Doomstead Diner Menu => Geopolitics => Topic started by: RE on June 24, 2016, 07:36:14 AM

Title: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: RE on June 24, 2016, 07:36:14 AM


youtube-Logo-4gc2reddit-logoOff the keyboard of RE



Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666

Friend us on Facebook



Published on The Doomstead Diner on June 24, 2016



http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/content/uploads/2016/03/brexit-800x500.jpg



Discuss this article at the Geopolitics Table inside the Diner



Unbelievably, INCREDIBLY, the Brits Voted for BREXIT, aka divorcing from the European Union.



As this campaign went on over the last few months, the Brexit Champions seemed to be gaining the upper hand, and as of about a week ago I thought Brexit would win over Bremain.



But then, by SHEER COINCIDENCE, something happened.  A Brit MP, Jo Cox was ASSASSINATED, with the Assassin reportedly crying BRITAIN FIRST or something like that anyhow before he shot and stabbed her to death.  Not quite ALLAHU AKBAR! but similar enough to turn off people to voting for Brexit if this reminded them of Terrorist Tactics.



Campaigns were suspended for 3 days on both sides, and although there was some variation in the Polling, the tactic appeared to have WORKED, and the major Polling companies began reporting that Bremain would win.



Global Markets breathed a sigh of RELIEF, and after being hammered for a few weeks the Pound Sterling began to recover.  The markets calmes, all would be well, BAU would continue onward.



However, in the driving rain and flooding in many locations, with Polling locations having to be moved due to the weather issues, the Brits still turned out to vote, and in the end, the Brexit crowd won the day.



Tomorrow, and all of next week as well will see complete TURMOIL in the Financial Markets as well.  Nobody is certain of the repercussions, other than at least at the beginning the financial markets both in Britain and Europe will get positively HAMMERED.



At the same time though, just a Vote by the population at large to dissolve this marriage doesn't instantaneously dissolve all their financial entaglements, any more than when you get a divorce the financial entaglements with your spouse instantly dissapear.  In fact, it is orders of magnitude WORSE in a case like this, with "International Law" and "International Treaties" all involved.  Not just a few, hundreds if not thousands of laws and contractual agreements are on the chopping block here, and each one of them can run into hundreds if not thousands of pages of Legalese.  So what you will have here is a long and interminable set of court cases being held, and trust me the people who voted for Brexit will have no say whatsoever in how those cases are adjudicated.  What comes out at the end of it a few years down the line is a complete mystery, although if BAU ontinues, you can expect the result to benefit the Trnasnational Corporations rather than the people of Britain.



On Sunday here on the Diner on our Collapse Cafe discussion, we will be getting together with a few of the Diner Brits to discuss the outcomes and possible future resultant from the Brexit Vote.  We will go off LIVE @ High Noon Alaska Time, 4PM Eastern Time, 9PM Brit Summer Time.  Be there, or be Square.


Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: RE on June 24, 2016, 09:24:54 AM
...and so it BEGINS!

RE

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-24/worse-lehman-european-bank-bloodbath-sparks-dollar-funding-crisis (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-24/worse-lehman-european-bank-bloodbath-sparks-dollar-funding-crisis)

"Worse Than Lehman" - European Bank Bloodbath Sparks Dollar Funding Crisis

Tyler Durden's picture

For European banks, today is worse than Lehman with a 13%-plus collapse in the broad index. The major banks - like Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank - have crashed over 15% to record lows as "Lehman moments" loom. This crisis prompted massive demand for USDollars, sending basis swaps (and other funding vehicles) spiking which it appears is why The Fed said it was ready to provide liquidity.

The broad EU banking system is collapsing...

 

Led by the majors...

 

 

Raising "Lehman moment" alarms again...

And sparking desperate demand for USDollars...

 

And Sterling was sold hard into the European close (down 200 pips)

 

 

As counterparty risk looms again...

Which explains why The Fed stepped up already with swap lines...

Earlier today we said that it was inevitable that the Fed would join the world's other central bankers in providing backstops to global markets, the only question is whether it would take place before or after the open. We now have the answer. Before.

The Federal Reserve is carefully monitoring developments in global financial markets, in cooperation with other central banks, following the results of the U.K. referendum on membership in the European Union. The Federal Reserve is prepared to provide dollar liquidity through its existing swap lines with central banks, as necessary, to address pressures in global funding markets, which could have adverse implications for the U.S. economy.

Because free, impartial, efficient, and unmanipulated markets.  Also we can finally stop holding our breath on those two Fed rate hikes which the FOMC anticipates in 2016.

And then Lagarde confrmed:

  • *LAGARDE REITERATES SUPPORT FOR C.BANK LIQUIDITY READINESS
Title: The Brexit Hotel California: You Can Check Out, but You Can Never Leave
Post by: RE on August 01, 2016, 08:21:58 AM
Who could have expected this?   ::)

RE

http://www.businessinsider.com/eu-officials-britain-brexit-theresa-may-2016-7?r=UK&IR=T (http://www.businessinsider.com/eu-officials-britain-brexit-theresa-may-2016-7?r=UK&IR=T)

'They have to sort themselves out': Why a Brexit won't happen for a very long time

    Adam Payne

(http://static1.businessinsider.com/image/579f1f44dd0895b9398b468a-1068/rtsixxr.jpg)
German Chancellor Angela Merkel and British Prime Minister Theresa May address a news conference following talks at the Chancellery in Berlin, Germany July 20, 2016. REUTERS/Stefanie Loos

Britain simply is not prepared to even begin negotiating the terms of a Brexit and it should not expect to officially withdraw from the European Union until at least 2020, according to various EU officials.

Prime Minister Theresa May is under pressure from Leave MPs to deliver a Brexit as soon as possible. Pro-Brexit ministers like Liam Fox and David Davis have said that Article 50 — the official two-year process of leaving the 28-nation bloc — would begin as early next year.

However, EU diplomats have ruled this out amid the reality that a number of major hurdles are likely to severely delay the process.

One of these is the fact that nobody is entirely sure what the terms of Britain's departure from the EU will be.

"They [Britain] have to sort themselves out,"an EU diplomat at the centre of Brexit preparations told the Financial Times. "They come from London and they don’t know what they want. They don’t know what their government wants, what their parliament wants. They have not prepared.”

Another senior European diplomat said: “We’ve not even worked out what all the questions are, let alone found the potential answers." The current lack of consensus over what "Brexit" actually means isn't the only issue facing May, though.

Firstly, European Parliament elections are set to take place in 2019, where a brand new assembly will be elected with the power, in theory, to veto Britain's proposed Brexit terms. This means a Brexit could face a major roadblock even if May and her government are successful in working to a fast-track timetable.

Secondly, there is the well-documented issue of just how complex the process of negotiation will be."For all sorts of reasons we will want to finish this all before the June 2019 elections," a senior EU official told the Financial Times. "But that will be very, very tight. The complexity is vastly underestimated unless you want to be brutal and cut off ties.”

These warnings from EU diplomats come as a Conservative peer said on Monday that the House of Lords would likely delay Article 50 being triggered if a bill was put before parliament.

"If it comes to a Bill, I think the Lords might actually delay things. I think there's a majority in the Lords for remaining," Baroness Patience Wheatcroft told The Times newspaper.

"I would hope, while we delayed things, that there would be sufficient movement in the EU to justify putting it to the electorate, either through a general election or a second referendum."

The task facing Theresa May in delivering a Brexit seems to be getting more difficult with each day that passes. Business Insider has already noted how Leave voters shouldn't be sure about her "Brexit means Brexit" promise and why a Brexit might not actually happen at all.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy on August 02, 2016, 12:46:50 AM
Quote
The complexity is vastly underestimated unless you want to be brutal and cut off ties.

Brexit means "cutting off ties" - it couldn't be simpler.  The author wants to make it seem difficult, but it's not.  The House of Lords can't block legislation, only delay it a couple of days.  Teresa May won't last long if that's her attitude, which isn't clear from this biased account.  Once the ties are cut, then they can start on a new arrangement.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: RE on August 02, 2016, 12:54:23 AM
Quote
The complexity is vastly underestimated unless you want to be brutal and cut off ties.

Brexit means "cutting off ties" - it couldn't be simpler.  The author wants to make it seem difficult, but it's not.  The House of Lords can't block legislation, only delay it a couple of days.  Teresa May won't last long if that's her attitude, which isn't clear from this biased account.  Once the ties are cut, then they can start on a new arrangement.

The issue is, all the MPs are being heavily lobbied to "explain" to them how difficult this would be and how HORRIBLE it would be for them and their investments and paychecks once a Brexit really goes through.  So when caucusing to decide on some "plan" for Brexit, the MPs cannot themselves come to an agreement on ANYTHING, thus they have nothing to present to the EU as a consensus group opinion.  They simply do not KNOW what they want, or how to achieve it.  Not surprising because about anything they want is NOT achievable.

RE
Title: British court delivers blow to E.U. exit plan, insists Parliament has a say
Post by: RE on November 03, 2016, 06:40:32 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/british-court-delivers-blow-to-eu-exit-plan-giving-parliament-role-in-process/2016/11/03/36a98138-a1af-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/british-court-delivers-blow-to-eu-exit-plan-giving-parliament-role-in-process/2016/11/03/36a98138-a1af-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html)

World
British court delivers blow to E.U. exit plan, insists Parliament has a say
Claimants in Brexit case welcome court ruling
Play Video1:37
Hairdresser Deir Dos Santos and investment manager Gina Miller, the two lead claimants in a case at England's High Court, welcomed the court's Nov. 3 ruling that the British government needs parliamentary approval to trigger the process of exiting the European Union. (Reuters)
By Griff Witte November 3 at 8:46 AM

LONDON — A senior British court on Thursday dealt a severe blow to Prime Minister Theresa May’s plans to begin the process of exiting the European Union early next year, ruling she must get Parliament’s approval before she acts.

The decision greatly complicates May’s stated plan to trigger Article 50 — the never-before-used mechanism for a country to leave the European Union — by the end of March at the latest.

Most members of Parliament opposed Brexit in the lead-up to Britain’s June referendum, when voters opted for an exit by a 52-to-48 margin. On the streets, however, the court decision risked setting off an angry backlash from voters who favored leaving the European Union and believed the issue was settled.

[What is Article 50?]

May’s lawyers argued that she had the right to begin the Brexit process without first getting Parliament’s consent. But a three-judge panel on the London-based High Court sided with a group of plaintiffs who contended that Parliament must first weigh in.
British prime minister: Brexit will happen 'before the end of March'
Play Video1:19
Speaking July 10, British Prime Minister Theresa May said she would trigger the process to leave the E.U. by the end of March 2017. (Reuters)

“The most fundamental rule of the U.K.’s constitution is that Parliament is sovereign and can make and unmake any law it chooses,” the judges wrote. “As an aspect of the sovereignty of Parliament it has been established for hundreds of years that the Crown — i.e. the Government of the day — cannot by exercise of prerogative powers override legislation enacted by Parliament.”

May is now likely to appeal Thursday's ruling to the Supreme Court, with justices likely to take the case in December. A Downing Street spokesman, speaking on the typical condition of anonymity, said that the government still intends to trigger Article 50 on its original schedule.

But analysts said that process could now be significantly delayed, especially if the Supreme Court rules Parliament should have a vote not only on whether the government triggers an exit but also on the substance of British demands in the divorce talks with Europe.

The court's decision stunned British political and legal observers — just as the referendum outcome also defied predictions that voters would favor staying in the European Union. Until Thursday, most analysts believed the court would side with the government. The High Court in Northern Ireland had even ruled as recently as last week that May's government could bypass Parliament.

The opposite decision on Thursday, by a court representing England and Wales, sets a new legal course and leaves it to the Supreme Court to ultimately sort out.

It also sparked an immediate rally in Britain's beleaguered currency, the pound, as traders reacted to the possibility that Britain's E.U. exit could be significantly delayed — or even blocked.

[Britain still struggles to define post-E.U. identity]

The pound has been battered since the referendum, and has been one of the worst performing currencies anywhere in the world this year. London's FTSE exchange remained down slightly despite the announcement, but other markets, including France's CAC, were higher in midday trading.

Pro-Brexit advocates quickly denounced the decision, saying it amounted to a betrayal of the public's will.

“I now fear every attempt will be made to block or delay triggering Article 50,” tweeted Nigel Farage, a longtime Brexit champion. “They have no idea level of public anger they will provoke.”

Pro-E.U. politicians, meanwhile, celebrated the decision and called on May to share with Parliament her negotiating strategy — something she has steadfastly refused to do.

“So far May’s team have been all over the place when it comes to prioritizing what is best for Britain, and it’s time they pull their socks up and start taking this seriously,” said Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron in a statement. His call was echoed by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

The court ruling — assuming it is not overturned on appeal — sets up a crucial decision in Parliament. Members of the ruling Conservative Party were almost evenly split on whether Britain should stay in the E.U. or leave when the country voted June 23. But solid majorities of the other major parties in Parliament — including Labour, the Scottish National Party and the Liberal Democrats — all opposed an exit.

[How globalism became a political boogeyman on both sides of the Atlantic]

May, who took office in July following the resignation of David Cameron, has only a narrow majority in Parliament and could struggle to pass legislation authorizing the start of Britain's departure.

Mujtaba Rahman, Europe director for the Eurasia Group consultancy, described the court decision as “a severe setback for Theresa May’s government.”

If the Supreme Court rules that Parliament needs to have a say in the government's strategy for handling the E.U. exit talks, Rahman wrote in a Thursday analysis, then pro-E.U. members of Parliament could use the process to “seek to tie May’s negotiating hand.”

One option for May, in turn, could be to call a general election next year “in order to ask the public to endorse her negotiating goals — in effect, to use an election to override Parliament,” he added.

Even before Thursday's ruling, pro-Brexit forces have experienced a number of setbacks since the June referendum vote.

May's government has struggled to put together coherent strategy for the tough negotiations to come with Europe if Britain goes ahead with departure plans. European leaders, meanwhile, have been fairly united in their insistence that Britain will not be given a special deal.

The negotiations are likely to focus on the trade-off between Britain's desire both to control E.U. immigration into the country and to retain access to the E.U.'s common market. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, a leading Brexit proponent, has said the government's objective in the talks “should be having our cake and eating it.”

But European leaders have said that won't be possible, and that Britain will have to allow immigrants if it wants to maintain the market access that is at the core of its trading relationships with Europe.

Johnson on Wednesday appeared to make unwitting reference to the government's struggles with its Brexit strategy, saying in a speech at an awards ceremony sponsored by the conservative Spectator magazine that Britain would make “a titanic success” of Brexit.

George Osborne, Britain's pro-E.U. former Treasury chief, quickly interjected: “It sank.”

Brian Murphy in Washington and Karla Adam in London contributed to this report.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy on November 03, 2016, 01:33:14 PM
While it is true the UK Parliament is sovereign, not the people, it would be a very brave Parliament that goes against the people's expressed will.  Cameron knew that, that's why he said he would quit if he lost, and then actually did.  The Scottish National Party perhaps has a moral case to argue, because Scotland as a whole voted against Brexit, but Scotland is not sovereign, the UK is. 

The Conservative Party whips will be hard at work, threatening withdrawal of pre-selection on mavericks.  The only alternative would be to form a new party, around Cameron I suppose.  If the same thing goes on in the Labour Party, I don't know who represents the Blairite faction these days, both major parties could split.

Whether they will bring up a split from NATO as well, which Corbyn personally supports, should be interesting.  All of the US's plans long-term imperial plans, the EU and NATO, are falling apart, and a Trump win could finish it off.
Title: Why May’s Going to Court to Avoid Parliamentary Vote on Brexit
Post by: RE on December 01, 2016, 07:31:46 PM
More Brexit nonsense.

RE

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-02/why-may-s-going-to-court-to-avoid-parliamentary-vote-on-brexit (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-02/why-may-s-going-to-court-to-avoid-parliamentary-vote-on-brexit)


Why May’s Going to Court to Avoid Parliamentary Vote on Brexit
by Alex Morales
December 1, 2016 — 7:01 PM EST

    Supreme Court hears government appeal in Brexit case next week
    Ex-minister says lawmakers ready to vote to trigger Article 50

(https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/ipbbjBs9Asa0/v0/680x-1.jpg)
British Prime Minister Theresa May. Photographer: Daniel Leal-Olivas/AFP via Getty Images

A landmark court case next week will decide whether U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May must call a parliamentary vote before triggering Brexit. She has plenty of reasons to avoid one, chief among them a reluctance to reveal her negotiating hand and concerns about delay.

The government’s top legal experts head to the Supreme Court in London for four days of hearings, seeking to overturn a High Court verdict that Parliament must have a say before Article 50 of the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty is invoked to formally start Britain’s withdrawal from the bloc. With even many ardent pro-“Remain” lawmakers saying they won’t try to block Brexit, the question arises why May doesn’t just accept the court’s decision.

“They may not wish to block it, but that doesn’t mean to say that they won’t try to use the opportunity to flush out the government’s negotiating stance,” John Curtice, professor of politics at Strathclyde University in Glasgow, said in an interview. Parliament “may not say ‘no,’ but they obviously do have the ability to delay saying ‘yes.’”

May is trying to keep a tight rein on the divorce proceedings, telling lawmakers repeatedly she won’t elaborate on her negotiating stance to avoid giving her EU counterparts the upper hand. She’s pledged to trigger Article 50 by the end of March, and is seeking to avoid a potentially time-consuming process in Parliament’s two houses. Ministers argue executive privilege -- known in the U.K. as royal prerogative -- allows the government to bypass lawmakers.
Outside Forces

“The government is throwing down a very clear sign about who wields power in modern Britain -- the government and not the courts,” said Matthew Flinders, a politics professor at the University of Sheffield. “It’s also an important part of Theresa May’s ideology that she wants to be seen as a strong, powerful politician who makes commitments, follows through on them and isn’t willing to be frustrated by outside forces.”

Those forces range from the plaintiffs in the High Court case that the government lost -- including Gina Miller, who runs an investment startup, and Deir Dos Santos, a hairdresser -- to Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, who says the semi-autonomous Parliament in Edinburgh must also have a say in pulling the Brexit trigger. Sturgeon’s top legal officer is also scheduled to be in court next week.

But for May, the political hurdles may be as high as the legal ones. The bulk of House of Commons lawmakers campaigned for “Remain” in the June referendum, and May doesn’t have a majority in the upper chamber, the House of Lords.

Even so, “if she puts it to a vote in Parliament, MPs will vote to trigger Article 50,” said former Business Minister Anna Soubry, who turned down a post in May’s government and has since been one of the most vocal Conservatives in seeking to temper the government’s stance on Brexit. “Their fear will be that it will be in some way open to amendment.”
‘Tug of War’

The most important business stories of the day.
Get Bloomberg's daily newsletter.
Soubry said she won’t personally vote to block Brexit. But earlier this week, she appeared alongside Chuka Umunna, the Labour Party’s former business spokesman, and former Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, a Liberal Democrat, to argue that retaining membership of the European single market should be at the core of Britain’s Brexit plan. The single market joins the 28-member EU with Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein in a free-trade area that also has common regulations and product standards.

May has refused to commit to keeping Britain in the single market or the customs union, which binds the EU and Turkey in a trading zone with common external tariffs. Lawmakers may seek to put riders on a Brexit bill to flush out her stance.

“It will become potentially the focus of a tug of war in which all sorts of different amendments are tabled,” said Flinders. “The parliamentary process is like a sausage machine: It’s a very irrational way to make law. You can understand why she would rather not have to put a bill through that process,” he said. “She may well have to make deals to get things through.”
Tory Divisions

There’s also a risk parliamentary debates will re-expose the longstanding fractures in May’s Conservatives that helped bring down the party’s past three prime ministers: David Cameron, John Major and Margaret Thatcher. Already, pro-Brexit lawmaker Peter Bone has submitted his own bill seeking to hold the premier to her timetable.

“The more action there is in the House of Commons, the more divisions inside the Conservative Party on this issue become exposed,” said Curtice. “There will be the Anna Soubrys of this world who will be looking for one thing, and the Bill Cashes who will be looking for something very, very different.” Cash, a vocal Euro-skeptic, heads the Commons European Scrutiny Committee.

The government has laid out the case it will make to the Supreme Court, saying on Nov. 11 it has the power to give effect to the result of the June referendum without going to Parliament. On Thursday, it said the legislatures in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland also don’t need a say because they don’t have jurisdiction over foreign affairs.
‘Not Telling’

"We’re appealing because we believe we’ve got a very strong case, and we intend to go to the Supreme Court and win it," May’s spokesman, Greg Swift, told reporters on Tuesday.

The court won’t rule until January, and Flinders said the verdict is “very unlikely” to differ from the lower court’s. That would leave the Brexit trigger in the hands of Parliament.

“The government will try a short, tight bill that’s framed as narrowly as possible in order to limit the opportunity for amendments,” said Curtice. “Don’t be surprised if the opponents say: ‘You’re now passing a resolution that we want to leave the EU; well, what are you arguing in this process?’ And that will make it quite difficult to carry on saying ‘we’re not telling you.’”
Title: The BREXIT that never was
Post by: RE on January 24, 2017, 03:19:14 AM
Hotel California.  You can Check Out, but you can NEVER LEAVE.

Favorite quote from this article:

Quote
“This case was about the legal process, not about politics,”

hahahahahahahaha!  ::)

We don't NEED no Stinkin' DEMOCRACY!

