Forum menu
Could Johnson ask for the extension but then refuse to take it up?
Surely the big brains have thought of that?
Trump impeached
Brexit cancelled
Spiderman staying in the MCU
😎😎😎😎😎
tjagain
Member
Could Johnson ask for the extension but then refuse to take it up?
No
Padfield (1968)13 established the principle that there are no unfettered discretions in public law, and that statutory powers must be used to promote the policy and objects of the statute, to be determined by the courts as a matter of law. Much of what follows can be traced back to that fundamental principle.
However im sure Cummings will try something
I cannot live with any form of brexit. I am so angry about the whole thing.
Its a disaster for the country, it will inevitably lead to the break up of the UK, it will impovrish us all
The whole thing is a populist play by a small number of super rich tax avoiders in order to reshape the uK into a very low wage very low tax economy and they got where they did by a 20 year propaganda campaign playing on the basest racist fears of small section of the population
also funded and directed by russia to destabilise the EU
I am a European. I have more in common with citizens of countries like the Netherlands and Denmark that I do with the backward looking little englander xenophobes
The england I was born in has moved away from me - I have not moved away from it
KImbers - the Benn act by my understanding states they must ask for an extension not enact it.
Trump impeached
Brexit cancelled
Spiderman staying in the MCU
My crystal ball says no 🤣
KImbers – the Benn act by my understanding states they must ask for an extension not enact it.
But parliament has voted not to crash out, and the Benn legislation legally forbids it (Parliament is sovereign, not Dominic boris)
It's a car crash fo sho.
Surely the benn act only asks for an extension and the 31st oct to leave is still on the statue books?
Its a point I really am not clear on
Surely the benn act only asks for an extension and the 31st oct to leave is still on the statue books
Yes, but to be legally obliged to ask for an extension and then refuse said extension would be a contradicion.
It would be subverting the spirit of the legislation.
Cummings boris might attempt such a feat but I'm pretty sure the supreme Court is on speed dial and would quash such a move fairly swiftly.
Not ideal but I can cope with that.
I'm with tjagain.
I might be happy with a 2nd ref but really it's clear the whole affair is an almighty **** up and A50 should be revoked pending a sensible grown up review of what the EU does for us and our place within it. As should have been the case from result of the 2016 referendum.
Surely the benn act only asks for an extension
My understanding is that if an extension is requested and is granted, we are still members of the EU.
I thought the legislation was to ask for a specific extension, if this was offered it was automatically accepted, it the EU offered a different date it had to be taken to parliament for a vote to accept/reject/counter offer.
Also Spiderman is almost as annoying as Brexit.
I Agree completely, slow old man
.. Revoke article 50, dealing with the fringe gammons will be child's play compared to the alternatives.
I'm not really seeing a mechanism to revoke unless the Liberal Democrats get a majority coalition though, via a general election.
And a general election at this point is unlikely to deliver that, whilst corbyn is still pissing into the wind.
A general election right now would be very very bad.
Prime minister Cummings needs to be forced to secure an extension to alow breathing space for maneuvers.
Trump impeached
Brexit cancelled
Spiderman staying in the MCU
The latter being the least likely. Thanks, Sony.
Force the extension then the election then a referendum
The tories will be toast after an extension. Brexit party will split their vote. lib dems will take votes and seats in the south, SNP will clean up in scotland, Labour will hold on to most of the north.
Hung parliament it has to be another referendum
Well let's be honest, it will be a hung parliament either way.
Extension, then a referendum, then a general election.
Can't be done that way Matty - a second referendum would take too long. Nine months is what the electoral commission states. NO "government of national unity" could hold together that long and do you want to leave Johnson there that long?
It doesn’t have to take anywhere near that long… but… agreed… a multi multi party coalition is unlikely to hold on long enough for it to happen… but… an election could return a house that needs to form a multi multi party coalition to do any thing anyway! It really isn’t looking like any party will get the numbers to rule alone… unless the Brexit Party packs up and leaves the Conservative Brexit Party to romp home with a majority.
So the Telegraph going with Hungary veto.
