Hmm, well, a point Sirrah.

When the aim was no border in Ireland, Johnson has delivered one. And it will not work. Whilst the compliant will submit to the proposals the whole reason for border checks is that we know there are those who will cheat. Johnson’s plan for checks away from the border provides no mechanism to deal for those who will flout the border for gain. At which point the plan, necessarily, fails. And that’s before the politics are considered.

There are people who cheat on the current border arrangements too. So, the logical difference between the new and the old is what?

For example, those claiming asylum regularly cross national boundaries within the EU. It’s also, inside the Schengen area, illegal to have general checks set up to stop them doing so – that’s to interfere with the free movement of people. It is only allowable to have spot and intelligence led stops.

Err…..

48 comments on “Hmm, well, a point Sirrah.

  1. We need open borders so that the whole world can come here, but God help them if they bring some goods in without paying the correct amount of tax.

  2. So Norway is separated from Sweden by barbed wire & minefields? I never knew that. Never seen those surrounding Andorra, either.

  3. The UK has said many times it has no intention of building a hard border on the way from Eire into NI/UK. So no hard border going north.

    The Irish government has said many times it doesn’t want to build a hard border on the way from NI/UK into Eire.

    So the only people building a hard border will be the EU, building it in Eire, against the wishes of the Irish, for traffic going south. Thus the Irish are enslaved, they should complain to their owner.
    Though good luck with the poor sods ordered to obey their EU masters and trying to build it; the Irish are not known for patiently putting up with that sort of thing.

    NB Has anyone figured out a way to open the box and release Tim Worstall’s cat? We seem to have two parallel universes, and I haven’t found a way to access a specific instance of this site. UIT seems random which site, and which set of topics I get each day.
    Please just stop the messing with it TimW! What was wrong with this version of the site (the old one)?

  4. While waiting for a full analysis by the lawyers who destroyed Treason May’s WA I think this is better. BoJo clearly says that we are NOT to be under their customs and laws.

    BoJo is BlueLabour but is now far too far Brexit-linked to go any other way. If he has just rehashed Treason’s BRINO –well he hopes to be PM after a GE–it would hardly help him if the Deal allows the EU to stop our trade deals and kick the shit out of us economically for the next 5 years. That was exactly what Treason May intended. As her EU masters told her to.

    So I cautiously think this deal an improvement. The DUP and ERG accept it inc Steve Baker and Bill Cash. Who has fought the EU longer than Cash?

    The EU likely won’t accept it .

    The “Big 3” of the House of Traitors treason-gang have already rejected it. Tho’ it seems possible numbers of ZaNu MPs might vote for it on the grounds that they don’t want to lose the best job they will ever have.

    And Irish puke Vardo has said he might well veto it anyway.

    So No Deal is still the most likely.

  5. The DUP and ERG accept it inc Steve Baker and Bill Cash. Who has fought the EU longer than Cash? The EU likely won’t accept it .

    I agree on all the above points. It fundamentally does deliver on BRExit and allows a managed and potentially time limited (by NI administration rather than EU) exit from the arrangements. So in that regard it is better than May’s capitulation treaty / Versailles 2.0

    If it was a choice of this deal or no-BRExit, then I’d accept this deal (although I still think “No Deal” is better, it probably can’t be achieved with the current crop of traitors in Parliament)

    The bigger question is “Will is pass”? – on that I don’t know, so we’re still in Schrödinger’s BRExit between now and November 1st.

    My own personal odds of 13 to 12 for BRExit on 31st October still feel about right.

  6. It seems to me that Boris is bending over backwards to be seen as reasonable and genuinely negotiating in good faith.

    He must know however that it stands a snowballs chance in hell of getting accepted. People from the EU have already rejected it without even reading his proposals, so it’s pretty certain that they’re not interested in a deal, and are not negotiating in good faith.

    This leads me to beleive that this is simply positioning for what happens after it is rejected.

