Another new Brexit thread

[M18CTID]

I'll believe it when I see it from the EUs side tbh mate.
Johnson's actions over the last month or so have eradicated any belief or trust in his words I have. If he's willing to Iie to the Queen why would he be truthful to you or me?

Oh, I'm not hanging on his every word - far from it - but I still feel there's a bit to play out yet

 

[aguerrrroooooooooooo]

Oh, I'm not hanging on his every word - far from it - but I still feel there's a bit to play out yet

We shall see, I'm not holding my breath that a deal will be struck

 

[west didsblue]

The suspicion is that BoJo will look to agree something that stuffs NI and breaks the GFA. This will force either the EU or the HoC to vote it out. He will then demand an election and resign as PM but not as Party Leader. That forces no deal or Corbyn (most likely) to step in and get an extension but an election will be inevitable.

All this is just BoJo looking for his best route into the election. The deal or lack off is just a prop, he doesn't really care what is in it as he knows it will fail in the HoC - the timing is of more importance.

As long as he's got his 10 point lead over Labour he'll carry on with this strategy. He really doesn't care about anything except securing himself the PM job for the long term.

 

[M18CTID]

We shall see, I'm not holding my breath that a deal will be struck

Me neither

 

[M18CTID]

When we triggered A50 and were confidently demanding that the EU give us a good deal or be crushed a no deal Brexit was dismissed as cloudcuckooland and ‘project fear’. Fast forward nearly three years and it’s Govt policy.

Everytime we double down on Brexit we get an equally strong counter response. If a no deal Brexit is fine then revoking A50 is fine. They are opposite ends of the spectrum. If a major party can embrace no deal as legitimate policy then another party will embrace its alter ego of revoke. Each drives the other. And as people get used to the idea of no deal or revoke they get comfortable with the idea and no longer see them as extreme but as a simple solution. The longer it continues then no deal will morph into breaking off all diplomatic ties with some EU countries and revoke will become adopting the Euro.

And if people think this is unlikely well we have already started ‘empty chairing’ EU ministerial meetings and skipping public press conferences so the direction of travel is clear.

All hypothetical until such a time as the Tories campaign for a GE on a No Deal ticket

 

[mat]

https://www.supremecourt.uk/live/court-01.html


Any legal geeks want to watch the Supreme Court proceedings.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

We shall see, I'm not holding my breath that a deal will be struck

Me neither

Not one that will ever get through the HoC - no. BoJo wants the deal path to fail so he can act the big man and push for No Deal. That is the narrative he wants going into an election ASAP.

If he does resign and the rest of the HoC form some sort of pact that sees a PM instated - one interesting thought is that this rebel government could play a long game. Deny BoJo his early election and for example open an inquiry in to brexit - release all the papers - start looking at a 2nd Ref with a soft deal etc. All to frustrate BoJo. A very difficult alliance to form but BoJos worst nightmare.

 

[west didsblue]

Not one that will ever get through the HoC - no. BoJo wants the deal path to fail so he can act the big man and push for No Deal. That is the narrative he wants going into an election ASAP.

If he does resign and the rest of the HoC form some sort of pact that sees a PM instated - one interesting thought is that this rebel government could play a long game. Deny BoJo his early election and for example open an inquiry in to brexit - release all the papers - start looking at a 2nd Ref with a soft deal etc. All to frustrate BoJo. A very difficult alliance to form but BoJos worst nightmare.

I think that's actually quite likely. A coalition that would see out the current term could do a lot to get the nation's mindset away from Brexit and make Brexit synonymous with uncertainty and division. The coalition could use the war chest set aside for Brexit to actually make a positive difference to people's lives. The fact that it would most likely be led by Corbyn wouldn't matter too much because he would know he could never get a majority to implement the policies that would be anathema to the Lib Dems, ex-Cons and much of the population. At the end of that who in their right mind would vote for a party whose policy would be to crash out with No Deal?

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

That’s not necessarily accurate. Article 50 says that a member state can leave in accordance with its own constitutional arrangements. There is much scope for argument that a country cannot be taken unlawfully (in terms of its own constitutional arrangements) out of the EU. The principle that you can’t benefit from your own wrongful act is of course one that is recognised in our own law as well as in other legal systems. The law of the UK is that Boris is compelled to seek an extension in the circumstances envisaged in the Act, and as Lord Sumption said last night there doesn’t seem to be any wiggle room in the Act. If he unlawfully fails to comply, the principle that a member can leave in accordance with its own constitutional arrangements might be offended.

