Topic: Brexit: "Vultus inanis est et mori in fossa ego sum!"

[oldfordie]

Aye. But if the government haven't got the votes to pass the motion to have a summer recess this year, which means avoiding a confidence vote in the new PM if they do try to do that before Tory leadership is decided, then the chances of surviving the following confidence vote (which would be the only reason to keep parliament open given gridlock on Brexit) are slim indeed.

Am missing something.
They are going to have vote of confidence in the new PM before they decide who this new PM is.
EDIT again, So they want to be able to decide this new PM while parliament is in recess so they can hold the confidence vote in September.  ?

[Zeb]

Am missing something.
They are going to have vote of confidence in the new PM before they decide who this new PM is.
EDIT again, So they want to be able to decide this new PM while parliament is in recess so they can hold the confidence vote in September.  ?

Aye. And if they can't get that through then it's because enough Tory and/or DUP MPs aren't willing to give the new PM time to find a majority without at least knowing who it is first.

[oldfordie]

Aye. And if they can't get that through then it's because enough Tory and/or DUP MPs aren't willing to give the new PM time to find a majority without at least knowing who it is first.

Hopefully this is all hypothetical now after May announced she won't stand down until a new Tory leader does have the support of Parliament, I couldn't of seen them getting away with this anyway, the only MPs who would support their cunning plan are the nutty leave no deal MPs, they are in the minority.

[Riquende]

Hopefully this is all hypothetical now after May announced she won't stand down until a new Tory leader does have the support of Parliament,

Christ, can you imagine? A new Tory party leader in the wings but May refusing to resign as PM unless the Commons promises nicely not to immediately push for a GE? There would be a huge question of legitimacy and I can well imagine her own entire party refusing to co-operate with her if she tried.

Though thinking on, how would that even play out? The only mechanism to force the PM out is a vote of no confidence in the Government, but only Corbyn can call that and would he, knowing that before a GE happened the new Tory leader would have the chance to form an administration? I mean, he could immediately call another one if he felt he had moderate Tory support, but the whole situation is ludicrous.

[Zeb]

Hopefully this is all hypothetical now after May announced she won't stand down until a new Tory leader does have the support of Parliament, I couldn't of seen them getting away with this anyway, the only MPs who would support their cunning plan are the nutty leave no deal MPs, they are in the minority.

May's gonna be PM forever....

Her spokesman has rolled back on that though - saying now that it's been misinterpreted and she'll be gone as and when new leader comes in. Beyond the hypothetical, there are some real issues in the Tories with MPs looking at the exit door if X or Y becomes PM. Against that, they'd much rather change the government without an election than risk one and have Corbyn be asked to form it. Think TIG/Change have the same problem right now too. Labour isn't short of MPs on the same train either.

[oldfordie]

Christ, can you imagine? A new Tory party leader in the wings but May refusing to resign as PM unless the Commons promises nicely not to immediately push for a GE? There would be a huge question of legitimacy and I can well imagine her own entire party refusing to co-operate with her if she tried.

Though thinking on, how would that even play out? The only mechanism to force the PM out is a vote of no confidence in the Government, but only Corbyn can call that and would he, knowing that before a GE happened the new Tory leader would have the chance to form an administration? I mean, he could immediately call another one if he felt he had moderate Tory support, but the whole situation is ludicrous.

May's gonna be PM forever....

Her spokesman has rolled back on that though - saying now that it's been misinterpreted and she'll be gone as and when new leader comes in. Beyond the hypothetical, there are some real issues in the Tories with MPs looking at the exit door if X or Y becomes PM. Against that, they'd much rather change the government without an election than risk one and have Corbyn be asked to form it. Think TIG/Change have the same problem right now too. Labour isn't short of MPs on the same train either.

Ive heard some of these nutty leave MPs talking absolute s,, the last few days. 1 was saying leaving with no deal is the default position in the WA and MPs knew this when they voted for the WA so we will
 leave at the end of October, nobody mentioned the fact that we should have left in March but Parliament forced the PM to ask for a extension and Parliament will do it again before October.
I think the biggest point of all is the majority of MPs are against a no deal, these nutty leave MPs can come up with any cunning plan they want(and they have had a few over the last year or so all flopped) but IMO Parliament will stop them. I think Parliament would still stop them even if the government  was brought down, MPs would demand the PM asks the EU for a extension to allow us to hold another GE.

[No666]

Heidi Allen sent the following email to constituents today:

"Returning to sit as an Independent.

When I left the Conservatives in February, it was because I could see the party had drifted to the right and was prioritising its own self preservation over the future of our country. How could it be that the party always relied upon for fiscal responsibility and the economy, was now advocating a no deal Brexit!?