RE

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/world/europe/theresa-may-brexit-vote-article-50.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/world/europe/theresa-may-brexit-vote-article-50.html)

‘Brexit’ Talks Can’t Start Without Parliament, U.K. Supreme Court Rules

By KATRIN BENNHOLDJAN. 24, 2017

(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/01/25/world/25Brexit1/25Brexit1-master768.jpg)
Journalists waiting for the ruling outside the Supreme Court in London on Tuesday. Credit Toby Melville/Reuters

LONDON — Prime Minister Theresa May must secure the approval of Parliament before she can begin the process of taking Britain out of the European Union, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday.

The ruling, which upholds an earlier decision by the High Court in London, creates another hurdle for Mrs. May, who has promised to begin a two-year, irreversible process of exit negotiations by the end of March by invoking the European Union’s Article 50, the legal mechanism for leaving the bloc.

“Today, by a majority of 8 to 3, the Supreme Court rules that the government cannot trigger Article 50 without an act of Parliament authorizing it to do so,” said David Neuberger, the Supreme Court president, in announcing the decision.

A majority of lawmakers, including many from Mrs. May’s Conservative Party, campaigned to stay in the European Union before the referendum last year, although most political observers said it was unlikely that legislators would dare to reject the will of the voters who backed a withdrawal.

In one important victory for the government, the court ruled that Mrs. May would not need separate approval from the regional legislatures in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
Continue reading the main story
‘Brexit’: Britain’s Decision to Leave the E.U.
Updates on Britain’s exit from the European Union.

    Retrial for Law Executives, U.S. Economic Growth Findings and Auto Industry and Trump
    JAN 22
    Fox News Hires Nigel Farage, a Trump Ally Who Backed ‘Brexit’
    JAN 20
    Godfather of ‘Brexit’ Takes Aim at the British Establishment
    JAN 20
    Theresa May’s ‘Global Britain’ Is Baloney
    JAN 20
    Theresa May Explains ‘Brexit’ at Davos
    JAN 19

See More »

ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story

“The devolution statutes were enacted on the assumption that the U.K. would be a member of the E.U. but they do not require it,” Lord Neuberger said. “Relations with the E.U. are a matter for the U.K. government.
How ‘Brexit’ Could Change Business in Britain

Months after the vote, little is clear. Britain’s trading relationship with the E.U. looks to be in limbo. Companies are reassessing their long-term investments in Britain. Here’s what’s happened so far.

Within minutes of the ruling, Jeremy Wright, Britain’s attorney general, issued a statement saying that the government would comply with the ruling.

The case has underscored the polarizing nature of the June referendum, in which 52 percent of Britons voted to leave the European Union.

One of the plaintiffs, Gina Miller, an investment fund manager, has said she was threatened with murder and rape by supporters of Brexit, as Britain’s decision is commonly known, who have accused her of trying to sabotage an exit. A lawyer by training, Ms. Miller has said she is merely standing up for the rights of Parliament.

“This case was about the legal process, not about politics,” Ms. Miller said in a news conference outside the Supreme Court, where she thanked her law firm, Mishcon de Reya, for fighting her case.

Ms. Miller said she had been the victim of a torrent of criticism since filing the case, and said she was “shocked by the levels of personal abuse that I have received from many quarters over the last several months for simply bringing and asking a legitimate question.”

Even the judges have found themselves under immense pressure. Members of the High Court who ruled against the government in November, setting the stage for the Supreme Court decision, were described by one tabloid newspaper as “enemies of the people.”

The ruling comes a week after Mrs. May first outlined her vision for a clean break with the European Union single market, one in which Britain would close its borders to visa-free migration for citizens from other countries in the bloc — a “hard Brexit” as it is often referred to here.
Photo
Prime Minister Theresa May has already outlined her vision for a clean break with the European Union single market. Credit Matt Dunham/Associated Press

Under the terms of Article 50, the prime minister, who officially supported remaining in the bloc but expressed only tepid support for it during the referendum campaign, has two years to complete exit negotiations once she invokes the rule.

In her speech last week, Mrs. May pledged to give both houses of Parliament the opportunity to vote on any accord, but lawmakers from across the political spectrum have made clear that they want to be involved from the start.

“I and many others did not exercise our vote in the referendum so as to restore the sovereignty of this Parliament only to see what we regarded as the tyranny of the European Union replaced by that of a government,” Stephen Phillips, a member of Mrs. May’s Conservative Party, said when the case was first brought.
Morning Briefing: Europe

What you need to know to start your day, delivered to your inbox.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

    Privacy Policy

If no deal is reached with the 27 other member states once the two-year countdown begins — or if Parliament rejects a final deal at that stage — it would most likely result in the sort of “cliff edge” breakup that Mrs. May, along with Britain’s bankers and business leaders, hope to avoid.

Mrs. May’s government had argued that under Britain’s unwritten constitution, the leadership can make or leave international treaties without parliamentary approval.

The High Court disagreed, ruling in November that it would be unlawful to use executive powers known as “royal prerogative” to start a process that would take rights away from citizens that had been granted by Parliament. Only Parliament could take those rights away, the court said.

The government appealed the decision, taking the case to the Supreme Court, the country’s highest judicial body, which came to its own conclusion after four days of hearings in front of its 11 justices.

Most legal commentators had predicted that the government would lose the case, and according to British news reports, officials have already started drafting parts of a bill that would be subject to parliamentary approval in a bid to keep to the March timetable.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy2 on January 24, 2017, 02:50:33 PM
I still don't think there is much of a problem.  PM May, or at least her whips, in private conversations with Conservative Party MPs, will say "If we lose this vote, May will call a snap General Election, and you will be disendorsed if you didn't vote the Party line", and everything will fall into place.  There's a lot of support for Brexit in other parties too, more than enough to cover any rebels.

Referenda are an unfortunate embarrassment, because they make the people think they matter.  Parliament IS sovereign, after all. 
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: RE on January 24, 2017, 03:00:31 PM
I still don't think there is much of a problem.  PM May, or at least her whips, in private conversations with Conservative Party MPs, will say "If we lose this vote, May will call a snap General Election, and you will be disendorsed if you didn't vote the Party line", and everything will fall into place.  There's a lot of support for Brexit in other parties too, more than enough to cover any rebels.

Referenda are an unfortunate embarrassment, because they make the people think they matter.  Parliament IS sovereign, after all.

Articles I have read stated that MOST MPs (like 80%) of ANY party were against a Brexit.  Just like the CONgress Critters here, their loyalty is not to the people, but to the corporations that fund their campaigns.  Corporations are AGAINST a Brexit.  Forget the Whips, the lobbyists will swamp them and buy better Dinners with fine wine also.

A Snap Election would not bring in much better pols.  And then like Syriza in Greece, the banks would put the thumbscrews to them and they would lose their nerve.

RE
Title: Brexit or Not, Parliament Reigns Supreme
Post by: RE on January 25, 2017, 11:46:44 AM
So when will Parliament vote on this?  ???  :icon_scratch:

RE

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-25/brexit-or-not-parliament-reigns-supreme (https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-25/brexit-or-not-parliament-reigns-supreme)

U.K.
Brexit or Not, Parliament Reigns Supreme
1
Jan 25, 2017 1:01 PM EST
By
Noah Feldman

The U.K. Supreme Court’s judgment on Tuesday requiring Parliament to authorize Brexit was conservative in the deepest and best sense of the term. Allowing the government to withdraw from the European Union without a parliamentary vote would have enabled the prime minister and her cabinet to change U.K. law on their own, a violation of Parliament’s traditional sovereignty. In practice, if Parliament votes in favor of Brexit, the judgment may not slow down the process very much. But the court nonetheless imposed a respect for orderly constitutional forms -- and required Britain’s elected representatives to take full and individual responsibility for their epochal decision.

Unlike the High Court, whose judgment it was reviewing, the law lords of the U.K.’s highest court  avoided high-flown theoretical declarations about the nature of parliamentary sovereignty. Instead, the court presented its ruling as an interpretation of the European Communities Act of 1972, the law that Parliament passed to facilitate the incorporation of European law into U.K. law.

The basic argument urged by the Brexit challengers was that withdrawing from the EU would effectively change U.K. domestic law -- because the 1972 law makes EU law into domestic U.K. law. According to basic British constitutional principles, only Parliament can change domestic laws. The ministers can conduct foreign relations on their own -- including signing and withdrawing from treaties -- but they’re not supposed to be able to change the legal rights of British subjects.

On the other side, the Tory government maintained that informing the EU of Britain’s intention to leave wasn’t a domestic act, but rather an exercise of foreign relations power. It added that the 1972 law didn’t say anything about the legal effects of EU withdrawal.

The government acknowledged, of course, that announcing withdrawal would trigger legal consequences. But it pointed out that under the relevant EU treaty, withdrawal would still take two years. In the meantime, the government could introduce legislation in Parliament -- charmingly known as a “Great Repeal Bill” -- that would take care of changes to U.K. law.

The Supreme Court resolved the case in an 8-3 vote by holding that the true meaning of the 1972 law was that Parliament delegated to EU institutions the power to make some domestic U.K. laws. If the U.K. left the EU, the court reasoned, the result would be that the 1972 law would no longer be operative. The domestic laws would therefore change. That meant withdrawal would affect U.K. domestic law, and change the existing legal rights of British subjects. It followed that an act of Parliament was required.

In a separate analysis, the court also said that the parliaments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland did not have the inherent right to block EU withdrawal by demanding their own votes. The basis for this holding was that Parliament has retained its authority to make decisions regarding the devolved parts of the kingdom.

The constitutional upshot of all this was to reaffirm the centrality and essentially absolute sovereignty of Parliament when it comes to making the most important decisions in the life of the U.K.

Seen from the perspective of Britain’s partly unwritten constitutional law, this outcome was deeply conservative. The idea of parliamentary sovereignty, put into canon in the late 19th century by the scholar A.V. Dicey, goes back centuries, to William Blackstone (1723-1780) and (Dicey thought) even Edward Coke, who died in 1634.

Indeed, the greatest reduction of parliamentary sovereignty in modern British history came from allowing EU law to determine domestic U.K. law -- precisely what the 1972 act did, according to the court. The thrust of the court’s judgment was therefore to reinstate the traditional, conservative doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty at precisely the moment that the U.K. is preparing to throw off the partial sovereignty of the EU.

Brexit supporters therefore shouldn’t be too upset about the judgment. Many of them deeply dislike the idea of Britain ceding sovereignty to Brussels. The Brexit referendum can be seen in symbolic terms as a kind of “Britain first” objection to such concessions.

The U.K. Supreme Court was reminding Brexit voters that if they want to get back to traditional British sovereignty, they also have to go back to traditional British sovereign institutions -- of which Parliament is first and foremost.

That’s good conservatism, the kind grounded in the preservation of tradition that has worked. Such conservatism insists, with the great parliamentarian Edmund Burke, that change should proceed gradually, stepwise, not by leaps.

Referendums are populist. Parliamentary votes express the traditional values of representative government. There is important value in making Parliament vote for Brexit. It’s not just that individual members will have to take a stand. The longest-running democratic institution in the world will have to give its imprimatur to a fundamental national decision.

    The name of the U.K.’s court was changed from Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, or law lords for short, to the “Supreme Court” by the Constitutional Reform Act of 2005. One reason for the change was to ensure compliance with European norms regarding an independent judiciary. It will be interesting to see if there is a move to rename or reorganize the court once Brexit goes into effect.
Title: Re: Brexit or Not, Parliament Reigns Supreme
Post by: monsta666 on January 25, 2017, 12:54:45 PM
So when will Parliament vote on this?  ???  :icon_scratch:

While the decision in the supreme court may seem dramatic the reality is it is not likely to effect the final outcome all that much. A bill - which is currently given special priority - is being passed through the house of commons to enable the UK to leave the EU (the government had anticipated the supreme court would reject their appeal). Since the conservative government holds a majority in the house of commons and the overwhelming majority are in favour of evoking article 50 it is likely the bill will pass allowing the UK to leave the EU. If all goes to plan then the UK would officially leave the EU by May 2020. The main thing this decision by the supreme court brings is the Teresa May and the executive branch of the government must lay out more detailed plans on what the conditions of an exit deal are so the members of parliament will debate those changes. However most MPs recognise the significance of the referendum and will not go against the will of the people. This sentiment does not just include the conservative party but also various labour MPs as well. The chances of a block to Brexit are quite low at this point as no party wants to contemplate the political fallout of going against the will of the people. For more information check out this article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38721650).
Title: The Brexit Soap Opera Marches On...
Post by: RE on February 05, 2017, 03:00:20 AM
More Daze of Our Collapse Lives...  ::)

RE

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/763293/BREXIT-Theresa-May-Tory-revolt-Neil-Carmichael-Ken-Clarke-Anna-Soubry-Nicky-Morgan (http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/763293/BREXIT-Theresa-May-Tory-revolt-Neil-Carmichael-Ken-Clarke-Anna-Soubry-Nicky-Morgan)

Theresa May faces Tory REVOLT as rebel MPs threaten to reject ‘CLIFF-EDGE’ Brexit

THERESA May faces a new threat to her Brexit timetable after up to a dozen Tories threatened to back a motion rejecting a “cliff-edge” exit from the European Union if negotiations with Brussels go south.
By Harry Walker
PUBLISHED: 02:52, Sun, Feb 5, 2017 | UPDATED: 03:37, Sun, Feb 5, 2017

Rebel Remoaners including Ken Clarke, Dominic Grieve, Nicky Morgan and Anna Soubry have argued Parliament must retain the right to tell the Government to get a better Brexit deal if the one brought to the table is not satisfactory.

Because the Prime Minister has only a razor-thin majority of 16, the move puts her in a dubious position.
Related articles

    STURGEON WARNED: Do more to 'sell BRAND SCOTLAND' in wake of Brexit
    House of Lords could force May to delay Brexit for a YEAR

Rebel leader Tory MP Neil Carmichael told the Mail on Sunday it was “illogical” to have a Commons vote on any Brexit deal after two years of negotiations, but no vote if there was no deal.

He said: “Parliament must have a final say when we get to the endgame.

“We could be faced with the prospect of leaving the EU by ‘falling off a cliff’ – as some have described leaving with no deal – with potentially disastrous economic consequences.

neil carmichael theresa mayGETTY
Neil Carmichael is leading a potential revolt against the Prime Minister on Brexit.

The MP for Stroud added: “To argue that MPs can have a say if we achieve a deal, with all the safeguards implied by it, but no say if we walk away with none of these, defies all logic.

“If that occurred, it would be even more important for MPs to be able to vote for or against it.”

Anna Soubry, who has been one of the most vocal critics of Brexit within Tory ranks since the referendum campaigns last year, backed Mr Carmichael’s argument.

anna soubryGETTY
Anna Soubry has been an outspoken critic of Brexit since the referendum last year.

ken clarkeGETTY
Ken Clarke is among the MPs threatening to back the motion.

She said: “It is essential that MPs get a say when the negotiations are over. Some Brexiteers would be happy to force the Prime Minister to walk away with no deal and no thought to the consequences for the country.

“Sensible voices inside the Government know it would be a mistake to rush this.”

But Government ministers have accused the rebels of undermining the Prime Minister’s negotiating tactics.
Theresa May's Brexit plan
Mon, January 16, 2017
It's finally here!
      
      
Play slideshow
Continued cooperation with the EU to tackle terrorism and international crime.
Getty Images
1 of 7

Continued cooperation with the EU to tackle terrorism and international crime.

    Continued cooperation with the EU to tackle terrorism and international crime.
    The British Prime Minister Delivers Her Brexit Speech
    Michael Gove Discusses How EU Membership Weakens British Border Control And Threatens Our Security
    FRANCE-EUROPE-MIGRANTS-BRITAIN-CALAIS-DEMOLITION
    Frankfurt City Feature
    INDIA-BRITAIN-DIPLOMACY-TRADE
    Article 50: The Justices of the Supreme Court of the UK who will be sitting on the Article 50 case

One told the Mail: “If we tell the EU we will walk away if they don’t make concessions, but they know Parliament can make us go straight back again, it gives us zero leverage.

“This is just another obstacle put up by people who are unable to accept that Brexit means Brexit.”

Tory rebels, along with Labour MPs, Lib Dems and Scottish Nationalists are ready to back an amendment tabled by Labour’s Chris Leslie.

Mr Leslie said: “No one doubts that Brexit will go ahead. But it is crazy for Mrs May to say she will consult Parliament if she gets a deal but not if she doesn’t.”
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy2 on February 07, 2017, 12:05:30 AM
When I read things like this I realise how pathetic all my efforts to try and change the world have been.  How is it possible to fight a hydra-headed monster like this?

Brexit was the people telling the elites what they think of them - no, it wasn't, it was all part of a ploy by the US elites to drag Britain away from the EU and weaken the standards that make life so difficult for US exporters.

http://www.monbiot.com/2017/02/04/dark-arts/ (http://www.monbiot.com/2017/02/04/dark-arts/)
Dark Arts: How a dark money network is taking power on both sides of the Atlantic.
George Monbiot
4th February 2017

It took corporate America a while to warm to Donald Trump. Some of his positions, especially on trade, horrified business leaders. Many of them favoured Ted Cruz or Scott Walker. But once he had secured the nomination, the big money began to recognise an unprecedented opportunity.

Trump was prepared not only to promote the cause of corporations in government, but to turn government into a kind of corporation, staffed and run by executives and lobbyists. His incoherence was not a liability but an opening: his agenda could be shaped. And the dark money network that some American corporations had already developed was perfectly positioned to shape it.

Dark money is the term used in the US for the undisclosed funding (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_money) of organisations involved in political advocacy. Few people would see a tobacco company as a credible source on public health, or a coal company as a neutral commentator on climate change. To advance their political interests, such companies must pay others to speak on their behalf.

Soon after the Second World War, some of America’s richest people began setting up a network of thinktanks (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot) to promote their interests. These purport to offer dispassionate opinions on public affairs. But they are more like corporate lobbyists, working on behalf of those who founded and fund them. These are the organisations now running much of the Trump administration (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/30/donald-trump-george-monbiot-misinformation).

We have no hope of understanding what is coming until we understand how the dark money network operates. The remarkable story of a British member of parliament provides a unique insight into this network, on both sides of the Atlantic. His name is Liam Fox. Six years ago, his political career seemed to be over.

The scandal he had caused by mixing his private and official interests, that was highly embarrassing to David Cameron’s government, had forced him to resign as Secretary of State for Defence. But today he is back on the front bench, with a crucial and sensitive portfolio: Secretary of State for International Trade (https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers/secretary-of-state-for-international-trade).

In 1997, the year the Conservatives lost office to Tony Blair, Liam Fox, who sits on the hard right of the parliamentary Conservative party, founded an organisation called The Atlantic Bridge. Its patron was Margaret Thatcher. On its advisory council sat the future cabinet ministers (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/oct/15/liam-fox-atlantic-bridge) Michael Gove, George Osborne, William Hague and Chris Grayling. Fox, who became a leading campaigner for Brexit, described the mission of The Atlantic Bridge (https://web.archive.org/web/20091101011935/http:/www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/steigerwald/s_476031.html) as “to bring people together who have common interests”. It would defend these interests from “European integrationists who would like to pull Britain away from its relationship with the United States”.

The Atlantic Bridge was later registered as a charity. It was part of the UK’s own dark money network: only after it collapsed did we discover the full story of who had funded it.

Its main sponsor  (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/oct/11/michael-hintze-liam-fox-backer)was the immensely rich Michael Hintze, who worked at Goldman Sachs before setting up his own hedge fund, CQS. Hintze is one of the Conservative party’s biggest donors (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/15/hedge-fund-conservatives-donation-michael-hintze-funding). In 2012, he was revealed as a funder (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/mar/27/tory-donor-climate-sceptic-thinktank) of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, that casts doubt on the science of climate change. As well as making cash grants and loans to The Atlantic Bridge, he lent Liam Fox his private jet (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/oct/11/michael-hintze-liam-fox-backer) to fly to and from Washington (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/8821209/Liam-Foxs-friend-Adam-Werritty-linked-to-Conservative-donor.html).

Another funder was the drug company Pfizer. It paid for a researcher at The Atlantic Bridge (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/oct/11/david-cameron-aide-liam-fox) called Gabby Bertin. She went on to become David Cameron’s press secretary, and now sits in the House of Lords: Cameron gave her a life peerage in his resignation honours list.

In 2007, a group called the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) set up a sister organisation, The Atlantic Bridge Project (https://www.carbonbrief.org/atlantic-bridge-and-the-climate-skeptic-connection), to run the US arm of Fox’s initiative. ALEC is perhaps the most controversial of the corporate-funded thinktanks in the US. It specialises in bringing together corporate lobbyists with state and federal legislators to develop “model bills”. The legislators and their families enjoy lavish hospitality from the group, then take the model bills home with them, to promote as if they were their own initiatives (http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/What_is_ALEC%3F).

ALEC has claimed that over 1000 of its bills are introduced by legislators every year, and one in five of them becomes law (http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/What_is_ALEC%3F). It has been heavily funded (http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/What_is_ALEC%3F#Who_funds_ALEC.3F) by tobacco companies, the oil company Exxon, drug companies and Charles and David Koch (http://www.prwatch.org/news/2011/07/10887/cmd-special-report-alecs-funding-and-spending): the billionaires who founded the first Tea Party organisations (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/25/tea-party-koch-brothers). Pfizer, that funded Gabby Bertin’s post at The Atlantic Bridge, sits on ALEC’s corporate board (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/ALEC_Corporations). Some of the most contentious legislation in recent years, such as state bills lowering the minimum wage (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/mar/06/alec-minimum-wage-report), bills granting corporations immunity from prosecution and the “ag-gag” laws, forbidding people to investigate factory farming practices, were developed by ALEC (http://www.collective-evolution.com/2016/12/24/alec-the-organization-that-allows-corporations-to-write-legislation/).