    So, what happens next?

  7. BlokeInBrum – we leave. As Parliament voted we should.
    That’s leaving on 31st October and leaving with no deal.

    Strangely parliament appears to want to overturn the decision of parliament but does not have the votes to do so.

  8. Mr Ecks

    “Who has fought the EU longer than Cash?”

    Jeremy Corbyn, actually. Magic Grandpa entered the HoC in 1983; Bill Cash in a 1984 by-election.

    I’d call it ironic, if I thought that Jezza understood irony.

  9. “He must know however that it stands a snowballs chance in hell of getting accepted. People from the EU have already rejected it without even reading his proposals, so it’s pretty certain that they’re not interested in a deal, and are not negotiating in good faith.

    This leads me to beleive that this is simply positioning for what happens after it is rejected.”

    I think everything Boris (and thus Cummings) has done so far is with one aim – to win the next election that will have to come one way or another. Even if Parliament forces another A50 extension there will be an election fairly soon after, has to be, the Remain faction in Parliament can only agree on not wanting a No Deal, but not what they do actually want.

    So the rampant electioneering (spending on this that and the other) is the first part of that strategy, followed by the ‘People vs Parliament/Courts’ shenigans of the prorogation, which either was going to give Boris the power to prorogue Parliament and force Brexit, or it was going to pit him against a Remain Rump Parliament and the Courts, all of which are good for PR with an electorate that hates insiders and Establishments right now.

    Now we have the WA Mk2 plan, which again is a win win for Boris, if the EU accepts it, that puts HUGE pressure on the Remain side to vote for it, or the EU throws it out, in which case come the election Boris can say ‘Well I tried, I made a decent proposal and the EU were having none of it, so No Deal its got to be’. And if Parliament do have to vote on Boris’s WA Mk2 thats another win win – they either vote it through, or stymie ANOTHER version of Brexit, with the resulting bad press for the Remain parties.

    So all of the governments actions to date have only 2 outcomes, either we get Brexit now, or Boris’s Tory party get painted as ‘The Brexit Party’ for the looming election, which helps position the Tories as the best recipients of the 17.4m Brexit votes. I think Cummings has decided that an election and new Parliament is going to decide Brexit, not the current Parliament, and thus everything has been aimed at positioning the Tories best for that battle. If by some stroke of luck they get it early, then thats a bonus, but a GE showdown is the most likely endgame for this process.

  10. I’m actually warming to the idea of a hard border, for the purposes of stuffing Perfidious Hibernia in general and the Hindoostani abortionist in particular.

    Let them eat Europe.

    Btw, why do we still permit the Irish freedom of movement and privileged access to our public services? Doesn’t seem like this dispensation is buying us any loyalty or even affection.

  11. @Jim

    “Now we have the WA Mk2 plan, which again is a win win for Boris, if the EU accepts it, that puts HUGE pressure on the Remain side to vote for it, or the EU throws it out, in which case come the election Boris can say ‘Well I tried, I made a decent proposal and the EU were having none of it, so No Deal its got to be’.”

    The third possibility is that the reception is lukewarm, the proposal treated as a basis for further talks but neither embraced nor denounced. In that case presumably Boris gets to argue he should be reelected to finish the negotiating job.

    Think you’re fundamentally right that this is really all about the next GE (and an extension is probable). I think the lukewarm response is the most likely as the EU don’t want No Deal and Johnson seems to be making a genuine attempt at negotiation, I also view it as unlikely he’d want to go into an election as an outright proponent of No Deal.

    @Martin

    Can you explain how we leave on 31 Oct with no deal, or is that your personal preference rather than something you actually expect to happen? Johnson finds a way around the Benn Act that stands up in court and the parliamentary opposition neither passes a tougher Benn Act 2.0 nor kicks him out of office and just lets him get on with it? Or an EU member state unexpectedly vetoes extension?

