politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris Johnson complies with the surrender bill, ditches all ov

SystemSystem Posts: 12,215
edited October 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris Johnson complies with the surrender bill, ditches all over the country are feeling lied to now

Like prorogation this looks like a classic Dom strategy but I expect Boris Johnson to be submissive to the courts early next week https://t.co/pwkQqnJYNp

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    OMG is this a first?
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    Second.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    I deserve an award for getting 'Dom' and 'submissive' in the same sentence.
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    So this is meant to be the point where Brexiteers are furious and flock to the Brexit Party.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    edited October 2019
    The second was a covering letter, written by Sir Tim Barrow, the UK's Permanent Representative in Brussels, which made clear that the first letter was from Parliament, not the Government.

    And the third was a letter from Mr Johnson, which was also sent to the leaders of the other 27 EU nations, in which he disavowed the first letter by making clear that he does not want any delay to Brexit.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7592073/Boris-Johnson-sends-THREE-letters-EU-one-urge-Brussels-NOT-grant-delay.html
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,818
    You have to love Boris! What a guy!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    oxfordsimon said:

    Going to court over a signature will be an utter waste of time, money and other resources. The Act requires the PM to send a letter. Not to sign a letter.

    It does not preclude any other communication on the subject.

    I have just looked at the text of the Act and nowhere does it require a signature.

    I imagine the argument is over the spirit of it being frustrated, but Mr David Allen Green does not seem concerned, and in practical terms I cannot see what it alters when his view is very well known on the subject. He should have just sent the letter with nothing else and they'd have known it was under protest, so it was just for home consumption and meaningless it seems.

    No doubt someone will pop up to suggest this is another reason for a potential Labour rebel to not vote for the deal legislation.
    Scott_P said:

    kle4 said:

    So why the Court case?

    The court case was already underway, and the sender of that Tweet is not a judge in the Court of Session
    It was a rhetorical question really - the EU seem to have acknowledged the letter and will act up on it, nothing that happens in the court will change that unless you believe it will declare the way he sent the letter invalid and he has to send it again, delaying the official receipt of it by the EU so they cannot start to consider whether to grant it until they make their judgement on, what, Tuesday?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,041
    Artist said:

    So this is meant to be the point where Brexiteers are furious and flock to the Brexit Party.

    May not be as likely, given that it looks like parliament is yet again frustrating Brexit
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    https://twitter.com/jamessflee/status/1185666537971163136
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    Better change the headline until the court rules he has complied with the Surrender bill. It will change so much!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    So BoZo sends a request for an extension, which he hasn't signed.

    We will find out on Monday if he has complied with the law, and at some point whether the EU are willing to grant it or not.

    Where his cunning plan might yet come unstuck is if BoZo gets VONCed.

    He would no longer be PM, but his extension request would still be extant.

    Not signing it would mean he can't revoke it...
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    The PM is a child.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    edited October 2019
    BJ cannot really say Parliament is playing games and he is somehow above it by sending 3 letters! I thought he was supposed to be intellegent, not something he is showing by playing childish games with 3 letters! Do you trust BJ? No. :wink:
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/MehreenKhn/status/1185666939869388800
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I deserve an award for getting 'Dom' and 'submissive' in the same sentence.

    😂😂😂😂
  • ozymandiasozymandias Posts: 1,503
    Don’t think this is going to generate the negative headlines for Johnson the Benn Act architects were hoping for 😉
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,312
    Scott_P said:

    So BoZo sends a request for an extension, which he hasn't signed.

    We will find out on Monday if he has complied with the law, and at some point whether the EU are willing to grant it or not.

    Where his cunning plan might yet come unstuck is if BoZo gets VONCed.

    He would no longer be PM, but his extension request would still be extant.

    Not signing it would mean he can't revoke it...

    Wot?
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,818
    I thought Boris was lazy , three letters in one evening after a working Saturday is some going.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.
  • AramintaMoonbeamQCAramintaMoonbeamQC Posts: 3,855
    Mercifully, I've been out of the house all day and have missed all the nonsense.

    He's sent a letter but not signed it? Is that like 'I was present but I didn't lay a wreath'?

    Dismal.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    state_go_away said:

    You have to love Boris! What a guy!

    Why?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Johnson has complied with the law. It didn't require him to send it with flowers.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    state_go_away said:

    I thought Boris was lazy , three letters in one evening after a working Saturday is some going.

    And after the childcare cost too
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,641
    bigjohnowls said:

    The PM is a child.

    He is winding up a lot of people and winning lots of votes
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,818
    bigjohnowls said:

    state_go_away said:

    I thought Boris was lazy , three letters in one evening after a working Saturday is some going.

    And after the childcare cost too
    Presumably his partner was not hogging his laptop!

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,706
    The EU have ‘received’ the request despite Boris’ silly little posturing.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Pulpstar said:

    Johnson has complied with the law. It didn't require him to send it with flowers.

