What is this obsession with who writes the extension letter? The letter is a lie anyway. It purports to be a request from the PM. It is not. It is not from the government. It is not from the Cabinet. It may as well be signed by its actual instigators in the HOC or even better John Bercow on their behalf. I hope that the letter meets a fitting end-burnt in the grate at Downing St or given to the Downing St dog.
Indeed.
Which is why the idea that Boris sending the letter under duress and threat of imprisonment by Remainer MPs will mean he gets blamed in the same way May did is nonsense.
Question is, if Boris does send the letter will the Opposition then agree to the election as promised? Or will they wait for the opinion polls to start moving?
On Twitter today, Julia Hartley Brewer, Isabel Oakshott and Andrew Lilico have all said they would withdraw their support for Boris if he extends. It isn't viable.
Two out of three are attention-seeking loudmouths (and in the case of Lilco probably a borderline psychopath)
JHB surprises me as she's normally sensible. I suspect she'll change her mind during the cut and thrust of an election campaign as the choices are layed out before her...
JHB surprises me as she's normally sensible. I suspect she'll change her mind during the cut and thrust of an election campaign as the choices are layed out before her...
She will have the choice between a serial liar and loser, or Nigel Fucking Farage
Would there be anything to make the following letter to the EU be unlawful?
Dear Jean Claude Juncker and Ursula von der Leyen,
Under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act (No 2) 2019 the Parliament of Westminster has instructed the UK goverment to send you a letter requesting an extension, please see attached.
You are aware of the UK government's opinion regarding an extension but if an extension is granted the United Kingdom government will be required to nominate a new EU Commissioner. If an extension is granted then the United Kingdom intends to nominate Nigel Farage MEP as European Commissioner.
Your Sincerely, Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
If the nominee is required to be a Tory for some reason maybe replace with Bill Cash or Iain Duncan Smith etc
Would there be anything to make the following letter to the EU be unlawful?
Dear Jean Claude Juncker and Ursula von der Leyen,
Under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act (No 2) 2019 the Parliament of Westminster has instructed the UK goverment to send you a letter requesting an extension, please see attached.
You are aware of the UK government's opinion regarding an extension but if an extension is granted the United Kingdom government will be required to nominate a new EU Commissioner. If an extension is granted then the United Kingdom intends to nominate Nigel Farage MEP as European Commissioner.
Your Sincerely, Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
If the nominee is required to be a Tory for some reason maybe replace with Bill Cash or Iain Duncan Smith etc
Yes - the Act sets out the terms of the letter to be sent. The PM can't also then write stuff which is intended to frustrate the purpose of the Act. This was clearly explained some time ago by Lord Sumption.
What is this obsession with who writes the extension letter? The letter is a lie anyway. It purports to be a request from the PM. It is not. It is not from the government. It is not from the Cabinet. It may as well be signed by its actual instigators in the HOC or even better John Bercow on their behalf. I hope that the letter meets a fitting end-burnt in the grate at Downing St or given to the Downing St dog.
Indeed.
Which is why the idea that Boris sending the letter under duress and threat of imprisonment by Remainer MPs will mean he gets blamed in the same way May did is nonsense.
Question is, if Boris does send the letter will the Opposition then agree to the election as promised? Or will they wait for the opinion polls to start moving?
On Twitter today, Julia Hartley Brewer, Isabel Oakshott and Andrew Lilico have all said they would withdraw their support for Boris if he extends. It isn't viable.
He has to extend, under the law of the land, if he fails to get a deal.
What is this obsession with who writes the extension letter? The letter is a lie anyway. It purports to be a request from the PM. It is not. It is not from the government. It is not from the Cabinet. It may as well be signed by its actual instigators in the HOC or even better John Bercow on their behalf. I hope that the letter meets a fitting end-burnt in the grate at Downing St or given to the Downing St dog.
Indeed.
Which is why the idea that Boris sending the letter under duress and threat of imprisonment by Remainer MPs will mean he gets blamed in the same way May did is nonsense.
Question is, if Boris does send the letter will the Opposition then agree to the election as promised? Or will they wait for the opinion polls to start moving?
On Twitter today, Julia Hartley Brewer, Isabel Oakshott and Andrew Lilico have all said they would withdraw their support for Boris if he extends. It isn't viable.
He has to extend, under the law of the land, if he fails to get a deal.
On topic Fox hunting fan. In London. Avoid with betting $$$
I don't expect his programme will include setting up meets in Kensington Gardens, although to be fair anything which helped reduce the nuisance of foxes on London streets should be quite popular.
No, but it will be hammered at by Khan. The Tory manifesto bilge of a foxy free vote was part of the 2017 debacle. Rory attends (legal) hunt meetings and is a keen pro hunter. It will go down in metropolitan luvvie millenial London like a cup of cold sick
.
A few thoughts:-
1. A shame Rory will be leaving Cumbria. He was a good spokesman for his constituency. 2. He must be assuming that there will be a GE before next May. Either that or he will resign his seat and there will be a by-election. Otherwise he can't possibly combine being London Mayor (assuming he wins, unlikely as that may be) with being a Cumbrian MP. 3. He voted to Remain but has accepted the referendum result. That does allow him to say to the Lib Dems that he respects the result unlike them. Even people like me who have turned towards the Lib Dems and who would prefer to remain are uneasy about a policy to revoke Art 50 without more and even more uneasy about Swinson's statement that if there were to be a referendum with another Leave result she would ignore it. 4. How much this will matter depends on whether there has been a deal or an extension by next May. He can say, unlike the Lib Dems, that he has voted for a deal precisely because he wanted to avoid No Deal. He didn't just talk on this; he voted in accordance with what he was saying and for something. That makes him relatively rare amongst many of those who are loudest in complaining about a No Deal Brexit. 5. As an ex-prisons Minister he has interesting stuff to say on crime and this is where Khan could be vulnerable.
The odds are against him but I welcome his entrance into the race.
We are very fortunate, Ms Cyclefree, that you continue to post. Much more thoughtful than many of the posters.
(You can send the cheque later!)
I will treat you to the coffee of your choice (sprinkled with chocolate marshmallows and pineapple slices for all I care) - and even cake - the next time you visit this wonderful place!!
Very kind. Thanks. However, I take my coffee as it supposed to be; black and unadorned.
What a sensible choice. The offer still stands, though. Genuinely.