To run the US arm of Atlantic Bridge, ALEC brought in its director of international relations, Catherine Bray (https://web.archive.org/web/20081024001607/http:/www.alec.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Catherine_Bray). She is a British woman who had previously worked for (https://www.linkedin.com/in/catherinebraygriffith?authType=name&authToken=LsD_) the Conservative member of the European Parliament Richard Ashworth and the UKIP member Roger Helmer. She has subsequently worked for (https://www.linkedin.com/in/catherinebraygriffith?authType=name&authToken=LsD_) the man who brought us Brexit, Daniel Hannan. In 2015, she married Wells Griffith, who became the battleground states director (https://www.linkedin.com/in/wellsgriffith) for Trump’s presidential campaign.

Among the members of The Atlantic Bridge’s US advisory council (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/The_Atlantic_Bridge) were the ultra-conservative senators James Inhofe, Jon Kyl and Jim DeMint. James Inhofe is reported to have received over $2 million in campaign finance from coal and oil companies (http://dirtyenergymoney.com/view.php?searchvalue=inhofe&search=1&type=search#view=connections). Both Koch Industries and ExxonMobil have been major donors. Coincidentally, he has described man-made global warming as “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people” (https://thinkprogress.org/inhofe-calling-climate-change-the-greatest-hoax-ever-is-doing-the-lords-work-8315dfbe4d6f#.rez6d1hsj).

Jon Kyle, now retired, is currently acting as the “sherpa” (http://arizonaspolitics.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/breaking-arizonas-jon-kyl-becomes-trump.html) guiding Jeff Sessions’s nomination as Trump’s attorney general through the Senate.

Jim DeMint resigned his seat in the Senate to become president of the Heritage Foundation (http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/d/jim-demint), which is probably, after ALEC, the second most controversial thinktank in America. It was founded with a large grant from Joseph Coors, heir to the Coors brewing empire, then built up with money from the banking and oil billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife. Like ALEC, it has been richly funded by the Koch Brothers (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Heritage_Foundation). Heritage, under DeMint’s presidency, drove the attempt (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/jim-demint-the-most-hated-man-in-washington-104209) to ensure that Congress refused to pass the federal budget, temporarily shutting down the government. Fox’s former special adviser at the Ministry of Defence (https://www.myheritage.org/news/heritage-scholar-earns-praise-in-the-uk-house-of-commons/), an American called Luke Coffey, now works for the foundation (http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/c/luke-coffey).

The Heritage Foundation is now at the heart of Trump’s administration. Its board members, fellows and staff comprise a large part of his transition team. Among them are Rebekah Mercer (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-transition-heritage-foundation-231722), who sits on Trump’s executive committee, Steven Groves (https://diplopundit.net/2016/11/20/trump-transition-agency-landing-team-for-statedept-includes-old-familiar-names/) and Jim Carafano (http://www.citizen.org/documents/People-Shaping-the-Trump-Administration-report.pdf) (State Department), Curtis Dubay (http://thehill.com/policy/finance/307066-trump-taps-economists-investors-for-transition-team) (Treasury) and Ed Meese, Paul Winfree (http://www.citizen.org/documents/People-Shaping-the-Trump-Administration-report.pdf), Russ Vought and John Gray (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/report-trump-team-preparing-usd10-trillion-in-budget-cuts.html) (Management and Budget). CNN reports that “no other Washington institution has that kind of footprint in the transition” (http://m.cnn.com/politics/2016/12/06/meet-donald-trumps-think-tank?fullarticle=true).

Trump’s extraordinary plan to cut federal spending by $10.5 trillion was drafted by the Heritage Foundation, which called it a “Blueprint for a New Administration” (http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2016/11/blueprint-for-a-new-administration). Russ Vought and John Gray, who moved onto Trump’s team from Heritage, are now turning this blueprint into his first budget (http://thehill.com/policy/finance/314991-trump-team-prepares-dramatic-cuts).

It will, if passed, inflict devastating cuts on healthcare, social security, legal aid, financial regulation and environmental protections, eliminate programmes to prevent violence against women, to defend civil rights and fund the arts, and will privatise the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Trump, as you follow this story, begins to look less like a president and more like an intermediary: implementing an agenda that has been handed down to him.

In July last year, soon after he became trade secretary, Liam Fox flew to Washington. One of his first stops was a place he has visited often over the past 15 years (http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/nonstaff/f/dr--fox): the office of the Heritage Foundation, where he spoke among others to Jim DeMint. A freedom of information request reveals (https://www.desmog.uk/2016/11/14/revealed-liam-fox-s-post-brexit-us-trade-talks-business-groups-and-neocon-think-tank-heritage-foundation) that one of the topics raised at the meeting was the European ban on American chicken washed in chlorine: a ban that producers hope the UK will lift (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/29/britain-us-trade-deal-gm-food-eu-rules) under a new trade agreement. Afterwards, Fox wrote to DeMint (https://www.desmog.uk/2016/11/14/revealed-liam-fox-s-post-brexit-us-trade-talks-business-groups-and-neocon-think-tank-heritage-foundation), looking forward to “working with you as the new UK government develops its trade policy priorities, including in high value areas that we discussed such as defence.”

How did Fox get to be in this position, after the scandal that brought him down six years ago? The scandal itself provides a possible clue: it involved a crossing of the boundaries between public and private interests. The man who ran the UK branch of The Atlantic Bridge was his friend Adam Werrity, who operated out of Michael Hintze’s office building. Werrity’s work became entangled with Liam Fox’s official business as defence secretary (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/oct/14/guardian-broke-fox-werritty-story). Werritty, who carried a business card naming him as Fox’s adviser but was never employed by the Ministry of Defence, joined the secretary of state on numerous ministerial visits overseas, and made frequent visits to Fox’s office (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/60517/allegations-fox.pdf).

By the time details of this relationship began to leak, the Charity Commission had investigated The Atlantic Bridge and determined that its work didn’t look very charitable (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/91169/response/228343/attach/4/Copy%20of%20Atlantic%20Bridge%20Education%20and%20Research%20Scheme%20report.pdf). It had to pay back the tax from which it had been exempted (Hintze picked up the bill (https://www.ft.com/content/79d90fe4-f8e7-11e0-a5f7-00144feab49a)). In response, the trustees shut the organisation down. As the story about Adam Werrity’s unauthorised involvement in the business of government began to grow, Fox made a number of misleading statements (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/oct/09/defence-secretary-fox-holed). He was left with no choice but to resign.

So when Theresa May brought him back into government, and gave him a portfolio that should, in principle, involve setting clear boundaries between public and private interests, it was as strong a signal as we might receive about the intentions of her government.

The trade treaties that Fox is charged with developing set the limits of sovereignty. US food and environmental standards tend to be lower than ours, and they will become lower still if Trump gets his way. Any trade treaty we strike will create a common set of standards for products and services. Trump’s administration will demand that ours are adjusted downwards, so that US corporations can penetrate our markets without having to modify their practices. All the cards, following the Brexit vote, are in US hands: if the UK resists, there will be no treaty. What May needed – even before Trump became president – was a person prepared to strike such a deal.

As the Financial Times reports (https://www.ft.com/content/9dbac4e0-ab32-11e6-ba7d-76378e4fef24), “the election of Donald Trump has transformed the fortunes of Liam Fox”. He is now “an indispensable member of Theresa May’s front bench team”. The shadow diplomatic mission he developed through The Atlantic Bridge plugs him straight into the Trump administration.

Long before Trump won, campaign funding in the US had systematically corrupted the political system. A new analysis by US political scientists (https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/WP_48_Ferguson_et_al.pdf) finds an almost perfect linear relationship, across 32 years, between the money gathered by the two parties for congressional elections and their share of the vote. But there has also been a shift over these years: corporate donors have come to dominate this funding.

By tying our fortunes to those of the United States, the government binds us into this system. This is part of what Brexit is about: European laws protecting the public interest were portrayed by Conservative Eurosceptics as intolerable intrusions on corporate freedom. Taking back control from Europe means closer integration with the US. The transatlantic special relationship is a special relationship between political and corporate power.

In April 1938, President Franklin Roosevelt sent the US Congress the following warning (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=15637). “The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism.” It is a warning we would do well to remember.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: RE on February 07, 2017, 12:18:18 AM
When I read things like this I realise how pathetic all my efforts to try and change the world have been.  How is it possible to fight a hydra-headed monster like this?

Unless you are a Billionaire or part of the Political Elite, trying to change the world is an exercise in futility.  All you can do is observe it and be bemused.

RE
Title: Everything you need to know about whether the House of Lords will block Brexit
Post by: RE on February 20, 2017, 08:17:33 AM
http://www.businessinsider.com/house-of-lords-block-brexit-article-50-eu-theresa-may-2017-2?r=UK&IR=T (http://www.businessinsider.com/house-of-lords-block-brexit-article-50-eu-theresa-may-2017-2?r=UK&IR=T)

Everything you need to know about whether the House of Lords will block Brexit

(http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/58aaf14add08957a348b47f1-1119/undefined)

    Adam Bienkov

House of Lords debate whether to block Brexit Daniel Leal-Olivas PA Wire/PA Images

    House of Lords begin two-week debate on whether to pass or amend the Brexit bill
    If passed Theresa May will have power to trigger Article 50
    Peers have submitted more than a dozen amendments
    Lords want to force 'meaningful vote' on Brexit deal
    EU citizens could be guaranteed rights

LONDON – The House of Lords will on Monday begin a two-day debate on whether they should block Article 50 — the two-year process by which Britain will leave the EU.
Is there any chance they will vote against it?

Not really. The Lords are normally reluctant to vote down any legislation that has been passed by the House of Commons, particularly when the Commons have not even amended that legislation. Couple that with the firestorm that any vote against Brexit would cause and the chances of peers rejecting this bill look vanishingly slim to nonexistent.
So it's all done then?

Hold on a second, they're not finished yet. The Lords have submitted more than a dozen amendments to the bill, including eight from Labour's frontbench. Given that the government doesn't have a majority in the Lords there is a good chance that at least one of these amendments will pass when peers vote on them next week.
What are they?

The amendments cover similar ground to those submitted and voted down by MPs earlier this month. They include calls for the government to regularly update Parliament on the progress of negotiations, calls to retain single market membership and calls to hold a second referendum. All of these are likely to fail. However two amendments — a call for the rights of EU citizens living in the UK to be guaranteed and a call for a commitment to allow Parliament a final 'meaningful vote' on Theresa May's Brexit deal — have a much greater chance of passing.
What's a 'meaningful vote' mean?

Labour want to force the government to commit to a parliamentary vote on whatever draft Brexit deal she secures, before it is sent for ratification by the European Parliament. The government have already promised such a vote, however they have made clear that any vote against would simply lead to the UK falling out of the EU without a deal. It would be a 'deal or no deal' vote and would not force May to renegotiate a new deal. Labour aren't satisfied with this.

So what happens if any of the Lords' amendments pass?

The bill would then pass back to the House of Commons where MPs would debate and vote on the Lords' amendments. Given that the Commons have already rejected an almost identical set of amendments it is highly unlikely that they would change their mind and decide to accept these. They would therefore reject the amendments and the bill would then pass back to the Lords where potentially this game of ping pong would continue.
So peers could hold up Brexit indefinitely?

Technically yes. Practically no. The shadow leader of the House of Lords, Angela Smith has already stated that there will be no "extended ping pong" between the houses, telling the BBC that Labour did not want to "frustrate" the triggering of Article 50 - currently tabled to happen before the end of March. However, that doesn't mean there won't be a certain amount of back and forth. Labour peer Lord Mandelson told Andrew Marr on Sunday that while "the House of Commons must prevail... I hope [they] will not throw in the towel early.”
So it's all for show?

Quite probably yes. If the Lords do amend the bill then it will cause much huffing and puffing on Fleet Street, including more off-the-record Downing Street briefings about scrapping the Lords, but ultimately the Brexit bill is still highly likely to pass with enough time for Theresa May to fulfill her Article 50 timetable.
What happens then?

That's when the real fun begins. Britain will immediately begin it's negotiations with the other 27 EU countries about our future relationship together. The British government is keen to begin negotiations on trade and transitional arrangements straight away, however many other EU leaders want to leave those until after the thorny issue of Britain's divorce bill of up to €60 billion is settled.

Whatever happens, the UK will only have 18 months or so before the deal will have to go for ratification. And that's if they even have one. If no deal is secured, Britain would automatically fall out of the EU on WTO terms. After that point Britain would either embark on a glorious journey to the sunlit uplands of a bright new prosperous post-EU future, or begin its descent into becoming a post-industrial tax haven vassal state of Donald Trump. It all depends on your point of view.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy2 on February 20, 2017, 02:44:24 PM
Quote
They would therefore reject the amendments and the bill would then pass back to the Lords where potentially this game of ping pong would continue.
So peers could hold up Brexit indefinitely?

Technically yes.

Complete bullshit.  Bills only get 3 readings, the Lords can't override the third.

Where do they find journalists willing to write about Parliamentary process when they don't understand how it works?
Title: Theresa May faces likely defeat in Lords over rights of EU citizens
Post by: RE on March 01, 2017, 01:43:39 AM
More Ping-Pong on Brexit.  ::)

RE

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/28/theresa-may-faces-defeat-in-lords-over-rights-of-eu-citizens (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/28/theresa-may-faces-defeat-in-lords-over-rights-of-eu-citizens)

 Theresa May faces likely defeat in Lords over rights of EU citizens

Peers support Labour amendment to Brexit bill to protect European residents in UK after article 50 is triggered
Houses of parliament with EU flag held by protester

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/30242b251571cee21155ef008d1b979ce69511ea/0_54_4134_2479/master/4134.jpg?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=90c4102c5beb64ddd2e430bd11f11ef5)
The home secretary, Amber Rudd, wrote to peers on Tuesday to persuade them not to vote against the government. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA

Anushka Asthana, Heather Stewart and Peter Walker

Wednesday 1 March 2017 04.15 EST
First published on Tuesday 28 February 2017 17.00 EST

The Conservative government is likely to be defeated in the House of Lords over the issue of securing the rights of EU citizens living in the UK, despite a last minute plea from the home secretary, Amber Rudd.

Peers are lining up to support a Labour party amendment – which now has the formal backing of a Conservative, a Liberal Democrat and a crossbencher – calling on ministers to bring forward proposals to protect Europeans resident in Britain within three months of article 50 being triggered.
ADVERTISING

Losing a vote during the committee stage in the House of Lords means the Brexit bill will have to enter a so-called ping pong between the Houses of Commons and Lords, delaying its passage into law by at least one week.

Rudd sent a letter to peers on Tuesday in an effort to persuade peers not to vote against the government, insisting that there was no question of treating European citizens with “anything other than the utmost respect”.

She said that their status would be the top priority once negotiations were underway but argued that the government could not act unilaterally over the issue because it would risk the status of British people living across the continent.

“They could end up facing two years of uncertainty if any urgency to resolve their status were removed by the UK making a one-sided guarantee,” she said. Rudd argued that the hold-up was because a few EU countries, including Germany, had insisted that they would not negotiate anything linked to Brexit until article 50 had been triggered.
The stories you need to read, in one handy email
Read more

Her letter suggests that the government is not prepared to strike a compromise with peers by setting out a formal promise to bring forward plans within three months, with sources saying they are keen for the Brexit bill to be passed without any amendments.

She also made clear that there would be a separate opportunity to debate and vote on the future immigration system put forward by the government when legislation is laid down in the future.

Labour’s leader in the Lords, Lady Smith, called Rudd’s message “deeply disappointing” and said it had paved the way for a government defeat over the issue.
Advertisement

“To continue to use people as bargaining chips in this way is not only shameful but could have a dire impact on the UK’s economy and essential services,” she said.

“Confirming the rights of those EU citizens living in the UK can only be of benefit to our citizens worried about their future in EU countries but the government’s approach seems to be to sit back and wait for others to blink first.”

The Labour amendment calls for EU citizens and family members legally resident in Britain by the time the Brexit bill is passed – in mid March – to be treated in the same way after Brexit as they are now.

A Labour Lords source said it was highly unusual for peers to force a vote on legislation at this stage, as usually they would hope to keep pressing the government for further concessions.

“A committee stage vote in the Lords is as rare as a white rhino,” he said, but added that it was inevitable “because it is clear that we have exhausted the deliberation and dialogue with the government and we would be wasting our time to have the debate again at report stage. This needs to go back to the Commons to be debated”.

Other issues to be discussed on Wednesday – including the question of a meaningful vote on the final Brexit deal – are likely to only come to a vote next week.

The Brexit bill’s first stumbling block comes as David Davis told cabinet ministers they must be prepared for the possibility of Britain leaving the EU without a trade agreement in place. The prime minister’s spokesman said the Brexit secretary had made clear to colleagues that they must “prepare not just for a negotiated settlement but the unlikely scenario where no mutually satisfactory agreement can be reached”.

The foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, also spoke at the event claiming he was fed up with people “droning and moaning” about the risks of Brexit.

The foreign secretary did not name Sir John Major, but made clear that the former prime minister was among those who had been warning that “the sky was about to fall in”.

“And I feel like saying: ‘Come off it, sunshine.’ Every generation hears its prognostications of gloom. And look at us today. We are living longer than ever before. We are healthier than ever before,” he said.

Earlier, former chancellor George Osborne issued a stark warning to May about the risks of leaving the European Union without a trade deal,. He said: “Let’s make sure that we go on doing trade with our biggest export market, otherwise withdrawing from the single market will be the biggest act of protectionism in British history.”
Title: Ministers 'will seek to overturn Brexit bill defeat'
Post by: RE on March 02, 2017, 12:40:56 AM
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39136739 (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39136739)

Ministers 'will seek to overturn Brexit bill defeat'

(http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/00DC/production/_94902200_mediaitem94902199.jpg)

    33 minutes ago
    From the section UK Politics

The government will seek to overturn the defeat inflicted on its Brexit bill by the House of Lords, sources say.

Peers defied ministers when they voted by 358 to 256 to guarantee the rights of EU nationals living in the UK after Brexit.

The government said it was "disappointed" at the first defeat for its draft legislation.

MPs will have the chance to remove the Lords' amendment when the bill returns to the House of Commons.

    Kuenssberg: What next?
    Brexit: All you need to know
    Reality Check: How many EU nationals in the UK?
    UK has 'moral' duty to Gibraltar on Brexit

Before then, next Tuesday, the Lords will consider backing other possible amendments to the bill, which authorises Theresa May to trigger Brexit.

Government sources said the bill should simply be about invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, beginning formal negotiations.

The vote came after a heated debate in the Lords where the government was accused of treating EU citizens like "bargaining chips".

Ministers attempted to stave off defeat, saying the issue was a priority for the government but should be tackled as part of a deal that also protected UK expats overseas.

The amendment backed by the Lords requires the government to introduce proposals within three months of Article 50 to ensure EU citizens in the UK have the same residence rights after Brexit.

(http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/520B/production/_90330012_eunationals.png)

(http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/11F6E/production/_90328537_uk_migrants_living_in_other_eu.png)

The Department for Exiting the EU said: "We are disappointed the Lords have chosen to amend a bill that the Commons passed without amendment.

"The bill has a straightforward purpose - to enact the referendum result and allow the government to get on with the negotiations."

The government said its position had "repeatedly been made clear", saying it wanted to guarantee the rights of EU citizens and British nationals "as early as we can".
Now what?

BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg

Government sources tonight sound relaxed.

They knew this vote was likely to go against them. And it's an issue that the government believes it has a clear defence on.

Indeed, even during Theresa May's leadership campaign before she moved into Number 10, she articulated the same position. In her view, it would be unwise to guarantee the rights of the three million or so EU citizens in this country, before other EU countries are ready to do the same for British citizens abroad.

For her opponents that's distasteful, immoral even, because many people who have made their lives in the UK could be used, so the phrase goes, as "bargaining chips" in a negotiation.

There is little sign however of the government giving way despite the defeat.

Read the rest of Laura's blog

Former Lords leader Lord Strathclyde said the vote represented "wrong-headed and muddled thinking".

He said it was difficult to see where a compromise between the government's position and that taken by the Lords could be found.
Media captionLord Strathclyde: "We've turned British citizens living in the EU into bargaining chips"

Crossbencher Lord Kerslake, a former head of the civil service, said the vote showed that the Lords overwhelmingly felt the rights of EU citizens in the UK was an issue that should be sorted out now.

He told BBC One's Breakfast that while the government had given assurances that it wanted to resolve the matter as soon as possible, there was a risk it could take two years if the EU decided it wants all issues included in a single deal.

Labour's shadow Lords leader Baroness Smith said there was a "moral", a "legal" and a "pragmatic" case in favour of guaranteeing EU nationals' rights.
Media captionBaroness Smith: "People are not bargaining chips"

Seven Conservative peers voted in favour of the amendment, which was proposed by Labour with the support of the Liberal Democrats.

Shortly after the Lords vote, MEPs in the European Parliament debated the status of EU migrants in the UK.

Justice Commissioner Vera Jourova told MEPs that EU citizens in the UK and British citizens elsewhere in the EU "deserve to know what their rights will be" after Brexit.