    @JG

    They’re not an ideal guide but a lot of betting markets make 31 Oct about a one in four chance. If you do think it’s more likely then there are some good value bets available. If it is any reassurance for the nervous, Brexit happening at all (including later dates) is rated more like a 75% chance.

  12. MBE–Sick of telling you. CCA–Syrrender Act+FTPA+ anything else put up TEMPORARILY set aside. GE date set after Brexit date. BoJo says yes the Courts and HoTraitors CAN review CCA–as is their right–but -because they are the cause of the emergency that review will take place after the GE. No court case will be allowed until after GE. Close court system altogether until that date if needs be. Pirorogue Parliament again as needed. Inform them that alternate venue meetings etc will not be recognised as Parliament

    No tanks, no arrests –a GE which people want and then the new HoC can review–and decide the future of the Supreme scum while they are at it.

  13. I don’t see Parliament accepting the deal for the simple reason they won’t give Boris a win like that. The EU/Remainer/Eire axis of evil will find a way to say it isn’t acceptable without them taking the blame.

    Other than that I think Jim’s analysis is spot on.

  14. Trouble is they don’t have to have an election. After a VONC if they get Caretaker Cunt in –it only needs 247 of them to vote No to a GE and CC is in to 2022. If it is is Jizz–or maybe ANY of them– every POS with one foot on UK soil from 14 up will be a voter by then so goodbye Brexit and indeed the UK.

    Too many weak wankers are peddling this Rule of Law shite. Fuck it. Johnson needs to act decisively now or we will all lose the fucking lot. And there will be no more rule of law–ever again. As far as our lives and progeny are concerned.

  15. MyBurningEars –
    We leave due to parliament voting for us to leave. Agreed they voted the EU Withdrawal Act through?

    They they rejected (repeatedly) the deal on offer. You agree that bit?

    So we are still leaving. And we have no deal because parliament won’t agree it.

    What does that tell you we are doing this month?
    Leaving? Or not leaving? Based on current decisions by parliament to date.

    An extension could be requested but the EU would be idiots to simply keep kicking the can down the road again and again. Eventually we will do as parliament agreed and leave.
    If parliament eventually agrees to the deal on offer then we leave with a deal.

  16. @Martin

    The legal default that we leave at the end of the notice period has been largely neutered by the willingness of the UK and EU to keep extending. While Johnson breaks the trend by his vocal unwillingness, the EU still seem keen to keep offering extensions – they hint want No Deal, don’t want to be the ones to be seen as to blame for the process failing, and an extension at this time is more likely to produce a positive outcome for them than a refusal. (Agree they won’t keep agreeing extensions in all circumstances – if they felt they could throw back the pressure on the UK, “here’s the agreement, now pass it in your parliament, you’re not getting anything better” and the prospect of No Deal frightened Parliament so much it would pass, I’m sure playing hardball would be an attractive option. With the existing agreement failing thrice in the current Parliament though, that wasn’t viable. Like Jim says the impasse is likely to be resolved in a fresh Parliament and the game of extension ping-pong might then have rather different rules.)

    Unless Johnson does get a deal through by 31st – for which the parliamentary arithmetic and negotiating timetable are incredibly tight – then the legal default is for the UK to request an extension and the political default is for the EU to accept it. So the possible route to No Deal on the 31st is not the natural default. As Ecks says, it would require someone to do something very drastic to force it to happen – my difference with Ecks is mostly in my assessment of how probable that seems right now.

  17. “Can you explain how we leave on 31 Oct with no deal, or is that your personal preference rather than something you actually expect to happen? Johnson finds a way around the Benn Act that stands up in court and the parliamentary opposition neither passes a tougher Benn Act 2.0 nor kicks him out of office and just lets him get on with it? Or an EU member state unexpectedly vetoes extension?”

