The Brexit Arms

[BrexitArmsLandLady]

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂

Hold the line Brexiters!!

Nearly there...

Only 53 days to go!

🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

And the people can decide, once Johnson's wizard wheezes to tout No Deal have been stopped.

Some Remainers would be happy to accept a BINO; some would not be happy with anything other than Remain and some are willing to accept the referendum result. Those doing the damage are in the first two groups

instead of trying to thwart it to prove themselves right

Excellent points.

There wouldn't be a trust issue with Theresa May

WHAT!

T May's attempt to conceal the attorney general legal advise on the wording of the WA was total deceit. An insult to;

the 17.4 Million who voted to leave, and;

UK law from the Miller case that parliament vote was required, and;

MP's would vote on the WA without seeing the legal advise.

I have yet to hear a remain supporter explain why T May's action was correct.

And the people can decide, once Johnson's wizard wheezes to tout No Deal have been stopped

Again an attempt to tailor the rules to suit remain supporters.

A GE would most likely result in a Brexit and Conservative Party coalition. If they get a majority similar to that in the 2016 referendum which was 400+ constituencies voted leave, any previously passed law can be overturned.

Polls show that people fear Corbyn as PM more than they fear a no deal Brexit. So labour's chance of winning a GE look small.

LibDems, Greens, Plaid Cymru, Change UK, like all small parties do badly under the seat system.

If leaving without any trade deal is Good, why would you try to negotiate a trade deal with anyone

The logic is no deal is better than a bad deal. However, what is a bad deal and what is not has the same difference of opinion as the result of the 2016 referendum.

My understanding of the news this weekend is that Corbyn wants a GE but isn’t prepared to vote for it until a no deal is off the table as Johnson can’t be trusted to not to move the date and default to a no deal.

So in @MysteryTripAgain 's mind, TM is as shifty as Johnson but also he isn't shifty.
I didn't like her but I don't think she would go back on her word line he is trying to.

You can't place the blame soley with the 'remainer elite' Finer
Boris Johnson seems to be going all out for a no deal. Can you not see that the chances of a no deal being a fucking disaster for this country are extremely high?
20+ Conservative MP's can see it, and now they have been sacked/resigned.
Brexit at any cost? What is wrong with you?

Yes@Parker231 , Which Johnson and his lickspittles are trying to cast as "doesn't want an election at all". Sadly, this is yet another fib that seems to be working.

I've yet to see one Leave supporter on here drop the rhetoric and say, we must avoid No Deal at all costs. Not one. A few mumble about wanting a deal but not one is prepared to criticise No Deal.

@bellinisurge

All politicians exist for their own purpose. Recent poll indicates that 75% think politicians serve their own purpose as opposed to the Country.

I didn't like her but I don't think she would go back on her word [line removed] like he is trying to

T May went back on;

UK law by signing WA before accepted by parliament.

Trust in T May vapourised when she attempted to hide the legal advise on the WA

Can you not see that the chances of a no deal being a fucking disaster for this country are extremely high

There lies another difference of opinion. Some, mostly remain supporters, think no deal will be a disaster and some, mostly leave supporters, think that no deal = disaster is an extension of Project Fear.

For those wanting an extension/deal then the action of the 21 MPs could be seen as making the situation worse. In their sheer determination to prevent a no deal they couldn't see or couldn't care that they have now created an complete and utter impasse, and the EU have also said as much - all options are pretty much exhausted. JC needs to agree to a GE today.

I agree that politicians should be uniting behind Brexit and making all the necessary preparations so that the benefits of leaving can be realised

But this takes us back to the leave campaigns inability to state what these tangible benefits really are.

Perhaps if the Govt/leavers on here could write a list of what they are, the nation could get behind Johnson.

Corbyn (and other parties) won’t agree to an GE today as that would equal a no deal. I agree the position is at stalemate but no deal is a disaster which no one will recover from.

A few mumble about wanting a deal but not one is prepared to criticise No Deal.

Because it's turned into a bloody death cult.
Tragic what's happening to this country. I used to respect leavers, their reasons (however flawed those were in my eyes). Now I am unfathomably disappointed in their sectarian and destructive stance.
I want remain ideally but I support a deal. No deal is an act of SABOTAGE against this country. I would have thought leavers would be meeting remainers in that particular compromise (after accusing them of intransigence for 3 years !). No. They prefer to listen to the English equivalent of Rasputin.
Brain-washed the lot of them! Those who are quietly sat in the corner, the reasonable but quiet leavers who don't stand up against this shit are no better than collaborateurs.

No they can all fuck off.

I've yet to see one Leave supporter on here drop the rhetoric and say, we must avoid No Deal at all costs. Not one

Maybe leave supporters think that No Deal is better than No Brexit.

A few mumble about wanting a deal but not one is prepared to criticise No Deal

I prefer a Deal compared to No Deal, but would never cancel brexit if a deal can't be made.

It’s not a exactly a difference of opinion is it ? It’s facts v emotion/feelings. It’s largely experts - economists, most business leaders - who predict that it will indeed be an absolute disaster for the country versus the average layperson who let’s be honest does not on the whole know all the facts.
And that is the issue ...

Love it.
Boris sends two letters.
One say the correct wording, required by law.
Second, that we have no alternative plan that no extension is wanted and that there is no other way forward than no deal, that we will not revoke and while Parliament required the first letter the country if required to vote would again back a second leave vote ..

But this takes us back to the leave campaigns inability to state what these tangible benefits really are

Old, and now irrelevant, argument. Both leave and remain presented their arguments as to the advantages and disadvantages of being in the EU. Voters listed and chose which side had the most advantages. Result was leave the EU. So the majority thought that leaving the EU had more advantages than remaining.

Which advantages swayed the 17.4 million leave voters will never be known.

And why do you think we can't get a deal eh? Because the fucking ERG ONLY WANTS NO DEAL so it sell off UK companies and conduct their shady business without accountability to anyone, LEAST OF ALL THE PEOPLE.

I'd rather have a smooth exit from the the eu and I don't fear a no deal scenario.

I understand the need to play hard ball with the impervious, imperious eu.
It's very basic technique and it cannot be for filled with leaks, strategy being openly discussed, we have not got a chance of any good deal.
We have no chance of a good deal with remainer dominated parliament, practising stolkholm syndrome and being in cahoots with the masters holding us in.

I don't know why anyone is surprised by Boris strategy, keeping cards close to his chest.
What I cannot understand is why there isn't legislation to protect the people of this country from a situation such as this?
Speaker acting in his own interests and Parliament acting agaisnt a vote, in cahoots with for the purpose of this negotiation... The other side!!

I love Europe I want to get back on great terms with them but right now Brussels at least is the other side and our mps are behaving like dodgy estate agents giving the game away!

No they can all XXXX off

So much for democracy when how people choose to vote has to be pre-approved in advance by others.

@mummmy2017

Nice try but the Benn Act getting Royal Assent today is specific 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.