It was because of that significant change of approach that I decided to leave the Conservative party and stand instead as an Independent.

At that time, I and the 10 other colleagues who had left Labour and the Conservative parties to sit as the Independent group, were incredibly well received by the public. At last, a group of MPs who were prepared to challenge the status quo and build a better kind of politics!

Early polling results gave us the confidence to formalise into a party structure, named "Change UK" in order to be able to fight the European elections at the end of May. However, what nobody could have anticipated was how the local elections in the intermediate period would transform the landscape. The Liberal Democrats did extremely well and immediately exceeded the early support we had enjoyed in the polls.

As the interim leader of Change UK, I felt strongly that we should be advising the public to vote tactically to enable the maximum number of remain MEPs to be elected. Our polling had fallen dramatically, whilst the Brexit party was storming ahead, so I believed our focus and support should shift to other Remain parties who were now fairing better than us in the polls.

If you did not see it at the time, please see my Channel 4 News interview on Wednesday 22nd May, where I outlined how uncomfortable I was that I had been unable to convince the majority of MPs in Change UK to back my preferred approach.

Instead, Change UK maintained its position to achieve as many votes for itself as possible, rather than collaborate with other parties. I felt collaboration would have achieved a better outcome.

Now the European elections are over, I remain unwavering in my strong belief that the country must always come first. As such, I have stepped down from Change UK and will return to sit once again as an Independent. 5 other colleagues have joined me - Sarah Wollaston, Luciana Berger, Angela Smith, Gavin Shuker and Chuka Umunna.

There are two principal reasons as to why I have done this.

As I have already described, I do not believe I can serve my constituents and country well if I put party interests ahead of theirs.

Secondly, the political landscape remains very volatile. In the coming weeks and months I can easily envisage MPs leave the Conservative party because they cannot tolerate a new Prime Minister who advocates a hard Brexit or no deal Brexit. Equally, there are Labour colleagues who will no longer tolerate Jeremy Corbyn‘s inability to fight as an opposition leader should.

Recognising that it is very difficult for MPs to leave their parties and immediately join other ones, I believe my role will be to help convene a safe neutral space in the centre ground of Parliament and offer a home for those MPs. It will allow us to work alongside the Liberal Democrats, Greens, SNP, Change UK and Plaid Cymru in the national interest, ensuring we do not crash out of the EU with no deal.

As I outlined last night on Peston, as an Independent MP with a reputation for cross party working and prioritising the national interest over party allegiance, I feel strongly that I will be able to help act as a convener.

It is my strong belief that this is what the country needs right now."

[Zeb]

3 more Tories and there's no majority even with the DUP, isn't it? Wonder if it's hope or expectation with defections. Last time round Tom Watson managed to head off a fair few Labour ones.

----

For anyone short a read on their morning break, Ian Dunt's weekly e-mail (no link - should be up on politics.co.uk at some point later) goes through the week in Tory internal politics.

Spoiler

The scale of the degeneration is now quite startling. As expected, the Tory leadership race has created the worst possible dynamic for the party. Every day the contenders now have to say something even more vigorously insane than what they said before just to stay in contention.

The topic this week was prorogation. This would involve basically dismissing parliament so that the government can force through no-deal. Dominic Raab, egged on by the Tory Jacobins at the ERG, is seriously proposing this. We should call it what it is, or rather what we would call it if it were to take place in another country: a coup. A government without a majority would be dismissing the democratically-elected assembly in order to implement an extreme policy measure for which it has no mandate.

In reality, there are several legal protections against this course of action. None of them are watertight, but the British constitution should be just about robust enough to deal with anyone foolish enough to try it. John Bercow would prevent it. This would involve a vote if parliament was already sitting. Or, if it wasn't, it would possibly see it decide to sit independently of government, a kind of village panto version of the English Civil War. And if all that failed, the Queen, poor thing, could intervene. And after that the courts. One of those things, almost certainly the first, would work. But it's revealing, and quite unutterably ghastly, that it is being mentioned.

Raab is pitching to the right of Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, which is not as lonely a space as you might imagine. Esther McVey has found it, and followed the path from there to the outer limits of the reservation, and then just kept on walking. This week she called for a purge of all Remain voters from Cabinet. Last week, she demanded that Britain create an 'invisible border' in Ireland before October. Perhaps she wanted Wonder Woman to arrive with her invisible plane and help with the construction effort. Andrea Leadsom is there too, ruling out even an attempt at renegotiation and demanding no-deal. Insanity is a hot ticket in summer 2019.