    Thanks to the recent Supreme Court judgement it is now quite reasonably arguable that any Bill that originated from Parliament and not from the Government is unlawful. The Supreme Court were quite clear – the role of Parliament is to scrutinise legislation, not propose it, and the Government have the proposing role. Indeed thats the main reason they gave for the prorogation being illegal – the loss of Parliamentary scrutiny on the Executive. I almost wonder if the SC put that lot in as a hidden bonus for Boris – we’re going to kick you for the prorogation but there’s a way out for you in this ruling, if you’re watching carefully.

  18. Can you explain how we leave on 31 Oct with no deal

    With the DUP endorsement, and the ERG making positive-sounding noises (while waiting to read the small print) the suggestion is that the numbers could be there to approve Boris’ deal.

    So one route is that it gets voted through Parliament and ends up in the EU’s court: take it, or No Deal.

    Personally, I’d still far rather have a clean break Brexit, but from what I’ve read so far this deal is better than no Brexit at all.

  19. “Btw, why do we still permit the Irish freedom of movement and privileged access to our public services? Doesn’t seem like this dispensation is buying us any loyalty or even affection.”

    It’s a good question, isn’t it? Seems to have been the original bit of Remainery. The Establishment couldn’t really come to terms with the independence of the Republic so it got foisted on the UK public without their consent. It’s doubtful if it would have got a yes vote in any UK referendum since the 20s. Wonder if it’d get one even now?
    And the original immigration fit up. The owning classes got their cheap labour. The working classes got shafted.

  20. @BiW

    “So one route is that it gets voted through Parliament and ends up in the EU’s court: take it, or No Deal.”

    It’s only going to go to Parliament (as May’s deal did) once the EU leaders have signed off on the proposed deal. But I’m not sure what would happen if, say, the European Parliament then voted it down.

  21. “But I’m not sure what would happen if, say, the European Parliament then voted it down.”

    The Commission would ignore it, because thats the sort of organisation the EU is, the rules apply only when it suits those in (real) charge.

  22. @Jim

    From memory, the treaties require the European Parliament to sign off on any deal so the Commission can’t really just ignore it. Whether the “vote again until you get it right” approach applies to European institutions or just member states I dunno.

  23. @Mr Ecks October 3, 2019 at 12:21 pm

    Has the proposed new deal been published?

    So far it sounds like May’s Surrender Agreement with Johnson admitting NI/RoI border is UK’s problem, lets have border in Irish Sea and dick about in NI

    Not happy

    .
    @Jim October 3, 2019 at 5:23 pm

    Thanks to the recent Supreme Court judgement it is now quite reasonably arguable that any Bill that originated from Parliament and not from the Government is unlawful. The Supreme Court were quite clear – the role of Parliament is to scrutinise legislation, not propose it, and the Government have the proposing role.

    +1

    @MBE October 3, 2019 at 6:34 pm

    what would happen if, say, the European Parliament then voted it down.

    Commission ignore it, EU Parl is an advisory speaking (not debating) club not a legislator

  24. I wonder what would happen if the Brexit Party MEPs were the ones who tipped the votes in the EP against accepting Boris’s deal? One assumes the UK’s MEPs would have a vote?

  25. MyBurningEars – the default is that we are leaving on 31st October.
    Only if an extension is requested and granted will that date be changed. So far there isn’t such a request made and therefore no extension given.

    So currently we are leaving with no deal. Perhaps that will change this month. But based on parliament so far I’m not betting any money on a change.

    Perhaps a fresh parliament after a GE can vote better. Though there are no guarantees and the disagreements already in place may simply remain with no one idea with majority support.
    The double bind in place is that a deal must pass both EU and UK agreement – and to do both with the same deal is appearing unlikely.

    May’s deal was workable (I have read it) – but could not pass in our parliament. Partly that’s due to the party – opposition parties don’t want a Tory victory regardless.

    Perhaps this deal is also workable, but because its BoJo presenting it then the rabid anti-Tories will force it down.

    Leaving just the will of parliament applying – us leaving with no deal. As Boris appears to prefer.