What is this obsession with who writes the extension letter? The letter is a lie anyway. It purports to be a request from the PM. It is not. It is not from the government. It is not from the Cabinet. It may as well be signed by its actual instigators in the HOC or even better John Bercow on their behalf. I hope that the letter meets a fitting end-burnt in the grate at Downing St or given to the Downing St dog.
Indeed.
Which is why the idea that Boris sending the letter under duress and threat of imprisonment by Remainer MPs will mean he gets blamed in the same way May did is nonsense.
Question is, if Boris does send the letter will the Opposition then agree to the election as promised? Or will they wait for the opinion polls to start moving?
On Twitter today, Julia Hartley Brewer, Isabel Oakshott and Andrew Lilico have all said they would withdraw their support for Boris if he extends. It isn't viable.
Two out of three are attention-seeking loudmouths (and in the case of Lilco probably a borderline psychopath)
JHB surprises me as she's normally sensible. I suspect she'll change her mind during the cut and thrust of an election campaign as the choices are layed out before her...
The choice will be
1. If you want to Leave - Vote Con.
2. Remain - Vote for anyone else.
Johnson bending over backwards for the DUP won't impress JHB.
JHB surprises me as she's normally sensible. I suspect she'll change her mind during the cut and thrust of an election campaign as the choices are layed out before her...
She will have the choice between a serial liar and loser, or Nigel Fucking Farage
What is this obsession with who writes the extension letter? The letter is a lie anyway. It purports to be a request from the PM. It is not. It is not from the government. It is not from the Cabinet. It may as well be signed by its actual instigators in the HOC or even better John Bercow on their behalf. I hope that the letter meets a fitting end-burnt in the grate at Downing St or given to the Downing St dog.
Indeed.
Which is why the idea that Boris sending the letter under duress and threat of imprisonment by Remainer MPs will mean he gets blamed in the same way May did is nonsense.
Question is, if Boris does send the letter will the Opposition then agree to the election as promised? Or will they wait for the opinion polls to start moving?
On Twitter today, Julia Hartley Brewer, Isabel Oakshott and Andrew Lilico have all said they would withdraw their support for Boris if he extends. It isn't viable.
Two out of three are attention-seeking loudmouths (and in the case of Lilco probably a borderline psychopath)
JHB surprises me as she's normally sensible. I suspect she'll change her mind during the cut and thrust of an election campaign as the choices are layed out before her...
The choice will be
1. If you want to Leave - Vote Con.
2. Remain - Vote for anyone else.
I think they represent a significant chunk of the Leave vote and will take them with them to the Brexit Party. Boris has to keep his hands clean from any extension.
Would there be anything to make the following letter to the EU be unlawful?
Dear Jean Claude Juncker and Ursula von der Leyen,
Under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act (No 2) 2019 the Parliament of Westminster has instructed the UK goverment to send you a letter requesting an extension, please see attached.
You are aware of the UK government's opinion regarding an extension but if an extension is granted the United Kingdom government will be required to nominate a new EU Commissioner. If an extension is granted then the United Kingdom intends to nominate Nigel Farage MEP as European Commissioner.
Your Sincerely, Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
If the nominee is required to be a Tory for some reason maybe replace with Bill Cash or Iain Duncan Smith etc
Not sure it would serve much purpose.
European Commissioners are formally nominated by the European Council, albeit based on the recommendations of national Governments.
They can also be rejected by the European Parliament, and indeed two (Rovana Plumb of Romania and Laszlo Trocsanyi of Hungary) were rejected this year. These were on conflict of interest grounds rather than simply "don't like them" but I suspect grounds to reject could be found.
Finally, the President of the European Commission could effectively sideline a Commissioner in whom she had no confidence in a meaningless role.
I agree Rory is a big lay oppertunity. He'll get huge nedia coverage, raise loads of money, shine in all the debates and will quickly be judged to be the best candidate then the best actual Mayor ( which on some metrics he is ). He'll then save his deposit and get an objectively very resppectable result for an Independent coming from a 7 month standing start but relatively underperform the hype. I'd be looking at Betfair lay oppertunities associated with media bubbles and early polling surges.
Would there be anything to make the following letter to the EU be unlawful?
Dear Jean Claude Juncker and Ursula von der Leyen,
Under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act (No 2) 2019 the Parliament of Westminster has instructed the UK goverment to send you a letter requesting an extension, please see attached.
You are aware of the UK government's opinion regarding an extension but if an extension is granted the United Kingdom government will be required to nominate a new EU Commissioner. If an extension is granted then the United Kingdom intends to nominate Nigel Farage MEP as European Commissioner.
Your Sincerely, Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
If the nominee is required to be a Tory for some reason maybe replace with Bill Cash or Iain Duncan Smith etc
EU law requires all Commissioners to uphold the principles of the Treaties, including that of working towards ever closer union. It thus isn't legal for a eurosceptic to be a Commissioner and the European Parliament would vote him down on that basis.
If it's offered to him and he refuses to take the oath, then the post will either remain vacant or they'll appoint somebody as a stand-in
Plus, he would be quite a good commissioner. He'd fuck around, make entertaining speeches, and just generally be an ineffectual nuisance. And would thus be an improvement on some.
I've mentioned this before but it bears repeating: the European Parliament has got actual fascists in it: genuinely scary people who are either violent or can access the violent. The prospect of an English Eurosceptic giving sarcastic speeches really isn't scary, or even bothersome.
Would there be anything to make the following letter to the EU be unlawful?
Dear Jean Claude Juncker and Ursula von der Leyen,
Under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act (No 2) 2019 the Parliament of Westminster has instructed the UK goverment to send you a letter requesting an extension, please see attached.
You are aware of the UK government's opinion regarding an extension but if an extension is granted the United Kingdom government will be required to nominate a new EU Commissioner. If an extension is granted then the United Kingdom intends to nominate Nigel Farage MEP as European Commissioner.
Your Sincerely, Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
If the nominee is required to be a Tory for some reason maybe replace with Bill Cash or Iain Duncan Smith etc
EU law requires all Commissioners to uphold the principles of the Treaties, including that of working towards ever closer union. It thus isn't legal for a eurosceptic to be a Commissioner and the European Parliament would vote him down on that basis.
I don't actually think that's right. A police officer or judge is required to uphold the law, but that doesn't preclude those who want to change the law (even very radically) from being police officers or judges. Indeed, I expect most people in their jobs do things they don't really believe in but it's their job so that's it.
However, as explained below, I think it's pretty likely a deliberately provocative nomination would be eased out by the Council of Europe refusing to nominate, or the Parliament refusing to approve, or the President of the Commission sidelining the person.