It's like watching a documentary about an Amazonian tribe which has never had contact with human civilisation. You watch fascinated as they go around their bizarre rituals, like reciting Article 24 of the GATT or talking in Bizarro world opposites about the effects of US free trade agreements. The only way you could possibly say this stuff, or worse yet believe it, is if you had given up all interest in the outside world for a sustained period of time.

The EU will not get rid of the backstop. The plan with the backstop will not get through parliament. These are the realities. They've been the realities for some time and it is tiresome to have to keep on repeating them. They are the basic building blocks around which you need to formulate your policy. But instead of doing so the candidates have magicked up some alternate reality where these things do not apply.

What a tedious thing to base an imaginary world on. They could have at least have invented jet packs, or great roving digital dinosaurs soaring through the sky. Instead we get this maddening rubix cube of nonsense.

Almost every candidate, from the swivel-eyed, like Raab, to the more reasonable, like Fuckwitted Pob lookalike Michael Gove, want to fix the backstop problem using the legendary "alternative arrangements" long proposed by the ERG. It is quite remarkable the way this phrase has entered the debate without anyone ever really asking what it actually designates.

It is so profoundly childlike. They do not like Scenario A, so they propose Scenario B. What is Scenario B? Well, it's an alternative. And what is the alternative? Not A. And round and round we go, on a logic loop. It's like watching your own brain swirl down a drain.

There are certain things you can do to reduce the friction on borders, including trusted traders schemes, pre-and-post crossing declarations, information sharing between customs authorities and hands-off high-tech surveillance. But this is a million miles from the sci-fi fantasy land the mythical 'alternative arrangements' have occupied.

They would still involve checks on the border for food products. They would involve checks away from the border for other issues, and this infrastructure would be no less a piece of infrastructure by virtue of being a few miles off. They would still raise the problem of what you do when a lorry approaches which has not become a trusted trader. Do you let it pass and risk any old rubbish come into your territory? Or do you stop it and create a de facto border? Most importantly of all, they would still be installed without the consent of the communities who actually live there, on either side of the border.

Still. No need to worry about that. Alternative arrangements will save us. We can use these imaginary solutions to win an imaginary negotiation with the EU, conducted under an imaginary time frame, and then pass an imaginary bill which will receive the imaginary consent of an imaginary House of Commons. Job done.

That is where the Conservative party is right now. This is the mental space it occupies. And the only time it rears its head out of the fairy tale, it threatens - in a way that is genuinely alarming - the basic democratic functions upon which the country operates. It is a pitiful, godawful state of affairs. And there's weeks more of it to go.

[close]

[Red Beret]

For a while I've felt politics has had similarities to the fall of the Roman Republic, with a number of politicians too popular (with the mob) and too untouchable (insulated by wealth & connections) to be reigned in by the existing institutions of the state; and them realising the power they could have.

But who ends up as Caesar?

All civilisations go through such convulsions before they collapse. At their peak they succumb to corruption, debauchery and self gratification.

They problem is it's never happened on such a scale before. We've never had such a massive, complicated and intricate society collapse under it's own weight before. It will be a societal black hole, a new dark age.

[oldfordie]

 

Femi
‏Verified account @Femi_Sorry

Nigel Frottage says Brexit voters in Peterborough didn't understand what they were voting for.
Couldn't make it up!
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1136947305859469312

[Riquende]

All civilisations go through such convulsions before they collapse. At their peak they succumb to corruption, debauchery and self gratification.

They problem is it's never happened on such a scale before. We've never had such a massive, complicated and intricate society collapse under it's own weight before. It will be a societal black hole, a new dark age.

I'm not talking about the collapse of the Empire into barbarism in the 5th century AD (let's not go there, as a major part of it was the failure to deal with immigration from Eastern Europa...) but the transition from the Republic to the Principate Empire throughout the latter part of the 1st century BC. A key ingredient was the refusal of powerful men to comply with the law and traditions of society, with the bodies supposed to keep them in check increasingly powerless to intervene.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Quarter of pesticides used in US are banned in EU




More than a quarter of the total volume of pesticides used in US agriculture are banned in the European Union, and 3 percent and 2 percent are banned in China and Brazil respectively, according to a study published Thursday in the journal Environmental Health.

Researchers studied herbicides, insecticides and fungicides, and found that of 374 active ingredients authorized for agricultural use in the US in 2016, 72 of them were banned in the EU.

Two products in particular were banned in the EU, Brazil and China, including paraquat, an herbicide which the US Centers for Disease Control calls “highly poisonous,” which has been banned in Europe since 2007.