    And he can blame parliament for a hell of a lot regarding that. He may be an idiot, he is a canny one though.

  26. Does make for an interesting scenario if EU haven’t responded by the Benn act date for an extension; imagine Boris saying I need to wait until this deal is refused or agreed so I can bring it to HoC, are they going to force an extension request at that point as it would just look stupid and a waste of time. Though given the HoC was petty enough to refuse time for the Conservative conference it wouldn’t surprise me.

  27. John Redwood

    The Prime Minister’s letter said “the backstop acted as a bridge to a proposed future relationship with the EU in which the UK would be closely integrated with EU customs arrangements and would align with EU law in many areas. That future relationship is not the goal of the current UK government. The government intends that the future relationship should be based on a Free Trade Agreement in which the UK takes control of its own regulatory affairs and trade policy”

    The government seeks a major rewrite of the Political declaration [which has no legal force] to reflect this different future relationship. It leaves open the other issues surrounding the existing Withdrawal Agreement, which would need to be changed to avoid its provisions stifling the intent of a genuine Brexit with a possible Free Trade Agreement for the future relationship….

    https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2019/10/03/the-uk-offer-for-talks/

    Sounds like May’s Surrender Treaty with changes to the non-binding Political declaration.

  28. It’s only going to go to Parliament (as May’s deal did) once the EU leaders have signed off on the proposed deal.

    I don’t see why EU signoff has to be a requirement for Parliament endorsement; especially with time running out. With a “take it or leave it” offer from Boris, there’s no need to wait for any negotiating as there won’t be any.

  29. Bloke in Spain – Yarp.

    Pcar – J-Red also says “There is a long way to go to get an Agreement which does allow a proper Brexit, but the very different approach to where we wish to go is most welcome.”

    I wouldn’t worry too much about it, because:

    * It’s an invitation to further talks, not a final offer

    * The destination of those talks is a free trade deal, not the stitch up Treeza planned

    * The EU seems unlikely to accept

    * Parliament almost definitely won’t accept

    * God, St. George, and Our Lady of Walsingham are with us (just ask Jacob)

    #beofgoodcheer my friend. The good guys are gonna win this.

  30. Just heard Johnson’s statement in the house . Minor changes from Mayhab’s servitude plan which Johnson told us was dead only last week! It is a sell out.

    It strikes me there is every incentive for Labour and remainers to vote against his servitude plan mark 2. The only saving grace is if the EU reject his servitude plan and go for no deal. I fail to see any other outcome that will save your party and govt.

    https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2019/10/03/the-uk-offer-for-talks/#comment-1060436

    Boris Johnson makes a statement to the House of Commons on Brexit Negotiations
    “Re-opening the WA and removing the backstop” – The May-Johnson Surrender Treaty
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk-MzyixBgs

    .
    ERG chairman Steve Baker MP on BBC News
    youtube.com/watch?v=Eta2MYHn588

  31. But I’m not sure what would happen if, say, the European Parliament then voted it down.

    Nobody wants to be holding the no deal baby when the music stops. Apart from TBP MEPs the rest will do as they’re told by the Commission.

    I saw something from Benn on my Twitter feed, he’s already dismissing it. Corbyn, as could be expected has ignored it and started waffling about worker’s rights because they don’t trust British voters.

    As an aside, this week’s Talking Politics podcast is a review of how we got to an in/out referendum, well worth a listen as a refresher on all the shenanigans from all parties. I’d forgotten the details of Blair’s insincere pledge for a referendum on Lisbon and Brown’s legal manoeuvrings to avoid it after it was changed from a constitution in title only. Remainers should be reflecting that a referendum then would have negated the need for an in/out in 2016.

  32. Pcar–Don’t think it is Treason May’s sellout.

    Remember Johnson hopes to be PM after any GE.

    Treason May’s shite was designed to allow her EU masters to give us an economic kicking for the next few years. In the hope we would crawl back like whipped curs.

