OMG - Johnson just lost his majority whilst in full flow of his speech

[Bearbehind]

Goodness me this is madness

Now what - can he even carry on?

If I was Barnier and aware that UK had passed a law that prevents no deal, I would not bother to turn up at the negotiations. All I would need to do is to type a list of what UK must accept based on fact that new law does not allow UK to reject. Then hand over the list to anyone who fancies a free trip to No. 10 Downing Street

Isn’t that just the problem mystery

You’d (in the general Leavers sense) be sly and underhand and move the goal posts in that situation whilst all the EU will do and have ever done is offer what is possible within the confines of our red lines

Those who think it’s with playing chicken with no deal because the EU are terrified of the prospect (lol) would do well to read this, which outlines the actual reality of it fit the UK.

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/ivan-rogers-the-realities-of-a-no-deal-brexit/

Yeah I know it’s long for the brexiteers, but it would do them good to read it.

I've never understood the view that keeping No deal on the table is a negotiating tactic

It prevents EU imposing ridiculous demands on the UK that the UK can't reject in the hope that UK revokes Article 50.

for us it will be disastrous plus we'll still have a hard border with Ireland, which again is more disadvantageous for us than the backstop would be

EU laws require border between EU and Non EU Countries. Less than 1% of UK trade goes across the Irish border. By no means disastrous in monetary terms. However, it makes life more difficult for those who cross the border as part of their daily lives.

@Bearbehind, the outcast MPs are now independent Conservatives. Of all the stupid things to do, removing the Whip from 21 MPs when you’ve just lost your majority, must be right up there. Behaving like a petulant toddler has just handed those 21 MPs the real power in the Commons. I knew Johnson was stupid, I didn’t realise the magnitude of his stupidity.

But it doesn't prevent that, does it, MysteryTripAgain? It's premised on the view that the EU will roll over rather than allow No Deal to go through, and it's perfectly clear that they won't. It's the absolute epitome of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

@Bearbehind

Post was an extreme version of how UK could be ransomed into remaining in the EU against the result of the 2016 referendum. Don't think EU would actually do that at this stage as it would make them look bad, but no deal off the table greatly reduces the chances of any improvement of existing WA.

That was such a mess for Johnson and his mates.

It was actually good to see them being held accountable, including Cummings who is now in spotlight.

I don’t see how he can repair such lack of trust from others.

May was disagreed with but people trusted her.

After all, the Leave campaign promised repeatedly that it wouldn't be triggered unless and until there was a good deal on the table, so it's fully in accordance with what people voted for

Leave campaign did not trigger Article 50. It was triggered by 498 MPs.

Brussels said they would not start the negotiations before UK had triggered Article 50. This goes against the briefing notes prepared by the European Parliament in February 2016 which stated that informal discussions could take place before Article 50 was triggered, but it was not done that way at EU's insistence.

Look at page 3 of 8 on:

www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2016/577971/EPRS_BRI(2016)577971_EN.pdf

It's premised on the view that the EU will roll over rather than allow No Deal to go through, and it's perfectly clear that they won't

So no deal it is then.

Had EU followed their own withdrawal guidelines the situation might be different. Look at page 3 of 8 on the following:

www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2016/577971/EPRS_BRI(2016)577971_EN.pdf

Discussions about withdrawal agreement can take place before Article 50 is triggered. This makes sense as both EU and UK could at least get a feel for what sort of leave could happen before UK issued its formal notice to withdraw.

This did not happen as EU insisted, against their own guidelines , that UK must trigger Article 50 before any discussions took place.

but no deal off the table greatly reduces the chances of any improvement of existing WA.

No it doesn’t - it make no difference whatsoever

The WA is all that is possible within our red lines

The only way of improving it is by changing the red lines

May was disagreed with but people trusted her

What!

After she attempted to withhold the legal advice given by G Cox that stated the WA could result in UK being locked into a CU and SM forever due to the backstop?

If that is not underhand what is?

Some did. It was just on Radio 4 a quote.

Exactly that.

