So Johnson has 30 days to come up with an alternative to the backstop......

[Bearbehind]

This will be interesting to watch!

@MysteryTripAgain - I can see the argument why FPTP is considered unfair, but I am not sure how could administer a PR system. For example, a party wins 55% of seats, but nationally has 45% of the vote. How would it be decided which constituencies get the MP they voted for and which do not?

You still haven't answered my question: Do you consider the UK electoral system democratic? If not, why not and what are you doing to ensure it becomes democratic?

You are the one stating that a decision being carried when voted for by a minority of voters leads to the law of the jungle. In the vast majority of votes in the UK, this is what actually happens.

Oh, and PR works perfectly well in many countries. You could always look at how it is implemented elsewhere. For example, we use a single transferrable vote system in Ireland.

@MysteryTripAgain - I was not referring to media coverage, but the fact that nobody on UK mainland got the chance to vote like those in NI.

They did get a chance to vote. They had the opportunity to vote for a government with stated policies wrt the peace process. The constitutional system in the UK is such that referenda are not required for decisions of this nature.

You could equally argue that the whole of the UK should have a vote on Scottish independence. That would not be a fair vote. Equally, the GFA was voted on by those whose daily lives would be impacted by the changes. The troubles spreading over to England (I don't recall any bombings in Wales or Scotland) was not particularly relevant to the GFA, although it did impact on public opinion and attitudes.

You still haven't answered my question: Do you consider the UK electoral system democratic? If not, why not and what are you doing to ensure it becomes democratic?

When there are more than two parties it is likely that the party with the most votes has less than 50% of the total. As several new parties have appeared in 2019 alone this is even more likely.

So how about two rounds of votes? After the first round the two parties that got the most votes are voted on in the second round. That way for sure there will be a party elected by majority unless they both receive the same number of votes.

Downside is there may be a lower turnout in second round as people who voted for parties that were eliminated in round one don't bother to vote.

Is the current system perfect? No it is not. Is the above solution likely to become the new method? Don't know as the two major parties have always been against the PR system as more favourable to themselves. Maybe the upside of Brexit is that the two party system begins to break up?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-49493632

Parliament to be suspended

@MysteryTripAgain - You still haven't answered my question: Do you consider the UK electoral system democratic? If not, why not and what are you doing to ensure it becomes democratic?

I can only assume that you are not answering as you believe the system is democratic, which then makes a nonsense of your argument against the vote for the GFA being allowed to hold sway over brexit decisions.

@whyamidoingthis

My suggestion is to have two rounds of votes, but that has to be voted through. Conservative and Labour Party unlikely to want to change the method of elections as they benefit from the existing system.

Error has been failure to revisit the GFA and add a section that explained how GFA could be maintained in the event of either, or both, ROI or UK chose to follow Article 50 which was agreed by all EU members.

Johnson obviously does not think GFA is relevant as demonstrated by his attempt to close parliament till 14 October 2019.

@MysteryTripAgain - You still haven't answered my question directly but does you last response mean that you consider the UK electoral system undemocratic or that you simply think there is a better way of doing it.

Error has been failure to revisit the GFA and add a section that explained how GFA could be maintained in the event of either, or both, ROI or UK chose to follow Article 50 which was agreed by all EU members.

Nope. The error was in assuming the UK would have the integrity to uphold their obligations under the GFA in the event A50 was invoked. I have already told you a number of times how Ireland, despite wanting to join Schengen, didn't because of the implications for the GFA. You know, grown up behaviour and integrity.

Johnson obviously does not think GFA is relevant as demonstrated by his attempt to close parliament till 14 October 2019.

See my point above about integrity!

@whyami

Everyone has to stick with the existing election system until it is changed. Two rounds of votes would lead to a majority win. However, reduced turnout would open the door for bad losers to argue that those who chose not to vote would have voted for the losing side had they voted.

Heard many people say that 51 million did not vote to leave the EU. Silly argument as the electorate is not 51 million to begin with.

UK declined to join Schegen as well. Being an island frontier controls at ports and airports were deemed better than land border controls.

UK leaving EU does not affect GFA as UK has said it will not install a border. EU laws that require border control is what will contradict the GFA. ROI will have to make a choice of whether they sacrifice protection of the Single Market in favour of the GFA or to retain the Single Market.

@MysteryTripAgain - You still haven't answered my question. Do you consider the UK electoral system democratic? If not, why not and what are you doing to ensure it becomes democratic?

UK declined to join Schegen as well.

You're obviously not reading posts. I told you in a previous post the reason Ireland did not join Schengen, despite wanting to, was because the UK did not want to join it. Ireland was cognisant of their responsibilities under the GFA and so decided not to join as if the UK was not part of Schengen, Ireland joining it would have caused problems under the GFA.

