To wonder how people think a new Prime Minister is going to be able to deliver Brexit

[Bearbehind]

I’m no fan of Theresa May; the reason we are in the mess we currently are is because of her red lines and the fact she has never been honest about what was and was not achievable.

But what do people think a new PM can achieve?

No deal will seriously damage the country, even the government’s own impact assessments have concluded that and there’s simply not the numbers in parliament for no cal to happen (even though it’s the default position)

The EU aren’t suddenly going to remove the backstop for a new PM because we’ve proven we cannot be trusted to do what we say so it’s needed.

Heseltine on BH now, sadly musing at the logic that it could Unify the Tory party (5 million of their supporters who voted for Remain), to insist that the 'nuclear' option of No Deal is acceptable and threat of which could leverage the EU into a different WA.

I think it'll just be delayed for years and years. No one can negotiate a hard Brexit with a soft border so leaving with a deal doesn't look like an option. No deal will never get through parliament so that wont happen either; it'll just rumble on for fucking ever blighting the landscape of this country and creating deeper and more damaging divides. Such an unbelievable shit show.

.. could not just take us out with no deal in the face of a Parliament in which there is majority against it. Parliament (not the executive) is Sovereign.
But he could because leaving in October with no deal is the legal default position. All a Brexiteer govt has to do is hang on to power until the 31/10.Even if Labour wanted to be turkeys calling for a GE, there is the question of timescale surely? The summer recess is fast approaching!

You think BJ won't take us out with no deal?

No, he won't none of them will, for the simple reason that the tory administration is a minority Govt, just a handful of Tory remainers have to rebel and a vote of no confidence will go through, a GE and opposition for the Cons, plus they will be forever associated with economic disaster.

The new PM will come up against the same obstacles as May did.

What's perhaps more shocking is as the country faces its biggest crisis for decades, the Tories decide on a beauty pageant.

The reason why we ended up with this dreadful deal from the EU is because the EU correctly surmised that TM would not seriously enable the UK to leave on WTO on the 31st March.

The next PM needs to be someone who will plan for a managed exit on WTO on the 31st Oct as the default position of the UK, which is not in the EU's interest so they may change their position on their so called 'deal' being the red line. But whether they do or they don't leaving on WTO is now the default position on the 31st of Oct and there's nothing parliament can do about that.

It going on go years and years isn't any good. There are a lot of companies in limbo at the moment waiting on contracts to be awarded that can't till Brexit is sorted. And the pound is dropping

"a trade deal can be negotiated instead of a WA. Yup, David Davis saying this in 2019

Davis is confirming what I've written earlier. In his view the UK can leave the EU without a deal on 31st Oct, but then needs to negotiate a deal on 1st November. Whatever Davis chooses to call it, a Deal is still required. Note, a trade deal is not sufficient - the UK needs to agree terms for standards, certifications, qualifications, movement of capital and for cooperation in areas such as the environment, policing, GPS - all of the issues that don't end at the border.

Because we don't really need to control our borders

WTO rules require a border between the UK and EU. Common sense dictates that a country needs to control the external border against smuggling, counterfeit goods, sub-standard goods, illegal trafficking of rugs, goods and people. The UK already does this for trade from outside of the EU (but not very well - cf the court case against the UK for failing to prevent fake Chinese goods from entering the EU through the UK) and except at the border with Ireland, the UK controls all passengers at the UK border - British, EU and non-EU - as the UK is not a Schengen state.

Leaving in March was also the default position.

The pressures to rule out no-deal will be exactly the same for Boris et al as it was for May.....food, medicines, exports, GFA etc ability to Govern/win next GE....

Given that the EU have been prepping for no-deal long before the UK has, it is also clear they have taken no-deal as a very serious proposition, so you are wrong about this too.

The next PM needs to be someone who will plan for a managed exit on WTO on the 31st Oct as the default position of the UK, which is not in the EU's interest so they may change their position on their so called 'deal' being the red line.

The UK cannot immediately trade on WTO. WTO is the framework for negotiations, not the end point, so on 1st Nov, the UK has to begin negotiations with the EU and the rest of the world, having ripped up 750+ international agreements overnight. These negotiations might take years. In the meantime, people need to eat, factories need materials, businesses need markets to sell to.

WTO requires a border between the UK and Ireland - in breach of the GFA. Breaching an International Treaty can result in immediate and serious international sanctions against the defaulting nation.

It is the UK that is leaving the EU. The WA is the UK's proposal for a deal. "In a stand-off between Britain and the EU, 44 per cent of our exports is more important to us than eight per cent of the EU’s exports is to them" [T. May, 2016].