Well all this is a complete shambles of a strategy from BJ. Proroguing Parliament when there really was little need and an email trail shows you were lying! Threatening deselection to rebel MPs then doing it to 21 of them straight way has just strengthened their resolve. The attitude of JRM, lounging on the front benches and MG appearing to have no clue about fresh food imports and spouting nonsense has made all he said subsequently in the HOC yesterday sound like complete made up crap!

And I am a paid up conservative leave voter. I want Brexit and I want no Brexit left on the table but this a dreadful.

Govey explained it all yesterday: He knows all about fresh food imports because he once had a summer holiday job as a porter in an Aberdeen market.

.....or does that make him a "So-called Expert....?"

@MysteryTripAgain - UK didn’t agree to the WA

Theresa May's government negotiated and agreed the WA. The UK government agreed it with the EU but then rejected it in parliament.

Passing a law that prevents UK from leaving without a deal is an open cheque book for the EU as they can offer UK ridiculous terms safe in the knowledge they can’t reject as no deal has been removed.

The EU have compromised and facilitated the UKs decision while sticking to the red lines they drew from the start. The UK have no clue what they want and cannot decide how they want to leave. The general consensus from the EU seems to be: "would you just make up your minds and get out". I think the UK staying would be a destructive element. They have been so for quite some time.

Any club that does not allow members to leave on reasonable terms is an undemocratic club.

Given that you have stated on another thread that you believe the UK electoral system is undemocratic when you don't like the result, I don't think your opinion on he democracy of any institution is worth much.

Less than 1% of UK trade goes across the Irish border. By no means disastrous in monetary terms. However, it makes life more difficult for those who cross the border as part of their daily lives.

Except that accounts for 35% of NI exports. But hey, that's ok. NI can be thrown under the bus.

Except that accounts for 35% of NI exports. But hey, that's ok. NI can be thrown under the bus.

Have they a sitting government in place yet? To speak for them so to speak......

Theresa May's government negotiated and agreed the WA. The UK government agreed it with the EU but then rejected it in parliament

Wonder if Gina Miller is unpopular among remain supporters? Government might have got the WA through had it not been for the Miller case?

The UK have no clue what they want and cannot decide how they want to leave

A FTA granted by EU is what UK seeks. WA as it stands does not achieve that.

Based on recent events in UK Parliament I would say that remain supporters don't know what they want either. Remain call for people to be allowed to speak, but parliament has said no to another referendum and that a general election should not take place.

Will EU agree to an extension beyond 31 Oct 2019 without a valid reason such as referendum or general election?

@LaurieMarlow thank you for that link yesterday to the Spectator.

A well thought through and cogent argument about the risks for both the UK and the EU.
Unfortunately, it's left me feeling even more depressed about Brexit.

Have they a sitting government in place yet? To speak for them so to speak...

It suits the Tories to keep the DUP on side by leaving the NI Assembly in limbo.

Otherwise they'd have to investgate where all of the money went. And then Aunty Arlene wouldn't want to play with them any more .

From the Belfast Telegraph:

April 2018: Mrs Foster admits to the RHI Inquiry that she didn't read the legislation which set up RHI. She feels she doesn't bear personal responsibility for the scheme, even though it was set up on her watch as a minister.

amp.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/how-rhi-scandal-sparked-a-row-that-brought-down-the-assembly-37311004.html

@1FineDane - Have they a sitting government in place yet? To speak for them so to speak......

No. The lot of them are a complete disgrace. Although it seems to be the DUP are the most intransigent in this instance. They are anti the GFA so never wanted power sharing in the first place.

@MysteryTripAgain - A FTA granted by EU is what UK seeks. WA as it stands does not achieve that.

OK. The UK don't seem to have any realistic idea of what they want. They want all the benefits with none of the costs. The EU is perfectly happy to negotiate a FTA provided the GFA is protected. The UK refuses to uphold their responsibilities under the GFA.

WA as it stands does not achieve that.

WA is not a deal. It is a roadmap that allows deals to be created. The UK insisted the backstop be UK wide. This was a major concession in that part of the EU.

The EU is perfectly happy to negotiate a FTA provided the GFA is protected

So why don't EU agree to FTA? Border issue does away then does it not as good pass freely between Countries that have FTA?