Phorate, a neurotoxic insecticide, is banned in the EU, Brazil and China, but allowed in the US, though the state of New York has prohibited spraying it aerially.

On the other hand, the US has banned only two or three pesticides that are allowed in the EU, Brazil and China, which the study points out are among the largest agricultural producers in the world, along with the US.

“(The US) originally had a regulatory agency that was very good, and banned a lot of pesticides, like DDT,” study author Nathan Donley, a scientist at the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity, said of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which was created in 1970 and swiftly implemented pesticide regulations.

“A lot of Americans are still in that mindset that we have a regulatory agency that’s very functional and very protective,” he said.

“A lot of Americans just don’t know how far the US has fallen behind.”

The EPA’s weaknesses are not an issue of Democratic or Republican political power, according to Donley — the study ended in 2016, the final year of Barack Obama’s presidency, and doesn’t include information about the agency under President Donald Trump, whose administration has significantly diminished its regulatory ambitions.

It is the EPA’s pesticide division that is to blame, Donley said, lamenting the influence of powerful agriculture and pesticide lobbies on Congress, which decides the EPA’s budget.

“I think it is that the industry has captured the decision makers,” he said.

“When the EPA makes decisions that the agricultural industry doesn’t like, they put themselves in a position where, you know … (a) politically tough spot.”

And they will push for us to accept them all in the UK.

[Slick_Beef]

And he's already said he's not complying, with any attempt by the EU to force the issue only going to play well with his core vote.

I dunno Nige, I thought you were elected as part of a team of about 8 people for the region? Maybe one of them? At least 2 or 3 are from your party.

For a while I've felt politics has had similarities to the fall of the Roman Republic, with a number of politicians too popular (with the mob) and too untouchable (insulated by wealth & connections) to be reigned in by the existing institutions of the state; and them realising the power they could have.

But who ends up as Caesar?

I'm not talking about the collapse of the Empire into barbarism in the 5th century AD (let's not go there, as a major part of it was the failure to deal with immigration from Eastern Europa...) but the transition from the Republic to the Principate Empire throughout the latter part of the 1st century BC. A key ingredient was the refusal of powerful men to comply with the law and traditions of society, with the bodies supposed to keep them in check increasingly powerless to intervene.

Have you read "The Storm Before the Storm" by Mike Duncan mate? A marvellous book on this very topic

[oldfordie]

Looks like all the officials in charge of preparing us for a no deal in October are doing a runner.

UK official in charge of Brexit border plans resigns
Karen Wheeler’s resignation stokes fears the UK will not be ready for a no-deal Brexit by October

The government official in charge of delivering “frictionless” Brexit border arrangements, including emergency plans for Dover and Ireland in the event of no deal, has quit just two years into her job.

Karen Wheeler, director general of Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs Brexit border delivery group, was the lead official coordinating a cross-Whitehall response involving police, ports, customs and freight interests.

Her departure is being seen as a blow to the government and increasing the risk that the UK will not be as prepared for a possible no deal on 31 October.

“Nothing is happening in Whitehall now. Lots of people have been stood down on Brexit no-deal preparations and there is a general risk that people are just going to see this hiatus as an opportunity to clear off and go into the private sector,” said a source who knows Wheeler.

Jon Thompson, HMRC’s chief executive, said in a statement: “I would like to thank Karen for her outstanding work leading the Border Delivery Group to prepare the UK for EU exit and we wish her well for her retirement. We shall be announcing her successor in due course.”

Thompson is seen as one of the most brutally honest Whitehall officials in relation to the realities of Brexit, and his openness in multiple appearances in House of Commons select committees warning of ballooning costs of border arrangements has had a knock-on effect in the culture of the department.

It meant officials were unafraid of politically inconvenient truths, including Wheeler, who earlier this year said there were no magic technological solutions for preventing a hard border with Ireland in the event of no deal.

Wheeler said the UK would need a customs union with the EU, plus something that looked like a single market, to have completely free movement of goods across the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. She was appointed as director general for border coordination at HMRC on 3 July 2017.
HMRC declined to comment further on Wheeler’s departure, but there will be fears that other senior officials, including Theresa May’s chief Brexit negotiator, Olly Robbins, may also use the hiatus to seek pastures new.

Joe Owen, the Institute for Government’s Brexit programme director, predicted earlier this week that “many of the 16,000 civil servants working on Brexit will now be looking for a change of scenery”.

Wheeler is the second senior official to leave in as many months. Philip Rycroft, the civil servant in charge at the Department of Exiting the EU, left on 29 March, even though the UK did not, Owen noted.