    Can we amend the Benn Act so that he has to use the phrase pretty please
  • ozymandiasozymandias Posts: 1,503
    edited October 2019
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    The PM is a child.

    He is winding up a lot of people and winning lots of votes
    It’s becoming more obvious the Benn Act was more to humiliate Johnson that anything else.

    Seems its architects may have failed on that score.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    kle4 said:

    oxfordsimon said:

    Going to court over a signature will be an utter waste of time, money and other resources. The Act requires the PM to send a letter. Not to sign a letter.

    It does not preclude any other communication on the subject.

    I have just looked at the text of the Act and nowhere does it require a signature.

    I imagine the argument is over the spirit of it being frustrated, but Mr David Allen Green does not seem concerned, and in practical terms I cannot see what it alters when his view is very well known on the subject. He should have just sent the letter with nothing else and they'd have known it was under protest, so it was just for home consumption and meaningless it seems.

    No doubt someone will pop up to suggest this is another reason for a potential Labour rebel to not vote for the deal legislation.
    Scott_P said:

    kle4 said:

    So why the Court case?

    The court case was already underway, and the sender of that Tweet is not a judge in the Court of Session
    It was a rhetorical question really - the EU seem to have acknowledged the letter and will act up on it, nothing that happens in the court will change that unless you believe it will declare the way he sent the letter invalid and he has to send it again, delaying the official receipt of it by the EU so they cannot start to consider whether to grant it until they make their judgement on, what, Tuesday?
    If he has sent a second or thirty second letter which seeks to frustrate the benn act he may well be in contempt of court but we will see
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    Pulpstar said:

    Johnson has complied with the law. It didn't require him to send it with flowers.

    The concern seems to be that he sent the letter in a childish and sullen way, making clear he personally and the government did not want to do it but were forced to by Parliament.

    For one, that is an entirely accurate summary of what happened.

    For two, the EU know that is an entirely accurate summary of what happened.

    Is complying with an Act in sullen and childish fashion really frustrating it? It's petty, to be sure, but is grudging compliance really unlawful?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,041
    ozymandias said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    The PM is a child.

    He is winding up a lot of people and winning lots of votes
    It’s becoming more obvious the Benn Act was more to humiliate Johnson that anything else.

    Seems its architects may have failed on that score.
    Especially as he now has a deal. It just looks like they are trying to block Brexit.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,636
    Despite being a Leaver, I must admit Boris's is being a cock here. The other leaders know his views. It's not like this will be a surprise.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    ozymandias said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    The PM is a child.

    He is winding up a lot of people and winning lots of votes
    It’s becoming more obvious the Benn Act was more to humiliate Johnson that anything else.

    Seems its architects may have failed on that score.
    If they want to take charge of the process vis a vis our relations with external powers they'll need to install another Prime Minister.
  • BantermanBanterman Posts: 287
    Remainers lead by Grieve, Letwin, bercow, Benn, supported by Corbyn have totally abused and corrupted the process of parliament and cry like babies when its thrown back in their faces.

    It will be the ultimate hoot if the arch Eurofile Macron kills their Hotel California dream.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    edited October 2019
    RobD said:

    ozymandias said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    The PM is a child.

    He is winding up a lot of people and winning lots of votes
    It’s becoming more obvious the Benn Act was more to humiliate Johnson that anything else.

    Seems its architects may have failed on that score.
    Especially as he now has a deal. It just looks like they are trying to block Brexit.
    This is the optics they are going for...that only one leader is trying to get brexit done.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    nichomar said:

    kle4 said:

    oxfordsimon said:

    Going to court over a signature will be an utter waste of time, money and other resources. The Act requires the PM to send a letter. Not to sign a letter.

    It does not preclude any other communication on the subject.

    I have just looked at the text of the Act and nowhere does it require a signature.

    I imagine the argument is over the spirit of it being frustrated, but Mr David Allen Green does not seem concerned, and in practical terms I cannot see what it alters when his view is very well known on the subject. He should have just sent the letter with nothing else and they'd have known it was under protest, so it was just for home consumption and meaningless it seems.

    No doubt someone will pop up to suggest this is another reason for a potential Labour rebel to not vote for the deal legislation.
    Scott_P said:

    kle4 said:

    So why the Court case?

    The court case was already underway, and the sender of that Tweet is not a judge in the Court of Session
    It was a rhetorical question really - the EU seem to have acknowledged the letter and will act up on it, nothing that happens in the court will change that unless you believe it will declare the way he sent the letter invalid and he has to send it again, delaying the official receipt of it by the EU so they cannot start to consider whether to grant it until they make their judgement on, what, Tuesday?
    If he has sent a second or thirty second letter which seeks to frustrate the benn act he may well be in contempt of court but we will see
    Misconduct in public office perhaps as well. Someone should report him to the police on that!
  • ozymandiasozymandias Posts: 1,503
    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Johnson has complied with the law. It didn't require him to send it with flowers.

