The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
Political spin-doctoring is the most interesting of professions. Those who are good at it are completely worshipped by their political bosses, even when scandals pop up.
In recent memory we had Cameron appointing and then desperately hanging on to Andy Coulson until he ended up in prison, and before that Damien McBride running Gordon Brown’s spin operation through the recession with an iron fist (and lots of complaints).
I’d say no deal is very unlikely now however things could start unraveling quickly this week on the WAIB.
It’s likely the opposition will start amending this , now although any future government doesn’t have to honour this it’s likely to cause problems with the ERG .
I’m shocked the media have not picked up on Steve Bakers tweet , bizarrely Laura K who retweeted it failed to understand the significance of this part of that .
“Support the legislation to completion in good faith, provided it is not spoiled by opponents of Brexit”.
I would at this point hope for not too many dramas but nothing’s over till it’s over !
Onto the DUP who are now on the war path . No amount of money from the government is going to make a blind bit of difference and their votes are now crucial as regards to any possible amendments.
As long as any amendments are cross party and not just Labour ones the DUP could prove very troublesome over the next few weeks.
They’ve already said they’re going to vote against the second reading of the WAIB .
To my mind the only real question now is whether - if the deal can't get through the current House of Commons - the opposition can realistically block a general election. I am assuming that if the deal doesn't get through the EU will grant an extension long enough to hold an election, and that if there is a general election the Tories will get at least a working majority.
It seems to me that voting down a deal and then trying to block a general election will go down extremely badly with the public. I'm not even sure Corbyn would want to do it.
There is a problem for Boris in maintaining the pretence that he doesn’t want a GE, if there is a ratified deal in place. The only justification he had for upsetting Brenda from Bristol was Parliament’s blocking of Brexit.
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
That sounds fair but we must not underestimate the effect of Boris and the Saj's promises to spaff the cash. Costing and funding commitments only matters for the red team, it turns out.
But does anybody really believe him? Time after time, he has shown himself to be a liar, and his team have no respect for the rules. Totally untrustworthy, I would say.
Of course, and that will dent him. But everyone believed May - and then she told the old folks she was coming with a death tax. Fewer will believe Johnson, but his campaigning will be relentlessly positive.
Sure, it will be bullshit, but Johnson can be a surprisingly effective confidence man - hard though that might be to appreciate, for those of us immune to his patter.
Yet he still plans to continue his Scottish court case against the government tomorrow. People donating to him have more money than sense, at some point (and it possibly came close to happening last week) a judge somewhere is going to declare him a vexatious litigant for trying to turn everything the government does into a court case.
Isn’t it the court itself that has said it will sit tomorrow? When it does, it will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and the case will be over. The PM has done what he said he would never do. There was no Cummings master plan - just a very good spin operation, which most of the media is swallowing wholesale. It is very, very impressive.
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
Surely it was a mistake for Johnson to say he wouldn't comply. It would have been better to criticise it as strongly as he wanted to, but make it clear that of course he would comply with the law.
From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.
They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
Not sure these dalyaing tactics ARE fine and good. Remainers seem to forget, Boris's 31st October "do or die" deadline wasn't of his making. It was the deadline granted, amongst some disquiet, by the EU. It is their deadline he is trying to achieve, without the need to ask them for a further extension to some unspecified time, for some unspecified purpose.
Where the Remainers have got it wrong is misjudging Boris. To their surprise, Boris has got on really well with the EU leaders. He is making all the right noises that he is a fervent European who will be a good team player - just outside the structures of the EU. The Remainers have been dripping poison in the EU's ears, about how Brexit Britain will be an existential threat to them, and they must take all measures to stop our leaving. Except, with Boris, it doesn't feel like that.
Boris has been trying his hardest to meet the EU's original extended deadline. I suspect that having now got the measure of the man, they will be much more inclined to help him out with peeling the Remainers' fingers off the Brexit doorframe....
If they had the measure of the man, they’d be counting their finger after shaking hands with him.
Yes, it makes the final destination much more likely to be ‘Canada’ than ‘Norway’. A few years of an independent trade policy also makes it much less likely that we rejoin the EU at some point down the line, as doing so would mean tearing up trade agreements and large price increases on food.
The stated intention of the Johnson Deal is Canada, not Norway, so clearly that's a very possible outcome. There are several problems with it through.
Firstly any UK FTA will come with strong level playing field commitments, so why take less access for the same commitments?
Secondly an FTA will impose barriers to trade with our by far most important trading partner, compared with the status quo, without bringing benefits for third country trade. There are powerful business lobbies who don't want to lose trade.
Thirdly FTAs take many years to negotiate and have uncertain outcomes. People are supposedly fed up with Brexit and want it done. Johnson's plan drags out the arguments forever.
An FTA comes with a lot of headwinds. Given that and the non-viability of No Deal, noting the problems a divergent GB causes for Northern Ireland, but assuming staying in the EU is not an option, and given half, or maybe more than half now, of the population don't actually want to leave the EU, the only other option is some version of the Vassal State.
I think that's where we will end up.
Johnson has demonstrated two things with his Withdrawal Agreement.
1. The flexibility to hit a self-imposed deadline.
2. The ability to identify what is most important to his core, ERG, support.
This indicates a willingness to agree to a minimalist Canada-style FTA, accepting in large part whatever draft the EU have sat ready in a drawer.
There will be some concessions that he might fight hard to avoid making. On fisheries, for example. It's possible Scottish fishermen will be the next DUP, though.
They will get their just desserts , how they could be stupid enough to trust the Tories yet again is just beyond belief. As they say , there are none so blind as those that will not see.
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PMCourt will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
We’re in the end game. From here it’s Johnson’s Deal, a general election followed by a deal or revoke. The EU can live with any of those, so they’ll offer one more extension (if necessary) to enable one of those outcomes. The high likelihood, though, is that Johnson’s deal will be where we end up, on or around 31st October.
Yet he still plans to continue his Scottish court case against the government tomorrow. People donating to him have more money than sense, at some point (and it possibly came close to happening last week) a judge somewhere is going to declare him a vexatious litigant for trying to turn everything the government does into a court case.
Isn’t it the court itself that has said it will sit tomorrow? When it does, it will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and the case will be over. The PM has done what he said he would never do. There was no Cummings master plan - just a very good spin operation, which most of the media is swallowing wholesale. It is very, very impressive.
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
I think the Govt will be entitled to argue that the “spirit” of the Act went out of the window with the passing of the Letwin amendment. The basic purpose of the Benn Act was to avert no deal (through the seeking of an extension) in the event that a deal couldn’t be agreed with the EU and supported by Parliament. The Govt met their obligation to secure a deal and offer the chance for Parliament to support or reject it. They did neither. Johnson can not honestly go back to the EU and say that an extension will be required, since he does not know that Parliament will fail to pass legislation approving the deal before October 31st. Which is in effect what he has said in the accompanying letters.
From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.
They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
If the deal could only pass due to short-term momentum thanks to months of phoney political theatre about leaving with no deal, there would have been a backlash after the details sunk in. Given that Brexiteers have largely united behind the deal, why not call Corbyn's bluff and go for a second referendum?
From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.
They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
I am curious why you think that. The Boris/ERG faction cheered him when he casually threw the DUP under the bus. They would have crucified May if she had done precisely the same thing.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
I see what you mean. The Press are reporting that Johnson is trying to frustrate the extension. The Court will be told that he isn't. If the Court accepts that then the Press will report that he's been allowed to try to frustrate the extension.