“There is likely to be even more churn in the levels below, even if it’s not as visible externally,” he said. “By October, with the Brexit deadline rapidly approaching, the officials in some of the key no-deal jobs could have been in post for little more than a few months.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/06/uk-official-in-charge-of-brexit-border-plans-resigns

[ShakaHislop]

Brexit: Government spends £97m on consultants

Preparing for Brexit has cost the UK government £97m in consultancy fees, the National Audit Office has revealed.

The money has been spent on hiring external experts because government departments lack the staff and skills needed, the NAO said.

It criticised the government for a lack of transparency, saying details of contracts had not been published in a timely fashion.

It also said the bill was higher than disclosed by the Cabinet Office.

According to the Cabinet Office, £65m had been earmarked for consultancy services between April 2018 and April 2019.

But NAO investigations uncovered another £32m worth of spending in the same period.

Many contracts had been extended, particularly in April this year, when the date for the UK's departure from the EU was changed to 31 October.

"Departments continue to prepare for EU exit and total spend on consultancy support will rise," the NAO said.

Under government guidelines, departments are supposed to publish details of such contracts within 90 days.

But the NAO found it had taken an average of 119 days for basic information about Brexit consultancy contracts to be published.

It added that six consultancy firms had received 96% of Brexit-related work, led by Deloitte, with 22% of the contracts by value.

The others were PA Consulting (19%), PwC (18%), EY (15%), Bain & Company (11%) and Boston Consulting Group (10%).

A government spokesman defended the spending, saying it was "often more cost-efficient to draw upon the advice of external specialists for short-term projects requiring specialist skills".

He added: "These include EU exit priorities such as ensuring the uninterrupted supply of medical products and food to the UK."

A spokeswoman for the Management Consultancies Association said consultants had been "proud to provide expert support to the government with its Brexit preparations during this critical time".

She added: "Departments have faced an unprecedented volume of workload planning for all Brexit scenarios and using external resources has enabled the government to work quickly and with intensity on major programmes across the UK."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48547813

[PaulF]

I suspect the real cost to the government will be far higher than £97m.   The salaries of 600+ MPs wasting time for the last three years and getting absolutely nowhere for starters.....

[BobOnATank]

With 16000 people I'd estimate they are burning £8.5m per day which equates to roughly £2bn a year in civil servants alone so £97m isn't much of it. £2bn would fund a lot of schools, social care and NHS improvements of course....

[Lush is the best medicine...]

I suspect the real cost to the government will be far higher than £97m.   The salaries of 600+ MPs wasting time for the last three years and getting absolutely nowhere for starters.....

i think it’s £75k they get per year, so around £145m on salaries, never mind how much has been pissed away on expenses to Brussels and their pretend trade negotiations with the north sentinel island to make it look like they’re doing something

[oldfordie]

Labour have a awful habit of kicking remain voters in the balls at the very moment when you think they have no other option but to demand another referendum.

Thornberry may face reshuffle after Labour split over new EU vote
Move would punish shadow foreign secretary for backing second Brexit referendum

Jeremy Corbyn and his inner circle are considering a frontbench reshuffle that could see the shadow foreign secretary, Emily Thornberry, moved as a punishment for insisting that the party must back a second Brexit referendum, according to several senior figures in the party.

There is also growing support from some of Corbyn’s allies, including union leaders close to the leader’s office, for a new contest to be held that could see Tom Watson replaced as deputy leader, following his persistent backing for a public vote on the UK’s exit from the EU.

Sources inside Corbyn’s office said last night that there were “all sorts of mischievous rumours” being put about, but did not confirm – or rule out – imminent changes to the party’s top team. “They are very angry with Emily and are out to get Tom,” said one shadow cabinet source. “That has been incredibly obvious over recent days.” Another senior source said: “There is talk of petitions going round local parties, particularly to rally support for a deputy leadership contest. This would require more than 50 MPs to back it to get off the ground. They may want to do it, but it almost certainly won’t work.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/08/thornberry-may-face-reshuffle-after-labour-split-on-new-brexit-vote

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Why any remain voter would want to vote for them is beyond me, then again why anyone who isn’t a racist or stupid would vote for them now is also beyond me

[oldfordie]

Why any remain voter would want to vote for them is beyond me, then again why anyone who isn’t a racist or stupid would vote for them now is also beyond me

Well they are leaving no doubt, all they have to do now is to convince all Labour members and Labour voters on how wrong they are over demanding a referendum. why do I get the feeling they actually think when it comes to the crunch they only have to tell the Labour membership to vote for what they want and they will do it.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

why do I get the feeling they actually think when it comes to the crunch they only have to tell the Labour membership to vote for what they want and they will do it.

