Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Challenging the Benn Act

95 replies

Parker231 · 08/09/2019 11:55

Today’s news reports are saying that the Government won’t break the law but won’t ask for an extension. As a deal with the EU doesn’t seem to be happening, Johnson will have to request the extension?

OP posts:
Parker231 · 08/09/2019 11:57

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49625431

OP posts:
onalongsabbatical · 08/09/2019 14:27

And the latest is that France will say 'Non' unless they think we have made some kind of positive progress.
And who could blame them?
Led by donkeys indeed.

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 08/09/2019 16:40

I think that’s the same thing France has been saying since the first extension. They reluctantly backed the first but said they wouldn’t back a second.

Whether or not they can be convinced to back the second but won’t back the third remains to be seen.

onalongsabbatical · 08/09/2019 17:28

Yes that's true, they're reiterating their position in the light of current events.

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 08/09/2019 17:42

Yes. Presumably they have some sort of trust that the current government would pay heed to that warning and actually start to sort something. No idea what would give them that impression.

Septembersunrays · 08/09/2019 20:57

Who is going to beg macron for an extension?

onalongsabbatical · 08/09/2019 22:05

RafaIsTheKingOfClay I know, I suspect they keep hoping against hope that somehow we'll sort out some kind of sane response to all of this. They've been very tolerant and patient with our dysfunction.
Who is going to beg macron for an extension? I think the 'who' is a technicality with the law being passed, it's more a question of how. And we don't ask Macron, we ask the EU, but he has a veto as any of them would have, and is simply warning us that it could be exercised if we don't get our shit together. Which is fair enough.

Parker231 · 08/09/2019 22:11

The Benn Bill - getting Queens Assent tomorrow

What does the Bill do in relation to an extension?

The Bill is not the same as April’s Cooper-Letwin Bill. It goes further than that Bill in several key respects.

At first instance, clause 1 of the Bill gives the Government until Saturday 19 October to do either of two things. It could seek and secure the approval of MPs for either:

(a) a withdrawal agreement, or

(b) leaving the European Union without a withdrawal agreement

If by the end of 19 October the House of Commons has done neither of these things, the Prime Minister must then have sought from the European Council an extension of Article 50 for a further four months – until 31 January 2020.

If at any time after 19 October a withdrawal agreement is approved by the Commons, or the Commons decides the UK should leave without a deal, the Prime Minister can withdraw or modify his Article 50 extension request.

What happens if the European Council offers an extension?

If the European Council offers a further extension until 31 January 2020, subsection 3(1) of this Bill compels the Prime Minister to inform the European Council that the UK agrees to the extension. This compulsion was not explicit in the Cooper-Letwin Bill back in April.

If the European Council offers a further extension, but to a date other than 31 January 2020, under subsections 3(2-3) the Prime Minister has two choices. Either he can:

(a) agree to that extension, or

(b) ask the House of Commons (within two calendar days) whether it wishes to approve that extension.

If the House of Commons “decides not to pass” a specifically-worded motion approving the extension, the Prime Minister then has a free choice whether or not to agree to the extension under subsection 3(4).

What else does the Bill do?

Clause 2 of the Bill also gives Parliament, and the House of Commons in particular, an ongoing role in scrutinising progress towards the securing of a deal between the UK and the EU. The Government must publish a report on 30 November explaining what progress it has made in this regard. MPs would then, by 5 December, be asked to ‘approve’ that report.

If MPs were not to approve that report or were to amend the report’s approval motion the Government would then have to set out a further report explaining what it proposes to do in the negotiations. This second report would have to be published by 10 January 2020. This reporting and approval requirement then repeats every 28 days until either a deal has been reached with the EU or the Commons resolves that the requirement should cease.

Clause 4 of the Bill also changes the arrangements for aligning ‘exit day’ in UK domestic law with the date on which the UK leaves the EU as a matter of EU law under Article 50. If an extension is granted, Ministers would (under this Bill) be legally obliged to make regulations to ensure the two dates remain aligned. At the moment, it is technically a matter for Ministers whether and when to bring forward ‘change of exit day’ regulations in the event of an extension. A failure to bring forward regulations would create legal uncertainty. The UK would still be a Member State of the EU, but domestic law would have repealed the main legislation that ensures the UK complies with European Union law.