    The concern seems to be that he sent the letter in a childish and sullen way, making clear he personally and the government did not want to do it but were forced to by Parliament.

    For one, that is an entirely accurate summary of what happened.

    For two, the EU know that is an entirely accurate summary of what happened.

    Is complying with an Act in sullen and childish fashion really frustrating it? It's petty, to be sure, but is grudging compliance really unlawful?
    To be fair the act doesn’t stipulate he can’t do it in a sullen way. Perhaps Benn should have insisted Johnson affect a “ happy and co-operative tone” whilst submitting it. The width of his smile should have been stipulated also? 😀
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Dear Don

    When I said I would get this through Parliament I had my fingers crossed.

    Jester
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,641
    kle4 said:

    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.

    And of course the more the opponents kick up a fuss and involve the courts again the more publicity Boris receives and is likely to gain many more votes

    His opponents would be best advised to calm down

    However, the three letters are very clever and no doubt this was all part of the gaming involving Cummings. No wonder remainers despise him
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    The PM is a child.

    He is winding up a lot of people and winning lots of votes
    He has done minimum he needs to do , have to say the weak weirdos in Westminster need a good kicking. Hopefully EU will give them two fingers and the rats will have to make a decision next next week.
    I will miss all the excitement as I will be sunning my self on Lanzarote.
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 597
    How can the covering letters be declared unlawful? He can't unsend them and the court cannot compel the EU to disregard them.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,843
    The EU would have been well aware either way that the extension request is coming from parliament and not him, so it doesn't really make any difference. Our fate rests in Macron's hands now.

    If the deal passes, will we see an early election, as so many suggest? The line is already being stated that the deal is just a pathway to no deal, helped along by comments from various ERG MPs. So Labour can say no deal still not truly off the table yet. Not inconceivable that various excuses are found to delay an early election until Johnson's victory glow has faded at least (no winter election etc. public don't want one over xmas).

    Governments only called elections when they thought it was good for them in the polls or when the term was up. Now that the opposition has that power, wouldn't the same logic apply?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    Boris's letter says it is open to the Council to accede to the request mandated by parliament or to offer an alternative extension period, but that his view and the government position is that a further extension would damage the interests of the UK and the EU.

    So he has not stated that the EU should ignore the letter from parliament, therefore how has he frustrated it? I'm more and more convinced this is just a distraction technique or cheap move to posture to his base rather than anything serious.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    FPT
    stodge said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/SamGyimah/status/1185655935563419649

    The Benn Act wasn't a problem. The government had a deadline of until today to get a deal and put it before Parliament, the government honoured its obligations, got a deal and put it before Parliament ...

    ... then Parliament decided 'oh shit, we didn't think you'd actually get a deal - well tough, we're not going to vote on it'.
    No, the problem was nobody trusted Johnson or Cummings not to try to engineer a No Deal Brexit via a fait accompli of not getting the WA through all the stages of the Commons and Lords.

    Despite what you and others may think, Benn and in turn Letwin aren't about thwarting Brexit or defying the "will of the people". They are about preventing a No Deal crash out on 31/10 (for which there is no majority or mandate), whether accidental or engineered and ensuring the WA receives appropriate and proper scrutiny in Parliament.

    In other words, MPs today did their job - represented the interests of the country and asserted their role in the scrutiny of legislation.

    I still think a lot of people have been hoodwinked into believing we would leave the EU on 31/10 if the WA is passed - we won't. We enter a period of transition during which we not only remain a full member with all the obligations and commitments pertaining but we also have to negotiate a comprehensive future trade deal with the EU before 31/12/20.
    If Letwin and others didn't believe that, then on 29/9/19 if the WAIB hadn't been given royal assent yet they could have demanded Boris send an extension request or no confidenced him.

    Or they could have not put down the 'get a deal' section of the Benn Act which Boris honoured but they refused to vote on.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    edited October 2019
    All of this is theatre. The EU knew the situation and it is improbable that all of these scenarios havent already been discussed when they were working on the new deal.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,222
    rcs1000 said:

    Despite being a Leaver, I must admit Boris's is being a cock here. The other leaders know his views. It's not like this will be a surprise.

    At least he doesn't waste everyone's time with meaningless TV statements like his predecessor.
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    edited October 2019
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    All of this is theatre. The EU knew the situation and it is improbable that all of these scenarios havent already been discussed when they were working on the new deal.

    I do wonder whether the EU leaders could have done BJ a favour by coming out very clearly "there can be an emergency one-week technical extension to make sure all the legislation required gets through the UK and EU parliaments, but that will be your lot". All this "no extension will be necessary" sounded a lot like "but truth be told, we'd probably grant an extension anyway, just don't want to be seen to say it".
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Johnson has

    i) Legally complied with the act
    ii) The EU will avoid "No Deal" I suspect
    iii) Turned the attempted humiliation aspect of the act (Yes it was always a factor in addition to avoiding "No Deal") back on Parliament.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,641
    malcolmg said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    The PM is a child.