because they believe their own hype, getting 40% of the vote was a giant fluke (like the Tories getting 42%) and gave them delusions of grandeur when it comes to how popular they are when it was literally a perfect storm that was able to get them that high and they won’t be able to repeat that again

[oldfordie]

because they believe their own hype, getting 40% of the vote was a giant fluke (like the Tories getting 42%) and gave them delusions of grandeur when it comes to how popular they are when it was literally a perfect storm that was able to get them that high and they won’t be able to repeat that again

You would have to be crazy to think nothings changed since the 2017 GE. Corbyn gave a interview the day after the Peterborough by-election, he came across as fanatical, how everyone wrote Labour off but we showed them.
Corbyn & co plan is now coming to fruition, they were right all along to oppose a 2nd referendum.
A few people believe Johnson might well be the best choice for PM for remain.
We all know he's a lying bas.. who only cares about himself but Johnson is no nutty ERG MP, he does not believe all the bulls.. about leaving the SM etc. we all know what lead to Johnson forcing Cameron to call a referendum.
Corbyn may well face a Tory PM who will take us step by step towards another referendum, he could even win back some Tory voters arguing this is the only option for the country now. Johnson knows a hard Brexit will destroy the Tories.
Nobody knows what will happen over the next year or so but Corbyn has a 1 track mind and it's to oppose another referendum and leave with a deal.
Remain and leave voters do not support Corbyns argument.
I think Johnson will outmanoeuvre Corbyn with ease and we will end up with a referendum, how Corbyn reacts to this is anyone's guess but voters will know it wasn't what he wanted.

[drmick]

I'm not sure how you've come to that conclusion about Johnson. A second referendum and a softer Brexit?!?

One things for sure, he certainly has all the kingmaker folk behind him.

[Jiminy Cricket]

You would have to be crazy to think nothings changed since the 2017 GE. Corbyn gave a interview the day after the Peterborough by-election, he came across as fanatical, how everyone wrote Labour off but we showed them.

Not crazy, just monumentally dim. Corbyn has all the advantages of a posh education, and he shill does not possess the necessary acumen to run a window-cleaning round (nothing wrong window cleaning or being a window cleaner - considered it myself many moons ago when there was no cleaner in my parent's neighborhood and I was out of work - but you know what I mean). He's also a bit of a c*nt, and surrounded by full-on c*nts. They come up with an obvious bullshit explanation, Corbyn thinks it sounds great (and must be correct), and he then just trots it out because he knows no better. Ever has there been someone so obviously inept elevated to such an important role in UK politics? Not in my lifetime, and there has been some right doozies in competition for the title.

[oldfordie]

I'm not sure how you've come to that conclusion about Johnson. A second referendum and a softer Brexit?!?

One things for sure, he certainly has all the kingmaker folk behind him.

Ive been thinking about for a few days now. the idea was raised by someone on Newsnight, found myself agreeing with everything they said.
I would also add the last thing Johnson wants is a GE as he looks like loosing his seat so what are his options, I think it's about diffusing the situation rather than giving nutty leave supporters what they want. a no deal will be disastrous and he knows it, he will have to go through a few stages before conceding theres no other option left open to the country except another referendum. it's a argument Labour should have been making but Corbyn refuses to accept realty.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Ive been thinking about for a few days now. the idea was raised by someone on Newsnight, found myself agreeing with everything they said.
I would also add the last thing Johnson wants is a GE as he looks like loosing his seat so what are his options, I think it's about diffusing the situation rather than giving nutty leave supporters what they want. a no deal will be disastrous and he knows it, he will have to go through a few stages before conceding theres no other option left open to the country except another referendum. it's a argument Labour should have been making but Corbyn refuses to accept realty.

I can't see Johnson going for a referendum. He might be smart enough to know that is best option for the country (but since when has cared about that) - just I can't see him willing to take the inevitable hammering from the ERG, Frottage and Brexit party. I hope you are correct and I am wrong about this.

[oldfordie]

I can't see Johnson going for a referendum. He might be smart enough to know that is best option for the country (but since when has cared about that) - just I can't see him willing to take the inevitable hammering from the ERG,Frottage and Brexit party. I hope you are correct and I am wrong about this.