Still struggle to see Cummings plan here. No deal would be followed by a VONC surely and then election. The immediate disruption after a no deal will be very visual, real and plainly obvious to the electorate, and even with Brexit Party votes surely enough sane Tory voters would switch to LD or LAB. It would also cement SNP into Scotland.
I can't see how no deal benefits Cummings in an election.
It doesn’t have to take anywhere near that long…
It does is it is to be presented as actual facts.
The electoral commission states a referndum campaign must be nine months. You can argue this is a political decision intended to stymie a second scots referendum but electortal commission guidance really has to be adhered to to make it legally watertight
this is why the labour suggestion is for an interim government that last a few days - just long enough to ensure an extension is sought and granted and then it will be dissolved for an election
Once again - a parliament with no overall control does not mean coalitions are needed
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/second-referendum-brexit
A fair estimate is that the whole process would take a minimum of 21 weeks, but this would be much shorter than other recent referendums.
Once again – a parliament with no overall control does not mean coalitions are needed
True. But whatever agreements a minority government uses to govern could be just as delicate after the election as before. That a government might not hold on long enough for referendum before an election, as you point out, is true. But a government after the election could have the exact same, or even worse, parliamentary arithmetic to work with.
<3 months for a ref seems fair
Let's be honest we could have it tomorrow
Everyone is already a brexpert and knows which way they are likely to vote
Extension, then a referendum, then a general election.
That assumes the Tories would call for a second referendum. I think that's unlikely, so - extension, election, referendum.
Let’s be honest we could have it tomorrow
Everyone is already a brexpert and knows which way they are likely to vote
No I think some of campaign would still be needed, though how it would be better than the last one I don't know. Both sides were pathetic last time. Anyway, ideally no referendum but something like a royal commission which is what I think should have been done in 2016.
A Royal Commission is a new one on me - how would that work...?
Edit: so I just googled. This would seem to be the right thing to have done immediately post-referendum, or even before even having one, but maybe might be controversial now. But really, the government saying "the only way out of this impasse is to appoint a royal commission and we'll stand by the outcome", with appropriate terms of reference might be a decent way of taking some heat out of the situation, and start to reduce the ridiculous division that now exist between those who want out, and those who don't, with the entrenched positions on both sides.
Another referendum makes good sense
Leave or remain has been clearly decided so the new referendum should be about the type of deal.
Soft,Hard or single beds.
mattyfez
Well let’s be honest, it will be a hung parliament either way.
Do we have enough lamp-posts?
Good ol' Boris and Cummings - the blame everyone else narrative is coming on well...
https://news.sky.com/story/pm-to-eu-were-packing-our-bags-will-you-cheerily-wave-us-off-11828738
Soft brexit could be a sort of leave in name only, a similar arrangement to what we have now without the cherries, pay a bit more, lose some influence but life stays the same
Hard brexit could be a similar deal to the excellent May/EU agreement
Single beds could be no deal
It breaks the deadlock and keeps democracy alive. Problem solved. Goodnight.
exsee
Member
Soft brexit could be a sort of leave in name only, a similar arrangement to what we have now without the cherries, pay a bit more, lose some influence but life stays the same
Yup. And we've now established that all votes for brexit are a vote for any brexit you like no matter how hard, so nobody could complain if it goes the other way. Right?
I dunno about that, we've certainly established both the remain and leave votes were a very mixed bag of reasons, a new ref on the type of deal would suit both teams well without cheating anyone.
so nobody could complain if it goes the other way
i think you might be trolling with that one :o)
a new ref on the type of deal would suit both teams well without cheating anyone.
Well, apart from everyone under 22 that is.
Nope, they would still have their right to campaign to join the EU through the usual channels. Lib dems could become the 'join the EU asap' party
exsee - nope - remain votes were all for one thing - to stay in the EU as we are. Leave vote were for all sorts of differnt outcomes 99% of which were based on lies
And again nope - any future ref must be remain v leave. Polls show strongly that the population wants to stay
Exsee, once you acknowledge that we need another ref to decide what brexit means, you're admitting that the first ref was carried out with people not knowing what they were voting for
Invalidates the whole shitshow
Time to ditch brexit, move on & deal with the actual problems the country faces
Time to ditch brexit, move on & deal with the actual problems the country faces
Ha ha , you really think its going to be that easy don’t you?
