The Brexit Arms

[BrexitArmsLandlady]

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

Go BoJo!
Go BoJo!
Go BoJo!
Go BoJo!

So near & yet so far..............

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

George Osborne doesn’t agree on the VONC.
www.mumsnet.com/uploads/talk/201909/large-215498-image.jpg

I posted this on another thread a while back. I think Osborne is right. Why would the opposition give Boris what he wants. How naive does he think they are.

Why would the opposition give Boris what he wants.

It has nothing to do with 'giving Boris what he wants' - that is childish party politicking.

It is about giving the electorate the opportunity to eject the current Parliamentary configuration and install a fresh one.

Yes but why would he expect them to go along with a timetable that may result in a no deal Brexit

They could have had the GE before the 31sr Oct (the two occasions prior to prorog where they played politics instead)

Now it isn't possible to have it by then.
But they can VONC, install caretaker PM & that PM can request extension from EU.

Once extension approved, vote for GE.

The only reason they are not doing this is because they are still playing games: arguing over who gets to be PM & delighting in 'binding the hands of BJ' & 'humiliating him as much as poss'

Under the FTPA if Parliament votes for a GE then the PM gets to choose the date of the election. They didn’t trust BJ to set a date that would allow for a GE prior to 31 Oct. Given the unlawful prorogation of Parliament I can understand why they may have been doubtful about his intentions.

If opposition were confident they would win a GE it makes no difference what Johnson might have been planning. A GE takes place, Labour wins and JC is PM. Then no deal is off table. Easy.

They did not want a GE because there are two possible outcomes;

Cons get a majority

Coalition between BP and Cons.

Remember that GE are won on seat as opposed to %. So far there is no evidence the 406-410 constituencies who voted leave have changed their minds.

A majority of that magnitude can get any laws repealed. So the Benn Act is binned and UK returns to the same position as before.

EU may not agree to an extension beyond 31 Oct 2019 is another possibility. How many times have they said extensions can be granted for reasons such as another referendum or GE? Lots.

So if EU grant an extension, even if UK is not having another referendum or GE, what reasons will they give?

Or simply they didn’t trust BJ to set the date of the general election more than 25 days prior to 31st Oct meaning that a no deal Brexit would happen prior to the GE.

The opposition can only exercise any control over the date of the GE by refusing to vote for one. As soon as Parliament votes for a GE BJ is in sole control of when it happens (as long as he allows for the standard length of campaign).

So the HoC votes for a GE in early Sept and BJ sets the date for first Thursday in November. No deal happens whilst Parliament is dissolved.

Or simply they didn’t trust BJ to set the date of the general election more than 25 days prior to 31st Oct meaning that a no deal Brexit would happen prior to the GE

A one line bill which sets the date gets around that. However, as GE was blocked there was no point of such bill.

The Benn Act requires Johnson to request an extension to Jan 2020, but does not compel EU to agree. Even if EU does agree, UK will be in same position in Jan 2020 as it was before the Benn Act was passed.

If EU grant extensions, even though UK is not conducting a further referendum or a GE, the no deal MP's will argue that EU is waving the white flag. The logic would be that it proves EU is afraid of no deal (39 Billion lost apparently) and the reason for the extension is to prolong the time UK has to pay 1 billion per month of taxpayers money to EU.

Mystery do you think if we leave without WA in place that we won't be paying the EU anything ?

A one line bill has to go through the Lords and can be amended as it goes. And I doubt Johnson would risk any legislation that could easily have an attempted amendment for, say, a PV attached to it.

Mystery do you think if we leave without WA in place that we won't be paying the EU anything

That's the legal position apparently. However, not helpful if UK wants to trade with EU in the future.

PV attached to it

That was ruled out during the meaningful (or meaningless) votes.

So if people have changed their minds the two mechanisms have been removed as further referendum and GE are ruled out.

A lot has changed since those meaningful votes. Including MPs being dumped out of the Tory fold.

As all the ardent Brexiteers are about to find out, Johnson will bring back a rebranded WA, call it his work and they are all being backed into a corner to support it.

Think PV is on back burner while MPs wait to see what Johnson does next as only 3 weeks to 19 Oct when UK PM has to seek an extension from EU.

It's only on the back burner if Johnson can keep it there.

As all the ardent Brexiteers are about to find out, Johnson will bring back a rebranded WA, call it his work and they are all being backed into a corner to support it.

And IMO it's likely that the opposition will try to amend any bill to include a PV. The current parliamentary arithmetic has greatly improved the chances of this passing.

Under the FTPA if Parliament votes for a GE then the PM gets to choose the date of the election. They didn’t trust BJ to set a date that would allow for a GE prior to 31 Oct. Given the unlawful prorogation of Parliament I can understand why they may have been doubtful about his intentions.

And as has been repeatedly pointed out - they could have put forward a one line bill with the date on it to stop that.

BJ did not have the numbers in HoC to amend it & the HoL would not have done so either.
Once it had passed & been given assent the date would have been unchangeable

And as has been repeatedly pointed out - they could have put forward a one line bill with the date on it to stop that.

Opposition can't simply put forward a bill. The government would have to do that. You might ask yourself why they don't.

As all the ardent Brexiteers are about to find out, Johnson will bring back a rebranded WA, call it his work and they are all being backed into a corner to support it.

Leave posters on here have repeatedly said this was what they thought would happen, Farage & Brexit Party have said the same

There will be no surprises if & when this happens

It was (I think) one of the reasons for new session - because Bercow shat all over the certainty that it could be brought back again in this session

You might ask yourself why they don't

If HoC is against a GE, fixing the date is a bit pointless. A vote for GE has to happen first before the date is decided.

Opposition can't simply put forward a bill. The government would have to do that. You might ask yourself why they don't.

They can (& in fact they did - on more than one occasion - Benn bill being most recent example)

The opposition have control of the house now.

I know why the gov didn't bring it (because the opposition would have added amendments) but the opposition could easily have done it.

As all the ardent Brexiteers are about to find out, Johnson will bring back a rebranded WA, call it his work and they are all being backed into a corner to support it

Labour voted against the WA three times almost unanimously. As they are now a remain party I can't see them voting for any form of WA?

He's backing you all into a corner. And you are all lapping it up.