It's an example of where saying two different things to two different audiences looks likely to succeed.
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
I think the Govt will be entitled to argue that the “spirit” of the Act went out of the window with the passing of the Letwin amendment. The basic purpose of the Benn Act was to avert no deal (through the seeking of an extension) in the event that a deal couldn’t be agreed with the EU and supported by Parliament. The Govt met their obligation to secure a deal and offer the chance for Parliament to support or reject it. They did neither. Johnson can not honestly go back to the EU and say that an extension will be required, since he does not know that Parliament will fail to pass legislation approving the deal before October 31st. Which is in effect what he has said in the accompanying letters.
The Benn Act required the sending of the letter in the event that Parliament had not approved a MV. Since Letwin's idiocy prevented the resolution yesterday from being a meaningful vote Boris had no choice. I think the Court will be slightly unimpressed with the antics (not actually signing it, the accompanying letters etc) but I don't really see where they go from here.
Yet he still plans to continue his Scottish court case against the government tomorrow. People donating to him have more money than sense, at some point (and it possibly came close to happening last week) a judge somewhere is going to declare him a vexatious litigant for trying to turn everything the government does into a court case.
Isn’t it the court itself that has said it will sit tomorrow? When it does, it will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and the case will be over. The PM has done what he said he would never do. There was no Cummings master plan - just a very good spin operation, which most of the media is swallowing wholesale. It is very, very impressive.
- Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
Surely it was a mistake for Johnson to say he wouldn't comply. It would have been better to criticise it as strongly as he wanted to, but make it clear that of course he would comply with the law.
Not on the basis of today’s media coverage.
It was the most almighty hole he'd dug for himself, but with some help from Cummings he appears to have emerged from it relatively unscathed.
Yes, it makes the final destination much more likely to be ‘Canada’ than ‘Norway’. A few years of an independent trade policy also makes it much less likely that we rejoin the EU at some point down the line, as doing so would mean tearing up trade agreements and large price increases on food.
The stated intention of the Johnson Deal is Canada, not Norway, so clearly that's a very possible outcome. There are several problems with it through.
Firstly any UK FTA will come with strong level playing field commitments, so why take less access for the same commitments?
Secondly an FTA will impose barriers to trade with our by far most important trading partner, compared with the status quo, without bringing benefits for third country trade. There are powerful business lobbies who don't want to lose trade.
Thirdly FTAs take many years to negotiate and have uncertain outcomes. People are supposedly fed up with Brexit and want it done. Johnson's plan drags out the arguments forever.
An FTA comes with a lot of headwinds. Given that and the non-viability of No Deal, noting the problems a divergent GB causes for Northern Ireland, but assuming staying in the EU is not an option, and given half, or maybe more than half now, of the population don't actually want to leave the EU, the only other option is some version of the Vassal State.
I think that's where we will end up.
Johnson has demonstrated two things with his Withdrawal Agreement.
1. The flexibility to hit a self-imposed deadline.
2. The ability to identify what is most important to his core, ERG, support.
This indicates a willingness to agree to a minimalist Canada-style FTA, accepting in large part whatever draft the EU have sat ready in a drawer.
There will be some concessions that he might fight hard to avoid making. On fisheries, for example. It's possible Scottish fishermen will be the next DUP, though.
Thoughtful members of the ERG (!!!) might consider how quick Johnson was to throw the DUP under a train when he decided he no longer needed them.
The ERG have proved themselves capable of thinking ahead, as they demonstrated with their immediate focus on the potential for No Deal at the end of the transition.
I expect they are already working hard on recruiting potential new Tory MPs to their caucus, so that they remain strong enough not to be cut loose in such a way.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
We’re in the end game. From here it’s Johnson’s Deal, a general election followed by a deal or revoke. The EU can live with any of those, so they’ll offer one more extension (if necessary) to enable one of those outcomes. The high likelihood, though, is that Johnson’s deal will be where we end up, on or around 31st October.
The only way that Johnson's deal passes now is if the EU says no and it becomes a straight choice between deal or no deal. If there is an actual extension there will be no departure before a GE the outcome of which, as TSE points out in his thread header, should not be taken for granted.
Yes, it makes the final destination much more likely to be ‘Canada’ than ‘Norway’. A few years of an independent trade policy also makes it much less likely that we rejoin the EU at some point down the line, as doing so would mean tearing up trade agreements and large price increases on food.
The stated intention of the Johnson Deal is Canada, not Norway, so clearly that's a very possible outcome. There are several problems with it through.
Firstly any UK FTA will come with strong level playing field commitments, so why take less access for the same commitments?
Secondly an FTA will impose barriers to trade with our by far most important trading partner, compared with the status quo, without bringing benefits for third country trade. There are powerful business lobbies who don't want to lose trade.
Thirdly FTAs take many years to negotiate and have uncertain outcomes. People are supposedly fed up with Brexit and want it done. Johnson's plan drags out the arguments forever.
An FTA comes with a lot of headwinds. Given that and the non-viability of No Deal, noting the problems a divergent GB causes for Northern Ireland, but assuming staying in the EU is not an option, and given half, or maybe more than half now, of the population don't actually want to leave the EU, the only other option is some version of the Vassal State.
I think that's where we will end up.
Johnson has demonstrated two things with his Withdrawal Agreement.
1. The flexibility to hit a self-imposed deadline.
2. The ability to identify what is most important to his core, ERG, support.
This indicates a willingness to agree to a minimalist Canada-style FTA, accepting in large part whatever draft the EU have sat ready in a drawer.
There will be some concessions that he might fight hard to avoid making. On fisheries, for example. It's possible Scottish fishermen will be the next DUP, though.
You think Johnson might take the Level Playing Field obligations without getting access in return, in the interests of a quick and dirty deal?
Not saying you are wrong. I tend to rely too much on first principles.
BoZo's Surrender Deal is quite popular with the EU because it gives them everything that they wanted 2 years ago, before May extracted concessions. It is wrong to conflate that with personal popularity. EU leaders are capable of being polite and diplomatic even to petulant twats.
Your statement over the content of the deal is certainly opinion based. There are parts of the deal that are different, as illustrated by David Trimble supporting the deal.
Remainers think it's rubbish because it paves the way to a 'harder' Brexit, Leavers prefer it for the same reason. And the previous deal failed three times to gain a HoC majority - lets see how this one does.
Yes, it makes the final destination much more likely to be ‘Canada’ than ‘Norway’. A few years of an independent trade policy also makes it much less likely that we rejoin the EU at some point down the line, as doing so would mean tearing up trade agreements and large price increases on food.
Which deal do you anticipate brining about large decreases in the price of food?
We don’t even need to sign any deals for that, we simply leave the CAP and can set our own tariffs on food imports - which will be low for anything we don’t produce ourselves.
We could also ally with somewhere like Ukraine, who have plentiful surplus foodstuffs yet struggle to export to the EU because of high CAP tariffs.
Where I am in the Middle East, food is considerably cheaper than in the U.K., despite the vast majority of it being imported. The reason is high EU CAP tariffs vs low tariffs here. Why would we want to make food more expensive?
Didn't Ukraine end up with an FTA that included foodstuffs with the EU?
Yes, and as part of that agreement, Ukraine also reformed its food hygiene monitoring regime to reduce non-tariff barriers too.
The UAE keeps prices down by directly investing in farmland abroad and bypassing the market.