Big loss for Cumbria. On most metrics Rory is its best MP. A widely misconcieved county with huge demographic and economic challenges it needs good MPs. If he want to use his national fame and capacity he could have mounted a very serious local challlenge as an Independent MP candidate. And he'd be far more likely to be reelected than elected Mayor of London. Very frustrating.
Yep. I sort of agree. But the London media will now report his en marche far more than any bid he made in Cumbria.
Plus he says he did not want to stand against old tory mates in Cumbria. Presumably the newly selected candidate will be a local constituency worker and not some parachute job.
I wonder if the Tory PCC Peter McCall will go for it. Not my politics at all but he's very good, local and has limited incumbency as the PCC. And with the PCC post up next May him being the PPC for Penrith and the Border frees up the PCC post as a consolation prize.
I agree Rory is a big lay oppertunity. He'll get huge nedia coverage, raise loads of money, shine in all the debates and will quickly be judged to be the best candidate then the best actual Mayor ( which on some metrics he is ). He'll then save his deposit and get an objectively very resppectable result for an Independent coming from a 7 month standing start but relatively underperform the hype. I'd be looking at Betfair lay oppertunities associated with media bubbles and early polling surges.
Yawn. Next Tweet from a bloke with an opinion please.
He's talking nonsense anyway. Boris needs to indicate that the Benn act will not stop us leaving, or (thanks to the pond life in the Commons) he will have no negotiating position at all. Therefore, clearly he needs to hint that there is a way, without laying it out in step by step instructions.
Is an Act that stops us leaving legal? I don't mean this Act in particular, but in general wouldn't that mean one parliament trying to bind another?
I find it quite surprising that no leavers have tried to bring a court action that we are already in the EU unlawfully, what with Mr Brown having signed on the dotted line without the promised referendum.
Good afternoon, everyone.
The concept of no Parliament being able to bind a successor is simply that an Act cannot stipulate that it may not be repealed by a future Parliament.
So you could, in theory, pass an Act requiring repeated extension of the leaving date (unless and until a deal is reached or the EU refuse an extension) and that could continue into a future Parliament. But, crucially, the future Parliament could change or repeal that Act.
And, of course, there is lots of legislation passed many years ago by previous Parliaments that "bind" Parliament to the extent that they impact on its process and what it and the Government is able to do (but which they could repeal). The European Communities Act 1972 to give one example, and the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 to give another.
Thank you, that's interesting.
Was there ever a possibility of legal challenge to Mr Brown's signing us up without the promised referendum? I know they changed the name to get round those promises, but would that have stood up in court?
The state of the body politic would be rather healthier had MPs been less keen to throw their manifesto promises overboard when it came to the Lisbon/Constitution referendum.
Two out of three are attention-seeking loudmouths (and in the case of Lilco probably a borderline psychopath)
JHB surprises me as she's normally sensible. I suspect she'll change her mind during the cut and thrust of an election campaign as the choices are layed out before her...
The choice will be
1. If you want to Leave - Vote Con.
2. Remain - Vote for anyone else.
Edit to number 2 -
To Remain vote for whichever of Lab and LD have the best chance of winning your seat.
I hope when he loses decisively the resulting period of self reflection will be useful for Stewart. He strikes me as rather deluded at the moment.
He is trying to revive the art of compromise and centrist liberalism. It may turn out to be hopeless and the odds are against him winning the London Mayoralty. But far better to try and create a politics which seeks to find space in which disagreements can be resolved than what we have now from the main parties - the politics of extremism and "if you're not with us, you're against us" and preying on peoples' fears and worst instincts.
This whole spirit of the law thing, surely he can apply for an extension and tell the EU that the Boris Deal as presented is the only basis on which the UK will leave the EU with a deal? That's not frustrating the act, it's a factual statement of government policy (if they decide to make it so)
The courts will be awash with more attempts to make the bad man want the extension as much as they do. Make him say he loves it mummy, make the bad man say he loves the extension!
The courts will be awash with more attempts to make the bad man want the extension as much as they do. Make him say he loves it mummy, make the bad man say he loves the extension!
Point to where it hurt when the bad man said he wanted Brexit.
The courts will be awash with more attempts to make the bad man want the extension as much as they do. Make him say he loves it mummy, make the bad man say he loves the extension!
Point to where it hurt when the bad man said he wanted Brexit.
If this were really about avoiding no deal Brexit it would be very easy - they'd make Bercow have authority to send the letter via an act of parliament, or VONC and GNU sends it. But it's not, its about making Boris ask for it.
Try James Doleman aswell, that has a lot more of the judges questions and replies from the QCs .
You’ll see why I think the government case is falling apart . The afternoon session with the government QC is brutal !
Ah, thank you.
Yes follow James Doleman if you want to hear what a bitter Marxist republican with a thirst selectively tweets from the Court room....
Hm, three successive tweets of Mr Doleman's(sorry, not sure how to quote from within Twitter thread):
Webster "it cannot be clearer what the position of the Prime Minister is." Lord Pentland asks if this could be converted into a sworn statement, Webster seems very reluctant to agree this.
Lord Pentland "Why not give the undertakings," Webster "It's not necessary." Pentland "Why not just give them?" Webster "It wouldn't make a difference." Pentland "It would, it would lay the petitioners concerns to rest."
Lord Pentland "Public authorities often give undertakings, it's a legitimate question, and gives the court contempt jurisdiction." Webster disagrees Pentland "Are you suggesting the government and its officers are in a different position from ordinary members of the public?"
What is this obsession with who writes the extension letter? The letter is a lie anyway. It purports to be a request from the PM. It is not. It is not from the government. It is not from the Cabinet. It may as well be signed by its actual instigators in the HOC or even better John Bercow on their behalf. I hope that the letter meets a fitting end-burnt in the grate at Downing St or given to the Downing St dog.
Indeed.
Which is why the idea that Boris sending the letter under duress and threat of imprisonment by Remainer MPs will mean he gets blamed in the same way May did is nonsense.
Question is, if Boris does send the letter will the Opposition then agree to the election as promised? Or will they wait for the opinion polls to start moving?
On Twitter today, Julia Hartley Brewer, Isabel Oakshott and Andrew Lilico have all said they would withdraw their support for Boris if he extends. It isn't viable.
Isabel Oakeshott? Partner of Brexit Party chairman Richard Tice?