She said the matter should be addressed "as soon as possible" but that negotiations could only begin after the UK has triggered Article 50.
The stages the Brexit bill needs to go through to become law:

(It is currently at committee stage in the House of Lords)

(http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/15445/production/_94890178_brexit_bill_flow_v02_624gr.png)
Title: Brexit: UK 'not obliged' to pay divorce bill say peers
Post by: RE on March 04, 2017, 12:42:08 AM
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39154218 (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39154218)

Brexit: UK 'not obliged' to pay divorce bill say peers

(http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/1CF5/production/_94931470_mediaitem94931469.jpg)
Talks on the UK's exit are expected to start in the Spring. Photo AP

The UK could exit the EU without paying anything if there is no post-Brexit deal, a group of peers has claimed.

The government would be in a "strong" legal position if the two-year Article 50 talks ended with no deal, the Lords EU Financial Affairs Committee said.

But it warned failure to reach any kind of financial terms would undermine PM Theresa May's aim of securing continued favourable access to EU markets.

It has been reported the EU may demand a "divorce bill" of up to £52bn.

    Reality Check: EU budget and transitional deal
    Brexit: All you need to know

Mrs May has warned the EU against punishing the UK for voting to leave in last year's referendum but several EU leaders have said the UK cannot enjoy better arrangements outside the EU than it currently has.

The question of what, if anything, the UK remains financially liable for after Brexit is likely to be one of the flashpoints in negotiations when they begin in earnest.

Potential sticking points are likely to include:

    Whether already-agreed contributions to the EU budget should be honoured and up to what point
    What the UK should pay to continue to participate in EU programmes such as Erasmus
    Whether the UK chooses to pay to retain access to the single market on a transitional basis

Image copyright Reuters
Image caption The UK contributes to structural funds designed to reduce inequality across Europe

The cross-party committee said talk of billions in pounds in liabilities was "hugely speculative" and there was a case that there may be no upfront cost to leaving.

"Although there are competing interpretations, we conclude that if agreement is not reached, all EU law - including provisions concerning ongoing financial contributions and machinery for adjudication - will cease to apply, and the UK would be subject to no enforceable obligation to make any financial contribution at all," it said.

"This would be undesirable for the remaining member states, who would have to decide how to plug the hole in the budget created by the UK's exit without any kind of transition.

"It would also damage the prospects of reaching friendly agreement on other issues.

"Nonetheless, the ultimate possibility of the UK walking away from negotiations without incurring financial commitments provides an important context."
'Concrete'

The peers, led by the LibDem peer Baroness Falkner of Margravine, said some member states could take legal action against the UK for any outstanding liabilities but it was "questionable" whether any international court could have jurisdiction.

"Even though we consider that the UK will not be legally obliged to pay into the EU budget after Brexit, the issue will be a prominent factor in withdrawal negotiations.

"The government will have to set the financial and political costs of making such payments against potential gains from other elements of the negotiations."

During their inquiry, the committee was told the UK had signed up to "concrete" commitments under the terms of the Multi-Annual Financial Framework, which sets a ceiling for EU spending up to 2020.

Professor Takis Tridimas, from Kings College London, said he believed these were legally binding under existing EU treaties.

But he said they could be amended in "unforeseeable circumstances", if all member states agreed, and that the Brexit vote would constitute such a circumstance.
Title: MPs slam Theresa May over lack of a plan if Brexit talks collapse
Post by: RE on March 12, 2017, 04:37:47 AM
I just can't wait to see what the markets do if/when they actually DO trigger Article 50.  :o

RE

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/11/brexit-trigger-article-50-theresa (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/11/brexit-trigger-article-50-theresa)

MPs slam Theresa May over lack of a plan if Brexit talks collapse
PM plans to trigger article 50 ‘within days’ but all-party parliamentary committee says she is putting national interest at risk

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/98d07dbe8ed93dc97bff31d9205518971f305dc7/0_371_4161_2497/master/4161.jpg?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=f9939507e3d365c3048e871080272003)
Theresa May preparing to address a media conference at an EU summit in Brussels last Thursday. Photograph: Geert Vanden Wijngaert/AP

Toby Helm and Tracy McVeigh

Saturday 11 March 2017 17.30 EST
Last modified on Saturday 11 March 2017 19.53 EST

Theresa May has been accused by a powerful parliamentary committee of putting the national interest at risk by failing to prepare for the “real prospect” that two years of Brexit negotiations could end with no deal.

The criticism – and warnings of dire consequences – is levelled at May by the all-party foreign affairs select committee only days before she is expected to trigger article 50 – the formal process that will end the UK’s 44-year membership of the European Union.
Brexiters and Remainers both fail to grasp the challenges facing Britain
Tom Kibasi
Read more

After a detailed inquiry into what would happen if Brexit negotiations failed, the Tory chairman of the committee, Crispin Blunt, a supporter of leaving the EU, said: “The possibility of ‘no deal’ is real enough to require the government to plan how to deal with it.

“But there is no evidence to indicate that this is receiving the consideration it deserves or that serious contingency planning is under way. The government has repeatedly said that it will walk away from a ‘bad’ final deal. That makes preparing for ‘no deal’ all the more essential.

“Last year, the committee described the government’s failure to plan for a leave vote as an act of gross negligence. This government must not make a comparable mistake.”

His committee’s report says Brexit talks could break down for several reasons, including a deal being torpedoed at the 11th hour by the European parliament. The UK would be cast adrift and have to trade on World Trade Organisation rules, an outcome that would risk serious economic damage.

“It is clear from our evidence that a complete breakdown in negotiations represents a very destructive outcome, leading to mutually assured damage to the EU and the UK. Both sides would suffer economic losses and harm to their international reputations. Individuals and businesses in both the UK and EU could be subject to considerable uncertainty and legal confusion. It is a key national and European Union interest that such a situation is avoided.”

The conclusions are likely to embolden MPs – including a number of Tory rebels – who will insist on Monday that the government guarantee them a vote before any decision is made to leave the EU without a deal.

While amendments passed in the House of Lords are likely to be defeated, Tory MPs are determined to extract pledges from the government, even if they are not written into the Brexit bill.
The House of Lords amendments will probably be defeated.
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
The House of Lords amendments will probably be defeated. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images

Government whips are confident that the bill will gain royal assent by the middle of the week, allowing the prime minister to write to European Council president Donald Tusk to tell him that the UK is ready to begin formal divorce talks.

On Saturday night, in a sign that the government is keen to push ahead as soon as it can, the Brexit secretary, David Davis, issued a statement saying it was time to act on the will of the British people and leave the EU.

“However they voted in the referendum, the majority of people now want the prime minister to be able to get on with the job. By a majority of four to one, MPs passed straightforward legislation allowing the government to move ahead with no strings attached. I will be asking MPs to send the legislation back to the House of Lords in its original form so that we can start building a global Britain and a strong new partnership with the EU. Our new position in the world means we can restore national self-determination, build new trading links and become even more global in spirit and action.”
Labour MPs demand Corbyn backs fight to stay in single market
Read more

Labour’s Brexit spokesman, Keir Starmer, said he believed there was a high probability that May would trigger article 50 in the middle of this week. Referring to the select committee report he said: “It is a reminder of the stark choices we face over Brexit and the huge risks of the PM failing to get a good deal. Labour is clear that no deal is the worst possible deal and would not be in the national interest. The PM should be fighting for a close, collaborative future relationship with the EU and rule out the danger of reverting to WTO terms, as this would be disastrous for British jobs and businesses.”

But the debate continued to cause divisions in Labour as a group of around 30 Labour MPs, including a serving whip and a member of the shadow front bench, wrote an open letter criticising the leadership for failing to support a policy of staying in the EU single market.

The statement, drawn up by former shadow cabinet member Chuka Umunna and published on the Guardian website, says: “It is the basic responsibility of the Labour party to mount the strongest possible opposition to Theresa May’s government and fight for a Brexit deal that respects the will of the British people but ensures that they will not be made substantially worse off. As the party that has always stood up for working people, we must fight tooth and nail for a future that does not destroy their jobs and livelihoods. Single Market membership outside the EU is the way to achieve this and is what Labour should be arguing for.” The Labour leadership has argued for maximum access to the single market rather than full membership.
Arguments against single market membership illustrate a lack of ambition
Read more

The select committee report states that in the event of “no deal”, British people living in European countries could be left with no rights to healthcare, work, or benefits. “The worst-case scenario for UK migrants in the EU would be that they would be treated differently in different EU countries, at any rate where they had resided in a country for fewer than five years.”

Deals for EU citizens living here could also become “chaotic”, said the committee. An unplanned Brexit would lead to “high levels of anxiety” for British people living elsewhere in the EU, and EU migrants in the UK.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy2 on March 12, 2017, 07:36:21 AM
How can they say "no deal" would be bad for both EU and UK, and then say that could be the outcome?  Why wouldn't both sides end up negotiating something better?

This is UK party political point-scoring by the people not in charge, and the media printing anything outrageous without thinking about it.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: RE on March 12, 2017, 07:46:19 AM
How can they say "no deal" would be bad for both EU and UK, and then say that could be the outcome?  Why wouldn't both sides end up negotiating something better?

This is UK party political point-scoring by the people not in charge, and the media printing anything outrageous without thinking about it.

Often, even though SOME kind of deal would be better than NO DEAL, the negotiating points are so intractable a solution cannot be found. See Greece for this. It's a PREDICAMENT.

RE
Title: BREXIT! Scotty wants ANOTHER REFERENDUM!
Post by: RE on March 13, 2017, 07:01:02 AM
Can we hold a referendum on holding referendums?

I'm still waiting to see ANYTHING besides a lot of bullshit emerge from these referendums.  Even IF the Brits finally trigger Article 50, it's still 2 more years of bullshit negotiations, which in all likelihood will end in a stalemate.

You don't vote yourself out of the Hotel California.  You can check out, but you can never leave.

http://www.youtube.com/v/Gf7_9vkpX84

RE

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/13/europe/brexit-article-50-parliament/ (http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/13/europe/brexit-article-50-parliament/)

Brexit: Scottish leader seeks UK split as EU divorce looms

(http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170303095543-01-nicola-sturgeon-file-0117-exlarge-169.jpg)

By James Masters, CNN

Updated 9:23 AM ET, Mon March 13, 2017
How much will Brexit cost the UK?

 
How much will Brexit cost the UK? 01:06
Story highlights

    Theresa May set to trigger Article 50
    Landmark move could be made Tuesday
    Nicola Sturgeon announces new independence referendum plan

London (CNN)The First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, has said she will seek approval for a new independence referendum next week as the British government prepared to press ahead with the formal process of leaving the European Union.
Sturgeon said it was clear that the UK was heading for a "bad deal" on Brexit, and that Scottish voters deserved the option of remaining in the European Union as part of an independent nation.
Her decision to call for a new referendum came as Theresa May, the British Prime Minister, was getting ready to invoke Article 50, which would set the UK on the road to splitting from the EU.

May could begin the process as early as Tuesday if legislation passes its final hurdles in the UK parliament later Monday. But Sturgeon's announcement on Monday and the looming Dutch elections on Wednesday could push the timetable back.
Scotland to split?
Speaking in Edinburgh, Sturgeon said she would ask the Scottish parliament next week to grant her the authority to call a new independence referendum.
Sturgeon said May had failed to engage with her call for Scotland to remain in the European single market after Brexit, and that Scotland risked being taken out of the EU against its will.
Scotland's First MInister Nicola Sturgeon.
Scotland's First MInister Nicola Sturgeon.
In the Brexit referendum, Scotland bucked the UK trend and voted 62% to 38% to remain in the EU. Sturgeon said it was for Scots to decide whether they followed the rest of the UK or forged their own path.
"I am ensuring that Scotland's future ... will be decided by the people of Scotland," she told reporters at Bute House, the official residence of the Scottish first minister.
"It will be Scotland's choice and I trust the people of Scotland to make that choice."
Sturgeon said the referendum would take place between late 2018 and early 2019.
The UK government must agree to a new Scottish vote. Downing Street on Monday said Sturgeon's announcement was "divisive" and that May would seek a Brexit deal in the interests of the whole UK.
But the statement stopped short of saying the UK would block a new independence referendum. In the last one, in 2014, Scotland voted 55% to 45% to remain in the UK. Downing Street said there was no appetite in Scotland for a re-run.
Brexit bill
Sturgeon's announcement complicates the UK government's plan to begin the formal process of leaving the EU, which
Later on Monday, both houses of the UK parliament vote on the EU Withdrawal Bill which, gives May permission to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which governs the relationships between EU member states.
Brexit: UK government warned over 'serious dereliction of duty'
Brexit: UK government warned over 'serious dereliction of duty'
That would give the UK a two-year window in which to hammer out a divorce deal with the other 27 EU governments. The negotiations are expected to be tough, and there is no guarantee that a deal could be reached in the time available.
Government ministers have urged the House of Lords not to stand in the way of the bill if, as expected, MPs vote to remove amendments on Monday afternoon.
Any delay in the parliamentary process could mean the process would be pushed later in the month, as the UK government wants to avoid a clash with the Dutch elections, which are held on Wednesday.
Ministers may also want the dust to settle on Sturgeon's referendum call.
Pressure on May
May has come under increasing pressure from Parliament in recent weeks as the start of negotiations move closer.
On Sunday, lawmakers published a report which warned that the government's failure to prepare for a scenario in which no deal is reached with the European Union over Brexit would be a "serious dereliction of duty."
The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee said that the UK should be prepared for the "real prospect" that the two-year negotiation cycle may end in deadlock.
"The possibility of 'no deal' is real enough to require the government to plan how to deal with it," head of the committee Crispin Blunt said in the report.
"But there is no evidence to indicate that this is receiving the consideration it deserves or that serious contingency planning is under way. The government has repeatedly said that it will walk away from a 'bad' final deal. That makes preparing for 'no deal' all the more essential," he added.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy2 on March 13, 2017, 08:15:16 AM
The problem with UK referenda is that they are not legitimised in the Constitution, because the UK doesn't have a Constitution.  If it was written in the Constitution that referenda results had to be acted upon, then they might be worth something, but as it is, Parliament is sovereign, recently reaffirmed by the courts, so referenda are merely consultative.  And usually only called when they are thought will back the Government's opinion.

Sturgeon is only calling for an independence referendum because she thinks she can win it.  She will then face exactly the same problem with the sovereign UK Parliament.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: RE on March 13, 2017, 08:30:47 AM
The problem with UK referenda is that they are not legitimised in the Constitution, because the UK doesn't have a Constitution.  If it was written in the Constitution that referenda results had to be acted upon, then they might be worth something, but as it is, Parliament is sovereign, recently reaffirmed by the courts, so referenda are merely consultative.  And usually only called when they are thought will back the Government's opinion.

Sturgeon is only calling for an independence referendum because she thinks she can win it.  She will then face exactly the same problem with the sovereign UK Parliament.

IOW, referenda are a Waste of Fucking Time! (WOFT)

RE
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy2 on March 13, 2017, 03:57:19 PM
Quote
referenda are a Waste of Fucking Time!

UK ones are.  In principle though, they are good, but need to be enshrined in proper legislation that doesn't set the bar for change too high. 

With the advent of the internet, we could have referenda every weekend, and do away with Parliament's sovereign authority altogether - the people telling the public servants what to do, and political parties only devising the wording of their proposals.

Then Scotland could really break away from the "United" Kingdom.
Title: T-9 Days and counting to BREXIT?
Post by: RE on March 20, 2017, 02:18:38 PM
So, supposedly they will "pull the trigger" on March 29th?

What are the Diner opinions?  Will they actually DO IT?  ???  :icon_scratch:

If they DO "do it", what will the market reaction be? ???  :icon_scratch:  Is it "priced in"? ???  :icon_scratch:

RE

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/03/20/article-50-a-guide-to-britains-untested-plan-to-leave-the-e-u/?utm_term=.728a5c2a4eef (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/03/20/article-50-a-guide-to-britains-untested-plan-to-leave-the-e-u/?utm_term=.728a5c2a4eef)


WorldViews Analysis
Article 50: A guide to Britain’s untested plan for Brexit
By Adam Taylor March 20 at 11:54 AM

(https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-03-20/AP/APTOPIX_Britain_Brexit_81115-11690.jpg&w=1484)
London is seen through a hole in a stand that used to house a telescope for tourists. (Matt Dunham/AP)

After a lot of speculation, a big date in Britain's path to Brexit has been set: On March 29, Prime Minister Theresa May will trigger Article 50.

Britons have been waiting with bated breath for this moment, which effectively starts the formal process of their country leaving the European Union. But many outsiders may be left scratching their head, so here's a WorldViews guide to Article 50 for those catching up.

What is Article 50?

Article 50 is the European Union legislation that sets out how a member state can leave the organization. It's part of the Treaty of Lisbon, which was signed in 2007 and went into force in 2009.

What does it actually say?

Here is the full text:

    1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

    2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

    3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

    4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

    A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

    5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

What does that actually mean?

(https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2016/06/2300_steps_to_leave_eu_0624.jpg)

The law is vague on the specifics, perhaps intentionally — no country has ever invoked Article 50 in the past, and the E.U. long viewed the possibility of a country leaving as an unlikely and unwanted possibility.

The basics are covered, however. There is no set way for a country to decide it wants to leave the E.U. The member state seeking to leave can decide that itself. Then it will have to give an official statement to the European Council explaining that it plans to leave. This is what May will do on March 29.

The country that wants to leave would not negotiate directly with other member states to reach a deal on how it would leave. Instead, the 27 other member states would meet as the European Council and agree on a framework. Britain would then negotiate the technical details with the European Commission. The European parliament also will have a say, giving consent to the deal.

The article also clearly states that a country will have two years to reach an agreement on the exit, during which time the country would still be governed by E.U. treaties and laws, although it will not be allowed in the decision-making process. However, if all E.U. member states agree, that deadline could be extended.

Finally, if the country later decides it wants to rejoin the E.U., it has to apply for membership just like any other nation would.

Why trigger Article 50 now?

Originally, former British prime minister David Cameron had suggested he would trigger Article 50 immediately after Britain's June 23, 2016, vote to leave the E.U. However, that move was swiftly delayed by a number of factors, including Cameron's own resignation and the subsequent leadership battle to replace him.

May, Cameron's eventual successor, said in October that she wanted to trigger Article 50 by the end of March. There were further complications, however. A legal challenge meant that she was unable to use “royal prerogative” to force Britain to trigger Article 50 and instead was required to get parliament's approval. While the bill went through the lower House of Commons, the upper House of Lords tried to force amendments before backing down.

Logically, it makes sense for May to try to get the ball rolling on Article 50. Britain's economy is already at risk because of uncertainty over the country's future, so prolonging that uncertainty is a problem. But there is also a logic in not immediately triggering Article 50 — the negotiations are going to be tough for Britain, so it makes sense to take some time to work out the British position before formal talks have begun.

What will these negotiations involve?

The European Council will draw up guidelines for the negotiations. Both Britain and the E.U. will have large teams to negotiate. Britain has the newly formed Department for Exiting the European Union which is led by MP David Davis, with Trade Secretary Liam Fox and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson also likely to take large roles, while the European Commission has created a task force headed by French politician Michel Barnier.

The negotiations themselves will be wide-ranging, with unspent E.U. funding, the future of E.U. nationals living in Britain, and security arrangements all likely to be involved. It is currently unclear if the negotiations will include a future trade deal between Britain and the E.U. or whether that will be handled separately.

Any end deal will have to be approved by a “super” qualified majority (more than 72 percent) in the European Council and it would also need the approval of the European Parliament. May has also suggested that Britain's parliament will have a say on the final deal.

What else will Britain have to do?

A lot. It will have to work out not only its new relationship with the E.U. but also new trade relationships with many countries around the world. Experts suggest these separate negotiations could take years.

The British government will also have to repeal the legislation that took it into the E.U. and convert E.U. law into British law. There are reports that a “Great Repeal Bill” that would include both of these elements may be revealed on the same day as Article 50 is triggered. However, it is the subject of some controversy as it may rely on little used power known as the “Henry VIII clauses.”

Today's WorldView

What's most important from where the world meets Washington

There may be other events for May to watch out for — including but not limited to another potential Scottish independence referendum and perhaps an early British election.

So will Britain be out of the E.U. by March 2019?

That's the plan. Whether it happens that way or not is harder to say. Many experts suspect that as the Article 50 process has never been implemented before, it may take a long time to go through all the details. If no deal is reached within two years, it is possible that Britain would be forced into what has been dubbed a “dirty Brexit.” Even if it does take less than two years, it may result in only a transition deal, with the hard work of reimagining Britain's relationship with the E.U. still to come.

It is possible to extend the negotiating period further, but only if all 27 member states agree. And yes, most experts seem to think that it will be possible to reverse Brexit if Britain can convince the E.U. it has changed its mind.

(https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2016/06/Article50_0616.jpg)
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy2 on March 20, 2017, 09:43:26 PM
WaPo = Fake News

Of course they will do it, as Government stated they would long ago.  It has been non-news since.  Market reaction has been priced in since.
Title: BREXIT! Nigel Farage & Alastair Cambell go Mano-a-Mano
Post by: RE on March 27, 2017, 07:27:59 AM
T-2 Days and counting...

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/w3Wx9ai37Vc
Title: The BREXIT Clathrate Gun has been FIRED!
Post by: RE on March 28, 2017, 05:39:52 PM
Bye, Bye Britain.  Bye, Bye EU.

The Sun has just set on the British Empire.