TSE is right to worry about if he is fighting the last war, but I think overall the points are sound. People often seem to ignore that May had such leads or better, or blithely assume Boris is better so wont suffer the same fate.
Maybe. But a lot of people hate him, Corbyn is tough as a limpet, and the LDs will find a lot of people will choose labour over risking letting Boris back in.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
I see what you mean. The Press are reporting that Johnson is trying to frustrate the extension. The Court will be told that he isn't. If the Court accepts that then the Press will report that he's been allowed to try to frustrate the extension.
It's an example of where saying two different things to two different audiences looks likely to succeed.
This Number 10 is, for obvious reasons, the most media savvy there’s ever been (even more so than Blair/Campbell). They know what they’re doing.
From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.
Not just that- the right amendment has a reasonable chance of being added to the bill. What do the ERG do then?
From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.
And might peel off lab votes for the main bill. The battle for remain is not over yet.
Boris will be quite shameless about nicking the popular bits of Labour policies, leaving them with a pile of class war shite.....
Agreed, unlike May Boris can do retail politics well
All these delaying tactics are all fine and good but they can't hide from the people forever
Nah, BoZo is a crap campaigner who avoids scrutiny and forgets what he said the day before. He is widely despised and that is a powerful motivator to go out to vote against.
and yet to the best of my knowledge, he has never lost an election ?
How many has he actually fought, where he didn't have a very good chance of winning? Further didn't he endorse Zac Goldsmith as mayoral candidate? But it's a fair point.
Further to TSE`s piece, what would really put the cat amongst the pidgeons is a change in LP leader.
If there were a GE prior to 2022 but next spring at the earliest, there is time for a new LP leader should Corbyn decide to resign.
A new LP leader - a credible one such as, say, Starmer or Cooper - could be a game-changer.
Add to this the thought that BJ`s deal weakens the union and, due to this, has the potential to hurt the Tories when the public fully grasp this point.
Yes, it makes the final destination much more likely to be ‘Canada’ than ‘Norway’. A few years of an independent trade policy also makes it much less likely that we rejoin the EU at some point down the line, as doing so would mean tearing up trade agreements and large price increases on food.
I should also point out that Brexit would only substantially bring down prices on food where imports substitute for UK produce. EU tariffs are generally low on food items that are not produced in Britain and of course you don't pay tariffs on produce imported from another member state. The government has promised to support UK farmers. There will be little if any reduction in food prices.
EU produce. Not UK produce. The two are not the same.
The actual stuff that will be substituted is largely UK produced. In this case it largely is the same.
Edit tariffs on produce that comes from the EU now but isn't produced in the UK like winter vegetables aren't high enough for the UK source them from elsewhere. We will still source from the EU for that produce.
After three and a half years we get onto the big issues at the hearts of our relationship with the EU - the price of celery.
From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.
They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
I think on the contrary only a miracle can stop him. But we'll see.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
We’re in the end game. From here it’s Johnson’s Deal, a general election followed by a deal or revoke. The EU can live with any of those, so they’ll offer one more extension (if necessary) to enable one of those outcomes. The high likelihood, though, is that Johnson’s deal will be where we end up, on or around 31st October.
The only way that Johnson's deal passes now is if the EU says no and it becomes a straight choice between deal or no deal. If there is an actual extension there will be no departure before a GE the outcome of which, as TSE points out in his thread header, should not be taken for granted.
I think you’re being way too bleak. It’s very clear to me Johnson’s deal has majority support in the house - as Johnson himself says in his second letter, I believe. The EU will not risk a no deal from here having finally got it off the table.
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
I think the Govt will be entitled to argue that the “spirit” of the Act went out of the window with the passing of the Letwin amendment. The basic purpose of the Benn Act was to avert no deal (through the seeking of an extension) in the event that a deal couldn’t be agreed with the EU and supported by Parliament. The Govt met their obligation to secure a deal and offer the chance for Parliament to support or reject it. They did neither. Johnson can not honestly go back to the EU and say that an extension will be required, since he does not know that Parliament will fail to pass legislation approving the deal before October 31st. Which is in effect what he has said in the accompanying letters.
The Benn Act required the sending of the letter in the event that Parliament had not approved a MV. Since Letwin's idiocy prevented the resolution yesterday from being a meaningful vote Boris had no choice. I think the Court will be slightly unimpressed with the antics (not actually signing it, the accompanying letters etc) but I don't really see where they go from here.
If the Court were to find that he was in contempt by sending an additional letter in an attempt to undermine the extension request it's not obvious what the remedy would be. Send another letter to Tusk asking him to destroy the offending letter and forget he read it?
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
I think the Govt will be entitled to argue that the “spirit” of the Act went out of the window with the passing of the Letwin amendment. The basic purpose of the Benn Act was to avert no deal (through the seeking of an extension) in the event that a deal couldn’t be agreed with the EU and supported by Parliament. The Govt met their obligation to secure a deal and offer the chance for Parliament to support or reject it. They did neither. Johnson can not honestly go back to the EU and say that an extension will be required, since he does not know that Parliament will fail to pass legislation approving the deal before October 31st. Which is in effect what he has said in the accompanying letters.
The Benn Act required the sending of the letter in the event that Parliament had not approved a MV. Since Letwin's idiocy prevented the resolution yesterday from being a meaningful vote Boris had no choice. I think the Court will be slightly unimpressed with the antics (not actually signing it, the accompanying letters etc) but I don't really see where they go from here.
If the Court were to find that he was in contempt by sending an additional letter in an attempt to undermine the extension request it's not obvious what the remedy would be. Send another letter to Tusk asking him to destroy the offending letter and forget he read it?
Much as I distrust the man I think the second letter was drafted with legal advice.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
I see what you mean. The Press are reporting that Johnson is trying to frustrate the extension. The Court will be told that he isn't. If the Court accepts that then the Press will report that he's been allowed to try to frustrate the extension.
It's an example of where saying two different things to two different audiences looks likely to succeed.
This Number 10 is, for obvious reasons, the most media savvy there’s ever been (even more so than Blair/Campbell). They know what they’re doing.
The Tories are also more united than under May now. Most of the Guakeward squad will be back onboard once we've left too.
I think you’re being way too bleak. It’s very clear to me Johnson’s deal has majority support in the house - as Johnson himself says in his second letter, I believe. The EU will not risk a no deal from here having finally got it off the table.
I agree with that. I think we have come to the end of the beginning. To be clear, I thought we would be at this point two years ago.
From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.
They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
I am curious why you think that. The Boris/ERG faction cheered him when he casually threw the DUP under the bus. They would have crucified May if she had done precisely the same thing.
The DUP are now on the warpath. How does this government with a majority of something like -60 do anything or stop anything? The numbers have got so bad that the DUP lost their power. They could no longer offer a majority. They were no longer useful, seemed to be the thinking.
Yesterday's vote proved that to be wrong because Letwin would have been defeated if they had been onside. But I honestly think that Boris' solution to NI was both imaginative and as good an attempt at squaring that particular circle as was possible. If the NI proposals had applied to the whole of the UK like May's the DUP would have been content (one hesitates to say happy). But then the ERG would have kicked off. To get Brexit through we are going to need a new Parliament with fewer scum bags in it.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
I see what you mean. The Press are reporting that Johnson is trying to frustrate the extension. The Court will be told that he isn't. If the Court accepts that then the Press will report that he's been allowed to try to frustrate the extension.