I hope when he loses decisively the resulting period of self reflection will be useful for Stewart. He strikes me as rather deluded at the moment.
He is trying to revive the art of compromise and centrist liberalism. It may turn out to be hopeless and the odds are against him winning the London Mayoralty. But far better to try and create a politics which seeks to find space in which disagreements can be resolved than what we have now from the main parties - the politics of extremism and "if you're not with us, you're against us" and preying on peoples' fears and worst instincts.
Well, you clearly value centrism far more highly than I do - I don't see how following the central point between too completely arbitrary poles is, in and of itself, desirable or even sensible.
But leaving that aside, I don't think Stewart is (at the moment) leadership material, or cabinet material. He strikes me as someone who will always wander toward the nearest spotlight, like Robert Kilroy Silk, and looks set to be forever launching new movements objecting to this or that, with himself at the helm. I don't wish that for him, I would like him to snap out of it, and end up using his not inconsiderable talents for a more useful purpose.
The petition of concern might be scrapped for Stormont on Brexit related issues , this would remove the DUP veto .
From the surrender act ! We give you Bozos capitulation deal !
Just sort out the customs issue and we could have a deal .
Although the unhinged DUP might now pull their support as they know longer can walk about with their pathetic sense of superiority!
Is the petition of concern system not something that came later than the GFA and so could be scrapped without breaching it? Or would its removal be interpreted as breaching the spirit of the GFA?
Two out of three are attention-seeking loudmouths (and in the case of Lilco probably a borderline psychopath)
JHB surprises me as she's normally sensible. I suspect she'll change her mind during the cut and thrust of an election campaign as the choices are layed out before her...
The choice will be
1. If you want to Leave - Vote Con.
2. Remain - Vote for anyone else.
Edit to number 2 -
To Remain vote for whichever of Lab and LD have the best chance of winning your seat.
The petition of concern might be scrapped for Stormont on Brexit related issues , this would remove the DUP veto .
From the surrender act ! We give you Bozos capitulation deal !
Just sort out the customs issue and we could have a deal .
Although the unhinged DUP might now pull their support as they know longer can walk about with their pathetic sense of superiority!
Is the petition of concern system not something that came later than the GFA and so could be scrapped without breaching it? Or would its removal be interpreted as breaching the spirit of the GFA?
You’ve got me there ! I really don’t know that answer but the DUP veto is a big issue for a deal .
If they can resolve that it really helps to get a deal . Problem is though whether the DUP will still support it.
I don't normally post about Youtube ads I see, but there was one just now "Freedom Hong Kong", featuring an umbrella smashed with a hammer (from a hammer and sickle) asking if the world would be tomorrow (Hong Kong being today).
I hope when he loses decisively the resulting period of self reflection will be useful for Stewart. He strikes me as rather deluded at the moment.
He is trying to revive the art of compromise and centrist liberalism. It may turn out to be hopeless and the odds are against him winning the London Mayoralty. But far better to try and create a politics which seeks to find space in which disagreements can be resolved than what we have now from the main parties - the politics of extremism and "if you're not with us, you're against us" and preying on peoples' fears and worst instincts.
Well, you clearly value centrism far more highly than I do - I don't see how following the central point between too completely arbitrary poles is, in and of itself, desirable or even sensible.
But leaving that aside, I don't think Stewart is (at the moment) leadership material, or cabinet material. He strikes me as someone who will always wander toward the nearest spotlight, like Robert Kilroy Silk, and looks set to be forever launching new movements objecting to this or that, with himself at the helm. I don't wish that for him, I would like him to snap out of it, and end up using his not inconsiderable talents for a more useful purpose.
I value liberalism, properly understood. That is very different from just being in the middle of two points. It is a misunderstanding of what liberalism is though it is an easy and lazy stereotype that is used against those who march under the banner of liberalism.
RE the London mayor The AV voting system really doesn't lend itself to a competitive(ish) four+ horse race.
If the Tory vote splits between 1Rory2Bailey and vice versa it is possible that neither of them makes the top 2, and the LibDem doesn't get any benefit of Tory/Rory transfers and there is a large block of wasted votes.
Which to a degree would make the polling key if people wanted to vote in a way that wasn't ultimately wasteful. Now I could well see the Evening Standard under Osborne being a cheerleader for Rory, and maybe one of the main commissioners of public polls, which could help Rory, but on the other hand you would have to assume there are a block of people out there who will vote for whoever has "Conservative" next to them on the ballot paper.
This has to point to Khan being a very strong buy.
I think Khan only loses if he gets less than 40% first preferences and there are large transfers of second preferences between Rory and Siobhan.
I don't normally post about Youtube ads I see, but there was one just now "Freedom Hong Kong", featuring an umbrella smashed with a hammer (from a hammer and sickle) asking if the world would be tomorrow (Hong Kong being today).
Quite surprised to see that.
Hong Kong demonstrators should win the Nobel Peace prize - but no doubt they will give it to Veruca Saltdottir.
RE the London mayor The AV voting system really doesn't lend itself to a competitive(ish) four+ horse race.
If the Tory vote splits between 1Rory2Bailey and vice versa it is possible that neither of them makes the top 2, and the LibDem doesn't get any benefit of Tory/Rory transfers and there is a large block of wasted votes.
Which to a degree would make the polling key if people wanted to vote in a way that wasn't ultimately wasteful. Now I could well see the Evening Standard under Osborne being a cheerleader for Rory, and maybe one of the main commissioners of public polls, which could help Rory, but on the other hand you would have to assume there are a block of people out there who will vote for whoever has "Conservative" next to them on the ballot paper.
This has to point to Khan being a very strong buy.
I think Khan only loses if he gets less than 40% first preferences and there are large transfers of second preferences between Rory and Siobhan.
Khan gets ~80 ? % of Berry transfers and maybe 40% of Benita ?
What portion of Benita tickets are 1. Benita, 2 Stewart.
The thing is, if I was the EU, I'd give him the extension anyway. It doesn't cost them anything, and the can is kicked. And if Dominic did come to Brussels to negotiate, I'm sure they could find some Greek with poor English for him to negotiate with.
It is the obvious move because it humiliates Johnson. Moral is not to make snidey punishment beating jokes at the expense of people who may slightly later in your career be in a position to administer punishment beatings to you.
Why would you humiliate someone you are currently in an active negotiation with?
It would be unprofessional and counterproductive.
The EU is in negotiations with the UK, not with Boris Johnson. It would be an entirely rational strategy to do things which you hoped might lead to his replacement as the UKs mouthpiece by someone you felt you could deal more constructively with.