    He is winding up a lot of people and winning lots of votes
    He has done minimum he needs to do , have to say the weak weirdos in Westminster need a good kicking. Hopefully EU will give them two fingers and the rats will have to make a decision next next week.
    I will miss all the excitement as I will be sunning my self on Lanzarote.
    Have a great break Malc
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    kle4 said:

    oxfordsimon said:

    Going to court over a signature will be an utter waste of time, money and other resources. The Act requires the PM to send a letter. Not to sign a letter.

    It does not preclude any other communication on the subject.

    I have just looked at the text of the Act and nowhere does it require a signature.

    I imagine the argument is over the spirit of it being frustrated, but Mr David Allen Green does not seem concerned, and in practical terms I cannot see what it alters when his view is very well known on the subject. He should have just sent the letter with nothing else and they'd have known it was under protest, so it was just for home consumption and meaningless it seems.

    No doubt someone will pop up to suggest this is another reason for a potential Labour rebel to not vote for the deal legislation.
    Scott_P said:

    kle4 said:

    So why the Court case?

    The court case was already underway, and the sender of that Tweet is not a judge in the Court of Session
    It was a rhetorical question really - the EU seem to have acknowledged the letter and will act up on it, nothing that happens in the court will change that unless you believe it will declare the way he sent the letter invalid and he has to send it again, delaying the official receipt of it by the EU so they cannot start to consider whether to grant it until they make their judgement on, what, Tuesday?
    The Scottish court took him on his personal word that he would obey the law and do nothing to frustrate the benn act. If he has done either of those things he will be in contempt of court. The ruling was quite specific that accepted the PMs undertakings that he would do neither and deferred decision till after the event
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    edited October 2019
    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Despite being a Leaver, I must admit Boris's is being a cock here. The other leaders know his views. It's not like this will be a surprise.

    At least he doesn't waste everyone's time with meaningless TV statements like his predecessor.
    Those were the best bits! The anticipation, the confusion, the stunned reactions that a 30 second 'nothing has changed' was all that was said, the crest watching. Glorious times.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    If the EU accept the letter as an extension request then it is an extension request. Why is it in the interests of those wanting an extension to get the courts to rule that it is not an extension request?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    kle4 said:

    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.

    And of course the more the opponents kick up a fuss and involve the courts again the more publicity Boris receives and is likely to gain many more votes

    His opponents would be best advised to calm down

    However, the three letters are very clever and no doubt this was all part of the gaming involving Cummings. No wonder remainers despise him
    Clever it's the kind of idea my 2 year old Grand Daughter might find funny.

    I thought you were better than supporting this childish behaviour
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    alex. said:

    If the EU accept the letter as an extension request then it is an extension request. Why is it in the interests of those wanting an extension to get the courts to rule that it is not an extension request?

    Because he sent a second letter
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,317
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    kle4 said:

    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.

    And of course the more the opponents kick up a fuss and involve the courts again the more publicity Boris receives and is likely to gain many more votes

    His opponents would be best advised to calm down

    However, the three letters are very clever and no doubt this was all part of the gaming involving Cummings. No wonder remainers despise him
    Your Johnson/Cummings infatuation is laughable.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    All of this is theatre. The EU knew the situation and it is improbable that all of these scenarios havent already been discussed when they were working on the new deal.

    And the theatre will continue on Monday with someone complaining to the Court that he complied in a not correct way.

    He's being a cock, but we know now he is not seeking to spring no deal on the country, can they please get back to discussing the deal?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,641
    Paristonda said:

    The EU would have been well aware either way that the extension request is coming from parliament and not him, so it doesn't really make any difference. Our fate rests in Macron's hands now.

    If the deal passes, will we see an early election, as so many suggest? The line is already being stated that the deal is just a pathway to no deal, helped along by comments from various ERG MPs. So Labour can say no deal still not truly off the table yet. Not inconceivable that various excuses are found to delay an early election until Johnson's victory glow has faded at least (no winter election etc. public don't want one over xmas).

    Governments only called elections when they thought it was good for them in the polls or when the term was up. Now that the opposition has that power, wouldn't the same logic apply?

    Varadkar is a big player in this as well as Macron and remember they get on very well with Boris
  • humbuggerhumbugger Posts: 377
    alex. said:

    If the EU accept the letter as an extension request then it is an extension request. Why is it in the interests of those wanting an extension to get the courts to rule that it is not an extension request?

    Good evening all. Clearly Boris has sent an extension request in precisely the terms required by the Benn Act. I can't see what all the fuss is about.
  • ozymandiasozymandias Posts: 1,503
    alex. said:

    If the EU accept the letter as an extension request then it is an extension request. Why is it in the interests of those wanting an extension to get the courts to rule that it is not an extension request?

    Because the people who wrote it and enacted it wanted it to humiliate him and undermine him with the voters.

    It now won’t. Sorry.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    the three letters are very clever

    They have completely validated the Letwin vote.