It's an example of where saying two different things to two different audiences looks likely to succeed.
This Number 10 is, for obvious reasons, the most media savvy there’s ever been (even more so than Blair/Campbell). They know what they’re doing.
The Tories are also more united than under May now. Most of the Guakeward squad will be back onboard once we've left too.
Yet he still plans to continue his Scottish court case against the government tomorrow. People donating to him have more money than sense, at some point (and it possibly came close to happening last week) a judge somewhere is going to declare him a vexatious litigant for trying to turn everything the government does into a court case.
Isn’t it the court itself that has said it will sit tomorrow? When it does, it will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and the case will ery impressive.
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed ng.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
Surely it was a mistake for Johnson to say he wouldn't comply. It would have been better to criticise it as strongly as he wanted to, but make it clear that of course he would comply with the law.
More sensible, but the argument he hasn't complied in sending the letter look awfully weak, unless people want Tusk to say that he will wait for the court case before asking the EU leaders to consider the request as he hadn't really received it from the PM sufficiently.
The argument about not complying by frustrating it may have more legs but even there his personal letter is milder than people seem to think, do not say to ignore parliaments request, and nothing he hadn't publicly said anyway, but it's a question of how much the court cares he is taking the piss when the EU have accepted the request.
Remain needs to win the key votes this week or it is over. Is it really worth squabbling over the PM not physically signing the letter? Really? He can even defend that by saying he was not supposed to alter the form of the letter. The argument hes not sent it is bizarre.
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
I think the Govt will be entitled to argue that the “spirit” of the Act went out of the window with the passing of the Letwin amendment. The basic purpose of the Benn Act was to avert no deal (through the seeking of an extension) in the event that a deal couldn’t be agreed with the EU and supported by Parliament. The Govt met their obligation to secure a deal and offer the chance for Parliament to support or reject it. They did neither. Johnson can not honestly go back to the EU and say that an extension will be required, since he does not know that Parliament will fail to pass legislation approving the deal before October 31st. Which is in effect what he has said in the accompanying letters.
The Benn Act required the sending of the letter in the event that Parliament had not approved a MV. Since Letwin's idiocy prevented the resolution yesterday from being a meaningful vote Boris had no choice. I think the Court will be slightly unimpressed with the antics (not actually signing it, the accompanying letters etc) but I don't really see where they go from here.
If the Court were to find that he was in contempt by sending an additional letter in an attempt to undermine the extension request it's not obvious what the remedy would be. Send another letter to Tusk asking him to destroy the offending letter and forget he read it?
Much as I distrust the man I think the second letter was drafted with legal advice.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
We’re in the end game. From here it’s Johnson’s Deal, a general election followed by a deal or revoke. The EU can live with any of those, so they’ll offer one more extension (if necessary) to enable one of those outcomes. The high likelihood, though, is that Johnson’s deal will be where we end up, on or around 31st October.
The only way that Johnson's deal passes now is if the EU says no and it becomes a straight choice between deal or no deal. If there is an actual extension there will be no departure before a GE the outcome of which, as TSE points out in his thread header, should not be taken for granted.
I think you’re being way too bleak. It’s very clear to me Johnson’s deal has majority support in the house - as Johnson himself says in his second letter, I believe. The EU will not risk a no deal from here having finally got it off the table.
The progress of the WAIB is going to be tortuous and slow. I will be amazed if Boris can get it through Parliament before the 31st unless the EU say this is it.
Yet he still plans to continue his Scottish court case against the government tomorrow. People donating to him have more money than sense, at some point (and it possibly came close to happening last week) a judge somewhere is going to declare him a vexatious litigant for trying to turn everything the government does into a court case.
Yeah, it’s not like he has anything to point to, like a landmark Supreme Court decision, is it?
It's a fair rejoinder to the vexatious point, though I couldn't even understand why he thought he had a case about the s55 of the trade act thing.
Boris will be quite shameless about nicking the popular bits of Labour policies, leaving them with a pile of class war shite.....
Agreed, unlike May Boris can do retail politics well
All these delaying tactics are all fine and good but they can't hide from the people forever
Nah, BoZo is a crap campaigner who avoids scrutiny and forgets what he said the day before. He is widely despised and that is a powerful motivator to go out to vote against.
and yet to the best of my knowledge, he has never lost an election ?
How many has he actually fought, where he didn't have a very good chance of winning? Further didn't he endorse Zac Goldsmith as mayoral candidate? But it's a fair point.
2012...he should have lost
And would have, had Oona King been the Labour candidate.
... the only other option is some version of the Vassal State.
I think that's where we will end up.
Johnson has demonstrated two things with his Withdrawal Agreement.
1. The flexibility to hit a self-imposed deadline.
2. The ability to identify what is most important to his core, ERG, support.
This indicates a willingness to agree to a minimalist Canada-style FTA, accepting in large part whatever draft the EU have sat ready in a drawer.
There will be some concessions that he might fight hard to avoid making. On fisheries, for example. It's possible Scottish fishermen will be the next DUP, though.
You think Johnson might take the Level Playing Field obligations without getting access in return, in the interests of a quick and dirty deal?
Not saying you are wrong. I tend to rely too much on first principles.
I think we have to identify what Johnson's most vital imperatives are. The first of these is, I believe, to keep the ERG onside.
I therefore think it is likely that he would trade even less access in return for weaker level playing field obligations.
If Johnson wins a landslide majority in the near future then he has more flexibility to agree a deal that meets other imperatives - I'm less sure whether that would mean abandoning the ERG for a closer deal, or going for no deal if necessary in favour of more freedom to set the parameters of a US deal.
If Johnson only has a small majority, or is still in a minority, then he is the same position as now. Beholden to the ERG to seek the hardest of Brexits, but a prisoner of Parliament who will seek to prevent No Deal.
One observation that I would make is that there is one consistent pattern in the Johnson premiership: it always seems that he has the votes, his persuasion strategy seems to be "I'm going to win, get on the winning side or you're anathematized" and then he loses.
It seems he has the votes next week. But does he? Even though I'm fairly sure he does, past performance suggests he will somehow contrive the opposite.
Perhaps he is merely an effective liar? I am beginning to see why many MPs do not trust him
That's the good thing about the legislation for those labour mps considering backing him - they can tell people it's not about trusting johnson, they trust the Word of the law they will pass, and can ignore the cries of dont trust him.
Of course, that means it better be well drafted to do what was promised or he is in trouble.
The stated intention of the Johnson Deal is Canada, not Norway, so clearly that's a very possible outcome. There are several problems with it through.
Firstly any UK FTA will come with strong level playing field commitments, so why take less access for the same commitments?
Secondly an FTA will impose barriers to trade with our by far most important trading partner, compared with the status quo, without bringing benefits for third country trade. There are powerful business lobbies who don't want to lose trade.
Thirdly FTAs take many years to negotiate and have uncertain outcomes. People are supposedly fed up with Brexit and want it done. Johnson's plan drags out the arguments forever.
An FTA comes with a lot of headwinds. Given that and the non-viability of No Deal, noting the problems a divergent GB causes for Northern Ireland, but assuming staying in the EU is not an option, and given half, or maybe more than half now, of the population don't actually want to leave the EU, the only other option is some version of the Vassal State.
I think that's where we will end up.
Johnson has demonstrated two things with his Withdrawal Agreement.
1. The flexibility to hit a self-imposed deadline.
2. The ability to identify what is most important to his core, ERG, support.
This indicates a willingness to agree to a minimalist Canada-style FTA, accepting in large part whatever draft the EU have sat ready in a drawer.