Only if you are certain it would be successful. If you are going to strike you need to kill.
An argument against never in any circumstances doing anything whatever, given the impossibility of ever knowing what will work and what won't without trying it.
Not at all.
But trying to get your counterparty fired is a very aggressive move. If it doesn't work you will find it very difficult to have a productive relationship going forward.
Wings over Scotland also commissioned polls earlier in 2018 with a similar result but linking specifically to Brexit views as I recall (I can't find the ref in a hurry).
Wings over Scotland also commissioned polls earlier in 2018 with a similar result but linking specifically to Brexit views as I recall (I can't find the ref in a hurry).
They wouldn't, only if the choice was the UK in the EU or England and Wales only out of the EU.
In any case a 4.7% swing from the SNP to the Tories in an Aberdeen by election last night despite Brexit
Would there be anything to make the following letter to the EU be unlawful?
Dear Jean Claude Juncker and Ursula von der Leyen,
Under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act (No 2) 2019 the Parliament of Westminster has instructed the UK goverment to send you a letter requesting an extension, please see attached.
You are aware of the UK government's opinion regarding an extension but if an extension is granted the United Kingdom government will be required to nominate a new EU Commissioner. If an extension is granted then the United Kingdom intends to nominate Nigel Farage MEP as European Commissioner.
Your Sincerely, Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
If the nominee is required to be a Tory for some reason maybe replace with Bill Cash or Iain Duncan Smith etc
Yes - the Act sets out the terms of the letter to be sent. The PM can't also then write stuff which is intended to frustrate the purpose of the Act. This was clearly explained some time ago by Lord Sumption.
No one has every responded to my suggestion that he sets out what he intends to do with the extension: (i) to negotiate with the EU to secure a WA without the backstop as the backstop is not acceptable and (ii) prepare for No Deal.
That's being helpful not trying to frustrate the act. Well worded it could make it clear to the EU there is little point in extending.
Seeing that Katie Hopkin post has just converted me to a leaver. It is the only thing so far to have done it.
Fear not, like so many of her ilk KH is all fart and no follow through.
'Katie Hopkins threatened to "run naked" through the streets of London with a "sausage" up her bottom if Sadiq Khan won the London Mayoral election and following the confirmation of his victory the out-spoken star has hinted she'll stick to her word.'
3. He voted to Remain but has accepted the referendum result. That does allow him to say to the Lib Dems that he respects the result unlike them.
I think you mean "unlike London voters, who still want to remain".
I'm not convinced that's a compelling electoral pitch.
Somewhere between 30-40% of Londoners support leaving
If the LDs and Labour chew each other up he could sneak through. Narrow path but not impossible
If Boris does manage to implement Brexit, I have a strong suspicion that many Remainers will be so dispirited that getting them to the polling booth at all will take quite some effort.
"What's the point? if they couldn't stop Brexit, with everything in their favour...."
You seem to have a very strange idea of how remainers think. Many millions of people in the country, perhaps even a majority, simply believe that the UK is economically better off in the EU.
None of that is going to change once we leave. There will be a strong movement to rejoin as soon as we have left. Given the demographics, I expect it will succeed at some point in the next decade or two unless Brexit proves to be a runaway success and I think the chances of that are fairly remote.
The strategic error the leavers are making is that they seem to believe that once we are out they can sit back and that's the end of the matter. The way the whole process has been conducted has pretty much ensured the issue won't go away.
Whichever government comes in after the Conservatives is likely to be committed to EFTA or a rejoin referendum at the very least.
3. He voted to Remain but has accepted the referendum result. That does allow him to say to the Lib Dems that he respects the result unlike them.
I think you mean "unlike London voters, who still want to remain".
I'm not convinced that's a compelling electoral pitch.
Somewhere between 30-40% of Londoners support leaving
If the LDs and Labour chew each other up he could sneak through. Narrow path but not impossible
If Boris does manage to implement Brexit, I have a strong suspicion that many Remainers will be so dispirited that getting them to the polling booth at all will take quite some effort.
"What's the point? if they couldn't stop Brexit, with everything in their favour...."
You seem to have a very strange idea of how remainers think. Many millions of people in the country, perhaps even a majority, simply believe that the UK is economically better off in the EU.
None of that is going to change once we leave. There will be a strong movement to rejoin as soon as we have left. Given the demographics, I expect it will succeed at some point in the next decade or two unless Brexit proves to be a runaway success and I think the chances of that are fairly remote.
The strategic error the leavers are making is that they seem to believe that once we are out they can sit back and that's the end of the matter. The way the whole process has been conducted has pretty much ensured the issue won't go away.
Whichever government comes in after the Conservatives is likely to be committed to EFTA or a rejoin referendum at the very least.
Good luck flogging the reconditioned Betamax recorders of Rejoin.
I expect the EU might say we’ve had enough of this fiasco .
The extension is offered upto March 31st before the next budgets are being decided . Sort yourselves out but that’s it , no more extensions .
At that point you choose , deal , no deal or revoke .
Why would they delay that till next March? There is a deal, a no deal and revoke option now. There is no purpose to the delay, no time for a referendum.
I expect the EU might say we’ve had enough of this fiasco .
The extension is offered upto March 31st before the next budgets are being decided . Sort yourselves out but that’s it , no more extensions .
At that point you choose , deal , no deal or revoke .
Why would they delay that till next March? There is a deal, a no deal and revoke option now. There is no purpose to the delay, no time for a referendum.
Wings over Scotland also commissioned polls earlier in 2018 with a similar result but linking specifically to Brexit views as I recall (I can't find the ref in a hurry).
They wouldn't, only if the choice was the UK in the EU or England and Wales only out of the EU.
In any case a 4.7% swing from the SNP to the Tories in an Aberdeen by election last night despite Brexit
The point is that the DUP is blocking their nice precious Brexit, no?
And aqs for the by election, it was not a swing from SNP to Tory but a swing from conservative sensu lato to LD on the raw data (assuming the usual meaning of 'Independent' in that context as someone effectively a Tory but unwilling to admit it, on which I stand to be corrected, ditto also if not first preference in previous election)
In which case the Commons will pass the Boris Deal and the EU can then be blamed for No Deal
What annoys me is the constant haughtiness from the EU and unwillingness to play an active role. The UK has come back with a proposal, and the EU just responds with "no, try again" rather than make a counter offer.
Would there be anything to make the following letter to the EU be unlawful?