Time to ditch brexit, move on & deal with the actual problems the country faces
Yep, apart from to do that the parties who have been in power for the last 20 years (mainly Tory) would have to admit that the actual problems are down to their decisions and are not the fault of EU, immigrants, financial crisis or any other excuse they can think of.
I could see a party like the Green party being able to do it but with 1 MP it maybe a struggle...
Project Fear was wrong (but less wrong than Economists for Brexit and getting more right over time)
https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1180543762205986821
Ha ha , you really think its going to be that easy don’t you?
It is easy. You just need to believe.
Project Fear was wrong
Yup, it underestimated how hard a Brexit would be aimed for, it underestimated the impact and didn't take into account the viscious circle it would start. It still hasn't happened yet and the impact is already at project fear levels.
Try reading the Twitter thread.
tjagain, nope both remain and leave votes were for all sorts of different reasons but it was clearly decided to leave, it was a good turnout and a very large cross section of society decided, now a new ref needs to decide on the type of deal. This suits both teams and allows us to break the deadlock
We need an independent and 'as impartial as possible' body to set up a new ref with a handful of genuine deal options /EU approved options/. A well put together ref that doesn't allow for vote splitting trickery from either side
Works well for the EU as well.
Jobbies a goodun.
Really? What different reasons were there to remain?
Remains always been a shit sell tbh.
Selling fake promises and Unicorns is way simpler than selling what you’ve already got (which is taken for granted till it’s gone).
Some voted because they fear change
some voted because they wanted to fly to Europe willy nilly
some voted because they were scared of losing value in their house
some voted because they thought their income would go down
some voted because they love the EU and everything it stands for
some voted because they wanted open borders
some voted because of the customs union
some voted so their children can work in Europe later in life
ETC ETC ETC ETC.
It was a basic ref question with a simple leave/remain choice. That has been decided now we move to filter the type of deal. Break the deadlock and move forward. We can join the EU whenever we like in the future via the usual channels
Problem solved unless you are at either end of the spectrum and nobody cares about those oddbods anyway
ETC ETC ETC ETC
But… can all those “reasons” be concurrently addressed by staying in the EU, or are they multually exclusive, or just simply very elusive, as many “reasons” to vote Leave in 2016 were?
Exsee remain may have been for different reasons (that which was most important to the voter) but there can only be one version of remain which everyone voted for. Remain means remain. See that actually makes sense.
The opposite cannot be said for leave. By choosing only a leave option you would immediately be disenfranchising almost half of everyone that voted and not giving a good proportion of leave voters the version they wanted. It is the solution that suits nobody and exactly what we have right now.
Problem solved unless you are at either end of the spectrum and nobody cares about those oddbods anyway
Which spectrum? We are already in a situation where even politicians proposing that we leave the EU with a transition period and a bridging agreement are attacked as traitorous remainers. Any referendum between two Leave options will soon descend into a reframing of the debate as “Brexit” and “not real Brexit”, despite both options being seen as less preferable to remaining an EU member by over half of voters (now, not back in 2016… remember all those under 22 voters you are happy not to have a say).
It was a basic ref question with a simple leave/remain choice. That has been decided now we move to filter the type of deal.
Wasn’t on the paper so doesn’t count 🙂
‘we’ were asked leave/remain the type of deal wasn’t an option and there was no mention of a follow up vote.
Definition of ‘Leaving’ changes on a day by day basis.
I think the Remain side should really be selling the (well, pre-2016) status quo as "The Deal"
Because it was a good compromise.
Tbh ‘Remain means Remain’ is actually a true meaningful statement whereas
‘Brexit means Brexit’ means er fk all.
And when your PM starts spouting shite like that it’s probably time to get off the bus.
Yep, apart from to do that the parties who have been in power for the last 20 years
Very true and thats why 17.4 million voted for Brexit. For most it was about kicking the politicians and Establishment in the teeth. I believe that those who did not vote for Brexit were fairly happy with the status quo which, considering the large liberal majority in the remain camp doesnt make much sense i would have thought they would be itching to get out of EU rule.