There will be some concessions that he might fight hard to avoid making. On fisheries, for example. It's possible Scottish fishermen will be the next DUP, though.
They will get their just desserts , how they could be stupid enough to trust the Tories yet again is just beyond belief. As they say , there are none so blind as those that will not see.
As well as the fisheries, it is farmers that are next to be chucked under a bus. I see the farmers most affected by leaving CAP are concentrated in those Tory seats on the Scottish borders.
Gove formulated agricultural policy to end growers subsidies, and to rewild the countryside. Broadly positive in terms of the local environment, but will have a significant reduction in domestic food production, along the lines of the late Victorian agricultural depression.
The new ministers at DEFRA, Villiers and Eustice have however talked about continuing producer subsidies, and protecting humane animal husbandry through non tariff barriers.
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
We’re in the end game. From here it’s Johnson’s Deal, a general election followed by a deal or revoke. The EU can live with any of those, so they’ll offer one more extension (if necessary) to enable one of those outcomes. The high likelihood, though, is that Johnson’s deal will be where we end up, on or around 31st October.
The only way that Johnson's deal passes now is if the EU says no and it becomes a straight choice between deal or no deal. If there is an actual extension there will be no departure before a GE the outcome of which, as TSE points out in his thread header, should not be taken for granted.
I think you’re being way too bleak. It’s very clear to me Johnson’s deal has majority support in the house - as Johnson himself says in his second letter, I believe. The EU will not risk a no deal from here having finally got it off the table.
I agree. True, there are plenty who backed the Letwin amendment for reasons which went way beyond Letwin’s intention, as unlike Letwim they have no intention of voting for the deal, but that doesn’t alter the very likely existence of a majority for the deal itself.
I’m reasonable sure that Johnson/Cummings will have worked that out, but are enjoying building outrage at their opponents in the meantime. If so, that has clearly worked, as David’s comments demonstrate.
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear to his counsel that they would be expecting a detailed report on what he had done. The court was also clear that it was a principle of public law that one had to comply not just with the letter but the spirit of the legislation. I think that this latter point is likely to be the source of some discussion. I think that the Court will want addressed on whether the 2 other letters Boris sent were designed to undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
I think the Govt will be entitled to argue that the “spirit” of the Act went out of the window with the passing of the Letwin amendment. The basic purpose of the Benn Act was to avert no deal (through the seeking of an extension) in the event that a deal couldn’t be agreed with the EU and supported by Parliament. The Govt met their obligation to secure a deal and offer the chance for Parliament to support or reject it. They did neither. Johnson can not honestly go back to the EU and say that an extension will be required, since he does not know that Parliament will fail to pass legislation approving the deal before October 31st. Which is in effect what he has said in the accompanying letters.
The Benn Act required the sending of the letter in the event that Parliament had not approved a MV. Since Letwin's idiocy prevented the resolution yesterday from being a meaningful vote Boris had no choice. I think the Court will be slightly unimpressed with the antics (not actually signing it, the accompanying letters etc) but I don't really see where they go from here.
If the Court were to find that he was in contempt by sending an additional letter in an attempt to undermine the extension request it's not obvious what the remedy would be. Send another letter to Tusk asking him to destroy the offending letter and forget he read it?
Much as I distrust the man I think the second letter was drafted with legal advice.
He had legal advice for the prorogation too. It's not infallible.
The case was continued to tomorrow by order to see what the PM did. It was made clear o undermine the application for an extension.
Counsel for the petitioners (Aiden O'Neill once again) will no doubt want to make representations on that too. Whether the Court ultimately concludes anything needs to be done is a different question. Despite the letter not being signed I think that there has been substantial compliance and it is likely that will be the end of the matter but counsel for the PM may have a difficult morning.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
If it goes to court, n is genuinely brilliant.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
It would have been nice to make a decision to be sure.
Given no real reason has been made for the extension, it being stock wording from a month ago, aka forever ago, the EU should sit on it for a week. They wont let us crash out but how long they give us should depend on what we are doing next. Legislation passed ? Short. Government falls and GE? January. Referendum? June.
I fear they'll just say Jan anyway, whichvwss the preferred date back in april.
I really like the tone of Boris second letter. Spot on.
They just had Cherry on R4, the Paddy O’Connell show is my favourite radio show at the moment, and he read Lord Panic out to her from Hansard and she flpaffed and bombed and sounded like a legal loser. Go hear for yourself.
Oliver Letwin moved his motion saying it’s just for a few weeks and is to prevent no deal and he’s keen to vote to enable Boris brexit. In my opinion he’s a liar. He knows full well what he is doing is different than that, to give remainers control to change it and thus throw Steve Baker and his crew off the haywain.
Boris biggest problem now is not his remain opponents but his self imposed die in ditch deadline. It wasn’t the Benn act that made the first letter very necessary, if he can’t pass his deal (or even if he does) both Boris and EU have a decision to make most likely a can to kick regardless of the Benn act. Do you see my point, Boris inherited (and arguably created earlier this year) can kick deadline run out, but he didn’t have to say die in a ditch and Yesterday and today he should be backing away from deadline with I will implement this deal but in reality we need longer to do this properly. He’ll still have 99% of current support on side. Yesterday and today he should be backing away from the self imposed die in ditch stuff.
Another smaller issue he may have, the tinkering with the PD from a May Hammond PD to ERG one could cost him votes he needs to pass it?
Yes, it makes the final destination much more likely to be ‘Canada’ than ‘Norway’. A few years of an independent trade policy also makes it much less likely that we rejoin the EU at some point down the line, as doing so would mean tearing up trade agreements and large price increases on food.
I should also point out that Brexit would only substantially bring down prices on food where imports substitute for UK produce. EU tariffs are generally low on food items that are not produced in Britain and of course you don't pay tariffs on produce imported from another member state. The government has promised to support UK farmers. There will be little if any reduction in food prices.
EU produce. Not UK produce. The two are not the same.
The actual stuff that will be substituted is largely UK produced. In this case it largely is the same.
Edit tariffs on produce that comes from the EU now but isn't produced in the UK like winter vegetables aren't high enough for the UK source them from elsewhere. We will still source from the EU for that produce.
After three and a half years we get onto the big issues at the hearts of our relationship with the EU - the price of celery.
Am pleased to report the planting of winter celery has recommenced after three week pause for whatever reason.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
It would have been nice to make a decision to be sure.
Given no real reason has been made for the extension, it being stock wording from a month ago, aka forever ago, the EU should sit on it for a week. They wont let us crash out but how long they give us should depend on what we are doing next. Legislation passed ? Short. Government falls and GE? January. Referendum? June.
I fear they'll just say Jan anyway, whichvwss the preferred date back in april.
The problem is on what terms the extension is granted. Do we keep paying £200m a week into the pot for example? Are we allowed to terminate the extension early? These things need to be agreed and Boris is clear that he is not agreeing anything.
He had legal advice for the prorogation too. It's not infallible.
What he did WAS legal at the time but the Supreme Court had to essentially preserve the unwritten supremacy of parliament. One can look through ALL of Lord Sumptions' musings on the matter to see this is the case.
... the only other option is some version of the Vassal State.
I think that's where we will end up.
Johnson has demonstrated two things with his Withdrawal Agreement.
