Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Brexit - What If?
The PM swallows his pride, sends the extension request to Brussels and it's refused (as one French minister has opined). What then?
Answers
Whether or not there is any extension / unity government or whatever if any deal that is acceptable to the EU cannot get approval in Parliament & MPs in their wisdom will not countenance a no-deal then the only alternative is to scrap Brexit & remain in the EU. Just revoke A50 and avoid any further messing about with a "People's Vote" or whatever. In that case the...
09:44 Sat 07th Sep 2019
//One rumour is even that Johnson is considering a second referendum as polls for a post Oct 31 election show the Brexit Party wiping out the Tory lead. //
that would require an extension of at least 6 months, and realistically longer than that, in order to manage the aftermath of the poll. would that be the political metaphorical equivalent of being dead in a ditch?
that would require an extension of at least 6 months, and realistically longer than that, in order to manage the aftermath of the poll. would that be the political metaphorical equivalent of being dead in a ditch?
It would keep him in power.
He can always claim that he was forced to go back in his word by an evil parliament.
If there was a referendum it should be held ASAP. Apart from anything else to minimise the embarrassing and divisive campaigning.
But the end result is either leaving the EU or “the people” voting to stay.
Anyway, it’s a huge IF
He can always claim that he was forced to go back in his word by an evil parliament.
If there was a referendum it should be held ASAP. Apart from anything else to minimise the embarrassing and divisive campaigning.
But the end result is either leaving the EU or “the people” voting to stay.
Anyway, it’s a huge IF
//If there was a referendum it should be held ASAP.//
a referendum would need legislation to arrange it; last time that took 7 months. constitutional experts reckon if much of the text was cut 'n pasted from the last one, the legislation could be in place in 12 weeks - assuming parliament can agree the wording of the question. campaigning would take a further 12 weeks. "ASAP" means, if the referendum is called as early as monday, a vote sometime in late February or early march.
a referendum would need legislation to arrange it; last time that took 7 months. constitutional experts reckon if much of the text was cut 'n pasted from the last one, the legislation could be in place in 12 weeks - assuming parliament can agree the wording of the question. campaigning would take a further 12 weeks. "ASAP" means, if the referendum is called as early as monday, a vote sometime in late February or early march.
//The PM swallows his pride, sends the extension request to Brussels....//
Bojo has stated clearly that he will not do that; therefore not doing so would be illegal, therefore the opposition will be forced to launch a vote of no confidence, therefore Boris will get his election which with the held of Farage he will win.
If a vote of no confidence isn't called he will leave by default.
Bojo has stated clearly that he will not do that; therefore not doing so would be illegal, therefore the opposition will be forced to launch a vote of no confidence, therefore Boris will get his election which with the held of Farage he will win.
If a vote of no confidence isn't called he will leave by default.
Except that the consequence of Johnson not obeying the law would be a legal challenge not a confidence vote.
Although it would be interesting to see how a PM who disobeys the law would go down in an election.
He don’t do that though.
He had to focus on leaving with a deal: after all that is what he really wants :-)
Although it would be interesting to see how a PM who disobeys the law would go down in an election.
He don’t do that though.
He had to focus on leaving with a deal: after all that is what he really wants :-)
If they are, then not so much for the advisor pushing and getting so far, but for not covering all risks while doing so, and claiming it's too late to stop government delivering the people's demand.
Clearly when those MPs outside of government are allowed control, giving them the opportunity to introduce bills designed to straitjacket the 'first among equals' and their team, and then rush the result through the system, almost anything is possible.
Clearly when those MPs outside of government are allowed control, giving them the opportunity to introduce bills designed to straitjacket the 'first among equals' and their team, and then rush the result through the system, almost anything is possible.
What I don't understand is why the surprise that we are where we are.
I pointed out a few months ago that a No Deal exit was unlikely in the extreme due to a Remainer Parliament. The current incumbents will do all they can to prevent us leaving at all and the camouflage of resisting "No Deal" ideally suits their purpose. I suggested that something similar to the Balls-Letwin obstruction would again be devised. Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty (plus an additional clause requiring monthly reports on progress - i.e. nothing).
I simply don't understand why Mr Johnson and his "Svengali" advisor seem so surprised or hijacked. It was also obvious that the FTPA would be used to the Remainers' full advantage and so we are where we are.
I pointed out a few months ago that a No Deal exit was unlikely in the extreme due to a Remainer Parliament. The current incumbents will do all they can to prevent us leaving at all and the camouflage of resisting "No Deal" ideally suits their purpose. I suggested that something similar to the Balls-Letwin obstruction would again be devised. Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty (plus an additional clause requiring monthly reports on progress - i.e. nothing).
I simply don't understand why Mr Johnson and his "Svengali" advisor seem so surprised or hijacked. It was also obvious that the FTPA would be used to the Remainers' full advantage and so we are where we are.