Perhaps they thought that leaving the EU would make the situation worse rather than better.
For most it was about kicking the politicians and Establishment in the teeth.
By giving them carte Blanche to do as they wish with the country 🙂
itching to get out of EU rule.
Which we sat at the table and could veto an generally er decide the rules.
Sorry for being a smart ass, I hate both EU and our Gov but think that the non elite people are less likely to get shafted by the EU.
(Edit - hates probably to strong a word and possibly unhappy with both is more applicable)
Yeah taking us out of the EU & giving the establishment even more power to screw us all over seems like a daft way to punish 'the establishment'
'Get Brexit done' is the latest 'brexit means brexit' just as empty and just a deceptive when we have to spend then the next decade repeating the last 3 years as we argue over the future relationship & 40+ ftas...
kicking the politicians and Establishment in the teeth
A lot of people voted Remain in 2016 (and this point is probably true of even more of those who would vote Remain now) not because they thought leaving the EU was in itself some kind of morally or philosophically bad thing, but because they didn’t trust those proposing that leaving the EU would improve their lives, or the lives of anyone they knew. They could see an attempt to grab power by Johnson, Farage and co… could see who was financially backing them, and didn’t exactly see them empowering the ‘people’ once they had leveraged themselves into power, they knew they’d only be acting in their own interests. That three years down the line there are still people saying that people voted against politicians and the establishment, while backing Boris f c i g Johnson as PM do deliver a great nebulous change for the better, or even more oddly thinking Tice, Farage, Banks and others are looking to improve their lives, says it all to me.
‘Get Brexit done’ is the latest ‘brexit means brexit’ just as empty and just a deceptive when we have to spend then the next decade repeating the last 3 years as we argue over the future relationship & 40+ ftas…
TBH using the EU as an excuse for everything worked well the first time round so may as well continue.
The electoral commission states a referndum campaign must be nine months. You can argue this is a political decision intended to stymie a second scots referendum but electortal commission guidance really has to be adhered to to make it legally watertight
Why does an advisory referendum need to be legally watertight? Genuine question, the whole court case a little while ago hinged on the very fact that it didn't have any legal basis for a mandate.
Remains always been a shit sell tbh.
Selling fake promises and Unicorns is way simpler than selling what you’ve already got (which is taken for granted till it’s gone).
Indeed, and it hurt us badly. Plenty of people voted leave as a synonym for "change." Ie, this is shit, let's try something - anything - else.
Revoke, remain, reform. That last bit is really important.
I think that’s optimistic now @Cougar… in the short to medium term at least it is likely to be… revoke, remain, opt-out… we are not about to regain a central role in setting the course for the EU, we’ve lost that for a generation thanks to all this Brexit infighting… we’re going to be “on the edge” of the EU for the foreseeable future… in or out… member or not. We’ve given up control that can not be reclaimed. It’s all about keeping the benefits or not now… neither leaving or remaining will make us a leader in the EU again. We are weakened. Which is all that some wanted from Brexit really… to soften us up on the world stage.
Perhaps they thought that leaving the EU would make the situation worse rather than better.
^^^ This pretty well summed up my attitude to how I voted ^^^
I voted remain,I'm a reluctant remainer. There's nothing that has happened since the referendum to change my opinion,sadly events have just confirmed my cynicism.
Edit
Do people think the EU will grant us another extension? I read that Macron was reluctant last time. Surely the EU are just as tired of all the Brexit stuff as we are & want to move on with their other business,with or without the UK?
If it wasn’t for Ireland, I’d suspect we’d be told “ta ta” at the end of the month. But the governments of many EU countries genuinely want to look after the interests of another member state… any extension granted is for Ireland really, not the UK (well, not for England, more specifically).
Oh no there’s a supertrawler in our waters be able to stop it after Brexit thou...
Hang on wasn't there a certain mep something Garage who could have prevented that.
Or did we sell the rights TBH in the need for greed world your never quite sure.
Do people think the EU will grant us another extension?
Yep or they’ve gotta build a border.
