it is a way of complying with the Benn Act without getting an extension - which is what they want!

farmchoice wrote: »

i think most of those options have been discounted by legal experts with the exception of not appointing a commissioner but whilst that would in theory lead to the uk being in effect thrown out of the eu it would not happen quickly.

I think it's a mistake to assume these people won't make new interpretations of law

FrancieBrady

Tea Shock wrote: »

That isn't the part she claimed the EU took!

She claimed they 'sat down' with the UK.

Do you think they just ran the 'Peace Programmes' without discussing/negotiating their format?

It's a bit mealy mouthed to suggest they had nothing to do with the GFA.

ballsymchugh

joeysoap wrote: »

The American panelist on QT understands the Irish perspective better than the majority of English people.

the absolute clown in the audience who suggested that 'Eire' should buy the 6 counties shows the chasm that is between the sensible and idiotic in the UK.

why would you buy back what was stolen?!!!

VinLieger

Tea Shock wrote: »

That isn't the part she claimed the EU took!

Nobody cares because that has nothing to do with the point she was making, nitpicking this specific point is slightly pathetic and verging on a strawman

liamtech

Rjd2 wrote: »

Top 2 Parties will be Labour and Tories next time round.

In 2016 Tories got 317 seats, Labour 262 and Lib Dems 12.

Swinson is more formidable than Farron but brave call to think they will get close to the big two.

I don't even think the Lib Dems will hurt Labour that much, reading a Guardian article the other week their was only 2 Labour seats they would fancy winning. However when it comes to the tories its currently 20.

Ladbrokes have the tories in for under/over 306.5....labour under/over 227.5 and the Lib Dems under/over 39.5 currently.

Lib Dems will do well next time round, but like Brexit Party might struggle to translate the poll numbers into seats.

Also easy to forget Swinson is not a cert to hold her seat either, she has lost it before and the SNP will be targeting it hard.

I agree about Swinson having a seat in Scotland being an issue - what i will say is that i genuinely worry that the LIB dems will take more of labor seats - if the opinion polls over the coming weeks have Lib Dem leading Labor, or even perhaps increasing their lead then its serious - if not then perhaps it will turn out as you said -

i guess my main point is that while many are hoping for a split in the Leave/Tory Vote with the Brexit Party, i would be more concerned with Remain/Centre-Left Mutually Assured Destruction in many seats, and if that happens the Tories will gain

Next few polls will tell a lot

It isnt looking promising Polls wise for soft/remain - although the Polls have been wrong in recent elections - it would be fascinating if it wasnt so serious

GM228

Tea Shock wrote: »

I think you're missing the point - it is a way of complying with the Benn Act without getting an extension - which is what they want!


I think it's a mistake to assume these people won't make new interpretations of law

Sorry I mis-read the post, but whilst it may frustrate the workings of the European Commission (i.e it could not work in accordance with the provisions of the TFEU), but, that does not in effect throw them out of Europe.

Water John

Lib Dems will regain seats in the SW, taking mainly from Tories.

Tea Shock

GM228 wrote: »

Sorry I mis-read the post, but whilst it may frustrate the workings of the European Commission (i.e it could not work in accordance with the provisions of the TFEU), but, that does not in effect throw them out of Europe.

But will it cause the EU to reject an extension request when the UK make it known in advance that they will refuse to appoint one?

J Mysterio

ballsymchugh wrote: »

the absolute clown in the audience who suggested that 'Eire' should buy the 6 counties shows the chasm that is between the sensible and idiotic in the UK.

why would you buy back what was stolen?!!!

Thats not what the guy said.

He said that UK should "give the six counties back to Eire" and that if people werent happy, they could give them a financial incentive to move to Britain. Still a bit off the wall.

FrancieBrady

J Mysterio wrote: »

Thats not what the guy said.

He said that UK should "give the six counties back to Eire" and that if people werent happy, they could give them a financial incentive to move to Britain. Still a bit off the wall.

I thought he said 'buy back' as well and that the EU could financially support us

J Mysterio

The Emma DeSouza case is showing also that the UK is trying to worm its way out of GFA in the courts. It's gaining surprisingly little traction.

https://twitter.com/EmmandJDeSouza/status/1180112893192343552

Joe_ Public

Just on the Scottish court papers suggesting the PM will indeed send the extension requesting missive, be aware that the mighty Tom Newton Dunn, the font of all knowledge and expertise on brexit matters, is very very sceptical:

https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1180122639475642368

Zubeneschamali

Tea Shock wrote: »

But will it cause the EU to reject an extension request when the UK make it known in advance that they will refuse to appoint one?

No, of course not.

The reason for the extension is to allow an election. The present Government saying they won't appoint a commissioner doesn't matter in the slightest, they'll be replaced 6 weeks after the extension is granted.

lawred2

Tea Shock wrote: »

But will it cause the EU to reject an extension request when the UK make it known in advance that they will refuse to appoint one?

Why would they do that?

Why make a decision based on something that hasn't happened?

At least force the UK into playing their hand.

Nody

Panrich wrote: »

I have a huge worry that all these ads about leaving on 31st October and the 'Get Brexit Done' slogans seen everywhere, they MUST have a genuine certainty in their plan.

I suppose we'll see what transpires but the court case revelations today add nothing that they haven't been saying for ages anyway.

I'm thinking election campaign personally; "Look this is what I was committing to make happen; we were ready and those backstabbing son of a guns stopped me, stopped you, from leaving as you voted for!" Of course because it's not official election times yet there are no rules or limitations on what you can put up either...