    You can't trust BoZo.

    Parliament needs to pas ironclad laws that BoZo can't frustrate, wriggle out of, ignore, bypass, or break.

    Classic Dom...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,212
    edited October 2019
    state_go_away said:

    I thought Boris was lazy , three letters in one evening after a working Saturday is some going.

    Well he did crib the text of at least one of them....
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,844
    nichomar said:

    kle4 said:

    oxfordsimon said:

    Going to court over a signature will be an utter waste of time, money and other resources. The Act requires the PM to send a letter. Not to sign a letter.

    It does not preclude any other communication on the subject.

    I have just looked at the text of the Act and nowhere does it require a signature.

    I imagine the argument is over the spirit of it being frustrated, but Mr David Allen Green does not seem concerned, and in practical terms I cannot see what it alters when his view is very well known on the subject. He should have just sent the letter with nothing else and they'd have known it was under protest, so it was just for home consumption and meaningless it seems.

    No doubt someone will pop up to suggest this is another reason for a potential Labour rebel to not vote for the deal legislation.
    Scott_P said:

    kle4 said:

    So why the Court case?

    The court case was already underway, and the sender of that Tweet is not a judge in the Court of Session
    It was a rhetorical question really - the EU seem to have acknowledged the letter and will act up on it, nothing that happens in the court will change that unless you believe it will declare the way he sent the letter invalid and he has to send it again, delaying the official receipt of it by the EU so they cannot start to consider whether to grant it until they make their judgement on, what, Tuesday?
    The Scottish court took him on his personal word that he would obey the law and do nothing to frustrate the benn act. If he has done either of those things he will be in contempt of court. The ruling was quite specific that accepted the PMs undertakings that he would do neither and deferred decision till after the event
    He has sent the letter. The extension request process is underway. What else was he required by law to do?
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    edited October 2019
    dodrade said:

    How can the covering letters be declared unlawful? He can't unsend them and the court cannot compel the EU to disregard them.

    If there's a problem, it'll be that the Benn Act specifies not just that he sends a letter of specific wording, but that:

    "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension..... "


    They will try to argue that's he sabotaging it. Govt lawyers will argue that his duty under the act is fulfilled the moment he sent the letter.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    edited October 2019
    nichomar said:

    alex. said:

    If the EU accept the letter as an extension request then it is an extension request. Why is it in the interests of those wanting an extension to get the courts to rule that it is not an extension request?

    Because he sent a second letter
    Did the Benn act prohibit the PM writing letters other than those approved by Parliament? It’s as if people are talking as if Govt is still conducted in the 18th century
  • Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    Remainers aren’t very bright are they? You can’t criticise the PM for failing to keep his promise not to extend, and hope Farage eats into his vote, if at the same time you’re going to court to argue he refused to ask for an extension and will do anything to secure Brexit.

    Play to the remain gallery and you boost his support in his core. You crack on. An election is coming.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,818
    bigjohnowls said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    kle4 said:

    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.

    And of course the more the opponents kick up a fuss and involve the courts again the more publicity Boris receives and is likely to gain many more votes

    His opponents would be best advised to calm down

    However, the three letters are very clever and no doubt this was all part of the gaming involving Cummings. No wonder remainers despise him
    Clever it's the kind of idea my 2 year old Grand Daughter might find funny.

    I thought you were better than supporting this childish behaviour
    I always get you two mixed up
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    nichomar said:

    alex. said:

    If the EU accept the letter as an extension request then it is an extension request. Why is it in the interests of those wanting an extension to get the courts to rule that it is not an extension request?

    Because he sent a second letter
    That does not answer why it is in their interests to get the court to rule so - such a judgement would resul tin what? The court sending the letter, which the EU already have, with a note saying this is the will of parliament, which Johnson already told the EU as well. Or it sends it with no note. Or it makes Johnson send it with no note, and that he physically sign it this time.

    How do any of those options affect whether or not the EU accept the extension request, offer a new date, or say no?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    I don't see the problem with adding the covering letter, it doesn't actually contradict the actual request - if anything it confirms it, since he says it's up to the EU whether they grant the extension.

    Not signing the formal request was wanky but a lot of things about brexit are wanky.
  • humbuggerhumbugger Posts: 377
    Andrew said:

    dodrade said:

    How can the covering letters be declared unlawful? He can't unsend them and the court cannot compel the EU to disregard them.

    If there's a problem, it'll be that the Benn Act specifies not just that he sends a letter of specific wording, but that:

    "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension..... "


    They will try to argue that's he sabotaging it.
    Well they'd be wrong, because the Act goes on to say...."by sending a letter". He's done that using exactly the wording required by the Act.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,641
    edited October 2019
    Gardenwalker said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    kle4 said:

    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.