Dear Jean Claude Juncker and Ursula von der Leyen,
Under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act (No 2) 2019 the Parliament of Westminster has instructed the UK goverment to send you a letter requesting an extension, please see attached.
You are aware of the UK government's opinion regarding an extension but if an extension is granted the United Kingdom government will be required to nominate a new EU Commissioner. If an extension is granted then the United Kingdom intends to nominate Nigel Farage MEP as European Commissioner.
Your Sincerely, Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
If the nominee is required to be a Tory for some reason maybe replace with Bill Cash or Iain Duncan Smith etc
Yes - the Act sets out the terms of the letter to be sent. The PM can't also then write stuff which is intended to frustrate the purpose of the Act. This was clearly explained some time ago by Lord Sumption.
No one has every responded to my suggestion that he sets out what he intends to do with the extension: (i) to negotiate with the EU to secure a WA without the backstop as the backstop is not acceptable and (ii) prepare for No Deal.
That's being helpful not trying to frustrate the act. Well worded it could make it clear to the EU there is little point in extending.
That might work but the EU will still extend because of the general election . And on the second point that could be an issue as it could be seen as trying to elicit a no to the extension and thereby be seen to be frustrating the act .
In which case the Commons will pass the Boris Deal and the EU can then be blamed for No Deal
What annoys me is the constant haughtiness from the EU and unwillingness to play an active role. The UK has come back with a proposal, and the EU just responds with "no, try again" rather than make a counter offer.
Wings over Scotland also commissioned polls earlier in 2018 with a similar result but linking specifically to Brexit views as I recall (I can't find the ref in a hurry).
They wouldn't, only if the choice was the UK in the EU or England and Wales only out of the EU.
In any case a 4.7% swing from the SNP to the Tories in an Aberdeen by election last night despite Brexit
The point is that the DUP is blocking their nice precious Brexit, no?
And aqs for the by election, it was not a swing from SNP to Tory but a swing from conservative sensu lato to LD on the raw data (assuming the usual meaning of 'Independent' in that context as someone effectively a Tory but unwilling to admit it, on which I stand to be corrected, ditto also if not first preference in previous election)
The Ind was not ahead on first preferences last time, this was one con, one SNP defence, both held but Tories moved ahead on first prefs from second last time (to snp)
Yawn. Next Tweet from a bloke with an opinion please.
He's talking nonsense anyway. Boris needs to indicate that the Benn act will not stop us leaving, or (thanks to the pond life in the Commons) he will have no negotiating position at all. Therefore, clearly he needs to hint that there is a way, without laying it out in step by step instructions.
Is an Act that stops us leaving legal? I don't mean this Act in particular, but in general wouldn't that mean one parliament trying to bind another?
I find it quite surprising that no leavers have tried to bring a court action that we are already in the EU unlawfully, what with Mr Brown having signed on the dotted line without the promised referendum.
Good afternoon, everyone.
The concept of no Parliament being able to bind a successor is simply that an Act cannot stipulate that it may not be repealed by a future Parliament.
So you could, in theory, pass an Act requiring repeated extension of the leaving date (unless and until a deal is reached or the EU refuse an extension) and that could continue into a future Parliament. But, crucially, the future Parliament could change or repeal that Act.
And, of course, there is lots of legislation passed many years ago by previous Parliaments that "bind" Parliament to the extent that they impact on its process and what it and the Government is able to do (but which they could repeal). The European Communities Act 1972 to give one example, and the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 to give another.
Thank you, that's interesting.
Was there ever a possibility of legal challenge to Mr Brown's signing us up without the promised referendum? I know they changed the name to get round those promises, but would that have stood up in court?
It was only a manifesto promise and those have no legal standing.
Wings over Scotland also commissioned polls earlier in 2018 with a similar result but linking specifically to Brexit views as I recall (I can't find the ref in a hurry).
They wouldn't, only if the choice was the UK in the EU or England and Wales only out of the EU.
In any case a 4.7% swing from the SNP to the Tories in an Aberdeen by election last night despite Brexit
The point is that the DUP is blocking their nice precious Brexit, no?
And aqs for the by election, it was not a swing from SNP to Tory but a swing from conservative sensu lato to LD on the raw data (assuming the usual meaning of 'Independent' in that context as someone effectively a Tory but unwilling to admit it, on which I stand to be corrected, ditto also if not first preference in previous election)
The Ind was not ahead on first preferences last time, this was one con, one SNP defence, both held but Tories moved ahead on first prefs from second last time (to snp)
Wings over Scotland also commissioned polls earlier in 2018 with a similar result but linking specifically to Brexit views as I recall (I can't find the ref in a hurry).
They wouldn't, only if the choice was the UK in the EU or England and Wales only out of the EU.
In any case a 4.7% swing from the SNP to the Tories in an Aberdeen by election last night despite Brexit
The point is that the DUP is blocking their nice precious Brexit, no?
And aqs for the by election, it was not a swing from SNP to Tory but a swing from conservative sensu lato to LD on the raw data (assuming the usual meaning of 'Independent' in that context as someone effectively a Tory but unwilling to admit it, on which I stand to be corrected, ditto also if not first preference in previous election)
If the Tories are up 10% in Scotland at the next general election and the SNP up less than 1% as was the case in the Aberdeen by election last night, the Tories will be gaining SNP seats in Scotland not losing them
3. He voted to Remain but has accepted the referendum result. That does allow him to say to the Lib Dems that he respects the result unlike them.
I think you mean "unlike London voters, who still want to remain".
I'm not convinced that's a compelling electoral pitch.
Somewhere between 30-40% of Londoners support leaving
If the LDs and Labour chew each other up he could sneak through. Narrow path but not impossible
If Boris does manage to implement Brexit, I have a strong suspicion that many Remainers will be so dispirited that getting them to the polling booth at all will take quite some effort.
"What's the point? if they couldn't stop Brexit, with everything in their favour...."
You seem to have a very strange idea of how remainers think. Many millions of people in the country, perhaps even a majority, simply believe that the UK is economically better off in the EU.
None of that is going to change once we leave. There will be a strong movement to rejoin as soon as we have left. Given the demographics, I expect it will succeed at some point in the next decade or two unless Brexit proves to be a runaway success and I think the chances of that are fairly remote.
The strategic error the leavers are making is that they seem to believe that once we are out they can sit back and that's the end of the matter. The way the whole process has been conducted has pretty much ensured the issue won't go away.