1. The flexibility to hit a self-imposed deadline.
2. The ability to identify what is most important to his core, ERG, support.
This indicates a willingness to agree to a minimalist Canada-style FTA, accepting in large part whatever draft the EU have sat ready in a drawer.
There will be some concessions that he might fight hard to avoid making. On fisheries, for example. It's possible Scottish fishermen will be the next DUP, though.
You think Johnson might take the Level Playing Field obligations without getting access in return, in the interests of a quick and dirty deal?
Not saying you are wrong. I tend to rely too much on first principles.
I think we have to identify what Johnson's most vital imperatives are. The first of these is, I believe, to keep the ERG onside.
I therefore think it is likely that he would trade even less access in return for weaker level playing field obligations.
If Johnson wins a landslide majority in the near future then he has more flexibility to agree a deal that meets other imperatives - I'm less sure whether that would mean abandoning the ERG for a closer deal, or going for no deal if necessary in favour of more freedom to set the parameters of a US deal.
If Johnson only has a small majority, or is still in a minority, then he is the same position as now. Beholden to the ERG to seek the hardest of Brexits, but a prisoner of Parliament who will seek to prevent No Deal.
Thanks for the reply.
I don't think the EU will accept reduced playing field obligations. It's the price to play.
So the question is how hard will Johnson bargain to get access quid pro quo? Fast deals are where you concede everything to the other more powerful operator. So could Johnson do exactly that and present the loss of access to our main market as just the type of buccaneering he goes on about?
I should add that the present deal suggests Johnson doesn't see any mileage in No Deal. Although No Deal is still a possibility at the future arrangements stage, he would seem to have excluded it as an acceptable outcome.
On topic I sort of agree with you TSE. Regardless what polling is telling us, going into 2017 the idea of Corbyn PM seemed ludicrous, absolutely not going to happen, but now it doesn’t feel so ludicrous, just unpalatable but not for keeps. If that sort of makes any sense?
From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.
They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
That was the hope of those backing the amendment, besides Letwin himself and a few others. Like you I think it will work. Whether enough get on board with a referendum being tacked on I dont know, probably not, but I think the ERG will be flakey when amendments are lost and the labour rebel votes will be flakey if the amendments are rejected.
Theres a reason the opposition did not want a MV. It psychologically would have committed people to back the legislation - after all they just said they backed the deal.
By not backing it yet those people can be worked and persuaded over dozens of anendment fights. Leave need to get it done this week to succeed - remain win if they get it bogged down and chip away at it with amendments.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
It would have been nice to make a decision to be sure.
Given no real reason has been made for the extension, it being stock wording from a month ago, aka forever ago, the EU should sit on it for a week. They wont let us crash out but how long they give us should depend on what we are doing next. Legislation passed ? Short. Government falls and GE? January. Referendum? June.
I fear they'll just say Jan anyway, whichvwss the preferred date back in april.
The problem is on what terms the extension is granted. Do we keep paying £200m a week into the pot for example? Are we allowed to terminate the extension early? These things need to be agreed and Boris is clear that he is not agreeing anything.
Then he will be removed. This only applies if remain United to stop him this week. They can no longer keep fighting over temporary pms etc, this it it, we leave if he gets the legislation through.
Yesterday's vote proved that to be wrong because Letwin would have been defeated if they had been onside. But I honestly think that Boris' solution to NI was both imaginative and as good an attempt at squaring that particular circle as was possible. If the NI proposals had applied to the whole of the UK like May's the DUP would have been content (one hesitates to say happy). But then the ERG would have kicked off. To get Brexit through we are going to need a new Parliament with fewer scum bags in it.
The difficulty there is that with a few exceptions such as the wise Conservatives of Newcastle-under-Lyme, the new intake is likely to be scumbag-heavy...
From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.
They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
That was the hope of those backing the amendment, besides Letwin himself and a few others. Like you I think it will work. Whether enough get on board with a referendum being tacked on I dont know, probably not, but I think the ERG will be flakey when amendments are lost and the labour rebel votes will be flakey if the amendments are rejected.
Theres a reason the opposition did not want a MV. It psychologically would have committed people to back the legislation - after all they just said they backed the deal.
By not backing it yet those people can be worked and persuaded over dozens of anendment fights. Leave need to get it done this week to succeed - remain win if they get it bogged down and chip away at it with amendments.
I am getting this feeling that EU will press for a second ref and Boris won’t No Deal us and go along with it 😗. It needs an MV win it really does.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
I see what you mean. The Press are reporting that Johnson is trying to frustrate the extension. The Court will be told that he isn't. If the Court accepts that then the Press will report that he's been allowed to try to frustrate the extension.
It's an example of where saying two different things to two different audiences looks likely to succeed.
This Number 10 is, for obvious reasons, the most media savvy there’s ever been (even more so than Blair/Campbell). They know what they’re doing.
The Tories are also more united than under May now. Most of the Guakeward squad will be back onboard once we've left too.
Oliver Letwin on Marr 100% backing the deal
Who the hell would trust a word that comes out his mouth?
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
I see what you mean. The Press are reporting that Johnson is trying to frustrate the extension. The Court will be told that he isn't. If the Court accepts that then the Press will report that he's been allowed to try to frustrate the extension.
It's an example of where saying two different things to two different audiences looks likely to succeed.
This Number 10 is, for obvious reasons, the most media savvy there’s ever been (even more so than Blair/Campbell). They know what they’re doing.
The Tories are also more united than under May now. Most of the Guakeward squad will be back onboard once we've left too.
Oliver Letwin on Marr 100% backing the deal
Who the hell would trust a word that comes out his mouth?
I’m sorry Big G I agree with Gin. See my post below,
It’s not what he’s saying his anmendmrnt actually does it’s what it does actually does. Like a false Cuprinol tin.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
We’re in the end game. From
The n for granted.
I think you’re being way too bleak. It’s very clear to me Johnson’s deal has majority support in the house - as Johnson himself says in his second letter, I believe. The EU will not risk a no deal from here having finally got it off the table.
It has theoretical support in the house. When they get into detail and in order to keep the ERG on side Boris has to fudge that the things to get the labour rebels on board are not as firm as he implied?
Letwin has not killed off the deal. But he may have hamstrung it and it's a question if it can limp over the line or not.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
It would have been nice to make a decision to be sure.
Given no real reason has been made for the extension, it being stock wording from a month ago, aka forever ago, the EU should sit on it for a week. They wont let us crash out but how long they give us should depend on what we are doing next. Legislation passed ? Short. Government falls and GE? January. Referendum? June.
I fear they'll just say Jan anyway, whichvwss the preferred date back in april.
The problem is on what terms the extension is granted. Do we keep paying £200m a week into the pot for example? Are we allowed to terminate the extension early? These things need to be agreed and Boris is clear that he is not agreeing anything.
There is no financial burden from an extension, as the payments would have continued anyway during Transition. The total exit bill remains the same, except of course in the event of No Deal, and hence no transition.
Isn't an unsigned letter merely an interesting piece of paper?
Tusk seems to have accepted it as an application. Emails aren't signed but are used to form contracts daily. It might have been different if the EU had said this was not a formal application.
Oh it's going to court. Aiden won't miss a chance like that. I think your assessment is right but there is the counter story of "humiliation". Neither are correct of course. Parliament passed a ridiculous law so that it had yet more opportunities not to make an actual decision. The PM has complied with it but it far from clear what, if anything, it will actually achieve.
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
It would have been nice to make a decision to be sure.