    And of course the more the opponents kick up a fuss and involve the courts again the more publicity Boris receives and is likely to gain many more votes

    His opponents would be best advised to calm down

    However, the three letters are very clever and no doubt this was all part of the gaming involving Cummings. No wonder remainers despise him
    Your Johnson/Cummings infatuation is laughable.
    I have to admit Boris has exceeded all my expectations and brought together my party.

    I can understand some being upset that I am ready to rejoin as soon as he restores the whip to the rebels
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited October 2019
    A court can compel someone to do something but they can't compel the spirit in which they should do it. That's the stuff of totalitarianism.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,706
    Boris cares about Boris. Two articles on Brexit, three letters tonight, but always one ego.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,706
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    kle4 said:

    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.

    And of course the more the opponents kick up a fuss and involve the courts again the more publicity Boris receives and is likely to gain many more votes

    His opponents would be best advised to calm down

    However, the three letters are very clever and no doubt this was all part of the gaming involving Cummings. No wonder remainers despise him
    Your Johnson/Cummings infatuation is laughable.
    I have to admit Boris has exceeded all my expectations and brought together my party.

    I can understand some being upset that I am ready to rejoin as soon as he restores tge whip to the rebels
    If he needs to, he will throw you under a bus again.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    Andrew said:

    dodrade said:

    How can the covering letters be declared unlawful? He can't unsend them and the court cannot compel the EU to disregard them.

    If there's a problem, it'll be that the Benn Act specifies not just that he sends a letter of specific wording, but that:

    "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension..... "


    They will try to argue that's he sabotaging it. Govt lawyers will argue that his duty under the act is fulfilled the moment he sent the letter.
    The sabotage argument is pretty weak when apparently if he'd sent no second or third letter he'd have been fine even though he's been yelling 'I don't want an extension EU, please do not grant one' on TV and on twitter for weeks or months. No no, the sabotage only really became effective in a letter which said 'Up to you, parliament wants this but but I don't'. Really?

    Just call him a cock and move on, I say. The battle for Remain will be about votes for a referendum, or amending the WAIB so that the ERG reject it. Not this.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,515
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    The PM is a child.

    He is winding up a lot of people and winning lots of votes
    Based on what evidence?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Scott_P said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    the three letters are very clever

    They have completely validated the Letwin vote.

    You can't trust BoZo.

    Parliament needs to pas ironclad laws that BoZo can't frustrate, wriggle out of, ignore, bypass, or break.

    Classic Dom...
    100% correct.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    malcolmg said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    The PM is a child.

    He is winding up a lot of people and winning lots of votes
    He has done minimum he needs to do , have to say the weak weirdos in Westminster need a good kicking. Hopefully EU will give them two fingers and the rats will have to make a decision next next week.
    I will miss all the excitement as I will be sunning my self on Lanzarote.
    Have a great break Malc
    Thanks G , I am looking forward to a relaxing break, taking daughter and grandchildren so be very pleasant. Off very early Tuesday.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    humbugger said:


    Well they'd be wrong, because the Act goes on to say...."by sending a letter". He's done that using exactly the wording required by the Act.

    I think you might be right. If the Benn Act had separated that into two sections it'd be stronger: ie a) the PM must seek an extension, AND must send a letter. The wording in a single sentence makes it seem like the two are the same.

    No doubt govt lawyers have been over this pretty carefully.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    edited October 2019
    Andrew said:

    dodrade said:

    How can the covering letters be declared unlawful? He can't unsend them and the court cannot compel the EU to disregard them.

    If there's a problem, it'll be that the Benn Act specifies not just that he sends a letter of specific wording, but that:

    "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension..... "


    They will try to argue that's he sabotaging it. Govt lawyers will argue that his duty under the act is fulfilled the moment he sent the letter.
    <blockquote class="Quote" rel="

    I looked up the definition of misconduct in public office and by sending the second and third letter you could argue he is not fulfilling his duties by trying to undermine the Benn letter. BJ might think he is being smart but all it takes is one MP to report him to the Police to start the ball rolling... 😉
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,843
    edited October 2019
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Paristonda said:

    The EU would have been well aware either way that the extension request is coming from parliament and not him, so it doesn't really make any difference. Our fate rests in Macron's hands now.

    If the deal passes, will we see an early election, as so many suggest? The line is already being stated that the deal is just a pathway to no deal, helped along by comments from various ERG MPs. So Labour can say no deal still not truly off the table yet. Not inconceivable that various excuses are found to delay an early election until Johnson's victory glow has faded at least (no winter election etc. public don't want one over xmas).

    Governments only called elections when they thought it was good for them in the polls or when the term was up. Now that the opposition has that power, wouldn't the same logic apply?

    Varadkar is a big player in this as well as Macron and remember they get on very well with Boris
    Yes and it's not surprising, at least on a superficial level Boris clearly has charisma and is personable (not to mention Boris speaks French so probably helped him charm Macron, Juncker et al). Fair to say it's one of his big advantages over May.

    I think the EU could offer an extension that complies with the Benn Act but stipulate that if legislation is passed the UK can leave as soon as it's ready. They did something similar with May already.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,641
    Jonathan said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    kle4 said:

    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.