It is of course ultimately a matter on which the ECJ would have to pronounce, if it actually arose, and there are as always arguments both ways. But I think there is a respectable argument to the effect that an act of Martyrdom by Boris by simply refusing to comply with the law would not lead to us crashing out without a deal in any event.

The irony is not lost .....

 

[Neville Kneville]

Not one that will ever get through the HoC - no. BoJo wants the deal path to fail so he can act the big man and push for No Deal. That is the narrative he wants going into an election ASAP.

If he does resign and the rest of the HoC form some sort of pact that sees a PM instated - one interesting thought is that this rebel government could play a long game. Deny BoJo his early election and for example open an inquiry in to brexit - release all the papers - start looking at a 2nd Ref with a soft deal etc. All to frustrate BoJo. A very difficult alliance to form but BoJos worst nightmare.

This is all because they tried to hijack Brexit for extremists from day 1, rather than making it the cross party issue it should have been.

There is no way the majority of the Labour Party could have voted against an early withdrawal agreement which they themselves were involved in agreeing. They could even have agreed across Parliament, to implement the most popular agreement & come back with several options.

They made it an 'us v them' issue instead & half of the 'us' wanted no deal at all, from day one, so they needed Labour, to get through a deal they had no say in & didn't agree with.

That's the only reason we are still in the EU.

 

[Blue Hefner]

Don’t agree remain would win but what constitutes a landslide given a win by over 1 million votes last time wasn’t deemed enough?

I was thinking more in terms of % than numbers but If I was to pick a number I'd go 60/40 in favor of remain and bare in mind that if they do get into a position to offer a 2nd referendum then they would have been voted in so there will be an appetite for it

I also think that in any future campaign Leave would struggle, mainly because they would be campaigning on no-deal this time rather than, what turned out to be, a wish-list of possibilities which have proved to be un-deliverable

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

I think that's actually quite likely. A coalition that would see out the current term could do a lot to get the nation's mindset away from Brexit and make Brexit synonymous with uncertainty and division. The coalition could use the war chest set aside for Brexit to actually make a positive difference to people's lives. The fact that it would most likely be led by Corbyn wouldn't matter too much because he would know he could never get a majority to implement the policies that would be anathema to the Lib Dems, ex-Cons and much of the population. At the end of that who in their right mind would vote for a party whose policy would be to crash out with No Deal?

It must be what the Tories fear. They would have to continue to work together to stop no deal so the communication lines are open - the only issue is the range of characters that would have to work together. Luciana Berger, Chukka and various former tories forced to sit alongside Corbyn etc. Loads of obstacles in the way as they all slag each other off routinely, Jo Swinson laying into Corbyn this week - but, if they thrash out what can be achieved, i.e. cancel all the no deal planning and spend the money on schools and police etc, a full blown inquiry in to brexit and vote leave funding - all gravy. Unlikely but one of the options on the table.

 

[Magicpole]

I’m watching the case at the Supreme and the barrister presenting the case has been pulled up about five times for not having provided the correct page numbers and supporting documents. What an absolute fuck up and somebody will be getting their arse kicked. Totally amateurish presentation failing to have their case in order. Shambles.

It shouldn’t affect the points of law but it doesn’t look as if they have lined up the Ducks, or most importantly, haven’t shown on the papers where they are.

 

[BobKowalski]

All hypothetical until such a time as the Tories campaign for a GE on a No Deal ticket

It’s Govt policy to leave on the 31st October with or without a deal. Nothing hypothetical about it.

 

[M18CTID]

It’s Govt policy to leave on the 31st October with or without a deal. Nothing hypothetical about it.

They're not 100% pursuing No Deal though are they?

 

[BobKowalski]

They're not 100% pursuing No Deal though are they?

21 Tory rebels and the opposition parties in Parliament would seem to disagree.

To facilitate an agreement we need to present workable proposals on alternatives for the backstop. With 45 days to go none have been presented. We have been negotiating for two and a half years. The only deal getting done in the next 45 days is the one that is already on the table or one with an alternative backstop that has already been agreed with the EU.

Everything else is just noise.

 

[1.618034]

I’m watching the case at the Supreme and the barrister presenting the case has been pulled up about five times for not having provided the correct page numbers and supporting documents. What an absolute fuck up and somebody will be getting their arse kicked. Totally amateurish presentation failing to have their case in order. Shambles.

It shouldn’t affect the points of law but it doesn’t look as if they have lined up the Ducks, or most importantly, haven’t shown on the papers where they are.

Seems like it's because the Judges/Justices? have electronic versions vs his paper version. You also have to understand that this has had to be done in a relative hurry, so all ducks/pages not lined up.