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HahwPMOnNqU/VRC1L6MKKpI/AAAAAAAAXas/zzsIxOJKaE8/s1600/tumblr_n0wtvp1xLa1rhrguuo1_1280.jpg)

RE

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-28/theresa-may-signs-brexit-letter-what-happens-once-article-50-triggered (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-28/theresa-may-signs-brexit-letter-what-happens-once-article-50-triggered)

Theresa May Signs Brexit Letter: What Happens Once Article 50 Is Triggered?

(http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2017/03/27/theresa%20may%20signs%20brexit_0.jpg)

by Tyler Durden
Mar 28, 2017 5:43 PM


Moments ago, Theresa May signed the letter to European Council President Donald Truk which will invoke Article 50 and Trigger Brexit.


What happens next?

Here is a summary of next steps courtesy of Jack Davies, consultant editor of Trading Floor, courtesy of Saxo Group

    The UK government triggers Article 50 starting the Brexit process Wednesday
    Two years of negotiations to be set in motion to uncouple UK from EU
    Sterling has plunged circa 15% since the night of the Brexit vote
    Future of EU workers in the UK and visa-versa yet to be decided

Victrola VSC-550BT 3-Speed Vintage Bluetooth Suitcase Turntable with Built-In Stereo Sp...
The Victrola portable suitcase turntable is an absolute classic and loaded with features. Includes built-in Bluetooth technology to wirelessly stream music from any Bluetooth enabled device, 3-spee...
Ad by jcpenney.com

The British government is set to formally invoke Article 50, the clause within the European Union’s de facto constitution that almost didn’t make it into the final draft because what it allows for – the exit of a member state from the EU – was thought by many too awful to be permitted.

But allowed it was and now what had been thought unthinkable is to happen Wednesday, a member state has begun what will undoubtedly be an excruciating divorce from the bloc.

How is Article 50 triggered and what happens next?

Triggering Article 50 is easy. In theory, it could be as simple as somebody in Whitehall sending an email to somebody in Brussels. In the end, the UK’s ambassador to the EU informed Donald Tusk that it would come in letter form to his office on March 29. But even as late as mid-March, eurocrats were still scratching their heads as to whether letter or email was more appropriate and if so who should be sending and receiving the memo.

But if they struggled with protocol, it doesn’t get much simpler from here. Under the Lisbon Treaty, member states wishing to leave the European Union have two years from the day they trigger Article 50 to negotiate their exit. In theory, if after 24 months a compromise has not been reached, then the state in question is dumped from all EU institutions and frameworks instantly and without any phasing out to cushion the fall.

Interdependency is hardcoded into the union, so this kind of cold-turkey exit is something both sides will be keen to avoid. If they are to do so, the bulk of the negotiations will have to have been concluded within 18 months of Article 50 being invoked, so as to allow enough time for both parliaments to approve the final deal.

The clock’s likely to run even tighter than that though, as the EU has said it won’t begin negotiating with Westminster until the UK settles a bill estimated to be as high as $64 billion.

v
Cracks in the EU edifice will look sharper after Wednesday


What will happen to sterling when Article 50 is triggered?

Britain’s vote to leave the EU last summer trashed sterling, which lost 16 cents against the dollar overnight, and the pound has since plummeted to even lower depths. One slight consolation for sterling buyers will be that the pound will likely have little or no reaction to the invocation of Article 50, which has already been priced in by the market.

So much so in fact that many view the pound as undervalued, given the relative strength of the British economy, which is expected to grow by 2% over the coming year.

j
Source: SaxoTraderGO


What happens to FTSE 100 after Article 50 is triggered?

Saxo Bank’s head of equities Peter Garnry says that while general volatility will increase “simply because of the noise”, the triggering of Article 50 should not have a major immediate impact on equity markets since the event has already been discounted by them.

That said, what comes next could hold another story. As Garnry points out, “triggering starts the noisy political negotiations which will be a recurrent theme over the next two years.”

The FTSE 100’s high concentration in financials, mining and export-driven consumer staples companies (such as BAT, Diageo, Unilever and RB) makes the index vulnerable “should the GBP go up again on improving sentiment or even worse in tandem with falling commodity prices,” Garnry warns.

What will happen to EU nationals in Britain and vice versa?

As we have pointed out before, the four million people most vulnerable in a showdown between Brussels and Number 10 are the EU nationals living in the UK and British citizens making their living on the continent.

The British parliament recently voted down a proposal to safeguard the presence of EU nationals already in Britain regardless of the outcome of the next two years’ negotiations.

While the proposal was motivated by the Kantian precept that person should be used as a means to an end (in this case a bargaining chip in the messiest international negotiations since the second world war), British MPs sided with the government, which argued that while it was in favour of allowing EU citizens to remain, it did not want to give that concession away unconditionally.

And so, with neither side having ruled out a “hard Brexit” (the UK government has announced it’s currently drawing up plans for the outcome), those four million people appear to be as vulnerable right now as they fear.

Saxo’s head of forex strategy John J Hardy recently told TradingFloor that due to reciprocal rights for EU and UK nationals being such a potent bargaining chip, we could be well into 2018 before negotiators arrive at any meaningful accord on the issue.

* * *

Finally, here is Saxo’s head of macro analysis Christopher Dembik, who summarizes the salient points in the following video. Here are the key points:

    “Brexit will have clearly a deep impact on the [British] market in the medium term,” says Saxo’s head of macro analysis Christopher Dembik, who is based in the Danish bank’s Paris office.
    “For the British economy, I am not positive. There is no reason to believe that Brexit would have [only] a slight impact on the economy.
    “Brexit would have a strong impact because it would block investments as soon as investors understand that the UK doesn’t have a strong strategy to negotiate and that the EU won’t make it easy for the UK to leave.”
    He does not expect much to happen in terms of significant negotiations between the UK and EU until after the German federal election in September. However, Dembik says that British prime minister
    Theresa May could surprise many and pull a snap election to gain greater support - something former PM Gordon Brown failed to do when he succeeded Tony Blair and later lost a general election to the Conservative Party’s David Cameron.
    “Theresa May will face probably many challenges in order to negotiate with the European Union,” adds Dembik.
    “I do believe she will have no other choice than for calling for an early election in order to have enough popular support to try to negotiate with the European Union.”
    Despite these issues, Dembit says that in the longer term, the “strong” UK “will succeed and have a bright future.”
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy2 on March 28, 2017, 06:30:01 PM
Please, please, please, DO NOT follow the negotiations in all their excruciating detail.  Wake me up when the negotiations are over and both Parliaments have signed off on it.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: RE on March 28, 2017, 06:37:00 PM
Please, please, please, DO NOT follow the negotiations in all their excruciating detail.  Wake me up when the negotiations are over and both Parliaments have signed off on it.

That's like saying you don't want to watch a Rugby match and just wait until the final score is published on the Sports Page.

RE
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy2 on March 28, 2017, 06:44:08 PM
That's like saying you want to watch a Rugby match that lasts two years - even if you know it ends in a draw.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: RE on March 28, 2017, 06:53:30 PM
That's like saying you want to watch a Rugby match that lasts two years - even if you know it ends in a draw.

OK, granted it's longer than a Cricket Match, but generally Brits have patience for this stuff. lol.

I don't know it ends in a "draw", and I'm not sure what a draw means in this situation? ???  :icon_scratch:

In any event, I don't think they can make the whole 2 years before the EU collapses anyhow.

RE
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Palloy2 on March 28, 2017, 07:37:10 PM
Quote
I'm not sure what a draw means in this situation?

It means an agreement that they can both get ratified by their Parliaments.
Both sides agree a "no agreement exit" is not the best outcome, so they will agree on something better.
There's a lot of grandstanding and tough stances to happen before that, and it will be as boring as a 2 year cricket match.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: RE on March 28, 2017, 09:22:17 PM
Quote
I'm not sure what a draw means in this situation?

It means an agreement that they can both get ratified by their Parliaments.
Both sides agree a "no agreement exit" is not the best outcome, so they will agree on something better.
There's a lot of grandstanding and tough stances to happen before that, and it will be as boring as a 2 year cricket match.

I will keep it to just the highlights, the big plays and the big hits, like NFL Films.

http://www.youtube.com/v/pm5Nw5iBJv4

RE
Title: Britain between the Rock of Gibraltar and an EU Hard Place
Post by: RE on April 03, 2017, 09:38:36 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/04/02/brexit-could-give-spain-major-bargaining-power-over-gibraltar/?utm_term=.e4f6efccb5b8 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/04/02/brexit-could-give-spain-major-bargaining-power-over-gibraltar/?utm_term=.e4f6efccb5b8)

WorldViews
Dispute over Gibraltar reveals hotheadedness of post-Brexit Britain
By Max Bearak and Rick Noack April 3 at 10:19 AM

(https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-03-28/Getty/AFP_N225T.jpg&w=1484)
The Rock of Gibraltar, as seen from La Linea de la Concepcion near the southern Spanish city of Cadiz. (Jorge Guerrero/AFP via Getty Images)

In the shadows of the massive rock pictured above live roughly 30,000 Britons, crowded onto a peninsula whose only land border is with Spain, and by extension, the European Union. Unsurprisingly, almost every single resident of Gibraltar, the United Kingdom's sole continental outpost, voted to remain in the European Union in the summer's referendum on “Brexit.”

Speaking to my colleague Griff Witte in January, Gibraltar's chief minister, Fabian Picardo, described the Brexit campaign's triumph as a moment of “deep sorrow,” as his constituents, in Witte's words, “are committed Europeans and because they knew the vote to leave would give Spain leverage.”

Leverage, in this case, regards heretofore weak Spanish claims on the territory. Despite its obvious geographical contiguity with Spain, and the fact that more than 12,000 workers commute into the territory from Spain every day, native Gibraltarians steadfastly maintain that they are British, as the land itself has been since the early 1700s. In a 2002 referendum, they almost unanimously reaffirmed that in the ballot box.

[From Brexit to ‘Legs-it’: Daily Mail disgusts Britain with ‘sexist’ front page]

(https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2017/04/Gibraltar-4-398x1024.jpg)
But with its essential reliance on the Spanish mainland, Britain's withdrawal from the open border and customs agreements of the European Union means that Spain can choose to exert crippling economic pressure as a bargaining chip.

On Friday, the European Union indicated that it would tacitly back Spain's claims on the territory in its draft negotiation guidelines for Brexit. The document stipulates that “no agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom may apply to the territory of Gibraltar without agreement between the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom.” In other words, London will have to negotiate directly with Madrid on any Brexit-related arrangements affecting Gibraltar.

The wording was immediately lauded in Spain and seen as an affront in the U.K.

British Prime Minister Theresa May called Picardo on Sunday morning to say that the U.K. remained “steadfastly committed to our support for Gibraltar, its people and its economy,” and that she would defend the “freely and democratically expressed wishes” of its residents that had made their desire to remain part of Britain clear. A former leader of May's Conservative Party, Michael Howard, took the rhetoric up a few notches, saying that Britain would go to war against Spain for Gibraltar if necessary, just as Margaret Thatcher did against Argentina in 1982 over the Falkland Islands.

“Thirty-five years ago this week, another woman prime minister sent a task force halfway across the world to defend the freedom of another small group of British people against another Spanish-speaking country, and I’m absolutely certain that our current prime minister will show the same resolve in standing by the people of Gibraltar,” Howard told Sophy Ridge on Sunday on Sky News.

On Monday, British Prime Minister Theresa May laughed off questions about Howard's comments, while Spanish foreign minister Alfonso Dastis said he was “surprised by the tone of the comments coming out of Britain” and suggested some British politicians were “losing their cool.”

British politicians who did not support Brexit expressed alarm that “saber-rattling for war” against longtime European allies had begun even before negotiation guidelines had been agreed upon. “It is absolutely ludicrous and totally inflammatory,” said Tim Farron, leader of the Liberal Democrats.

Speaking to the BBC, former Labour party foreign secretary Jack Straw called any threats of military action against Spain “frankly absurd” on Monday.

Today's WorldView

What's most important from where the world meets Washington

In continental Europe, the escalation of the dispute over the weekend was perceived as bizarre and unnecessarily aggressive. “The warmongering rhetoric over Gibraltar is worrisome, though not so much for the actual prospect of a shooting war over those rocks, but rather what those comments reveal about the mind-set of those who are ready to elevate the narcissism of small differences to a causa belli,” said Cornelius Adebahr, a European affairs experts with the German Council on Foreign Relations. “All countries concerned are NATO allies, so the actual idea of going to war is insane.”

Adebahr cautioned that bigger E.U. members like Germany are not interested in an escalation of the dispute, and tend to disagree with Spain's basis for territorial claims.

Gibraltar is home to a British air base, airport and seaport, and it is only 12 miles from the coast of North Africa. The U.K. handles its security and foreign policy, while leaving all other matters, including taxation, to the local government.
Title: Brexit: Yannis Varoufakis weighs in
Post by: RE on April 29, 2017, 12:14:01 AM
Varoufakis is Backus!

RE

https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2017/04/02/pm-theresa-may-has-miscalculated-op-ed-in-the-mirror/ (https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2017/04/02/pm-theresa-may-has-miscalculated-op-ed-in-the-mirror/)

PM Theresa May has miscalculated – Op-ed in THE MIRROR
Brexit DiEM25 English Op-ed The Mirror webmaster YanisVaroufakis 3829 Views 0 comment   April 2, 2017

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/2562568/images/o-YANIS-facebook.jpg)

Theresa May has miscalculated her Brexit strategy, says the ­former Greek finance minister who handled his country’s EU negotiations. Yanis Varoufakis, writing exclusively for the Mirror, says the PM’s threat of a “ hard Brexit ” will not make Britain’s departure any easier. Mr Varoufakis said: “By making a hard Brexit the default of the ­negotiating process, Mrs May has secured its credibility. “However, a credible threat can still produce an undesirable outcome.”

Mr Varoufakis, who co-founded the reform group ­Democracy in Europe 2025 (DiEM25) expects a frustrating two years for UK negotiators. He saw the methods of EU powerbrokers while securing a Greek bailout. And he says the UK ­negotiating team will get a similarly rough ride. Mr Varoufakis recommends going for a deal like Norway’s – non-membership but with ­access to the single market. Talks begin on April 29.
PM may have miscalculated

By YANIS VAROUFAKIS, Greece’s former finance minister, and founder of the DiEM25 movement

Prime Minister May is keen to avoid a defeat at the hands of EU negotiators determined to do to the UK that which they did to Greece in 2015.

Correctly, she has set out to arm herself with a credible threat.

The problem is that she may have miscalculated her optimal strategy.

By making a hard Brexit the default of the negotiations’ process, Mrs May has secured its credibility.

However, a credible threat can still produce an undesirable outcome.

London’s greatest miscalculation would be to assume that the EU’s negotiators are committed to the bloc’s economic interests.

Whilst negotiating Greece’s debt to the EU with them, I realised in horror that they cared very little about getting their money back and a great deal more about shoring up their relative positions in the games they play with one another – even if this sacrificed large economic gains.

Mrs May will encounter this mindset soon in Berlin, Brussels and Paris.

If my experiences are anything to go by, a frustrating two years await British negotiators.

They are faced with the EU’s favourite tactics: The EU Run-Around (as Brussels refers them to Berlin and vice versa), the Swedish National Anthem Routine (the feeling that whether you have outlined a sensible proposal or sung Sweden’s national anthem they react the same way), the All-Or-Nothing Ruse (refusing to discuss any issue unless all issues are simultaneously discussed) and the Blame Game (censuring you for THEIR recalcitrance).

Nothing good, for Britain or for the EU, will come out of this process. It is why I recommend a strategy that robs Brussels of all room to manoeuvre. That is: Request a Norway-like agreement for an interim period – something that they cannot refuse – and empower the next UK parliament to design and pursue Britain’s
long-term relationship with the EU.
Title: Juncker: "English is losing its importance"
Post by: RE on May 06, 2017, 12:40:49 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/1A4q1ap2NGA
Title: Juncker vs. Farage: The final battle
Post by: RE on May 06, 2017, 12:45:00 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/tQjWV9Bhc0g
Title: UK election 2017: Conservatives lose majority
Post by: RE on June 09, 2017, 12:12:20 AM
This should now get positively HILARIOUS!  :icon_mrgreen:

RE

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2017-40209282 (http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2017-40209282)

UK election 2017: Conservatives lose majority

    12 minutes ago
    From the section Election 2017

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/14DDE/production/_96407458_0630_national-seat-predicti.png)

Britain's Conservatives have lost their majority in a snap general that has resulted in a hung parliament.

With just a handful of seats left to declare, Thursday's poll shows gains for the opposition Labour Party.

This is seen as a humiliation for PM Minister Theresa May, who chose to call the election to try to strengthen her hand in talks with the EU on Brexit.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn urged her to resign, but she said her party would "ensure" stability in the UK.

Election results: Live updates

"At this time more than anything else, this country needs a period of stability," Mrs May said early on Friday.
Media captionTheresa May says the UK needs a period of stability

"And if, as the indications have shown and if this is correct that the Conservative Party has won the most seats and probably the most votes, then it will be incumbent on us to ensure we have that period of stability - and that is exactly what we will do."

Mrs May - who had a small majority in the previous parliament - had called an early election to try to improve her negotiation positions on Brexit.
Media captionLabour leader Jeremy Corbyn: "I'm very, very proud of the campaign my party has run"

But EU Budget Commissioner Günther Oettinger told German radio he was unsure Brexit talks could start later this month as scheduled. He said discussions with a weak UK negotiating partner could lead to a poor outcome.

Mr Corbyn earlier said: "If there is a message from tonight's results, it's this: the prime minister called this election because she wanted a mandate. Well, the mandate she's got is lost Conservative seats, lost votes, lost support and lost confidence."

"I would have thought that's enough to go, and make way for a government that will be truly representative of all of the people of this country," he added.

Final election results are expected by Friday lunchtime.

The biggest shock of the night so far has been Liberal Democrat MP Nick Clegg losing his seat to a Labour candidate. He was deputy prime minister of the UK from 2010 to 2015 in a coalition government with the Conservatives.

Former Scottish National Party leader Alex Salmond was also defeated, losing his seat to a Conservative.

A total of 650 Westminster MPs are being elected, with about 45.8 million people entitled to vote. A party needs 326 seats to have an overall majority.

    Full UK results breakdown
    Find the result by constituency
    In pictures: Focus on election counts
    'Hung Parliament' trends in Britain
    The non-Brit's guide to the UK election

What does the forecast say?

The Conservatives are forecast to win 42% of the vote, Labour 40%, the Lib Dems 7%, UKIP 2% and the Greens 2%.

In the House of Commons, the Conservatives are predicted to be 12 seats short of an overall majority, losing 15. Labour are set to gain about 30, the Lib Dems five and the SNP are predicted to lose 22 seats.

The Green Party would be unchanged with one seat and Plaid Cymru still have three MPs in Wales, according to the poll.

Northern Ireland has different political parties.
How other parties have reacted?

SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon said the election "has been a disaster for Theresa May".

"Her position I think is very, very difficult. We have to wait and see how things shake out," Mrs Sturgeon said, adding that she was "disappointed at the SNP losses".

Leader of UK Independence Party Paul Nuttall tweeted: "If the exit poll is true then Theresa May has put Brexit in jeopardy. I said at the start this election was wrong. Hubris."
Image copyright EPA
Image caption In Glasgow, SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon voted at a local community hall
Image copyright AFP
Image caption Lib Dem leader Tim Farron looked cheerful despite the rain after voting in Kendal, Cumbria

Lib Dem President Baroness Brinton said her party could not work with either Labour or the Tories as both are pushing for a "hard Brexit".

Green co-leader Caroline Lucas earlier said she could "hardly dare hope" that the exit poll was right, adding: "To be clear, Greens will never support a Tory government."
Why the election matters - it's all about Brexit

The election will largely determine the UK's negotiation policies in upcoming negotiations with the EU on Brexit.

Theresa May was against Brexit before last year's referendum - but now says there can be no turning back and that "Brexit means Brexit".

The reason the prime minister gave for calling the election was to strengthen her hand during the negotiations.

The Conservatives' priorities were set out in a 12-point plan published in January and the letter formally invoking Brexit in March.

The key elements include:

    No longer being bound by EU law and European Court of Justice rulings

    Quitting the EU single market and seeking a "comprehensive" free trade deal in its place

    Striking trade deals with other countries around the world

The Labour Party campaigned against Brexit in the referendum but now says the result must be honoured, and is aiming for a "close new relationship with the EU" with workers' rights protected.

The party has set out several demands and tests it says Brexit must meet. These include:

    Aiming for "tariff-free access" to the EU single market, while accepting "unchanged access" is impossible

    Leaving the option of the customs union on the table

    Refusing to accept a "no deal" scenario

Where UK's parties stand on Brexit
What about a possible impact on the UK economy?

When the election exit poll was revealed, the pound immediately dropped by 2% as investors took a position that a hung parliament was a possible outcome, writes BBC's Economics Editor Kamal Ahmed.
Image copyright Reuters
Image caption The pound fell sharply against the dollar after the exit polls were released.

Why would that lead the currency to decline? Because a hung parliament means that the government's direction of travel would be less certain.

Deals would have to be done. And those vital Brexit negotiations could become all the more difficult.