    If Johnson wants to be PM it hardly is to his advantage to be on the receiving end of an EU beating throughout his term of office.

    See this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19Zc_hWj10Y

  33. Treason May’s shite was designed to allow her EU masters to give us an economic kicking for the next few years. In the hope we would crawl back like whipped curs.

    This appears to be both true, and an indication of how perilously removed from normal, healthy human nature the bugmen of Brussels (and Whitehall) are.

    It’s as if they think 18th century Frenchmen woke up one matin, and decided the skulls of the ruling class would make for jolly footballs, for no reason at all.

  34. I’m of the impression that Boris knows that there is no deal that will put this to rest.

    Any deal of any kind is likely to be shot down by the Lib Dems and Labour simply because of who it comes from.

    The EU isn’t going to accept anything short of absolute capitulation, mainly because they don’t believe that we’re going to really, actually leave. At least not on our terms.

    Brexit types like me, the Spartans, ERG etc aren’t going to accept some watered down Brexit in Name Only. Possibly not the majority of the voting public either.

    That leaves only going hell for leather for a General Election by hook or by crook.

    Or do they have something up their sleeves?
    I have a gnawing feeling that things haven’t played out yet and that Boris and Cummings have some cards yet to play.

    We will see. I hope it’s not wishful thinking on my part, but I’m actually quite optimistic. A genie has been let out the bottle and no amount of twisting and turning by the usual suspects will change that.

  35. @BiND

    Nobody wants to be holding the no deal baby when the music stops. Apart from TBP MEPs the rest will do as they’re told by the Commission.

    I also rate it as unlikely that the European Parliament will be the one thing that blocks it, which is one reason I haven’t sat down and tried to work out what would actually happen in the event. But I was trying to think through BiW’s scenario whereby a deal is agreed and it gets through the UK parliament but still fails for some other reason. For what it’s worth I don’t think the UK parliament can just vote on a hypothetical deal, even if it’s offered up on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. I think an agreement actually needs to be have been reached first.

    But even if I’m right on this, BiW’s point that the UK parliament might not be the only blocker to the deal is a good one. I think in practice there’d be another extension if the hold-up was elsewhere though – can’t see any reason why the deal would suddenly be abandoned entirely and Britain would leave on a no-deal basis just because there’s a potentially solvable hold-up elsewhere. (“Because Boris is deep down a no-dealer and will take any excuse to obtain a clean Brexit” doesn’t really work if this scenario transpires, for example, since it requires him to have actually fought hard for a deal.)

    @Martin

    The double bind in place is that a deal must pass both EU and UK agreement – and to do both with the same deal is appearing unlikely.

    With the current make-up of parliament, definitely. Had May not gambled on that election though, she may well have been able to get her deal through. It’s possible Johnson would be able to get enough Labour rebels behind him to support a deal on the basis he proposes, but the Irish government isn’t going to be keen on a deal which leaves NI outside the customs union and I don’t think a deal acceptable to them could pass our parliament. So I think Jim is almost certainly correct to say that the endgame is going to be determined by the next parliament, not the current one.

    So currently we are leaving with no deal. Perhaps that will change this month. But based on parliament so far I’m not betting any money on a change.

    Currently UK law (apparently) requires the government to ask for an extension – but if an extension is denied by the EU then the default would be No Deal on 31 Oct. So while this is technically the “default” situation, it would requires something weird – probably several weird things – to happen first. So on that basis it seems unlikely, which is presumably the reason the betting markets rate No Deal this year as only an outside chance. What’s the actual pathway? It’s no good saying it should be the favourite because it will happen automatically – it still seems to require the EU to uncharacteristically deny an extension (why would they?) or the UK government to pull off some cheeky trick to avoid the consequences of the Benn Act (and not be stopped from doing so by the courts, nor by the opposition forcing through a stronger Benn Act 2.0, nor by the opposition getting their act together at crisis point and finding a “unity” candidate they can install as PM to replace Johnson). I’m not saying it’s impossible but how is it going to happen? “Remainers sit on their hands and refuse to do anything while the Benn Act is ignored or circumvented, then the clock ticks down and No Deal Brexit happens automatically” sounds even more far-fetched to me than the Ecksian suggestion that Johnson launches a temporary coup against Parliament.