I wouldn't describe it as Johnson going for a referendum.he will definitely go full on arguing for us to leave with or without a deal. the EU will not give us a deal with our red lines. Parliament will block a no deal. Johnson will make sure voters believe he has pushed this as far as he could. I think this is where he changes course from May, how he does this is anyone's guess, maybe the EU will refuse a extension and he gives in to demands from MPs for another referendum.
Am not saying I believe this is all going to happen for certain, nobody knows whats going to happen, I really don't see how the Tories get out of this mess unless they diffuse the situation. the Brexit party are ready to pounce whatever choice we make. remain and they will rip them apart, a no deal and they will rip them apart.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

I'm not sure how you've come to that conclusion about Johnson. A second referendum and a softer Brexit?!?

One things for sure, he certainly has all the kingmaker folk behind him.

to be honest you are far more likely to get a second ref from boris than corbyn/May/raab/gove etc, Boris is the only one who could get away with it IMO

[oldfordie]

Not crazy, just monumentally dim. Corbyn has all the advantages of a posh education, and he shill does not possess the necessary acumen to run a window-cleaning round (nothing wrong window cleaning or being a window cleaner - considered it myself many moons ago when there was no cleaner in my parent's neighborhood and I was out of work - but you know what I mean). He's also a bit of a c*nt, and surrounded by full-on c*nts. They come up with an obvious bullshit explanation, Corbyn thinks it sounds great (and must be correct), and he then just trots it out because he knows no better. Ever has there been someone so obviously inept elevated to such an important role in UK politics? Not in my lifetime, and there has been some right doozies in competition for the title.

Yeah, I know what you mean. Laura Murray was banging on about how great a night it was when the results came in for the 2017 GE.
Happy night, not for all the people who are still being crucified by Tory policies but brilliant night for Corbyn as it kept him in power and thats what matters.

[Jiminy Cricket]

to be honest you are far more likely to get a second ref from boris than corbyn/May/raab/gove etc, Boris is the only one who could get away with it IMO

A Nixon to China moment!? I guess we will find out the forthcoming months, as it seems inevitable that Johnson will be the next Tory leader.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Yeah, I know what you mean. Laura Murray was banging on about how great a night it was when the results came in for the 2017 GE.
Happy night, not for all the people who are still being crucified by Tory policies but brilliant night for Corbyn as it kept him in power and thats what matters.

not just him but his hangers on, who all got nice pay rises whilst the rank and file look like they’ll be going on strike

A Nixon to China moment!? I guess we will find out the forthcoming months, as it seems inevitable that Johnson will be the next Tory leader.

as mad as it sounds I think he fancies himself as the man who saved the country from ruin, let’s be fair the day after the referendum he wasn’t exactly celebrating was he?

[oldfordie]

 Excellent Brexit summary in 97 secs.

https://twitter.com/johnharris1969/status/1137689381639204865

[red_Mark1980]

So in this scenario.
Johnson wins, Johnson wants to push no deal. Parliament "won't allow it" The EU won't allow an extension. Time ticks on and we reach October.

We leave with No deal correct?

[TepidT2O]

So in this scenario.
Johnson wins, Johnson wants to push no deal. Parliament "won't allow it" The EU won't allow an extension. Time ticks on and we reach October.

We leave with No deal correct?

The considered opinion is that parliament can stop a  no deal scenario.

The next PM won’t last a year...

[Zeb]

Possible for Parliament to legislate against a government's wishes if they have the time and the numbers. And Bercow is willing to allow it. Neither the time to do it nor the numbers are in any way certain. Cooper's bill passed on a majority of 5, and preventing 'no deal' can only realistically be done by withdrawing Article 50 altogether.

See: https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/speaker-cant-guarantee-mps-can-stop-no-deal-brexit

[John C]

So in this scenario.
Johnson wins, Johnson wants to push no deal. Parliament "won't allow it" The EU won't allow an extension. Time ticks on and we reach October.

We leave with No deal correct?

From the BBC mate.

Can Parliament stop a no-deal Brexit?

By Daniel KraemerBBC Westminster

·       6 June 2019

One of the hot topics in the race to succeed Theresa May as prime minister is whether a new leader could make the UK leave the European Union without a deal, against the wishes of MPs.

Even though most MPs oppose a no-deal strategy, some argue the next government could go ahead without the consent of Parliament.

A row broke out on Wednesday after Conservative leadership candidate Dominic Raab said he would be prepared to prorogue Parliament to make sure the UK leaves the EU on 31 October.

What is prorogation?

At the end of every parliamentary session - which usually lasts around a year and starts with the State Opening of Parliament and a Queen's Speech - Parliament is "prorogued" by the Queen.

It essentially closes Parliament and ends the process of current legislation until a new session begins. Although it is technically at the Queen's "command", in practice it is the government's decision.

How could it be used to stop MPs forcing the government's hand?