Nervousness in the markets is likely to increase and investors could decide to move their money to more attractive places, such as the Eurozone where growth has picked up and political risk has reduced, our editor says.
Title: Theresa May's Biggest Mistake
Post by: RE on June 09, 2017, 04:45:55 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-09/theresa-may-s-biggest-mistake (https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-09/theresa-may-s-biggest-mistake)

Theresa May's Biggest Mistake
U.K. voters threw out the script. Let that be a lesson.
by Therese Raphael

June 8, 2017, 10:03 PM AKDT

(https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/il4ifYto9lE8/v0/800x-1.jpg)
Ouch. Photographer: Chris J Ratcliffe/Getty

It's happened again: The leader of a mainstream party was given favorable election odds, ran a poor campaign, got trounced on social media and was taught a painful lesson by voters. It's tempting to ask if they'll ever learn.

Theresa May, the U.K. prime minister, is known as a careful plodder, more technocrat and master-of-the-brief than glad-hander. But she took the biggest gamble possible in politics: She called an election she didn't have to call in a bid to increase her governing majority. David Cameron did something similar in deciding to put Britain's membership in the European Union up for a vote last year. Both thought victory was assured and both were punished for their hubris.

It isn't clear yet if May will lose her job as Cameron did. But the election has big implications regardless -- for politics, domestic policy and especially the Brexit negotiations that begin in 11 days.

As the initial exit polls showed a loss of Tory seats last night, the realization set in that, once again, voters weren't following the script. The Conservatives ended the night having lost their governing majority and facing a hung parliament; they're projected to get 318 seats. They will most likely stagger on as a minority government, getting support where they can.

This is miles from the thumping majority May expected. And Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party pulled off a historic reversal of fortune from the start of the campaign, when it trailed the Tories by more than 20 percentage points. Labour is expected to add around 35 seats from the 232 it received in 2015, an extraordinary coup. Only a short while ago, union boss Len McClusky was saying that 200 seats would be a good result.

It may seem that Thursday's election changes little: A Conservative prime minister will still occupy 10 Downing Street and Brexit still means Brexit. But in Britain's winner-take-all system, a narrow majority can change the landscape significantly.

One immediate question is whether May will continue as prime minister; that's hard to imagine now. The Conservatives are an unforgiving bunch. But they may decide that with the Brexit negotiations beginning so soon, and with such a slim majority, there's too much to lose now to succumb to in-fighting and become distracted by another leadership election.

If May stays on, her job will become much harder. The fact of Brexit doesn't change with this election, but the shape of it almost certainly does. The government will have to rely on parties that disagree with its approach to pass a hugely complex deal -- if one is reached at all -- through two houses of parliament. That may mean a gentler Brexit; or just a more confusing one.

Assuming May achieves a new trade deal with the EU and a smooth exit in 2019, Bloomberg Intelligence's forecast is that the U.K. economy will still be 2 percent smaller than had it remained in the EU. With a weakened Conservative government, that may be optimistic.

Where did May go wrong? Set aside her manifesto U-turn, her wooden television performances, the awkward refusal to join the debate, and her overuse of the phrase "strong and stable." May simply fought a negative campaign. The Tory marketing material that arrived in our home mainly warned of doomsday scenarios under a Labour leadership, in language that was suggestive of a hostile alien landing -- it was reminiscent of Hillary Clinton's warning of Donald Trump's invasion, which likewise backfired.

In the U.K. election, the scaremongering was even less effective, just as the scaremongering about Brexit didn't work. Voters don't like being bullied. Today's Labour voters, many of them young, don't remember the socialist experiments of 1970s but are still smarting from the financial crisis. They find Corbyn's promises of stimulus and spending on services attractive; "nationalization" isn't such a dirty word to them.

Ultimately, May seemed to harbor the same twin conceits as Cameron, Clinton and even France's mainstream parties: All underestimated the appeal of their opponent's message, and all assumed that voter support was sticky -- that once you have it, you get to hold it. Like a fading brick-and-mortar retailer, they banked on loyalty that no longer exists.

Today's voters instead resemble online shoppers. They can move quickly and impulsively, but are also ruthless, inclined to deliver a scathing review, and quick to demand a refund if they aren't happy. Misreading that was May's biggest error: She looked at poll figures back in April and saw a stock instead of a flow. With party loyalty at a low in the U.K., as elsewhere, there's more onus on a leader's personality, so each one of May's missteps -- and there were many -- were magnified.
Clear thinking from leading voices in business, economics, politics, foreign affairs, culture, and more.
Share the View

There's irony in how May got here. Cameron sought to put an end to Tory divisions over Europe by holding a referendum that would settle the matter, unite the party and keep it in power. When his gamble failed, May inherited Brexit and the party, with its simmering divisions. She called a vote of her own to settle any remaining doubts and strengthen her hand. Her party is still clinging to power -- but only just.
Title: The Hung UK Parliament
Post by: RE on June 10, 2017, 01:47:52 AM
http://www.ianwelsh.net/the-hung-uk-parliament/ (http://www.ianwelsh.net/the-hung-uk-parliament/)

The Hung UK Parliament
2017 June 9
7 Comments
tags: 2027 British Election, Jeremy Corbyn
by Ian Welsh

(http://www.michellehenry.fr/hungparl.png)

Final results are 318 for the Conservatives, 262 for Labour, 35 for the SNP (Scottish), 12 for the Liberal Democrats, 10 for DUP (Democratic Unionist) and 13 “Other”.

There are 650 seats total, meaning 326 are needed for a majority.

DUP is who the Conservatives will govern with, and they are the Protestant unionists in Northern Ireland. Not very nice people and associated with violence on behalf of staying in the UK.

Labour will not be forming the government, odds are, but this is a victory for Labour in that the Conservative’s majority is reduced to a minority.

72% of 18-24 year olds voted, which is unprecedented to my knowledge.

The takeaway is simple: left wing neoliberalism is dying (and with luck is dead), in England. A straight up message of nationalizing railroads and energy; of free tuition, of building homes, did far better than the neoliberals have done in years.

This was a 2 party election: 3rd parties shed followers.

Corbyn outperformed massively, which is the risk of demonizing one’s enemies. Having screamed about how terrible he was Blairites are reduced to saying “anyone else would have done better, May was awful”, which after they’ve lost two elections to Corbyn and been wrong about him 3 times, sounds weak.

Center-right parties are dying or reinventing themselves.  There is no appetite for mealy-mouthed neoliberalism. Go all right, or go what passes these days for hard-left. The demographics are 100% on the left’s side: the younger people are, the more they are left wing, and now, they’re even voting if offered politics which appeal to them.

I mean, given the university loans crisis, it seems like basic politics to offer them debt-forgiveness and free tuition.

In more immediate terms, the question is whether May will survive. Boris Johnson is likely sharpening his knife collection as we speak: she didn’t have to call this election and lost her majority in it, after a terrible personal performance in which she appeared scared to appear in the same room as Corbyn.

The second issue is when the next election will be. Is a coalition with the DUP in the works? Is it a strong coalition? It wouldn’t take much for the Conservatives to lose a vote of no-confidence and be back at the polling place, though other parties will be reluctant to knock them out with good reason, fearing that Britons will punish them for having to go back to the polls immediate.

A new election may be necessary, soon, and accepted as such, if the Conservatives find themselves unable to effectively negotiate Brexit.

I shall be interested to see if Labour MPs, who still hate Corbyn, launch another attack. There have been gestures of peace, but many will never give Corbyn credit for anything, and genuinely do disagree with his politics. I assume, however, that they will at least wait a while, while continuing to snipe and leak in hopes of weakening him.

We shall see.

Overall I’m very happy with this result. I expect(ed) the realignment to take till 2020/24 for demographic reasons, but this is an early earthquake of better politics to come.
Title: 🌍 Brexit – Thoughts for the next six months
Post by: RE on September 10, 2018, 12:01:30 AM
http://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/brexit-thoughts-for-the-next-six-months/ (http://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/brexit-thoughts-for-the-next-six-months/)

Brexit – Thoughts for the next six months
6th September 2018 / United Kingdom   

(http://truepublica.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Screen-Shot-2018-09-05-at-08.02.39.png)

Brexit - Thoughts for the next six months

TruePublica Editor: The next six months means little more than brace yourselves for the ride folks. There’s so much skullduggery, chicanery and backstabbing going on there’s sure to be a political bloodbath one way or the other and the outcome doesn’t look pretty.

 

Asked how chaotic the coming months could be in British politics, even battle-hardened veterans from both main parties struggle to find the words reports The Guardian: “It could be utterly ghastly, with a complete breakdown in party discipline,” says one former Tory cabinet minister. “It is unprecedented in my 30 years.”

A Labour MP is similarly apocalyptic: “This is probably the most dangerous, existentially dangerous, period for the Labour party since 1981. It’s not clear that the party will survive this time.”
Get Briefed, Get Weekly Intelligence Reports - Essential Weekend Reading - Safe Subscribe

Political Betting has Emily Thornberry at 5/1 as next leader of the Labour party and Jeremy Corbyn now a 2/1 bet he will lose his leadership alongside Theresa May at 1/3.

The Sunday Times is predicting a ‘double-coup’ with both leaders being ousted. That’s never happened before.

 

 

Source: House of Commons Library

Did I mention that the SNP has more of a membership that the ruling party does or that Labour now has 20 per cent more members than all other parties combined or that they are now the biggest political membership party across the entire European Union?

And yet, Labour is on the brink of self-destruction.

 
Whiners and Diners

It is no secret that potential Tory leadership candidates have been dining with donors with some plotting to stop Boris from doing any more damage – just at the same time Labour MP’s are covertly discussing a split.

In the meantime, the whole Brexit fiasco from one side of the political spectrum to the other is now just toe-to-toe punch-up.

Theresa May has declared war on Boris Johnson after allies said they had rumbled a plot by her Election guru to install the former Foreign Secretary as the next Prime Minister. Senior figures at Tory HQ claim that Sir Lynton Crosby is behind plans to mount a nationwide campaign against Mrs May’s Chequers agreement on Brexit as the precursor to a Boris leadership challenge.

 
Showdown

Let’s not forget public opinion has now changed on Brexit as well. More people now want to stay in the EU as they have now decided that so many lies were thrown about that the best course of action would be to forget the whole thing and make friends with our neighbours who we’ve been trashing for the last two years. That could force a showdown between an angry electorate (well, half of them) and the government (about a third of them).

Then we have new constitutional boundaries where more Labour MP’s could lose their seats than Tories. But the Tory losses reduce the thin balance of power they currently have – so both sides have an axe to grind with each other and from within. There are 50 seats being sacrificed – how will the incumbents fight back one wonders? Then again, there could be a leadership battle and the Tories could lose more seats yet again – or not.

 

“If she presses ahead with Chequers or, more likely, a watered-down version, it’s hard to see how we avoid a decisive showdown before Christmas,” said one pro-Brexit MP.

 

We should not forget we have police investigations and electoral commission reports on how much illegal activity took place over the EU referendum in the first place. Not that I think either will have any impact whatsoever.

Will there be a second referendum? There’s a big campaign for its support building. I doubt it will happen – but it all adds more fuel to the fires springing up all over the political landscape and in this environment, anything could happen.

Most MPs expect a Commons vote on the final Brexit deal by the end of the year and that will be an interesting one to witness. It may well be interesting to see public reaction when there is an admission that no trade-deals have been signed and the ones with any real potential are years away. Britain may well have to use WTO regulations in a no-deal agreement just at the time that Donald Trump is pushing the organisation to extinction. Oh dear!

Should May lose that fight, few agree on what would follow: a leadership challenge, an election or a second referendum. And let’s be fair, it is not in the realms of fantasy that all three could happen in that order as well – one or all of which spells nothing but chaos for Britain.

The other option and just as likely is that Britain capitulates and agrees to the worst of all deals. That is, some sort of trade deal that existed before but with no seat at the top table to determine rules and regulations.

For the general public, there are huge concerns. A Lack of faith in politics/politicians/government generally has become a top ten issue for the country for the first time according to a new Ipsos Mori poll. I think Ipsos are way behind the curve of reality here.

 

“This month’s Issues Index shows public concern about Britain and Europe remaining at the same record level measured in July. Fifty-seven per cent see European issues as one of the biggest concerns and 44% name it as the single biggest worry, compared with 58% and 45% last month.”

 

The poll also highlights that the country has become more polarised as a result of Brexit. So there’s worse to come, especially as one half of the country loses, which it inevitably will.

The last six-month run-up to the expected March 2019 exit from the European Union is set up to be as explosive and unpredictable as ever.

I’m told there are lots of reason to be optimistic – I just can’t think of any!
Title: 🌍 Britain's May appeals to EU leaders but no sign of Brexit deal
Post by: RE on September 20, 2018, 12:09:38 AM
Welcome to the Hotel EU. where you can Check Out but you can never leave.

http://www.youtube.com/v/9GUrcEx7Guw

RE

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu/britains-may-appeals-to-eu-leaders-but-no-sign-of-brexit-deal-idUSKCN1M000N (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu/britains-may-appeals-to-eu-leaders-but-no-sign-of-brexit-deal-idUSKCN1M000N)

World News
September 19, 2018 / 4:16 PM / Updated 17 minutes ago
Britain's May appeals to EU leaders but no sign of Brexit deal
Gabriela Baczynska, Elizabeth Piper, Francois Murphy

(https://d2pggiv3o55wnc.cloudfront.net/oann/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/2018-09-20T001521Z_1_LYNXNPEE8J009_RTROPTP_0_EU-SUMMIT_1.jpg)

6 Min Read

SALZBURG, Austria (Reuters) - Prime Minister Theresa May appealed directly to fellow European Union leaders on Wednesday to drop “unacceptable” Brexit demands that she said could rip Britain apart, urging the bloc to respond in kind to her “serious and workable” plan.
Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May talks to the media as she arrives for the informal meeting of European Union leaders ahead of the EU summit, in Salzburg, Austria, September 19, 2018. REUTERS/Lisi Niesner

They listened politely for a few minutes but said afterwards that a stalemate on the Irish border was unbroken — though some EU diplomats detected a cracking of ice around the spectacular summit dinner table, laid in the Salzburg theater used to film a dramatic escape finale in the film “The Sound of Music”.

Earlier, EU officials insisted May had to give more ground.

After Wiener schnitzel and four hours of wrangling over Europe’s migrant problem, May was given the floor and tried to win over her 27 peers by effectively asking them what they would do if they were asked to agree a “legal separation” of their countries — something she says the EU is asking for by insisting Northern Ireland might stay under EU economic rules.
Related Coverage

    Former UK minister says May's Brexit plans are delusional: Telegraph
    Former UK minister says May's Brexit plans are delusional: Telegraph

Maintaining a united front that refuses to let May bypass the negotiations run by Michel Barnier of the European Commission, they did not respond to her. They will discuss the issue among themselves over lunch on Thursday, setting what Barnier hopes can be a path to a final deal in two months.

“I believe that I have put forward serious and workable proposals,” May told the summit, according to a senior British government source. “We will of course not agree on every detail, but I hope that you will respond in kind.

“The onus is now on all of us to get this deal done.”

For now, however, with May still facing criticism of her “soft Brexit” approach at her Conservative Party conference in 10 days, there was little sign of either side giving way.

“At this stage, it’s a standstill. There is no progress,” Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite told Reuters after the dinner. Slovak Prime Minister Peter Pellegrini added: “On the border issue, there has been no progress.”

Sponsored

“It was polite,” said a senior EU diplomat. “They are trying to be nice to her and there will be nice words tomorrow.”

A second said May seemed to be edging toward compromise, offering new proposals on how to avoid differing economic regulations disrupting trade and speaking of a “middle way”: “She spoke. There was no reaction. ‘Thank you’ and we moved on.”

With barely six months until Britain leaves the bloc, at the risk of serious disruption if there is no deal to tie up legal loose ends, there is pressure on both sides: “You can hear very clearly the clock ticking in the room,” said the second diplomat. “And that’s starting to have a psychological effect.”

EU officials again said Britain had to move its own position over what has become known as the Irish backstop - how to avoid erecting border posts between the British province and EU member Ireland - as well as on future economic cooperation after Brexit day in March.

A government source suggested Britain would come up with other proposals to try to reach agreement on Northern Ireland “in due course”, but May has so far been reluctant to move from her Chequers plan, hashed out at her country home in July.
BORDER PLAN “NOT CREDIBLE”

The talks, which have gone on for over a year, are bogged down in how to ensure that what will become Britain’s only land border with the EU, between Northern Ireland and Ireland, will not become home again to the checks and tensions of the past.

May has rejected an EU proposal to keep the province in a customs union with the bloc if they fail to reach a deal to keep the entire EU-UK border open, instead offering a time-limited customs arrangement that would cover the whole of Britain.

Over dinner, she said the problem could be solved by securing the type of “frictionless trade” envisaged in her Chequers plan, and that Britain was still committed to agreeing a fall-back scheme with the EU.

“However, the Commission’s proposal for this protocol - that I should assent to a legal separation of the United Kingdom into two customs territories - is not credible,” she said.
These hills are alive with the sound of Brexit

May is keen to show hardline Brexiters, who will be out in force at the party conference and who have called on her to “chuck Chequers”, that her plan is the only one that can be negotiated with the EU.

And, possibly for that domestic audience, she told the EU leaders that although time was short, “delaying or extending these negotiations is not an option” and rule out the option of a second referendum on Britain’s EU membership.
“NO PROGRESS”

Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar told reporters before the dinner that there had been no advance on the issue: “I don’t think we’re any closer to a withdrawal agreement than we were in March, so I can’t report any progress, unfortunately.”

May will attend a morning session on Thursday to discuss security, where she will raise the poisoning of a former Russian spy. She will also have a face-to-face meeting with Varadkar.

She will then be out of the room when the other 27 leaders discuss her Brexit proposals over lunch, and will find out about their reactions only when summit chair Donald Tusk briefs her separately afterwards.

But the senior British source said Britain believed momentum was growing for a deal, noting Tusk’s plan to convene a special summit in mid-November to ink a hoped-for treaty.

“I think this signals that very serious discussions are now taking place,” the source said. “We are confident of getting a deal.”

Reporting by Gabriela Baczynska, Elizabeth Piper and Francois Murphy; Additional reporting by Alastair Macdonald; Writing by Elizabeth Piper and Alastair Macdonald; Editing by Lisa Shumaker
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Title: 🌍 The NAZIS and FASCISTS who founded the THE EU and their influence today
Post by: RE on September 20, 2018, 03:59:58 AM
If you think the Nazis are only over in Europe, you should think again.

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/7Nf5KeC4dAs
Title: 🌍 IMF (AGAIN) MAKES A FOOL OF ITSELF OVER BREXIT
Post by: RE on September 21, 2018, 12:04:36 AM
http://freenations.net/imf-again-makes-a-fool-of-itself-over-brexit/ (http://freenations.net/imf-again-makes-a-fool-of-itself-over-brexit/)

IMF (AGAIN) MAKES A FOOL OF ITSELF OVER BREXIT
Posted By: Rodney Atkinsonon: September 19, 2018In: News

(https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2016/07/07/102642003_International%20Monetary%20%20news_trans_NvBQzQNjv4Bqeo_i_u9APj8RuoebjoAHt0k9u7HhRJvuo-ZLenGRumA.jpg?imwidth=450)
l

WRONG

Joining that merry band of doom mongers (HM Treasury, the Bank of England and Chancellor Hammond) the IMF’s Christine Lagarde has again warned of “substantial costs” of a no deal Brexit. In fact of course there is no such thing as “no deal” – we simply go to the World Trade organisation deal, like most of the world’s nations – saving on the way big duties on imports from the rest of the world on cars, food and clothing and saving 40 billion Euros in contributions to the EU budget! The “substantial costs” are in having a deal!

George Osborne-sponsored IMF Head Lagarde (who was found guilty by a French Court of negligence for failing to challenge a Euro 400m payout to a friend of French President Nicolas Sarkozy) has continued that organisation’s negligence and incompetence. In 2012 it was pointed out – just as she was attacking Greeks for not paying tax – that she paid no tax on her £298,000 salary which if grossed up for proper tax would have been more than the President of the United States!

WRONG

It was in April 2013 that the IMF’s Chief Economist attacked the UK’s deficit reduction programme and warned of “playing with fire”. The following year the UK’s growth rate was 2.9% and that economist had to apologise.

WRONG

Lagarde said that leaving the EU would be a blow to the UK economy because “Countries trade mainly with their neighbours”. But the USA, thousands of miles away, is the UK’s biggest export market! The UK has a consistent trade surplus with the USA and a consistent large deficit with the EU.

WRONG

Lagarde further claimed that the UK was suffering from a lack of capital investment because of the threat of Brexit. But the overall picture is the opposite. There has been since January 2016 a 6% increase in UK Gross Fixed Capital Formation – from £81bn to £86bn.

When the IMF made a fool of itself in 2013-14 the UK was still showing far healthier growth than the stagnant EU. Today Lagarde says we are in trouble – after 20 years (since the Euro was launched) of greatly outperforming the EU. That is why we have nearly 3 million EU “citizens” working in the UK.

Even today the IMF has just increased its growth forecast for the UK from 1.4% to 1.5% and while we have just posted a 0.6% growth in the quarter to July the Eurozone growth rate was 0.3% which was the slowest growth rate since 2016 (when we voted to leave!) and the IMF says:

“Forecasts for 2018 growth have been revised down for Germany and France after activity softened more than expected in the first quarter, and in Italy”

CORPORATIST FORECASTER ELITES

Once again a large State corporatist institution has made a fool of itself in its analysis and forecasting. It is a catching disease, but inevitable from those who have comfortable careers and salaries – whether they are proved right or wrong.