Given no real reason has been made for the extension, it being stock wording from a month ago, aka forever ago, the EU should sit on it for a week. They wont let us crash out but how long they give us should depend on what we are doing next. Legislation passed ? Short. Government falls and GE? January. Referendum? June.
I fear they'll just say Jan anyway, whichvwss the preferred date back in april.
The problem is on what terms the extension is granted. Do we keep paying £200m a week into the pot for example? Are we allowed to terminate the extension early? These things need to be agreed and Boris is clear that he is not agreeing anything.
Then he will be removed. This only applies if remain United to stop him this week. They can no longer keep fighting over temporary pms etc, this it it, we leave if he gets the legislation through.
I think that they have left that too late. They should have removed him a couple of weeks ago but they couldn't agree between themselves.
Boris will be quite shameless about nicking the popular bits of Labour policies, leaving them with a pile of class war shite.....
Agreed, unlike May Boris can do retail politics well
All these delaying tactics are all fine and good but they can't hide from the people forever
Nah, BoZo is a crap campaigner who avoids scrutiny and forgets what he said the day before. He is widely despised and that is a powerful motivator to go out to vote against.
and yet to the best of my knowledge, he has never lost an election ?
How many has he actually fought, where he didn't have a very good chance of winning? Further didn't he endorse Zac Goldsmith as mayoral candidate? But it's a fair point.
2012...he should have lost
And would have, had Oona King been the Labour candidate.
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
I see what you mean. The Press are reporting that Johnson is trying to frustrate the extension. The Court will be told that he isn't. If the Court accepts that then the Press will report that he's been allowed to try to frustrate the extension.
It's an example of where saying two different things to two different audiences looks likely to succeed.
This Number 10 is, for obvious reasons, the most media savvy there’s ever been (even more so than Blair/Campbell). They know what they’re doing.
The Tories are also more united than under May now. Most of the Guakeward squad will be back onboard once we've left too.
Oliver Letwin on Marr 100% backing the deal
Who the hell would trust a word that comes out his mouth?
I’m sorry Big G I agree with Gin. See my post below,
It’s not what he’s saying his anmendmrnt actually does it’s what it does actually does. Like a false Cuprinol tin.
Well he was 100% backing Boris and will vote the deal through. He was foolish but he does accept it was backed by remainers but his purpose was to stop no deal and now divorces himself from remainers
DUP now likely to be on board, so I think it passes since several of the ex cons will back it too. Good news. Terrible for Boris who has lost momentum and will lose even more votes on it I should think - will he end up opposing his own bill?
If it goes to court, the court will rule that Johnson has complied with the law and asked for an extension. And most of the media will report it as a victory for Johnson! The Cummings spin operation is genuinely brilliant.
I see what you mean. The Press are reporting that Johnson is trying to frustrate the extension. The Court will be told that he isn't. If the Court accepts that then the Press will report that he's been allowed to try to frustrate the extension.
It's an example of where saying two different things to two different audiences looks likely to succeed.
This Number 10 is, for obvious reasons, the most media savvy there’s ever been (even more so than Blair/Campbell). They know what they’re doing.
The Tories are also more united than under May now. Most of the Guakeward squad will be back onboard once we've left too.
Oliver Letwin on Marr 100% backing the deal
Who the hell would trust a word that comes out his mouth?
I’m sorry Big G I agree with Gin. See my post below,
It’s not what he’s saying his anmendmrnt actually does it’s what it does actually does. Like a false Cuprinol tin.
Well he was 100% backing Boris and will vote the deal through. He was foolish but he does accept it was backed by remainers but his purpose was to stop no deal and now divorces himself from remainers
Next week will see if he is being honest
I believe he is, but it's too late - whatever his intent he has handed a chance for remain to win and they might take it. The labour rebels are only around 6 firmly in favour, the others might regard a referendum as giving the chance for leaving, as might ex cons like Hammond.
From here, the opposition’s main priority should be tabling amendments to the withdrawal legislation on workers’ rights, consumer protections and the environment. Tory rejections of them will be helpful when the election comes.
They would all pass. This government is a long way short of a majority. The risk for Boris is that it gets to the point the ERG says we are not backing the bill. To me the loss of momentum as a result of Letwin's imbecilic behaviour yesterday is likely to prove fatal. Only a refusal to extend by the EU can save Boris now.
That was the hope of those backing the amendment, besides Letwin himself and a few others. Like you I think it will work. Whether enough get on board with a referendum being tacked on I dont know, probably not, but I think the ERG will be flakey when amendments are lost and the labour rebel votes will be flakey if the amendments are rejected.
Theres a reason the opposition did not want a MV. It psychologically would have committed people to back the legislation - after all they just said they backed the deal.
By not backing it yet those people can be worked and persuaded over dozens of anendment fights. Leave need to get it done this week to succeed - remain win if they get it bogged down and chip away at it with amendments.
I am getting this feeling that EU will press for a second ref and Boris won’t No Deal us and go along with it 😗. It needs an MV win it really does.
I doubt the EU want a second referendum to the extent that they would “push” for it. Their preference is for the deal to be agreed as soon as possible.
FT reckons a maj for 'the deal' of around 4-5. I reckon at least a couple each of lab and ex cons will switch on certain amendments, meaning government defeat.
All this 'letter' stuff is essentially a sideshow IMO, like so much of the Brexit saga. To me, the fundamental situation remains as it has always been. We cannot and will not Leave with No Deal because that would be insane. We cannot and will not Remain because of the 2016 referendum. Thus we must and will Leave with a Deal. The key questions - which Deal and when - are now close to being answered. It will be this Deal and it will be soon. I'm sad about this, it means that the less enlightened side of our national character and personality has prevailed, but such is now the political reality. My main concern is that the negative of Brexit may be compounded by what for me would be an even bigger one - a thumping Conservative victory at the next general election. On this, I agree with the Header that it is not nailed on. But I am not feeling optimistic, I have to say.
I doubt the EU want a second referendum to the extent that they would “push” for it. Their preference is for the deal to be agreed as soon as possible.
I don't think they'll *push* for anything. I don't think they'd push for anything even if they had a clear consensus about which outcome they wanted, and they don't have that beyond not wanting No Deal. Just let the British politicians politick, wait until the last minute, see if the deal has been ratified, and if there isn't, since there's clearly stuff going on that may result in it being ratified, allow more time for that to happen.
Especially if the DUP back it . Which would have seemed unthinkable just last week.
I think a second EU ref won’t happen even if it gets through , Labour are very unlikely to win an election so the legislation will never see the light of day .
This is more about showing they want one to placate Remainers . How this plays out though in an election could be interesting. The Tories can’t now go for no deal as Johnson has got a great deal ! And if they pivot to that to avoid the Brexit Party they could have problems .
For Labour Leavers who aren’t part of the predictable 6 , isn’t it better to say I’ll vote for the deal but would just want the public to have the final say on the vote and not risk a huge backlash from their membership.
As we’re now being told it’s a true Brexit then that against Remain in a vote isn’t the rigged vote that was peddled by some .
DUP now likely to be on board, so I think it passes since several of the ex cons will back it too. Good news. Terrible for Boris who has lost momentum and will lose even more votes on it I should think - will he end up opposing his own bill?