    Leaving just the will of parliament applying – us leaving with no deal. As Boris appears to prefer.

    Particularly in the context of the next parliament rather than this one, there’s a chance of a deal being reached which there is not majority enthusiasm for even among the governing party – but where a majority of MPs are happy to say “we’ll accept it so long as it’s put to referendum (with Remain as the other option)”. So the fact that MPs are unable to back a deal that is acceptable to the EU may not necessarily leave No Deal as the only option, but could well prove a back door to Remain.

    Does Boris really have a personal preference for No Deal? I’m not sure. He talks a big game on No Deal. To some extent that’s to underline his credentials as somebody really serious about leaving, which is in part electoral and in part a negotiating position (when May’s negotiators first met the EU’s, apparently they all agreed that they didn’t really want Brexit and it was a shame they couldn’t just put the talks on ice, which was an utterly pathetic position for the UK side to take). Johnson also seems to have grasped that getting serious about No Deal preparations means you now have a serious Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement, in a way that May (and Hammond especially) refused to. I’m not sure this means he seems No Deal as his first preference. Or even if he personally prefers it as an outcome in some ways, he may not view it as politically feasible in terms of keeping the Tory party together, or electorally feasible in terms of keeping the necessary voting coalition together, so may not intend to actively pursue it.

    If I had to stake a guess based on his recent behaviour, I’d say he seems at least serious-ish about getting a deal. But then you may be right and that’s just him doing the pro forma stuff to show to his cabinet, MPs and potential voters that he’s made an effort (and if it falters it can be someone else’s fault).

  36. @Mr Ecks October 3, 2019 at 10:58 pm

    Mahyar Tousi is rather superficial and hero worshipping Johnson

    No Deal looking more likely given Corbyn rant – yipee

    Corbyn et al – Belfast Agreement does not mention: Trade, Border, Customs, Single Market

    As Hoey said in vid “Red Herring”

    Johnson should have played hardball and told EU: NI/RoI border is your problem not our’s

  37. Fees like Remain by pushing for revoke rather than BRINO have pushed parliament into a corner and there’s really no options left apart from no deal of revoke.
    Can’t see either side backing down enough to allow a deal through at this point, really is too much bitterness in Parliament

  38. MBE – So on that basis it seems unlikely, which is presumably the reason the betting markets rate No Deal this year as only an outside chance

    Betting markets are only as good as the collective misunderstanding of their participants tho.

    Which is why bookies got it wrong on the 2016 referendum, Paddy Power actually paid out to punters who bet Hillary would become president, they got it wrong on the 2017 election, etc.

    Basically it’s no more reliable than asking Russell Grant.

  39. “Feels like Remain by pushing for revoke rather than BRINO have pushed parliament into a corner and there’s really no options left apart from no deal of revoke.”

    I think this is Cummings strategy – he wants to push the Remain Rump further and further away from any form of Brexit at all, and make them come out purely for revoking A50. He’s already got the Lib Dems to that point, and Labour are perilously close to jumping that way too. Thus the Tories can legitimately paint themselves as the Party of Brexit – making the next election a simple one – vote LD/Lab, get to stay in the EU, vote Tory, get to Leave. No great arguments about types of leaving and BRINOs etc, just a binary choice, but this time under Parliamentary voting rules. Working on the premise that such a vote will result in a large Parliamentary majority for Leave, due to the distribution of votes and FPTP system.

  40. Ecks

    it only needs 247 of them to vote No to a GE and CC is in to 2022

    Not quite. Another VONC and then just 14 days? The SNP would only be supporting temporarily (to prevent no deal). If Jezza tried to stay, they are hardly likely to continue to support him, they also want a GE after all?