OP posts:
AuntieStella · 08/09/2019 22:12

If the French reports are accurate, it won't matter what the UK govt does or doesn't do.

They are not inclined to support further extensions when there has been no progress. I just don't see how there can be sufficient progress in time

Septembersunrays · 08/09/2019 22:35

Our shit hasn't been together for three years why would they grant us extension?

Parker231 · 08/09/2019 22:38

France would be under pressure from other countries to avoid a no deal, particularly ROI who have already said they would support an extension.

OP posts:
RancidOldHag · 09/09/2019 07:18

If France caved to pressure, it would rather prove a Leavers' point and undermine Remainers (I've read claims recently that of course countries can use their 'no' votes freely, so there's no chance of being corralled into something not wanted)

It is a great shame that the referendum was not held at the time of Maastrict, so we couid have continued with something more like EEC. And/or that country which voted against in their domestic referendum was persuaded to re-run until there was the 'right' result.

MysteryTripAgain · 09/09/2019 07:40

If France caved to pressure, it would rather prove a Leavers' point

Correct. The leavers' point being that EU is scared of UK leaving.

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 09/09/2019 08:46

It’s not scared of the UK leaving. It would currently like them to hurry up sorting their shit out and fuck off.

However France aren’t going want to be seen as responsible for causing no deal, and the EU will want to be seen as presenting a united front.

Oranginna · 09/09/2019 09:01

No EU country ever seems to use their veto. Horse trading occurs and everyone does what the richest country wants.

He who pays the piper calls the tune.

Oranginna · 09/09/2019 09:04

Come on France. Prove the Eurosceptics wrong.

MysteryTripAgain · 09/09/2019 09:24

It’s not scared of the UK leaving. It would currently like them to hurry up sorting their shit out and fuck off

So refuse to extend Article and force UK out of the EU.

However France aren’t going want to be seen as responsible for causing no deal, and the EU will want to be seen as presenting a united front

Thought individual members had freedom of speech?

MrPan · 09/09/2019 09:42

The EU Commission are being mightily patient because it is no-one's interest for the UK to leave the EU at all, least of all without an arrangement.
All EU states would suffer (though how much is a point) so politicians expressing a personal opinion on brexit is exactly that. IT doesn't carry a massive weight when seen in the context of the well being of the EU states overall.

MrPan · 09/09/2019 09:47

I think this talk about who is scared of who, who loses most etc is really juvenile, and damaging to the welfare of all EU citizens. We should have left the playground years ago.

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 09/09/2019 09:58

Thought individual members had freedom of speech?

In what way does this have anything to do with freedom of speech?

MysteryTripAgain · 09/09/2019 10:03

The EU Commission are being mightily patient because it is no-one's interest for the UK to leave the EU at all, least of all without an arrangement

So why was Article 50 passed into EU law? If none of the members wanted any of the other members to leave the EU what was the point of Article 50?

UK has voted to leave. Nothing in Article 50 that says members can't leave if other members don't like it or it is to the disadvantage of any of the other members.

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 09/09/2019 10:09

We can leave if others don’t like it. The EU isn’t stopping us leaving. There’d be no need for us to ask for an extension if we just passed the WA or figured out what we actually do want if the WA isn’t acceptable.

MrPan · 09/09/2019 10:13

I think that;'s because every org. should have an exit facility for when members wish to leave/resign. That's just good governance.

Of course the UK can leave, but the level of controversy and the cost to all involved means the EU are very willing to allow max time to reconsider the wisdom of leaving, and/or the best way of arranging this. They'd wish to restrict the consequences of UK self-damaging behaviour to other members as much as possible.
Seems sensible.

MysteryTripAgain · 09/09/2019 10:30

EU are very willing to allow max time to reconsider the wisdom of leaving

You mean people are hoping if leave is delayed long enough, Brexit will be forgotten and drift into obscurity.

They'd wish to restrict the consequences of UK self-damaging behaviour to other members as much as possible

Article 50 does not prevent leave on the basis that it might be disadvantageous to others.

MysteryTripAgain · 09/09/2019 10:33

There’d be no need for us to ask for an extension if we just passed the WA

WA, as it stands, allows the EU to keep UK locked in EU forever.

or figured out what we actually do want if the WA isn’t acceptable

Johnson has explained - backstop is out of the WA.