I think it is still unlikely. The vote yesterday saw 306 for Boris and most of the conservatives on the other side will move as will a fair number of independents and labour for a deal
Comments
In recent memory we had Cameron appointing and then desperately hanging on to Andy Coulson until he ended up in prison, and before that Damien McBride running Gordon Brown’s spin operation through the recession with an iron fist (and lots of complaints).
https://twitter.com/daverich1/status/1185798089782779905
I really cannot see the EU giving the UK an unconditional yes to any extension. As Boris has said that he will not negotiate in relation to an extension I don't see how one will come into effect. If the opposition had actually decided they wanted to revoke or even a second referendum they needed to come together to replace this minority government and then take control of the agenda. But that needed an actual decision which is beyond them.
I am sick to death of all this game playing. I was disgusted and depressed after yesterday, still am to be honest.
But everyone believed May - and then she told the old folks she was coming with a death tax. Fewer will believe Johnson, but his campaigning will be relentlessly positive.
Sure, it will be bullshit, but Johnson can be a surprisingly effective confidence man - hard though that might be to appreciate, for those of us immune to his patter.
It's an example of where saying two different things to two different audiences looks likely to succeed.
Greased piglet stuff.
I expect they are already working hard on recruiting potential new Tory MPs to their caucus, so that they remain strong enough not to be cut loose in such a way.
Not saying you are wrong. I tend to rely too much on first principles.
Maybe. But a lot of people hate him, Corbyn is tough as a limpet, and the LDs will find a lot of people will choose labour over risking letting Boris back in.
If there were a GE prior to 2022 but next spring at the earliest, there is time for a new LP leader should Corbyn decide to resign.
A new LP leader - a credible one such as, say, Starmer or Cooper - could be a game-changer.
Add to this the thought that BJ`s deal weakens the union and, due to this, has the potential to hurt the Tories when the public fully grasp this point.
Yesterday's vote proved that to be wrong because Letwin would have been defeated if they had been onside. But I honestly think that Boris' solution to NI was both imaginative and as good an attempt at squaring that particular circle as was possible. If the NI proposals had applied to the whole of the UK like May's the DUP would have been content (one hesitates to say happy). But then the ERG would have kicked off. To get Brexit through we are going to need a new Parliament with fewer scum bags in it.
The argument about not complying by frustrating it may have more legs but even there his personal letter is milder than people seem to think, do not say to ignore parliaments request, and nothing he hadn't publicly said anyway, but it's a question of how much the court cares he is taking the piss when the EU have accepted the request.
Remain needs to win the key votes this week or it is over. Is it really worth squabbling over the PM not physically signing the letter? Really? He can even defend that by saying he was not supposed to alter the form of the letter. The argument hes not sent it is bizarre.
I therefore think it is likely that he would trade even less access in return for weaker level playing field obligations.
If Johnson wins a landslide majority in the near future then he has more flexibility to agree a deal that meets other imperatives - I'm less sure whether that would mean abandoning the ERG for a closer deal, or going for no deal if necessary in favour of more freedom to set the parameters of a US deal.
If Johnson only has a small majority, or is still in a minority, then he is the same position as now. Beholden to the ERG to seek the hardest of Brexits, but a prisoner of Parliament who will seek to prevent No Deal.
Word of the law they will pass, and can ignore the cries of dont trust him.
Of course, that means it better be well drafted to do what was promised or he is in trouble.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-48880939
Gove formulated agricultural policy to end growers subsidies, and to rewild the countryside. Broadly positive in terms of the local environment, but will have a significant reduction in domestic food production, along the lines of the late Victorian agricultural depression.
The new ministers at DEFRA, Villiers and Eustice have however talked about continuing producer subsidies, and protecting humane animal husbandry through non tariff barriers.
True, there are plenty who backed the Letwin amendment for reasons which went way beyond Letwin’s intention, as unlike Letwim they have no intention of voting for the deal, but that doesn’t alter the very likely existence of a majority for the deal itself.
I’m reasonable sure that Johnson/Cummings will have worked that out, but are enjoying building outrage at their opponents in the meantime.
If so, that has clearly worked, as David’s comments demonstrate.
Given no real reason has been made for the extension, it being stock wording from a month ago, aka forever ago, the EU should sit on it for a week. They wont let us crash out but how long they give us should depend on what we are doing next. Legislation passed ? Short. Government falls and GE? January. Referendum? June.
I fear they'll just say Jan anyway, whichvwss the preferred date back in april.
I really like the tone of Boris second letter. Spot on.
They just had Cherry on R4, the Paddy O’Connell show is my favourite radio show at the moment, and he read Lord Panic out to her from Hansard and she flpaffed and bombed and sounded like a legal loser. Go hear for yourself.
Oliver Letwin moved his motion saying it’s just for a few weeks and is to prevent no deal and he’s keen to vote to enable Boris brexit. In my opinion he’s a liar. He knows full well what he is doing is different than that, to give remainers control to change it and thus throw Steve Baker and his crew off the haywain.
Boris biggest problem now is not his remain opponents but his self imposed die in ditch deadline. It wasn’t the Benn act that made the first letter very necessary, if he can’t pass his deal (or even if he does) both Boris and EU have a decision to make most likely a can to kick regardless of the Benn act. Do you see my point, Boris inherited (and arguably created earlier this year) can kick deadline run out, but he didn’t have to say die in a ditch and Yesterday and today he should be backing away from deadline with I will implement this deal but in reality we need longer to do this properly. He’ll still have 99% of current support on side. Yesterday and today he should be backing away from the self imposed die in ditch stuff.
Another smaller issue he may have, the tinkering with the PD from a May Hammond PD to ERG one could cost him votes he needs to pass it?
I don't think the EU will accept reduced playing field obligations. It's the price to play.
So the question is how hard will Johnson bargain to get access quid pro quo? Fast deals are where you concede everything to the other more powerful operator. So could Johnson do exactly that and present the loss of access to our main market as just the type of buccaneering he goes on about?
I should add that the present deal suggests Johnson doesn't see any mileage in No Deal. Although No Deal is still a possibility at the future arrangements stage, he would seem to have excluded it as an acceptable outcome.
https://twitter.com/RugbyWCPhysio/status/1185836740373692417
Theres a reason the opposition did not want a MV. It psychologically would have committed people to back the legislation - after all they just said they backed the deal.
By not backing it yet those people can be worked and persuaded over dozens of anendment fights. Leave need to get it done this week to succeed - remain win if they get it bogged down and chip away at it with amendments.
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1185835835859652608?s=20
It needs to be made quite clear that RU is a sport played by gentlemen, with no place for intentional violence.
It’s not what he’s saying his anmendmrnt actually does it’s what it does actually does. Like a false Cuprinol tin.
Letwin has not killed off the deal. But he may have hamstrung it and it's a question if it can limp over the line or not.
Next week will see if he is being honest
There aren't enough ex-Conservatives willing to back a fresh referendum and there are too many Labour rebels.
I think a second EU ref won’t happen even if it gets through , Labour are very unlikely to win an election so the legislation will never see the light of day .
This is more about showing they want one to placate Remainers . How this plays out though in an election could be interesting. The Tories can’t now go for no deal as Johnson has got a great deal ! And if they pivot to that to avoid the Brexit Party they could have problems .
For Labour Leavers who aren’t part of the predictable 6 , isn’t it better to say I’ll vote for the deal but would just want the public to have the final say on the vote and not risk a huge backlash from their membership.
As we’re now being told it’s a true Brexit then that against Remain in a vote isn’t the rigged vote that was peddled by some .
An *extra* apostrophe makes a nice change.
So wheres' the semicolon ;-) !