Whichever government comes in after the Conservatives is likely to be committed to EFTA or a rejoin referendum at the very least.
This is correct. But the biggest danger is the EU having us back. If we flick from Europhilia to Euroscepticism every change of government they may just take a De Gaulle position. This is why it is so important for Remainers to accept the referendum and hold out an olive branch to Leavers. Because when we have the majority we will need the same.
3. He voted to Remain but has accepted the referendum result. That does allow him to say to the Lib Dems that he respects the result unlike them.
I think you mean "unlike London voters, who still want to remain".
I'm not convinced that's a compelling electoral pitch.
Somewhere between 30-40% of Londoners support leaving
If the LDs and Labour chew each other up he could sneak through. Narrow path but not impossible
If Boris does manage to implement Brexit, I have a strong suspicion that many Remainers will be so dispirited that getting them to the polling booth at all will take quite some effort.
"What's the point? if they couldn't stop Brexit, with everything in their favour...."
You seem to have a very strange idea of how remainers think. Many millions of people in the country, perhaps even a majority, simply believe that the UK is economically better off in the EU.
None of that is going to change once we leave. There will be a strong movement to rejoin as soon as we have left. Given the demographics, I expect it will succeed at some point in the next decade or two unless Brexit proves to be a runaway success and I think the chances of that are fairly remote.
The strategic error the leavers are making is that they seem to believe that once we are out they can sit back and that's the end of the matter. The way the whole process has been conducted has pretty much ensured the issue won't go away.
Whichever government comes in after the Conservatives is likely to be committed to EFTA or a rejoin referendum at the very least.
Good luck flogging the reconditioned Betamax recorders of Rejoin.
We won't need much good luck if Brexit is the horlicks I am expecting it to be and half a million youngsters joining the electoral roll each year.
As I said, your complacency will be your downfall. You are so blinkered that you cannot conceive that having experienced Brexit there won't ever be a majority for rejoining.
The whole basis of the GFA is that both communities find a consensus. Not majority rule, minority be damned.
Mr Varadkar said there were five ways to avoid a hard border – the reunification of Ireland; the Irish Republic re-joining the UK; the UK remaining in the single market or customs union; the border backstop mechanism; or the UK reversing the Brexit decision.
“There are one in five ways that this can be done, and at least four of those would be acceptable to the Irish government, but the best one is of course a backstop or some form of backstop, and that’s what we are trying to achieve,” he said.
Not ruling out the Irish Republic re-joining the UK then
Wings over Scotland also commissioned polls earlier in 2018 with a similar result but linking specifically to Brexit views as I recall (I can't find the ref in a hurry).
They wouldn't, only if the choice was the UK in the EU or England and Wales only out of the EU.
In any case a 4.7% swing from the SNP to the Tories in an Aberdeen by election last night despite Brexit
The point is that the DUP is blocking their nice precious Brexit, no?
And aqs for the by election, it was not a swing from SNP to Tory but a swing from conservative sensu lato to LD on the raw data (assuming the usual meaning of 'Independent' in that context as someone effectively a Tory but unwilling to admit it, on which I stand to be corrected, ditto also if not first preference in previous election)
If the Tories are up 10% in Scotland at the next general election and the SNP up less than 1% as was the case in the Aberdeen by election last night, the Tories will be gaining SNP seats in Scotland not losing them
Wings over Scotland also commissioned polls earlier in 2018 with a similar result but linking specifically to Brexit views as I recall (I can't find the ref in a hurry).
They wouldn't, only if the choice was the UK in the EU or England and Wales only out of the EU.
In any case a 4.7% swing from the SNP to the Tories in an Aberdeen by election last night despite Brexit
The point is that the DUP is blocking their nice precious Brexit, no?
And aqs for the by election, it was not a swing from SNP to Tory but a swing from conservative sensu lato to LD on the raw data (assuming the usual meaning of 'Independent' in that context as someone effectively a Tory but unwilling to admit it, on which I stand to be corrected, ditto also if not first preference in previous election)
If the Tories are up 10% in Scotland at the next general election and the SNP up less than 1% as was the case in the Aberdeen by election last night, the Tories will be gaining SNP seats in Scotland not losing them
But I still don't understand the logic. It's not as if every constituency had a pretend tory standing last time who now pulls out for the next election. Unless you think Labour or the LDs - or Brexit - will enter an electoral pact with the SCUP?
The whole basis of the GFA is that both communities find a consensus. Not majority rule, minority be damned.
Mr Varadkar said there were five ways to avoid a hard border – the reunification of Ireland; the Irish Republic re-joining the UK; the UK remaining in the single market or customs union; the border backstop mechanism; or the UK reversing the Brexit decision.
“There are one in five ways that this can be done, and at least four of those would be acceptable to the Irish government, but the best one is of course a backstop or some form of backstop, and that’s what we are trying to achieve,” he said.
Not ruling out the Irish Republic re-joining the UK then
Let's see if the UK can reform itself into a federal republic first.
The whole basis of the GFA is that both communities find a consensus. Not majority rule, minority be damned.
Mr Varadkar said there were five ways to avoid a hard border – the reunification of Ireland; the Irish Republic re-joining the UK; the UK remaining in the single market or customs union; the border backstop mechanism; or the UK reversing the Brexit decision.
“There are one in five ways that this can be done, and at least four of those would be acceptable to the Irish government, but the best one is of course a backstop or some form of backstop, and that’s what we are trying to achieve,” he said.
Not ruling out the Irish Republic re-joining the UK then
Pretty clear he doesn’t want a deal that will pass this or the next parliament.
Wings over Scotland also commissioned polls earlier in 2018 with a similar result but linking specifically to Brexit views as I recall (I can't find the ref in a hurry).
They wouldn't, only if the choice was the UK in the EU or England and Wales only out of the EU.
In any case a 4.7% swing from the SNP to the Tories in an Aberdeen by election last night despite Brexit
The point is that the DUP is blocking their nice precious Brexit, no?
And aqs for the by election, it was not a swing from SNP to Tory but a swing from conservative sensu lato to LD on the raw data (assuming the usual meaning of 'Independent' in that context as someone effectively a Tory but unwilling to admit it, on which I stand to be corrected, ditto also if not first preference in previous election)
If the Tories are up 10% in Scotland at the next general election and the SNP up less than 1% as was the case in the Aberdeen by election last night, the Tories will be gaining SNP seats in Scotland not losing them
But I still don't understand the logic. It's not as if every constituency had a pretend tory standing last time who now pulls out for the next election. Unless you think Labour or the LDs - or Brexit - will enter an electoral pact with the SCUP?