It's not great but hardly "amateurish".

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

Not one that will ever get through the HoC - no. BoJo wants the deal path to fail so he can act the big man and push for No Deal. That is the narrative he wants going into an election ASAP.

If he does resign and the rest of the HoC form some sort of pact that sees a PM instated - one interesting thought is that this rebel government could play a long game. Deny BoJo his early election and for example open an inquiry in to brexit - release all the papers - start looking at a 2nd Ref with a soft deal etc. All to frustrate BoJo. A very difficult alliance to form but BoJos worst nightmare.

That whole scenario sounds great to me

 

[cibaman]

No. The Queen appoints the Cabinet on the recommendation of the Prime Minister. That would be fun.

I’m not certain, but I think you’re wrong. She would be sacking Johnson because he would be unable to do the job. But that doesn’t mean that the government has to fall. The contempt of court would be on Johnson, not the cabinet, who weren’t involved in the decision to prorogue. Surely the situation would be more like if Johnson fell under a bus? The Queen would simply send for another member of the cabinet. Of course Corbyn could call a motion of no confidence in that PM, if parliament is sitting. But he could do that anyway.

 

[George Hannah]

Just thought I'd drop in the cases against and for Boris' prorogation for political advantage as seen by a couple of experts

Lord Pannick, QC, believes those seeking a judicial review of the decision to suspend parliament have every chance of success.

Last month Sir John Major, the former prime minister, threatened such a move.

Lord Pannick has written in The Times: “The courts would not entertain a challenge to a personal decision by the Queen, because she, the head of the UK’s constitutional structure, is immune from legal process.”

However, he said what could be challenged “is the legality of the advice on prorogation given by the prime minister”.

According to the QC, Sir John and any other claimants “would need to show that the advice breaches a fundamental legal principle” — and one potentially would be the sovereignty of parliament.

Lord Pannick represented Gina Miller in the Supreme Court case that forced Theresa May’s government to put the Article 50 trigger to a parliamentary vote.

He pointed to three pillars of a potential legal challenge: the prime minister has sought to prorogue parliament to avoid parliamentary sovereignty on an issue of constitutional importance; Mr Johnson has attempted to stop parliament sitting on the brink of the Brexit deadline; and he has tried to evade parliament because it has previously made clear its wish to prevent a no-deal Brexit.

Lord Pannick added: “If he were to advise the Queen to prorogue parliament in these circumstances, the courts would be likely to hear an urgent application and then declare his advice to be unlawful.”

He concluded that while such a ruling meant that “parliamentary democracy would be restored”, there would still be doubt over what MPs would be able to do about the wider issue of Brexit.

The peer said that Mr Johnson “would be likely to suffer the political equivalent of the fate of Charles I, the last ruler to attempt to close down parliament because it stood in the way of his political objectives.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lord Sumption on Boris Johnson’s prorogation of parliament: the legal case for


The former Supreme Court justice Lord Sumption, who retired last December, told The Times: “The government will undoubtedly face a legal challenge.
“Some will consider what the prime minister has announced to be a disgrace and they will see the courts as the place to go,” continued the outspoken former senior judge.However, Lord Sumption, who is also a respected historian, said that while it may be unconventional to prorogue parliament as the Brexit deadline looms, doing so is entirely legal.

“I don’t think what the prime minister has said he is going to do is unlawful,” he said.

“It might be considered unconstitutional in as much as it might be argued to be contrary to a longstanding convention of the constitution.

“But the question is whether what the prime minister has done is a legal or political disgrace. Is what he has announced the subject of legal rules or of historical convention?

“The only objection is that the decision has been taken for questionable political motives. But that is not something the courts should rule on.”

And as Lord Sumption wrote for The Times last month: “Judicial review is concerned with acts of public bodies that are said to be unlawful. Conventions are different. They are rules but not legal rules and breach of them is not necessarily contrary to law.

“Conventions are customary rules of practice, supported by a consensus of opinion, whose force derives from the fact that it would be politically costly to disregard them.”

Ultimately, said Lord Sumption, “the problem lies in the awkward position of the Queen. She plainly ought not to act inconsistently with either the law or the conventions of the constitution, and presumably she would not wish to. But, in practice, she is likely to follow the advice of her ministers even if it is unconstitutional.”

Lord Sumption on Brexit about 10 minutes in here - brilliant analysis
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0005f05

Pannick is looking invincible in his opening submissions - appearances are deceptive I think - see Newsnight discussion 11 minutes in
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0008lff/newsnight-16092019