Apparently there's still time to agree a deal before 19 october

[StealthPolarBear]

But wouldn't a deal have to be approved by parliament? Which is prorogued?
Sorry to keep asking stupid brexit questions, I find explanations on here extremely useful.

Or is he negotiating a deal by the 19th which he hopes they'll then approve?

It still has to get through Parliament in a "meaningful vote".

I don't think it's impossible that a Northern Ireland only backstop will be agreed.

Wouldn't like to predict whether that will get through parliament. Lots of Tory MPs will vote against, quite possibly including some of the current cabinet.

But the timing-surely it can't go through parliament before the 19/10

Parliament will reconvene 14 October 2019.

MPs could accept the existing WA before 19 October by vote.

If not, then Johnson is required to request an extension to Article 50 under the recently passed new law. However, the EU is not obliged to agree to an extension and have previously stated that extensions will only be agreed if there are compelling reasons such as further referendum or a general election.

Further referendum has been ruled out by Parliament during the meaningful votes in the past. General election has been postponed and there is no agreement when it will happen,

So a difficult situation for the EU.

If EU does not agree to an extension, then UK leaves the EU without deal and all fingers will be pointed at the EU.

If EU do agree to an extension, even though UK will not have a further referendum and general election date is unknown, they are contradicting themselves.

All very strange

Thank you

I don't think it's impossible that a Northern Ireland only backstop will be agreed

For a vote on an NI only backstop, the WA will have to be changed and EU has said that it not going to happen. So how do these untested ideas ever reach the table?

But the timing-surely it can't go through parliament before the 19/10

If WA was accepted by MPs, UK could ask for a short extension to Article 50 to allow time to complete formalities. Don't think the EU would object to that.

But the timing-surely it can't go through parliament before the 19/10

I think this is probably correct, because the Queen's speech has to be debated first.

But even if an extension is requested and granted, agreeing a WA renders an extension moot. So it's still, just, possible to leave on 31/10 but I think it is highly unlikely. A short extension would be required to get the necessary legislation in place.

Sorry I'm not explaining this very well. How can Boris get a deal agreed by 19/10 when he has prorogued parliament until that very day?

There are two steps to agreeing a deal.

• an agreement in principle with the EU (possible during prorogation because proroguing only affects parliament not government, and it is the government that negotiates with the EU).

• the meaningful vote in parliament, which obviously can't happen during prorogation or even immediately after parliament reconvenes, because other business will take priority.

All this makes an extension inevitable - whether it is a short one to implement a WA agreed by parliament sometime between 19/10 and 31/10, or a longer one imposed by the Benn law.

OK thank you

Stealth When reading the responses on here, it's good to remind yourself that people come from a point of bias, so when you read things like this, remember the writer is looking at things from an extremely partial Leaver's viewpoint.

So a difficult situation for the EU.
If EU does not agree to an extension, then UK leaves the EU without deal and all fingers will be pointed at the EU.

People with half a brain will not be pointing the finger at the EU, but will be looking at the ineptitude of our own government, which chose to suspend parliament at a time of crisis. Leavers are already starting the 'blame the EU' rhetoric because they know this is a massive fuck up. It's important not to be taken in by this type of propaganda and to call it out when you spot it...

Tbh I am more interested in the practicalities for what to me seemed like an impossible situation.

@twofingerstoEverything

Boris would be ecstatic if he could say;

"EU forced us out without a deal"

as keeps the following groups happy;

DUP
ERG
No deal only supporters
Leave supporters who prefer no deal to no brexit

No need for a general election either. So Boris stays till 2022

There will be an election one way or another. If the EU refused the extension Labour would table a vote of no confidence I would imagine.

If the EU refused the extension Labour would table a vote of no confidence I would imagine

How would EU refusal to extend Article 50 be grounds for a vote on no confidence against UK Government?

Given we will almost certainly have a GE in November, the EU could agree to an extension based on on this.

Johnson has never had any intention of getting a deal, he believes he has to out brexit the brexit party and any form of the WA does not do that.

Actually Johnson just has to get past 31st October and have "left" to nullify the Brexit party. They're not likely to get very far arguing about the intellectual purity of whether or not the Brexit was hard enough if BJ can then cling on to 2022.

Because the government's handling of the situation (ultimately resulting in the EU's decision) has caused the most fundamental split in parliament ever seen. BJ has no majority, how can a minority government function for 3 years?

How can Johnson not ask the EU for an extension? and how can he stay in office with no majority at all?

He can only hope the EU turn down his request but just asking for one when he has said he'd "rather be dead in ditch" is a problem of credibility for him.

He can only hope the EU turn down his request but just asking for one when he has said he'd "rather be dead in ditch" is a problem of credibility for him

Makes me wonder if he has a secret up his sleeve to get around the new paw that was passed?

He brings back the WA with a minor tweak. Labour know they can't not vote for it again or it really will be leaving with no deal. ERG will hate it but will have left (and can be thrown out of conservative party for voting against - at least in theory agreed with cabinet). Minor tweak, new name and gone.

Tbh I am more interested in the practicalities for what to me seemed like an impossible situation.

I took the OP's question as a purely practical non-partisan question.

It's a good question actually.

ERG will hate it but will have left (and can be thrown out of conservative party for voting against - at least in theory agreed with cabinet).

Would Johnson throw them out? There seemed to be one rule for moderate Tories, and quite another for the ERG. I know who I regarded as the most genuine Tories.

Based on Johnson's discussions in Ireland yesterday, it looked like a NI backstop with an all-island animal health and food safety regime was a possibility. However, it also sounded like Johnson might try and include impossible conditions to that, such as the assembly having control over triggering the backstop, which effectively would give control to the DUP.

However, today Foster and Dodds met Johnson after which Foster released a statement saying Johnson is opposed to a NI only backstop. A spokesman for Johnson said the same.

In the meantime, Phil Hogan stated that there has been movement.

So basically, nobody knows what's going on. Presumably Johnson is playing some sort of machiavellian game that could result in everybody getting badly burned. I really don't think he is as clever as he thinks he is, which is a very dangerous situation to be in.

I'm back to think no deal. He'll pull some sort of fast one that means he doesn't have to ask for an extension and then crash out.