I guess UK will have to sacrifice freedom of movement - which will be hard to enforce.

I do feel sorry for both people in ROI and NI though.

@MysteryTripAgain - UK leaving EU does not affect GFA as UK has said it will not install a border. EU laws that require border control is what will contradict the GFA. ROI will have to make a choice of whether they sacrifice protection of the Single Market in favour of the GFA or to retain the Single Market.

Don't be ridiculous. Of course it would be the fault of the UK. Quite aside from their moral obligation to ensure they do not take an action that will risk the GFA, the UK will either have to put up a border with Ireland or put no borders up with anyone as per WTO most favoured nation rules. Taking back control of your border?

Don't be ridiculous. Of course it would be the fault of the UK

How? Nothing in Article 50 that excludes ROI or UK from leaving the EU.

A free trade agreement between EU and UK is one way ROI could get out its conundrum of trying to comply with EU border regulations and at same time preserving GFA. However, EU stated at the outset that future trade deals would not be discussed until a withdrawal agreement had been passed.

According to the author of Article 50 it was not the intent that all monetary settlements had to be concluded before the framework of the the future relationship could be discussed. Had EU not taken that approach and a trade deal had been made that was included in a withdrawal agreement the border might not have become an issue?

I guess UK will have to sacrifice freedom of movement - which will be hard to enforce

That would help with the GFA in terms of people crossing the invisible border.

I do feel sorry for both people in ROI and NI though

Me too. EU insistance that no trade deal between EU and UK can be discussed until a withdrawal agreement is passed does not take into account that EU laws require border control with non EU countries. Even Varadkar has acknowledged that some form of border checks will be required. EU has said the same

Trump supporting no deal and a great deal can be made with UK does not help ROI and NI as Johnson seems to be on board with Trump.

Why should there be a separate free trade agreement between the UK and an EU member that is part of a trading bloc. It's a Deal with the trading bloc or not.
Attempts to carve ROI out of the EU and bully it are both pathetic and pointless.

@MysteryTripAgain - Nothing in Article 50 that excludes ROI or UK from leaving the EU.

That is correct. However, an expectation of integrity on behalf of a signatory to an international peace agreement is a reasonable expectation. It is reasonable to expect them to leave in a manner that does not contravene their obligations under that treaty. Ireland has already shown how to act with integrity and uphold their obligations wrt Schengen.

A free trade agreement between EU and UK is one way ROI could get out its conundrum of trying to comply with EU border regulations and at same time preserving GFA

So you think it is reasonable that Ireland would be expected to effectively leave the CU and SM in order to facilitate the UK as opposed to the UK behaving in an honourable manner with regards to their obligations under the GFA? You should really remember that you no longer have the empire and bullying smaller countries to ensure they do your bidding is really not acceptable these days.

You still haven't answered my question. Do you consider the UK electoral system democratic? If not, why not and what are you doing to ensure it becomes democratic?

It's a Deal with the trading bloc or not

That's why I suggested a free trade deal between EU and UK. That way ROI would not have to install a border as per EU regulations as there would be a free trade deal between EU and UK. Hence no border required.

@MysteryTripAgain That's why I suggested a free trade deal between EU and UK.

Except May's red lines precluded that.

UK also have an option of doing Norway plus and if they want to fully withdraw in the future then get a fully formed border solution. It does seem nice of ROI to hold back on the Schengen partly for UK.

Even with a free trade agreement I don’t think that there can not be a border. To preserve EU rules (which they care about but UK not so much), things need to be monitored eg to make sure chlorine washed chicken doesn’t come in.

I don’t know what leavers will think when they find that there will still be freedom of movement of people from Europe into England (for example) via ROI and NI...

"That's why I suggested a free trade deal between EU and UK. That way ROI would not have to install a border as per EU regulations as there would be a free trade deal between EU and UK. Hence no border required."
Which happens after a WA. Assuming the parties can agree.
But ERG and Brexiteer MPs didn't go for it what are you going to do about it?

@Namenic - It does seem nice of ROI to hold back on the Schengen partly for UK.

We didn't do it for the UK as such. We did it to ensure we complied with our obligations under the GFA. And obviously because we care about peace in NI, which is currently part of the UK.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-44054594

@whyamidoingthis - I wish UK would care more about NI.

@Namenic - me too.

There is no place - even with a free trade agreement where the border is as frictionless as it currently is at ROI/NI border.

Which happens after a WA. Assuming the parties can agree

That's another error. Trade deal could have been discussed at same time when what UK owes EU was negotiated. Separating the two creates the border problem.

As for silencing those MPs who want UK to leave without a deal I don't know what to say. Trump not helping by supporting no deal and saying there will be a great deal made between UK and US. Johnsons decision to close parliament till 14 October sends out the wrong signal to EU. Bit like saying UK wants no deal and there is no point in any further negotiations.