    And of course the more the opponents kick up a fuss and involve the courts again the more publicity Boris receives and is likely to gain many more votes

    His opponents would be best advised to calm down

    However, the three letters are very clever and no doubt this was all part of the gaming involving Cummings. No wonder remainers despise him
    Your Johnson/Cummings infatuation is laughable.
    I have to admit Boris has exceeded all my expectations and brought together my party.

    I can understand some being upset that I am ready to rejoin as soon as he restores tge whip to the rebels
    If he needs to, he will throw you under a bus again.
    You seem upset
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,844
    Andrew said:

    dodrade said:

    How can the covering letters be declared unlawful? He can't unsend them and the court cannot compel the EU to disregard them.

    If there's a problem, it'll be that the Benn Act specifies not just that he sends a letter of specific wording, but that:

    "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension..... "


    They will try to argue that's he sabotaging it. Govt lawyers will argue that his duty under the act is fulfilled the moment he sent the letter.
    If you include the full section, it rather undermines the point you were attempting to make

    "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension of the period under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union ending at 11.00pm on 31 October 2019 by sending to the President of the European Council a letter in the form set out in the Schedule to this Act requesting an extension of that period to 11.00pm on 31 January 2020"

    Which is exactly what he has done - in the very precise form set out in the Schedule (which does not include a signature)

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/26/enacted
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Scott_P said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    the three letters are very clever

    They have completely validated the Letwin vote.

    You can't trust BoZo.

    Parliament needs to pas ironclad laws that BoZo can't frustrate, wriggle out of, ignore, bypass, or break.

    Classic Dom...
    Parliament can't.

    If they want rid of Boris, if they want one of them to be PM, if they want to control executive action then they should pass a VoNC.

    Otherwise Boris is PM and is perfectly within his rights as PM to exercise his authority or say his opinion or take any political decision he chooses.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,515
    What is wrong with you @Big_G_NorthWales? Why have you suddenly started drinking the Cummings Kool-Aid? Nothing has changed.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    nichomar said:

    kle4 said:

    oxfordsimon said:

    Going to court over a signature will be an utter waste of time, money and other resources. The Act requires the PM to send a letter. Not to sign a letter.

    It does not preclude any other communication on the subject.

    I have just looked at the text of the Act and nowhere does it require a signature.

    I imagine the argument is over the spirit of it being frustrated, but Mr David Allen Green does not seem concerned, and in practical terms I cannot see what it alters when his view is very well known on the subject. He should have just sent the letter with nothing else and they'd have known it was under protest, so it was just for home consumption and meaningless it seems.

    No doubt someone will pop up to suggest this is another reason for a potential Labour rebel to not vote for the deal legislation.
    Scott_P said:

    kle4 said:

    So why the Court case?

    The court case was already underway, and the sender of that Tweet is not a judge in the Court of Session
    It was a rhetorical question really - the EU seem to have acknowledged the letter and will act up on it, nothing that happens in the court will change that unless you believe it will declare the way he sent the letter invalid and he has to send it again, delaying the official receipt of it by the EU so they cannot start to consider whether to grant it until they make their judgement on, what, Tuesday?
    The Scottish court took him on his personal word that he would obey the law and do nothing to frustrate the benn act. If he has done either of those things he will be in contempt of court. The ruling was quite specific that accepted the PMs undertakings that he would do neither and deferred decision till after the event
    Yes, but the question is how has his being petty and childish frustrated the Act? If he'd sent it like a grown up they'd know from his previous words he did not want it, so how does a letter also saying so frustrate the Act?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500
    Gardenwalker said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    kle4 said:

    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.

    And of course the more the opponents kick up a fuss and involve the courts again the more publicity Boris receives and is likely to gain many more votes

    His opponents would be best advised to calm down

    However, the three letters are very clever and no doubt this was all part of the gaming involving Cummings. No wonder remainers despise him
    Your Johnson/Cummings infatuation is laughable.
    You are a pompous ass.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    kle4 said:

    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.

    And of course the more the opponents kick up a fuss and involve the courts again the more publicity Boris receives and is likely to gain many more votes

    His opponents would be best advised to calm down

    However, the three letters are very clever and no doubt this was all part of the gaming involving Cummings. No wonder remainers despise him
    Your Johnson/Cummings infatuation is laughable.
    I have to admit Boris has exceeded all my expectations and brought together my party.

    I can understand some being upset that I am ready to rejoin as soon as he restores the whip to the rebels
    Which rebels?

    Anyone who votes for the deal, especially if they didn't vote for Letwin, can and should get the whip back.

    Anyone who votes against his deal has chosen their own path. Goodbye.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Andrew said:

    No doubt govt lawyers have been over this pretty carefully.

    The same government lawyers who told BoZo he could unlawfully prorogue Parliament
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,587
    Gallowgate said:

    What is wrong with you @Big_G_NorthWales? Why have you suddenly started drinking the Cummings Kool-Aid? Nothing has changed.