If a new prime minister is concerned about MPs blocking the UK's exit from the EU, they could advise the Queen to prorogue Parliament, therefore sending MPs away so that they can't do anything to scupper Brexit.

It would be unprecedented in modern times to use this power for political reasons, rather than to end a session in preparation for a new Queen's Speech.

One leadership candidate, Rory Stewart, has said to do so would be "illegal, unconstitutional, undemocratic and it wouldn't work".

Without prorogation, can MPs stop no deal?

Some leadership candidates are more relaxed about leaving without a formal deal than others.

cVey thinks MPs can't stop no deal

Esther McVey has said politicians should "actively embrace" leaving without a deal and doesn't think Parliament can stop this.

But fellow Conservative MP Ken Clarke rejects this idea, saying it would be a "constitutional outrage" for a prime minister to attempt to leave without a deal against the will of Parliament.

But who is right? Can Parliament step in to block a looming no-deal exit? Or is the power solely in the hands of the new prime minister?

What's the law?

Currently, the default position is that the UK will leave the EU on 31 October. So if nothing changes, Brexit will happen regardless of whether there is a deal or not.

To change this, you have to change the law.

The government controls the timetable in Parliament, so the new PM could avoid opportunities for Parliament to force their hand, just by doing nothing.

This would mean that MPs wanting to block a no deal - perhaps by changing the exit date - would not have the opportunity to force the PM to do anything. But what are the options open to MPs who want to scupper the plans of a leader who is pursuing a no deal?

Take control of Parliament

In March and April this year, a group of MPs took control of the parliamentary timetable, ultimately passing a piece of legislation against the wishes of the government. The new law - dubbed the "Cooper/Letwin Bill" - forced the government to seek a delay to Brexit.

But it would be hard for MPs to do this again.

Backbenchers were able to seize control of Parliament in March by attaching an amendment to a government motion, which was seen as binding by the Speaker of the House, John Bercow.

The motion was legally required after the failed meaningful vote.

So if there is no meaningful vote, there is no motion, and there is no way to amend it and take control.

This is the argument supported by Ms McVey, who told the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme: "When you bring something forward to the floor of the House, it's only then things can be amended… and then you can alter the journey and the course. Well, I wouldn't be bringing back the withdrawal agreement, so there would be nothing you could amend to alter it."

A vote of no confidence

This is the most straightforward option.

It is a binding motion that would determine whether the current government has the support of MPs. If the PM loses the vote, there would be 14 days for someone to try and form a government. If no government is formed, it is back to the country for a general election.

Legislation

Any attempt to pass laws would give MPs the opportunity to force the government's hand and ultimately rule out leaving without a deal. For example, if a minister puts forward a business motion - which sets the timetable for a piece of legislation - an MP could amend it and take control of Parliament on another day, perhaps to pass a bill.

To avoid this, the government might have to decide not to bring any legislation to the Commons between July and October - not even laws that could help prepare for a no-deal scenario.

Emergency debates

Backbench MPs - with the help of the Speaker of the House - can force a debate onto the timetable on matters of emergency. These are usually seen as non-binding.

However, Mr Bercow has recently suggested they could be used to force the government to take a particular course of action.

He said in March: "The opportunities are fuller than has traditionally been acknowledged or taken advantage of by Members of the House of Commons."

Political pressure

Regardless of whether the procedure allows it, a prime minister going against the will of Parliament, and avoiding scrutiny by not bringing anything to Parliament, risks a breakdown of political trust.

This is a point argued by Jack Simson Caird of the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law, who argues that, even if Parliament cannot stop a leader pursuing a no deal, "realistically, the country is ungovernable if the government decides to completely ignore Parliament".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48519746

[TepidT2O]

Reuters quoting 'source close to Macron' saying any move by PM Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson to withhold the £39 billion divorce bill would be viewed as a 'sovereign debt default'

Good start there.

You want to renegotiate and you start by making a public assertion that you intend to totally shady the other party of you don’t get your own way.

Result? The world’s biggest trading block responds in kind.

[Jiminy Cricket]

as mad as it sounds I think he fancies himself as the man who saved the country from ruin, let’s be fair the day after the referendum he wasn’t exactly celebrating was he?

I am unconvinced. But, I hope you are correct. We need as many ways out (I mean, to Remain) as possible.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Good start there.

You want to renegotiate and you start by making a public assertion that you intend to totally shady the other party of you don’t get your own way.

Result? The world’s biggest trading block responds in kind.

I suspect that prospect will make no difference to Frottage and those advocating for a no-Deal Brexit. Onward!