I think bridge of Don was merely indicative as a tentative sign the ScotTory vote may be holding up better in NE Scotland, where they have that cluster of seats. If so it may mean that a national vote of say 20% might mean holding 4 or 5 seats rather than a couple
Comments
JHB surprises me as she's normally sensible. I suspect she'll change her mind during the cut and thrust of an election campaign as the choices are layed out before her...
The choice will be
1. If you want to Leave - Vote Con.
2. Remain - Vote for anyone else.
Do these three clowns not grasp this?
I think we know the answer to this one.
https://twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/1143893495956037632
European Commissioners are formally nominated by the European Council, albeit based on the recommendations of national Governments.
They can also be rejected by the European Parliament, and indeed two (Rovana Plumb of Romania and Laszlo Trocsanyi of Hungary) were rejected this year. These were on conflict of interest grounds rather than simply "don't like them" but I suspect grounds to reject could be found.
Finally, the President of the European Commission could effectively sideline a Commissioner in whom she had no confidence in a meaningless role.
Plus, he would be quite a good commissioner. He'd fuck around, make entertaining speeches, and just generally be an ineffectual nuisance. And would thus be an improvement on some.
I've mentioned this before but it bears repeating: the European Parliament has got actual fascists in it: genuinely scary people who are either violent or can access the violent. The prospect of an English Eurosceptic giving sarcastic speeches really isn't scary, or even bothersome.
However, as explained below, I think it's pretty likely a deliberately provocative nomination would be eased out by the Council of Europe refusing to nominate, or the Parliament refusing to approve, or the President of the Commission sidelining the person.
Was there ever a possibility of legal challenge to Mr Brown's signing us up without the promised referendum? I know they changed the name to get round those promises, but would that have stood up in court?
The state of the body politic would be rather healthier had MPs been less keen to throw their manifesto promises overboard when it came to the Lisbon/Constitution referendum.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/brexit-deal-cannot-hand-dup-veto-over-wishes-of-majority-insists-varadkar-38559960.html
The whole basis of the GFA is that both communities find a consensus. Not majority rule, minority be damned.
Worth reading.
To Remain vote for whichever of Lab and LD have the best chance of winning your seat.
Don't even think of doing anything else.
https://twitter.com/borisjohnson/status/1180148038649700358?s=21
Hm, three successive tweets of Mr Doleman's(sorry, not sure how to quote from within Twitter thread):
Webster "it cannot be clearer what the position of the Prime Minister is."
Lord Pentland asks if this could be converted into a sworn statement, Webster seems very reluctant to agree this.
Lord Pentland "Why not give the undertakings,"
Webster "It's not necessary."
Pentland "Why not just give them?"
Webster "It wouldn't make a difference."
Pentland "It would, it would lay the petitioners concerns to rest."
Lord Pentland "Public authorities often give undertakings, it's a legitimate question, and gives the court contempt jurisdiction."
Webster disagrees
Pentland "Are you suggesting the government and its officers are in a different position from ordinary members of the public?"
From the surrender act ! We give you Bozos capitulation deal !
Just sort out the customs issue and we could have a deal .
Although the unhinged DUP might now pull their support as they know longer can walk about with their pathetic sense of superiority!
But leaving that aside, I don't think Stewart is (at the moment) leadership material, or cabinet material. He strikes me as someone who will always wander toward the nearest spotlight, like Robert Kilroy Silk, and looks set to be forever launching new movements objecting to this or that, with himself at the helm. I don't wish that for him, I would like him to snap out of it, and end up using his not inconsiderable talents for a more useful purpose.
If they can resolve that it really helps to get a deal . Problem is though whether the DUP will still support it.
They are telling Brexiteers they do (and they believe them)
They are telling the courts they don't (and refuse to actually sign any contrary documents)
Quite surprised to see that.
What portion of Benita tickets are 1. Benita, 2 Stewart.
Depressing.
If only somebody had been pointing out for weeks this is where we would end up.....
But trying to get your counterparty fired is a very aggressive move. If it doesn't work you will find it very difficult to have a productive relationship going forward.
Certainly they should do it as its the only way to focus the tiny, pea-sized brains of most MPs... But will they?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/oct/08/labour-and-tory-mayors-unite-to-demand-they-take-back-control-of-regional-spending-after-brexit-politics-live?page=with:block-5bbb76f0e4b0fe77b41b05ed#block-5bbb76f0e4b0fe77b41b05ed
Wings over Scotland also commissioned polls earlier in 2018 with a similar result but linking specifically to Brexit views as I recall (I can't find the ref in a hurry).
In any case a 4.7% swing from the SNP to the Tories in an Aberdeen by election last night despite Brexit
That's being helpful not trying to frustrate the act. Well worded it could make it clear to the EU there is little point in extending.
The extension is offered upto March 31st before the next budgets are being decided . Sort yourselves out but that’s it , no more extensions .
At that point you choose , deal , no deal or revoke .
'Katie Hopkins threatened to "run naked" through the streets of London with a "sausage" up her bottom if Sadiq Khan won the London Mayoral election and following the confirmation of his victory the out-spoken star has hinted she'll stick to her word.'
None of that is going to change once we leave. There will be a strong movement to rejoin as soon as we have left. Given the demographics, I expect it will succeed at some point in the next decade or two unless Brexit proves to be a runaway success and I think the chances of that are fairly remote.
The strategic error the leavers are making is that they seem to believe that once we are out they can sit back and that's the end of the matter. The way the whole process has been conducted has pretty much ensured the issue won't go away.
Whichever government comes in after the Conservatives is likely to be committed to EFTA or a rejoin referendum at the very least.
And aqs for the by election, it was not a swing from SNP to Tory but a swing from conservative sensu lato to LD on the raw data (assuming the usual meaning of 'Independent' in that context as someone effectively a Tory but unwilling to admit it, on which I stand to be corrected, ditto also if not first preference in previous election)
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1180070120661618689
As I said, your complacency will be your downfall. You are so blinkered that you cannot conceive that having experienced Brexit there won't ever be a majority for rejoining.
“There are one in five ways that this can be done, and at least four of those would be acceptable to the Irish government, but the best one is of course a backstop or some form of backstop, and that’s what we are trying to achieve,” he said.
Not ruling out the Irish Republic re-joining the UK then
Merkel needs to have a word.