It’s an upside for Boris that someone else will have to sort his mess out over there in the event of no-deal.
The time limits imposed by A50 are all a bit pants but tbh no one ever thought anyone would be stupid enough to use it, most people are desperate to get in the club.
A successful Brexit would probably worked if we’d actually not signed it but put a letter of intention to leave and some bumf over what we wanted to achieve possibly not having a million red lines to start with.
It’s like an untrade deal in reality but populism and point scoring.
some bumf over what we wanted to achieve
We still haven’t determined that, and probably never will… we just need to ‘get Brexit done’ and then scrabble around working out what to do with it, and how, after we have left, in a rush and without proper security. I’m sure Johnson, Raab, Mogg and co will do what’s best for all of us plebs, not just what’s right for them and their associates, honest.
but it was clearly decided to leave,
Clearly?
opt-out…
Of what?
we are not about to regain a central role in setting the course for the EU, we’ve lost that for a generation thanks to all this Brexit infighting…
I wasn't really meaning "reform" the EU (though that would be nice) so much as putting our own house in order. Most of the concerns raised by leavers (back in 2016 at any rate) were domestic issues we'd scapegoated onto the EU / foreigners. It's well within our power to tighten up our immigration laws for instance, and that was a primary leave driver.
considering the large liberal majority in the remain camp doesnt make much sense i would have thought they would be itching to get out of EU rule.
EU rule?
What most leavers forget is that we were a huge part of the EU. There was no 'them'. We were one of the biggest influences on it. You had democratic representatives and they influenced policy.
We weren't being rules by the EU, we were taking a share in the partial ruling of the whole EU.
As for why liberals like the EU, maybe it's because the EU is big, strong and can enforce environmental standards and worker protections. These things require rules that reduce profitability; that's why it needs to be done at a supra national level, it means all the major trading partners have to stick to the same rules. Brexit ****s this up and WILL result in reduced environmental protection when we need more.
The time limits imposed by A50 are all a bit pants but tbh no one ever thought anyone would be stupid enough to use it, most people are desperate to get in the club.
Yep, 2 years sounds a bit made up/guessed. I imagine one thing the EU will do now is put the time limit at 10 years so anyone else that wants to leave just gets on with it over those 10 years with wasting everyone's time.
The under 22's aren't being ignored. They can campaign for joining the EU via the usual process. The UK can rejoin the EU when we vote to do so. You can't be suggesting we keep having referendums every time people become eligible to vote just in case they impact the original vote?
With a new ref on various leave deals the electorate get the right to decide how we leave. We can rejoin if it doesn't workout.
I think the Remain side should really be selling the (well, pre-2016) status quo as “The Deal”
Because it was a good compromise.
The largest democratic vote in British history rejected that option and decided to leave but something very close to it could still be put forward as a soft and sensual leave option.
Happy days.
The UK can rejoin the EU when we vote to do so.
No, it can rejoin IF the government of the day offers us a vote on it.
The Tory party is fighting the Brexit party for the right wing of the electorate - the rest of us are being ignored, as demonstrated by polls. The majority of people want a different option, but because there's a Brexit party the Tories are throwing us all under a bus to keep votes from the Brexit party's hands.
No, it can rejoin IF the government of the day offers us a vote on it.
Yep we’re passengers in this given the odd vote when offered the chance.
‘We’ actually have very little say other than pick our overlords but even that’s skewed with FPTP.
And who votes for the government of the day? Brexit badness will mean an easy win for someone
Hmm. If we leave, then the Brexit party is gone. So a new party that campaigns on rejoining would pick up a lot of votes especially if things have got worse.
We can join the EU whenever we like in the future via the usual channels
Good luck.
Yep, 2 years sounds a bit made up/guessed
Well for maximum irony Lord Kerr (we wrotez it.)
Kerr imagined that the exit procedure might be triggered after an authoritarian leader took power in a member country and the EU responded by suspending that country’s right to vote on EU decisions.
It seemed to me very likely that a dictatorial regime would then, in high dudgeon, want to storm out. And to have a procedure for storming out seemed to be quite a sensible thing to do — to avoid the legal chaos of going with no agreement,” Kerr said.