    Boris got a deal. That part has changed.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,844
    The_Taxman said:

    Andrew said:

    dodrade said:

    How can the covering letters be declared unlawful? He can't unsend them and the court cannot compel the EU to disregard them.

    If there's a problem, it'll be that the Benn Act specifies not just that he sends a letter of specific wording, but that:

    "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension..... "


    They will try to argue that's he sabotaging it. Govt lawyers will argue that his duty under the act is fulfilled the moment he sent the letter.
    Andrew said:

    dodrade said:

    How can the covering letters be declared unlawful? He can't unsend them and the court cannot compel the EU to disregard them.

    If there's a problem, it'll be that the Benn Act specifies not just that he sends a letter of specific wording, but that:

    "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension..... "


    They will try to argue that's he sabotaging it. Govt lawyers will argue that his duty under the act is fulfilled the moment he sent the letter.
    I looked up the definition of misconduct in public office and by sending the second and third letter you could argue he is not fulfilling his duties by trying to undermine the Benn letter. BJ might think he is being smart but all it takes is one MP to report him to the Police to start the ball rolling... 😉
    The Police would not take any such complaint seriously. There is nothing that has been done tonight that is in any way in contravention of what was required of him under the Act.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,818
    Has anyone else even been forced to send a letter? My Mum used to force me to write to a pen pal at one stage of my early teen years- I might have signed it
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    Cough *Padfield*
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Scott_P said:

    Andrew said:

    No doubt govt lawyers have been over this pretty carefully.

    The same government lawyers who told BoZo he could unlawfully prorogue Parliament
    He never unlawfully prorogued Parliament. Get your facts straight.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,641
    malcolmg said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    malcolmg said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    The PM is a child.

    He is winding up a lot of people and winning lots of votes
    He has done minimum he needs to do , have to say the weak weirdos in Westminster need a good kicking. Hopefully EU will give them two fingers and the rats will have to make a decision next next week.
    I will miss all the excitement as I will be sunning my self on Lanzarote.
    Have a great break Malc
    Thanks G , I am looking forward to a relaxing break, taking daughter and grandchildren so be very pleasant. Off very early Tuesday.
    Fabulous to have your family and especially grandchildren with you.

    I wish you all a super holiday.

    My youngest son and his partner with their two children were in Lanzarotte in June and they had a wonderul time
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,515
    kle4 said:

    Gallowgate said:

    What is wrong with you @Big_G_NorthWales? Why have you suddenly started drinking the Cummings Kool-Aid? Nothing has changed.

    Boris got a deal. That part has changed.
    We already had a deal. It doesn’t matter.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    ozymandias said:

    kle4 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Johnson has complied with the law. It didn't require him to send it with flowers.

    The concern seems to be that he sent the letter in a childish and sullen way, making clear he personally and the government did not want to do it but were forced to by Parliament.

    For one, that is an entirely accurate summary of what happened.

    For two, the EU know that is an entirely accurate summary of what happened.

    Is complying with an Act in sullen and childish fashion really frustrating it? It's petty, to be sure, but is grudging compliance really unlawful?
    To be fair the act doesn’t stipulate he can’t do it in a sullen way. Perhaps Benn should have insisted Johnson affect a “ happy and co-operative tone” whilst submitting it. The width of his smile should have been stipulated also? 😀
    The bill actually expressed the exact form of the letter all he had to do was sign it. It’s all a little silly the big issue is actually what happens in 14 months time which is gaining no traction. You’re being conned the Uber rich are going to piss all over everybody as they laugh all the way to the bank. But you can’t and won’t see it, enjoy you’re sovereignty and a venture capitalist driven conservative Britain.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1185673376557387777
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483
    Does the Benn Act say that Boris has to ACCEPT any offer of any extension?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,706
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Jonathan said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    kle4 said:

    This is a dead cat thing, right? It seems so utterly inconsequential but various bods will get worked up about Johnson not complying, when really it's just petty and the EU have treated it as complying regardless, and they know that the Parliament of the UK has asked for an extension.

    And of course the more the opponents kick up a fuss and involve the courts again the more publicity Boris receives and is likely to gain many more votes

    His opponents would be best advised to calm down

    However, the three letters are very clever and no doubt this was all part of the gaming involving Cummings. No wonder remainers despise him
    Your Johnson/Cummings infatuation is laughable.
    I have to admit Boris has exceeded all my expectations and brought together my party.

    I can understand some being upset that I am ready to rejoin as soon as he restores tge whip to the rebels
    If he needs to, he will throw you under a bus again.
    You seem upset
    Frustrated that a very clever, cunning but entirely dishonourable and destructive man prospers and that decent men like you fall for it. One day he will get his comeuppance. I hope the damage he does is not too great until then.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    edited October 2019
    No only if it is to 31/1 otherwise it has to come back to the commons
This discussion has been closed.