Outside in the real world the rest of us, acting in democratic markets and responsible to our fellow citizens, have to absorb the cost of their failures and get on with life. When we rise up and tell them that staying in the EU would be a disaster the supranational elitists can’t believe it – no wonder. While mass unemployment and social collapse have characterised the EU for 20 years the scribblers have sailed on regardless in their unearned luxury!
Title: 🌍 What’s going on with Brexit, explained in under 500 words
Post by: RE on November 17, 2018, 12:04:52 AM
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/16/18098437/brexit-deal-theresa-may (https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/16/18098437/brexit-deal-theresa-may)

What’s going on with Brexit, explained in under 500 words
The EU and UK struck a deal on how it would work. Then all hell broke loose.
By Zack Beauchamp@zackbeauchampzack@vox.com Nov 16, 2018, 10:50am EST

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/acsLI1ex4DJARcLrgSAPbdPsBgo=/0x0:4687x3402/920x613/filters:focal(1385x1050:2133x1798)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/62341996/1061910046.jpg.0.jpg)
UK Prime Minister Theresa May during a November 15 press conference on the Brexit deal. Matt Dunham/WPA Pool/Getty Images

This week, British Prime Minister Theresa May unveiled the draft of a deal she had struck with European Union negotiators on Brexit — the UK’s process of leaving the EU. Shortly thereafter, the British political system collapsed into complete chaos. Now, nobody really knows what Brexit will look like. It might not even happen at all.

The pro-Brexit camp in May’s Conservative Party has long been split between two sides. Advocates of a “hard Brexit” want to completely sever ties with the EU, separating British law from European law on topics ranging from trade to migration to product regulation. Advocates of a “soft Brexit,” by contrast, want to maintain some of these ties — arguing that a complete separation from the EU’s common market would be disastrous for Britain’s economy and political stability. (The leading opposition party, left-wing Labour, is largely but not entirely opposed to Brexit.)

The agreement May released on Wednesday is definitively a soft Brexit.

The deal has a provision that could keep the UK in the EU customs union (the system setting common trade rules for all EU members) indefinitely. This is designed to avoid a crisis over Northern Ireland, which is part of the UK but wants to retain an open border with neighboring EU member Ireland. Imposing border controls between Ireland and Northern Ireland could threaten the Good Friday Agreement, the deal that ended serious violence in Northern Ireland way back in 1999.

This might be smart politically, but the hard Brexit camp saw it as a betrayal: a failure to deliver on the promise to “take back control” over UK law. May forced her cabinet to agree to the deal on Wednesday, but on Thursday, two secretaries — including Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab — resigned in protest.

Also on Thursday, May went to Parliament to defend her deal, and was literally laughed at by the assembled MPs. Jacob Rees-Mogg, a comically aristocratic Conservative MP from the hard Brexit faction, submitted a letter of no confidence in May’s leadership — which could in theory topple her premiership.

By Friday morning, everything was a complete mess. Nobody knows if there are enough votes in Parliament to approve May’s Brexit deal. If the vote fails, May might well fail with it.

If the deal fails to pass Parliament, there are generally two options: a no-deal Brexit, which would devastate the UK economy, and a nationwide “second referendum” that would basically revisit the question of whether Britain wants to leave the EU at all. The expectation is that British voters, given another chance, would vote to end Brexit.

“The prospects of a second referendum have advanced considerably,” the Financial Times’s Robert Shrimsley writes. “Parliament will not stomach a no-deal exit. So the hardliners risk provoking the crisis that kills their dream, by smoothing the path to a second referendum.”

Is that likely? No one knows! Such is the state of British politics in the Brexit era: a true and complete omnishambles.
Title: 🌍 The Brutal Reality Of Brexit
Post by: RE on November 17, 2018, 12:45:43 AM
https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2018/11/16/the-brutal-reality-of-brexit/#1183d9405fb1 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2018/11/16/the-brutal-reality-of-brexit/#1183d9405fb1)

The Brutal Reality Of Brexit

(https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/960x0/https%3A%2F%2Fspecials-images.forbesimg.com%2Fdam%2Fimageserve%2F1061945530%2F960x0.jpg%3Ffit%3Dscale)
Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May gives a press conference inside 10 Downing Street in central London on November 15, 2018.  (PMATT DUNHAM/AFP/Getty Images)Getty

Frances Coppola
Senior Contributor
Markets

I write about banking, finance and economics.

Theresa May’s chickens are coming home to roost. The deal she agreed to with Brussels is unravelling fast, and her premiership along with it. So far, seven of her ministers have resigned. Letters calling for her replacement are pouring in to the powerful chairman of the Conservative Party’s 1922 Committee: once he receives 48 letters, there could be a vote of confidence in her leadership, and perhaps a leadership challenge. Other Tories are calling for a second referendum. Meanwhile, the Labour party is slavering at the possibility of an early General Election. The political crisis that has been simmering since 2016 has erupted with a vengeance.

The political fallout from Mrs. May’s latest attempt to square the Brexit circle is understandable. Her Brexit deal is horrible. It would lock the UK into a “frozen Brexit," neither in the EU nor completely out of it.  The U.K. would be forced to accept EU decisions over which it would have no say and continuing to contribute to the EU budget despite no longer being a member. It would also be unable to enact its own trade deals with the rest of the world until the freeze ended. And it would be unable to end the freeze unilaterally.

The idea is that this “frozen Brexit” would initially be only for a transitional period ending in December 2020, when it would be superseded by a free trade agreement. But the proposal allows this date to be extended, if necessary for decades, if no free trade agreement is negotiated. And if the transition ends without a free trade agreement, then the entire U.K. would remain in a customs union with the EU indefinitely, but Northern Ireland would have a closer relationship with the EU than the rest of the U.K.

For Brexiters and Remainers alike, this is the worst of all possible solutions. But horrible though it is, this deal satisfies the conditions set by Mrs. May in her Lancaster House speech. It also satisfies the EU’s conditions. No other proposal achieves this. It is, therefore, the best deal available. The U.K. Government has struck a deal that allows Britain to have its cake and eat it -- but the cake tastes so disgusting that no one wants to eat it.

The hard-Brexit European Research Group (ERG) seems to think that if it succeeds in replacing Mrs. May with a hard Brexiter, he or she could negotiate a deal more to its liking. On the other side of the political divide, the Labour party seems to think that if it succeeds in replacing Mrs. May with Jeremy Corbyn, he will be able to negotiate a deal more to its liking.
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
Vanguard BrandVoice
How To Prepare Your Portfolio For Any Weather
Forbes Insights
Welcome From Forbes To A Special Exploration Of AI Issue 2
Nuveen Brand BrandVoice
5 Great Initiatives That Municipal Bonds Financed

Both are deluded. The EU has no incentive whatsoever to renegotiate any of the deal. The road to this point has been long and painful, and the U.K. government has negotiated in bad faith throughout, repeatedly saying one thing to the EU then the opposite to its own politicians and the British press, and hurling insults when things don’t go its way. There is very little goodwill left on the EU side, and negotiation fatigue has well and truly set in.

Once again, the Tories are fighting among themselves rather than facing up to the reality of what they have done. Votes of confidence and leadership challenges will achieve nothing. They simply waste precious time.

And the Labour party is no better. Voting down the deal in the hopes of forcing a General Election is stupid beyond belief. The EU would no doubt grant an extension to Article 50 to allow a General Election to take place before Brexit, but that doesn’t mean it would be willing to renegotiate the deal. Jeremy Corbyn could well suffer the ignominy of being presented with Mrs. May’s deal as a “take it or leave it” choice.

Anyway, Mrs. May does not have to call an election even if Parliament votes down the deal. She can simply say that Parliament has chosen no-deal Brexit and her job is to implement it. Her repeated statements in today’s press conference that “politicians will be held to account for the decisions that they make” suggest that this is exactly what she would do.

The looming prospect of no-deal Brexit is already spooking markets. Sterling tanked today, and the cost of CDS protection on U.K. government debt rose. Shares in Britain’s state-owned bank RBS fell by 9%. While a no-deal Brexit would no doubt be priced in ahead of the actual event, there would clearly be considerable market disruption.

No-deal Brexit could also have catastrophic economic consequences. The IMF, which recently concluded its Article IV assessment of the U.K. economy, said that no-deal Brexit could cause GDP to fall by 5-8%, a similar fall to that the U.K. experienced in the Great Recession of 2008-2009. Other independent forecasters have similarly concluded that no-deal Brexit would knock a very large hole in the U.K. economy. And there have been repeated warnings of the consequences for U.K. jobs and livelihoods, not to mention supplies of essentials such as medicines, if the U.K. were suddenly cut off from European supply chains.

The British people did not vote to have their lives wrecked by a completely avoidable economic crash. They voted for an orderly exit from the EU. But if Parliament votes down this deal, then the only options left on the table are no-deal Brexit – or no Brexit at all.

There are growing calls for a second referendum. But such a referendum could not simply hand over to the people of Britain a choice between this horrible deal and a disastrous no-deal Brexit. If there is a second referendum, the ballot paper must have three options: Mrs. May’s deal, No Deal, and No Brexit. Only then will we discover whether the British population’s longing for “sovereignty” really trumps their rational desire for jobs, economic stability and prosperity.

But if there is no second referendum – and at present neither the Government nor the Labour party seem to be seriously considering it – then Parliament must decide whether a complete break with the EU in the interests of sovereignty, even at the cost of a deep economic recession, is better or worse for the British people in the longer term than “frozen Brexit." Or, of course, whether it is best to call the whole thing off.

There is now a real danger that the U.K. will sleepwalk its way into a disastrous no-deal Brexit. British politicians must stop their games and take their responsibilities towards the people of the U.K. seriously, before it is too late.
Title: 🌍 What May’s Brexit Deal Tells Us About The EU and Britain’s Future
Post by: RE on November 24, 2018, 12:35:31 AM
http://www.ianwelsh.net/what-mays-brexit-deal-tells-us-about-the-eu-and-britains-future/ (http://www.ianwelsh.net/what-mays-brexit-deal-tells-us-about-the-eu-and-britains-future/)

What May’s Brexit Deal Tells Us About The EU and Britain’s Future
2018 November 16
by Ian Welsh

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/fl6A32YjuftYUvbc69K7o5VwR5U_JucprAi2FhPECtmJJiou6yZLKFFvODBponhf2kLby86PKgF_ITIGJmoJ1L7LjjSwZcvG9A=s750)

So, May has a Brexit deal. It’s a terrible deal, which makes the UK subject to many EU laws, and which doesn’t allow Britain to withdraw from the deal if the EU doesn’t want it to.

This has caused ministerial resignations, and Corbyn has come out against it.

But the interesting part is what the EU and May have negotiated. This clause, for example:

(http://www.ianwelsh.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Clause-17-Brexit.jpg)

Corbyn’s policies include straight up re-nationalization of the railways, regulation of housing prices and the government outright building vast numbers of flats, among many other similar policies.

In other words, Corbyn’s policies interfere with liberal market rules. They are, actually, forbidden by the EU, but on occasion exceptions are made.

Now, retaining privileged access to the EU market was going to require some rule taking, but May has chosen to take more rules that are “no socialism” and less rules that are “treat your people decently.”

What May has done is negotiate a deal which ties Corbyn’s hands: he can’t do his policies if he becomes Prime Minister, and he can’t leave the deal. (Well, in theory, and perhaps in practice.)

Of course, Britain can still leave the deal: parliament is supreme, and one parliament cannot tie the hands of another parliament. Nonetheless, doing so would be damaging to Britain’s relationship with the EU, to put it mildly.

These sorts of efforts to tie future government’s hands, so that they can’t not do neoliberal policies are common. The now-dead Canadian Chinese trade deal had a clause which required a 20 year withdrawal notice, for example. The Canadian-EU free trade deal forbids the Canadian government from many of these sorts of policies as well.

This is the great problem with the neoliberal world order: it is set up to force countries into a specific sort of economy, and to punish them if they resist or refuse. That would be somewhat ok, but only somewhat, if neoliberal economics worked, but they don’t.

What they do, instead, is impoverish large minorities, even pluralities, in countries which adopt them. Those pluralities then become demagogue bait (hello Trump.)

Meanwhile Macron has proposed an EU military, and Germany’s Merkel has said she supports the idea.

EU elites are absolutely convinced their way is best, and that anyone who is against it is wrong. They are not primarily concerned with democracy (the EU is run primarily by un-elected bureaucrats), and do not consider democratic legitimacy as primary. If people vote for the “wrong” thing, EU elites feel they have the right to over-ride that. They have overseen what amount to coups in both Greece and Italy in the past 10 years.

The funny thing is that orthodox neoliberal economic theory admits there will be losers to neoliberal policies and states that they must be compensated. The problem is that has never been done, and indeed, with accelerating austerity, the opposite has been done: at the same time as a plurality is impoverished, the social supports have been kicked out from under them.

Macron has been particularly pointed in this: gutting labor rights in the name of labor market flexibility.

Neoliberalism, in other words, creates the conditions of its own failure. It is failing around the world: in America (Trump does not believe in the mulilateral neoliberal order), in Europe, and so on.

Even in countries that “support” the EU, there are substantial minorities, pushing into plurality status, which don’t support it.

So Europe needs an army. Because Eurocrats know best, and since neoliberalism isn’t working for enough people that things like Brexit happen; that Italy is ignoring rules, that the East is boiling over with right wing xenophobia, well, force is going to be needed. A European military, with French nukes, is the core of a great power military. And soon countries won’t be able to leave.

That, at any rate, is where things are headed. We’ll see if the EU cracks up first.

In the meantime, May’s Brexit deal really is worse than no deal, and in should in no way be passed. In fact, if I were Corbyn, and it was passed, if I became PM I’d get rid of it. Because it either goes or he breaks substantially all of his most important electoral promises.

The EU is loathsome. I won’t say it’s done no good, but it’s now doing more harm than good (indeed it has been for at least a decade.) As with the US, since it is misusing its power, it needs to lose it. That process will be ugly, since a lot of those who are rising to challenge it are right wing assholes (because the left has abandoned sovereignty).

But you can’t fail pluralities of your population and stay stable without being a police state and holding yourself together with brutal force.

Those are the EU’s two most likely futures: brutal police state, or crackup.

Pity, but that’s what EUcrats, with their insistence on neoliberal rules and hatred of democracy have made damn near inevitable.
Title: 🌍 Theresa May Loses Power Over Brexit Endgame in War With Parliament
Post by: RE on December 05, 2018, 01:10:21 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-04/may-loses-power-over-brexit-endgame-in-war-with-u-k-parliament (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-04/may-loses-power-over-brexit-endgame-in-war-with-u-k-parliament)

politics
Theresa May Loses Power Over Brexit Endgame in War With Parliament
By Tim Ross
and Robert Hutton
December 4, 2018, 2:43 PM AKST

(https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/iXicZDhveWHE/v0/800x-1.jpg)

    PM suffers three defeats in key votes as MPs savage her deal
    Worst night for a U.K. prime minister in Commons for 40 years


U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May is locked in a power struggle with the British Parliament that looks set to determine the final shape of Brexit.

May lost three key votes on a day of drama in the House of Commons on Tuesday, highlighting the weakness of her position as she tries to ratify the deal she’s struck with the European Union.

Theresa May
Photographer: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg

The result is that Parliament now has the potential to decide on Britain’s "plan B" if -- as expected -- it rejects May’s divorce agreement with the EU in the biggest vote of all next week.

Read more - Confused About Brexit? Here’s a Guide to the Endgame: QuickTake

That’s not what the premier wanted. It raises the possibility that members of Parliament could seek to pursue a softer withdrawal -- including potentially staying in the bloc’s single market -- or even attempt to stop Brexit entirely. One option that could gather momentum over the weeks ahead is for a second referendum to allow the public to overturn the decision of the first.

“No longer must the will of Parliament -- reflecting the will of the people -- be diminished,” Tory lawmaker Dominic Grieve said after engineering one of May’s defeats Tuesday. “Parliament must now take back control and then give the final decision back to the public because, in the end, only the people can sort this out.”

Dominic Grieve
Photographer: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images
Long Odds

On Dec. 11, Parliament will vote finally on whether to accept or reject the 585-page withdrawal agreement that May and the EU reached in November. Few officials in May’s government believe they have much chance of winning, with some Tories predicting a heavy defeat.

If they’re right, the U.K. will be on course to crash out of the EU with no deal, an outcome which the Bank of England and the Treasury warned last week would cause immediate and severe damage to the British economy. According the BOE analysis, house prices would be hit by 30 percent and the pound would fall by as much as 25 percent after a no-deal Brexit.

The signs are not good for May’s plan. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the official opposition, which he leads, will oppose her deal next week. Critics from all sides of the House lined up to raise objections to the deal.

Jeremy Corbyn
Photographer: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg
Key Votes Lost

Even Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party, which has a formal role propping up May’s minority Tory government, isn’t backing her.

On a day of fast moving developments on Brexit:

    An advisory opinion from the EU’s top court indicated that the U.K. can unilaterally decide to reverse Brexit.
    May lost two House of Commons votes forcing her to publish secret government legal advice on her Brexit deal. After being found in contempt of Parliament -- an unprecedented charge against a government -- May promised she would release the legal file Wednesday. The pound fell as much as 0.5 percent against the dollar.
    The premier then lost a third big vote that could prove even more significant: it gives Parliament the power to shape the final Brexit settlement if, as expected, May fails to get her deal approved in the Commons in the Dec. 11 vote. The pound pared earlier losses.

Speaking shortly after the defeats, May put on a brave face, and appealed to her colleagues to back her “compromise” plan or risk betraying voters who chose to leave the EU in the referendum of 2016.
Central Figure

“I do not say that this deal is perfect -- it was never going to be,” May told the Commons. “We should not let the search for the perfect Brexit prevent a good Brexit that delivers for the British people.”

The government’s frustration focused on the central figure of Commons Speaker John Bercow. He made the ruling to allow Tuesday’s damaging votes to take place.

John Bercow
Photographer: Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg

According to people familiar with the matter, May’s cabinet ministers expressed their private anger at Bercow’s handling of Brexit during a meeting earlier Tuesday, with some of those present voicing harsh words about the Speaker. Bercow’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Thanks to May’s defeats Tuesday, it would be the Speaker again who would decide how Parliament can shape the plan B if the premier fails to get her overall Brexit deal through the Commons next week.
Title: 🌍 Brexit: Theresa May Goes Greek!
Post by: RE on December 06, 2018, 01:20:57 AM
https://www.globalresearch.ca/brexit-theresa-may-goes-greek/5661913 (https://www.globalresearch.ca/brexit-theresa-may-goes-greek/5661913)

Brexit: Theresa May Goes Greek!
Will Parliament Save the Kingdom?
By Brett Redmayne-Titley
Global Research, December 05, 2018
Region: Europe
Theme: History

(https://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/brexit2.jpg)
Regularly presidents, prime ministers, congresspersons and parliamentarians worldwide negate the democratic will of their nation’s voters by refusing to support legitimate election results. Strangely, their treasonous actions continue without serious reprisal or punishment by the voter. This emboldens them. The reality of votes cast and “democracy”past does not does bode well for the people of the United Kingdom, their future as a nation or their hopeful return to sovereignty once called, “Brexit.”

While the name has not changed; the definition certainly has.

It has become all too easy for democracy to be turned on its head and popular nationalist mandates, referenda and elections negated via instant political hypocrisy by leaders who show their true colours only after the public vote. So it has been within the two-and-a-half year unraveling of the UK Brexit referendum of 2016 that saw the subsequent negotiations now provide the Brexit voter with only three possibilities. All are a loss for Britain.

(https://aei.um.edu.my/images/librariesprovider12/data/grexit.jpg?sfvrsn=2)


One possibility, Brexit, is the result of Prime Minister, Theresa May’s negotiations- the “deal”- and currently exists in name only. Like the PM herself, the original concept of Brexit may soon lay in the dust of an upcoming UK Parliament floor vote in exactly the same manner as the failed attempt by the Greeks barely three years ago. One must remember that Greece on June 27, 2015 once voted to leave the EU as well and to renegotiate its EU existence as well in their own “Grexit” referendum. Thanks to their own set of underhanded and treasonous politicians, this did not go well for Greece. Looking at the Greek result, and understanding divisive UK Conservative Party control that exists in the hearts of PMs on both sides of the House of Commons, this new parliamentary vote is not looking good for Britain.

The Fleeting Illusion of Election Night Victory.

Similar to Greece, the current state of Brexit leaves it now before the parliament – not the voters- as a poor Hobson’s choice. In a week, this faux- Brexit as it is currently- the spawn of an utter, and possibly deliberate, failure in the negotiations- will be decided. Here in the UK blame can be laid at the feet of just one national politician, who, like Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras, first appeared to their desperate country dressed in the mantle of “Hope”and “Change.” Too quickly Tsipras was stripped bare, following  Syriza’s staggering 2015 national election victory and his subsequent tepid and inept attempt to renegotiate with Brussels about its destructive debt structure and leave the EU. His public disrobing then- like that of UK Prime Minister Theresa May via her “deal”– would thus reveal the life-long scars of their true national allegiance gnawed into their backs by the lust of their masters in Brussels.

On Dec. 11, 2018, the most historic vote in modern UK history will take place. At stake is Britain. Like Greece, the whispered coercions to UK Parliament members by the arrogant likes of European Commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker and President of the European Council Donald Tusk and their EU members have begun. These are the men who have already beaten back the democratic attempts of Greece and Catalonia while affecting recent populist socialist movements in national elections in Italy and in Spain.