But whether they do or they don't leaving on WTO is now the default position on the 31st of Oct and there's nothing parliament can do about that

Leaving the EU is the default position. Whether or not the rest of the world agrees to allow the UK to trade under WTO rules requires months, maybe years, of negotiation.

illegal trafficking of rugs, goods and people

Drugs, as well as rugs!!

I understand the Tory leadership contest is just before the summer recess. Once parlianent returns there will not be sufficient time for a vote of no confidence and a general election before the 31st october rolls round

No Deal is not an end state and Brexiteers don't seem to be able to grasp that we will be in an incredible position of weakness if we take that route. We will be absolutely destroyed in negotiations, all going on against a background of an angry population in crisis. We won't be prepared enough by October 31st as all preps have been stood down.

No Deal sounds like a simple solution and that's why they like the idea. Brexit done.

Hell, even the Prime Minister (stupidly) said it was better than a bad deal. But it absolutely will not be a quick and glorious 'victory' and no politician or newspaper is ever honest about that.

It might be the default - but as I said up thread - if the Executive sits on its hands in the hope of dropping out with no deal when it is clear that there is a Parliamentary majority against that happening it will trigger a constitutional crisis likely to end up in the Courts. Come 31st October, the EU could legitimately take the line that the Executive is acting against the will of Parliament and therefore it will decide to do nothing until the UK courts sort that one out.

I understand the Tory leadership contest is just before the summer recess. Once parlianent returns there will not be sufficient time for a vote of no confidence and a general election before the 31st october rolls round.

I assume in that scenario a further extension will be requested so they just need to decide to hold a general election before the deadline, not actually have it. The EU were clear back in March that they would willingly grant an extension to give time for something like a general election or second referendum and presumably that would still be the case.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-prime-minister-no-deal-brexit-conservative-polls-leadership-election-latest-a8930166.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true

{Come 31st October, the EU could legitimately take the line that the Executive is acting against the will of Parliament and therefore it will decide to do nothing until the UK courts sort that one out.}

The EU can't intervene in individual sovereign countries politics.
If the cabinet/HoC/HoL haven't got a coherent plan together then on 31 Oct the EU will commence it's 'no deal' plan, with items like curtailing flights and the other measures that were on the 12 point list issued in February.
All of the measures are at the EU's discretion and can be withdrawn at any time but they have suggested these could be in place for 9 or 12 months maximum.

With a 'no deal' Brexit, there are (as the name suggests) no ongoing 'deals' with the EU beyond 31 October. ALL relationship legislation comes under EU control. If it suits the EU, it can continue (under EU rules and regulations).

I didn't say the EU would intervene. It could choose to do nothing while the constitutional position in the UK was resolved. It could argue that the will of Parliament was clear that a further extension was required so it might decide to keep the status quo. It's more likely though that Parliament would pass a vote of no confidence in a PM that tried to enforce a no deal policy .

{It could choose to do nothing while the constitutional position in the UK was resolved.}

I am not sure the EU can 'chose' to do nothing. The A50 'process' is a legal document and I presume it would need debate and a vote to change it's position. Given the gravity of this situation I presume a unanimous vote wold be needed so any of the EU27 could 'call time'.

@Nottheboreworms - It could argue that the will of Parliament was clear that a further extension was required so it might decide to keep the status quo.

No they couldn't. The EU can only consider an extension if the UK formally request it. They cannot impose an extension on the UK because the UK is a sovereign nation that is entitled to (but seems unable to) make sovereign decisions about its membership status.

But that's my point. Parliament is Sovereign. If it was clear that the majority of Parliament was against no deal and the executive was refusing to seek the extension I think the EU would find a way of stalling until that position was resolved.

@Nottheboreworms - But that's my point. Parliament is Sovereign. If it was clear that the majority of Parliament was against no deal and the executive was refusing to seek the extension I think the EU would find a way of stalling until that position was resolved.

The EU do not have the power to interfere in a sovereign decision. The UK have, by invoking A50, decided to leave the EU on a certain date. They asked to extend the date. The EU agreed. The EU must respect the decision made by the UK. Unless another extension is requested, the EU has no choice but to follow through with the decision made by the UK to leave the EU at the end of October.

The point is that No Deal will not seriously damage the country.

@Gth1234 - The point is that No Deal will not seriously damage the country.

There is really no arguing with that level of ignorance.

Isn't it entirely plausible that they do absolutely nothing, no more deal discussions or votes bu MPs and then in October we just come out of Europe with no deal.... Brexit delivered?

Unless I'm missing something about necessary process between now and October.