    Pcar

    So far it sounds like May’s Surrender Agreement with Johnson admitting NI/RoI border is UK’s problem, lets have border in Irish Sea and dick about in NI.

    Not happy

    As others are saying, it’s more than just the backstop. It’s becoming increasingly clear that it’s the PD (and whatever links to that in the WA) as well, which is now aimed firmly towards Canada Dry rather than May’s ever closer union.

    Ie, it’s a reset back to the split at Chequers, which of course is when Boris resigned. This is a significant proposed change, and which is why the Spartans increasingly look to be onside for this, whilst never supporting May’s treacherous capitulation.

  41. Boris is going to write asking for an extension if no agreement by Oct 19. Complying with Benn surrender act.

    Even if he doesn’t mean it it doesn’t look good. Not quite out by Halloween come what may or dead in a ditch.

  42. I think at this point he’s built up some credit with the electorate for trying and not indulging in Parliamentary procedural shenanigans and running to the courts so sending it ‘with a heavy heart, but no one is above the law’ etc. may actually be to his advantage not the detriment that Remain think it is, also they are bound to be sneering and trying to rub it in, which I don’t think will play well with the electorate.

  43. I don’t often swear on a public forum. But. Well. Fuck me.

    I remember the fall of the Wall. I remember all of those places I’d never heard of suddenly claiming independence … broadly, 89 to 91.

    They just did it.

    Where’s that bargepole? Oh, yeah. Anyway.

    If this was an economic question then, presumably, we’d have voted to remain*.

    These tergiversations and circumlocutions are as pathetic as a Quebecois friar’s tuck shop. Undignified, unbecoming. More of the same old slop, passed off as caviar.

    * Assuming leave means economic suicide. And, aside from the vindictiveness of our rulers, I see no reason why it should.

  44. @Edward Lud October 4, 2019 at 7:03 pm

    I remember the fall of the Wall. I remember all of those places I’d never heard of suddenly claiming independence … broadly, 89 to 91.

    They just did it

    +1

    UK does not need EU permission to leave now. UK will if we sign May/Johnson EU Surrender Treaty

  45. @PF October 4, 2019 at 11:47 am

    The Political Declaration [fairy tale] is irrelevant, the Treaty is the legal document

    BrexBox Episode 9: Boris Johnson’s plan is to sign the second worst deal in history
    “Boris Johnson the Prime Minister announced his Brexit plan during the Conservative Party Conference and it looks like he going planning on signing the second worst deal in history! He’s replacing the backstop with something more complicated, that doesn’t deliver Brexit”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nggs4dcnIU4

    Imagine what deal we might have had if we had not capitulated from the start. May and her cronies were a disgrace.

    Instead Johnson proposing May’s EU Surrender Treaty with a tiny, tiny tweak

    Still in CFP, ECJ, pay £39Bn, 2yr Transition etc

    It’s what Boris hasn’t said that’s important: eg money, laws, borders

    If EU say Yes, we’re doomed as changes are in non-binding [good faith] Political Declaration, not the Legal Treaty

    FFS BoJo, tell EU we’re doing nothing at NI/RoI border, we’ll accept everything from RoI – same as Checkpoint Charlie

  46. I think this is also on “some people are insane”, I won’t repeat all of what I said there, except:

    “The Political Declaration [fairy tale] is irrelevant, the Treaty is the legal document”

    I’m not sure that’s 100% true, but fine, let’s pretend it is.

    What does that change. As I said on the other thread, we would still genuinely be out. Like you, I can see and would prefer a better outcome, but my loosely worded simple criteria is this:

    “Once the dust has settled, are we still under the governance of the Commission, and are we still under the jurisdiction of the ECJ”.

    If no to both, then – whatever the price, treachery, call it what you want – we’ve left.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.