The farcical justifications from UK politicians have begun anew, trying desperately to convince Britons that this failure of negotiations and political will is actually good for them, their futures and for the UK. These de rigueur protestations are growing louder day-by-day as the public is told again and again, “This is the best we can do.”

Is it?

(https://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Cameron-Brexit-400x306.jpg)
As must be remembered, David Cameron, a Tory, called for the national Brexit vote in order, not to free the UK from the clutches of EU unelected dominance, but instead to further certify and strengthen the Conservative Party’s ongoing destruction of the UK’s social services, privatization of national assets, privatization of Britain’s healthcare system (the NHS), and increased austerity for UK families. All this, while an increasingly impoverished Britain saw their parliament approve tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, benefit reductions for workers, increased retirement age, and more funding for US/Israeli inspired wars under diktat from Brussels via Washington.

Ironically, like a cluster bomb of white phosphorous over a Syrian village, Cameron’s Brexit vote blew up spectacularly in his face. Two decades of ongoing political submission to the EU by the Cons and “new”labour had them arrogantly misreading the minds of the UK voter.

So on that incredible night, it happened. Prime Minister David Cameron… the Cons… New Labour…The Lib- Dems… and even the UK Labour Party itself, were shocked to their core when the unthinkable nightmare that could never happen, did happen. Brexit had passed by popular vote!

David Cameron has been in hiding ever since.

After Brexit passed the same set of naïve UK voters assumed, strangely, that Brexit would be finalized in their national interest as advertised. This belief had failed to read Article 50– the provisos for leaving the EU- since, as much as it was mentioned, it was very rarely linked or referenced by a quotation in any of the media punditry. However, an article published four days after the night Brexit passed, “ A Brexit Lesson In Greek: Hopes and Votes Dashed on Parliamentary Floors,” provided anyone thus reading  Article 50, which is only eight pages long and double-spaced, the info to see clearly that this never before used EU by-law would be the only route to a UK exit. Further, Article 50 showed that Brussels would control the outcome of exit negotiations along with the other twenty-seven member nationsand that effectively Ms May and her Tories would be playing this game using the EU’s ball and rules, while going one-on-twenty-seven during the negotiations.

In the aftermath of Brexit, the real game began in earnest. The stakes: bigger than ever.

Forgotten are the hypocritical defections of political expediency that saw Boris Johnson and then Home Secretary Theresa May who were, until that very moment, both vociferously and very publicly against the intent of Brexit. Suddenly they claimed to be pro- Brexit in their quest to sleep in Cameron’s now vacant bed at No. 10 Downing Street. Boris strategically dropped out to hopefully see, Ms May, fall on her sword- a bit sooner.

So, the plucky PM was left to convince the UK public, daily, as the negotiations moved on, that “Brexit means Brexit!” A UK media that is as pro-EU as their PM chimed in to help her sell distortions of proffered success at the negotiating table, while the rise of “old” Labour, directed by Jeremy Corbyn, exposed her “soft” Brexit negotiations for the litany of failures that ultimately equaled the “deal” that was strangely still called “Brexit.”

Too few, however, examined this reality once these political Chameleons changed their colours just as soon as the very first results shockingly came in from Manchester in the wee hours of the morning on that seemingly hopeful night so long ago: June 23, 2016. For thus would begin a quiet, years-long defection of many more MPs than merely these two opportunists.

What the British people also failed to realize was that they and their Brexit victory would also be faced with additional adversaries beyond the EU members: those from within their own government. From newly appointed PM May to Boris Johnson, from the Conservative Party to the New Labour sellouts within the Labour Party and the Friends of Israel, the quiet internal political movement against Brexit began. As the House of Lords picked up their phones, too, for very quiet private chats within House of Commons, their minions in the British press began their work as well.

The Kingdom’s New Waterloo?

Two weeks ago, Ms May announced the details of her very much anticipated “deal.” This was the culmination of her “tough” negotiating style with the European Union negotiators on Brexit.

The definition of pro-Brexit supporters in Ms May’s Conservative Party has amounted to two possible choices in result: the “hard Brexit” which completely severs ties with the EU. This would separate British law from European law on topics ranging from trade to migration to product regulation. The other strategy, a “soft Brexit,” would maintain some of these ties without a complete separation from the EU’s common market.

The details that Ms May released on Wednesday are without a doubt a very soft Brexit- one that pays no homage to the original vote. This is because the deal has a provision that would still keep the UK in the EU Customs Union (the system setting common trade rules for all EU members) indefinitely. This is an outrageous inclusion and betrayal of a real Brexit by Ms May since this one topic was the most contentious in the debate during the ongoing negotiations because the Customs Union is the tie to the EU that the original Brexit vote specifically sought to terminate.

Worse, this deal would have the UK parliament forfeit its current direct rights to EU law and courts in the advent of problems within the Customs Union after the deal. However, Britains are supposed to believe the protestations, now, that the EU will promise to provide smooth sailing from now on.

Theresa May’s No-Brexit/Brexit Deal

(https://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ireland-brexit-400x209.jpg)
The issue of the “Back-stop” has Ireland furious as well. This is designed to avoid a crisis over Northern Ireland, which is part of the UK but wants to retain an open border with neighboring EU member Ireland. Imposing border controls between Ireland and Northern Ireland could threaten the Good Friday Agreement, the deal that ended serious violence in Northern Ireland in 1999. Unlike, Ms May, Ireland does not trust the EU. Due to the Back Stop and the Customs Union, the EU will be able to force its will on the UK, as France has already said it will do over fishing rights, but the UK will not be able to cry foul, because Ms May will have given up the nation’s EU commercial rights of any kind over grievances.

Ms May’s failure was so obvious that cabinet defections– new ones- began immediately including Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab, who said, he cannot in good conscience” support the deal. His was followedbyWork and Pensions secretary, Esther McVey, who added,

    “We have gone from no deal is better than a bad deal, to any deal is better than no deal.”

When, on Thursday, PM May went to Parliament to defend her deal, she was met by howls of laughter as she attempted to show confidence before the whole House of Commons when defending her indefensible deal. Next, Tory Jacob Rees-Mogg, who has grandstanded throughout as  an MP from the hard Brexit camp, submitted a letter of no confidence in May’s leadership — which may see her soon join David Cameron in hiding.

As it stands before parliament next Tues., the choice is a Hard Brexit “No” vote or “Yes” to Ms May’s excuses for this deal. This choice also amounts to whether she will see her hand the keys to No. 10 over to the nightmare of Brussels, Jeremy Corby.

Yes or no, both, at this minute, are being sold as the only two choices, with EU President Junker helping this coercion by insisting that there will be no new negotiations and “this deal is the ‘best deal for Britain,” and that,

    “This is the only deal possible. So, if the House (of Commons) says no, we would have no deal.”

Both sides predict gloom and doom for Britain, and here, they may both be correct. This all the more highlights the failure and the treason of Ms May’s deal.

The last option is a new Brexit referendum. After a successful “No” vote. “The prospects of a second referendum have advanced considerably,” wrote the ultra-conservative Financial Times’s Robert Shrimsley, who added.

    “Parliament will not stomach a no-deal exit. So the hardliners risk provoking the crisis that kills their dream, by smoothing the path to a second referendum.”

This, of course, ignores Junker’s threats against further negotiations and the very questionable outcome from the voters who are tired of elections and this Brexit but will likely, then, have a new leader in the Commons.

As it stands, only one possible outcome, the “Hard Brexit,” is in keeping with the spirit of the Brexit that was voted for long ago. But if the fate of Greece is followed by EU vengeance on the UK in retribution, the Brits will be hit hard, fast and often. Considering the Tories, not surprisingly, have no plan for this, the pound will likely dive and prices soar in Venezuela style fashion. The deal, however, is a clear victory for the EUP and a new referendum as no guaranteed result except to continue to fracture Britain with yet another vote.  All choices, if these are choices, are very bad for Britain.

The question that should be most important to all British citizens, the one that must draw their attention to this Brexit finale, is no longer: “Brexit: ‘Yes?’or ‘No?’” The question must now be:

           “How many UK politicians will, a week from Wednesday, sell their vote, their soul and their country to EU?”

Their vote will answer this. The British people are in the hands of their politicians; the same collective UK cadre that has, for the past two decades, routinely beholden the UK to an unelected EU central body of monetary, military and sovereign control.

What could go wrong?

The Eight Hundred Pound Corbyn in the Room.

(https://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Labour-Party-leader-Jeremy-Corbyn-297x300.jpg)
Throughout the negotiations, there has at all times been a specter looming in the back of the minds of the Brexit negotiators and particularly in the black souls of Junker and Tusk. Arguably there is a much bigger reason for the failed Brexit negotiations and the final desperate measures of Ms May and her ilk to pass their “deal.” This reason, a voice of reason long discounted like the UK people themselves, now stands larger than ever. One diminutive little man. He stands for what they do not. This politician is pro-UK, pro-worker, pro-Labour, pro- NHS, pro-union, and pro- Palestine. He is also anti-privatization, anti- EU, anti-war, anti-nuclear war, anti-global warming. Worse, he is a devote socialist and a Jew…  a Jew who publicly holds Israel accountable for its crimes!

Yes. Behind all that has gone on with destroying Brexit, there is another nightmare, one that is the Kryptonite that Brussels is terrified of to its marrow. His name is Jeremy Corbyn.

However, Brussels is not scared of just the man himself nor his ideals and sincerity to his cause. No. What EU and EUP politicians, those that support all things Zionist, fear the most is his leadership: Unapologetic, populist, socialist, leadership. That is rising.

Corbyn is what the United Kingdom once was fifty years ago. During that too-long forgotten time, the workers and their vote forced political will in favour of their country and their families. Politicians feared their vote and Britain slowly reversed the social degradation that was the legacy of the industrial revolution and the engines of capitalism and capitalists run amuck. Corbyn is, and always has been, Old Labour; not the bastardized form that slowly infected parliament under the moniker of “New”Labour over the past twenty years. What hucksters like Tony Blair and the Labour Party elite were, in fact, offering as “new” was really just a quasi Conservative Party light platform that slowly morphed over the years into what the Conservative Party had once been itself under Thatcher and John Major. This left the British voter with the choices of only the Tories or the Conservative Party subsets such as the ineffective Lib-Dems, plus a few non-influential nationalist parties like DUP in Ireland and Plaid Cymru in Wales.

Hence, election-after-election, voters continued to see their country gutted by virtue of their own vote due to a lack of true choice or opposition candidates. The ongoing results were privatization, social service cuts, and imposed austerity on the UK majority that saw UK poverty levels skyrocket, as shown by last week’ scathing UN report. Instead, Britain became a haven for the wealthy and their massive tax dodging schemes- as shown by the Panama Papers- as poverty increased under more and more White Hall approved austerity. All pro- EU factions of all UK parties within the Parliament, however, were universal in their excuses and false justifications for their ongoing gutting of what remained of British socialism… election-after-election.

Except one.

Corbyn is real Labour. He is an unabashed supporter of, and a throwback to, a time when the UK was an economic powerhouse, but also had enough for everyone- by law! By all accounts and his consistent thirty-five-year track record as an MP, he is genuine. Minimized by his Labour colleagues and the UK press during decades of Labour Party decline, he has now emerged as the voice of reason, a champion of the worker, formidable in debate with his Tory adversaries and unflappable under the torrent of daily media and cross-bench White Hall criticism.

Few remember, as they should, that Corbyn, as leader of the Labour Party, has already survived a very contentious attempt by his own party members and the Friends of Israel to oust him as the leader. His success against this coup strongly shows that he has very powerful and connected political interests behind him: those which have spearheaded his ascent and believe in socialist reforms. They and Corbyn understand the true state and direction of current Britain; about this Brexit deal and about Ms May’s faux negotiations and her treason. They don’t like any of it.

To the troika (EU Commission, EU Central Bank and IMF) Corbyn is a much bigger threat than the failed attempts at sovereignty in Catalonia, Italy, Spain, Greece or Britain. Corbyn may prove to be- if he becomes PM- real leadership: leadership worth following. His sincere path to a return to an old-time Labour platform that returns control to the UK worker rather than elite and the powerful business interests is anathema to the capitalist forces ruling the EU. His consistent leadership reminds his growing group of followers, both in Britain and worldwide, of the good old days when the people did matter to their government and when there was enough for everyone- by law! He is a very dangerous man; for his is a message, not just for the UK but one being heard as a rallying cry in many capitalist dominated countries worldwide.

If Corbyn comes to power, his will- finally– be the first successful attempt at the return to a socialist Britain; the first non- military defeat for the EU and Capitalist forces worldwide. If he becomes PM, which seems increasingly likely, Corbyn’s example will be closely followed by other socialist national leaders in their own countries- sincerely or not (see: Bernie Sanders) –  where the 1% have all the wealth, all the services and all the control over an increasingly impoverished world. Anti-populist forces like the EU have so far globally stopped all forms of democratic expression including those elections that were –temporarily – successful, such as Syria, Yemen, Egypt, Honduras, and Ukraine. So, Brexit and Corbyn must be defeated.

While Brexit might be the unintended spark for a desperate world to watch glow, it is Corbyn who holds in his palm a very large box of matches.

The Mathematics of Treason: Tithing for Politicians.

PM May will not be going quietly. With her Prime Minister-ship, Brexit, EU control over the UK, Tory Control over parliament, and certification of the national rise of socialism at stake, her job is to cajole and lie-again- to an election weary Britain, one that has already suffered the distortions of the Scottish independence referendum (SNP), the ill-fated Brexit referendum, and then a national election- the one that saw May and her Cons club cling to power only by buying Irish DUP support for UK 1.5 Billion pounds. All this in thirty-three months.

The cycle has begun anew.

This time the stakes could not be higher. Ms May has already shown her desperation by offering bribes in the form of peerages to PM’s willing to vacate their current public anti-deal opposition. This week, Downing Street announced that John Hayes, a former MP and Transport Minister, who proclaims to be a staunch Euro-sceptic, would suddenly become Sir John in a rare honor. Earlier this week furious young Tory MPs claimed that now older Euro-sceptics had refused to put in the No Confidence letters against Theresa May because they were hoping for a peerage of their own Thus, Best for Britain champion Virendra Sharma said,

    “It seems like Downing Street will do anything to get their bad Brexit deal through.”

But it is Prime Minister Theresa May’s words that Britons should take notice of, particularly two all revealing sentences, that together show the strange mind and divisive, if not delusional, rational used to pass this bad deal. Beyond the oft-debunked claim by the PM that,  “Brexit is Brexit,” she would now, this week, have the MPs and the British public believe that:

    “This is the best deal we could get,” and, “We have to follow the will of the voter and pass [this] Brexit.”

The arrogance of these two statements is as incongruent as it is revealing.

Here, Ms. May would actually have the original Brexit voter believe that she has done such a good job negotiating this deal that her current Brexit- which it is not – must now be passed by parliament in order to honor the will of the Brexit voter- which it does not: the same voters that  would never have voted for Brexit in the form she has turned it into. Such is the delusion and arrogance of Ms May.

Ridiculous?  Maybe not.

Ms May must rely on getting her votes this time from parliament, not the people.  She needs 326 votes. Here lies the real threat to Britain.

There are 650 seats in House of Common so 326 is the magic majority. In terms of purported party loyalty, the Cons sit with 315 seats and an only coalition majority. But Labour’s opposition and 257 seats are fractured at best between true labour and faux labour members. The Scottish National Party is third with 35 followed by the Liberal-Democrats with 9. The remainder of 31 seats is split between nationalist parties like Ian Pasley’s Irish DUP, (10 seats) which have come out against the deal publicly, but has already shown it can be bought for the right price (1.5 Billion pounds), as in the last election of 2016.

The UK public must fear the Cons continued allegiance to Brussels. Yes, many have expressed outrage and insisted that they will not vote for this deal. However, with the Cons not having yet been successfully punished at the polls, it is surely a matter of time before the first defector- after a very lengthy and public set of excuses and self-serving rationale- joins the many other existing Tory yes votes. When that happens the floodgates will open and the defections will pour in for their just rewards to come. So, it is safe to assume that the Cons numbers will swell in support by the time of next Wednesday’s vote.

While Corbyn tries to hold ranks in order to achieve the Trifecta of defeating the deal, Ms May’s political future and becoming PM in one blow, there is, however, no chance of party unity on this vote. Like the Cons, it is just a matter of time and the next few days before the first public Labour defections and excuses- likely the same ones- “force” that slippery slope towards UK sovereignty to get suddenly steeper.

It is not likely that the minor parties will vote for the deal as they are ultra-nationalist, such as Plaid Cymru, since a ”yes” vote will see their platforms as utter hypocrisy and therefore doomed. If PM May and here supporters win, it will be the Conservative Party that will be convicted of the crime.

Ms May and the EU can start the count with a firm 90 seats, however. When it comes to UK parliamentary hypocrisy, the leader by far is the self-proclaimed Friends of Israel who are indeed just that. While voting for all things Israel and demonizing all reasonable and factual discussion of Britain’s burgeoning war machine or Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza so, they really hate Corbyn. It is fair to say that most will do as they are told and sell out Britain to central control and Zionist EU interests.

At this juncture, with a final parliamentary vote only days away, it should behoove the British voter to also look more closely at the failed attempt by Greece to leave the EU and the politicians then, who, in a matter of weeks, also turned tail on their country to also answer a call from Brussels.  Brexit, as it stands now before Parliament, is a terrible deal:  a deal that is worse than staying in the EU and a deal that will certainly punish the UK- as was the final result in Greece- for its attempt at sovereignty and populist democratic will. For all this, just like in Greece, is anathema to Brussels and just like in Greece the evil of Brussels does not just stop resistance; it puts it down and then punishes such indiscretions economically and brutally afterwards. Such it is today in Greece, as Alex Tsipras, PM in name only, goes hat in hand selling his countries airports, beaches, islands  and infrastructure for pennies on the Euro merely to service existing loans from Brussels in order to beg for more.

Greece was not a case study in leadership. It was a case study in political treason. Will it be repeated this coming Tuesday!

Regardless of the eventual total, what should be a very easy defeat for this treasonous “deal” being sold as a Brexit fait accompli, like Greece, the final tally may well be a disastrous defeat for Britain. It is likely that all of the UK will be following the final total of the vote. However, the total they should be counting is that of those MPs that turn on them and their country in the lead-up to Tuesday. For, if this deal is passed, it is these faces who must be remembered as the men and women who decided to thumb their nose at the British people and their country. And this they will surely do unless public pressure and outrage- which has not shown itself in decades- is made obvious to them all. Now.

Count Down to Tuesday…

The UK’s Telegraph reports 100 Tory MPs have now indicated they will vote the deal down in Parliament. But will they… after the days to come?

After Sunday’s EU unanimous vote, Ms May strangely offered to debate her deal for the first time, with Jeremy Corbyn. However, at the same time as the whole of Britain pricked-up their ears at this exciting news, Ms May backed out. Likely because she knows every one of her excuses will be cannon fodder for the Labour leader- and his rise in power.

The Express Newspaper polled3154 British adults about their opinion on the latest Brexit developments and no one is happy. Four in ten (42 per cent) of Britons oppose the deal, whilst only 19 per cent are in favor of it.

The remaining 39 per cent answered, “don’t know”. Here, the UK media has done its job via disinformation, thus giving the confidence to those PMs who do vote for the deal, that all will eventually be forgotten, regardless, by the next election.

Three of the many events from recent days should tell the UK voter just how important a real Brexit, one that does extricate Britain from EU control, really is and illustrate how much Brussels is worried about the outcome of this vote.

One: EU Parliament passed Theresa May’s deal in 38 minutes.

Nothing spells winning at the negotiating table like enthusiasm from only one side and this was the message on Sunday. With the last sticking point being the centuries-long contention between Spain and the UK regarding Gibraltar- one so explosive that the UK keeps a large military presence there today- PM May rolled over quickly on that too, leading Conservative MP, Andrew Bridgen to say,

    “It appears that there is no-one the prime minister will not betray to achieve her sell-out deal.”

It is safe to that Junker, Tusk and their twenty-seven EU brethren members understood the UK Prime Minister’s negotiating style in exactly the same way.

38 minutes?  Guess who won these negotiations?

Two: Italy.

Down south, this past week in Italy the newly elected Italian government, led by populist Prime Minister, Giuseppe Conte, and ethno-centrist Interior Minister Matteo Salvini, released their proposed annual national budget. Within twenty-four hours, the EU, Tusk and Junker stated clearly that they were not satisfied with Italy’s sovereign decision on how to spend its own national coffers. The EU demanded that Italy revise the budget to suit their unelected whims.

Three: Greece.

Britains  should consider this arbitrary bullying of Italy and of the UK. Then they should consider the sad EU imposed current condition of Greece. Next, they might dwell on the failed outcomes of previous elections within the nearby EU nations, and how similar movements were defeated in their nation as well. Last, they must pay closest of attention to what is actually in the souls of their own politicians and what they truly support.

If not these examples, then the UK citizens would do well to look at the state of subjugation, austerity and further poverty in all these countries and their own: the same countries who also saw, so recently, their hopes so quickly destroyed- like Brexit– by the false-flag allegiance of their elected politicians.

Then, Britons can collectively bend over-like their politicians- and begin to get used to taking it… themselves!

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Brett Redmayne-Titley has published over 150 in-depth articles over the past seven years for news agencies worldwide. Many have been translated. On-scene reporting from important current events has been an emphasis that has led to multi-part exposes on such topics as the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, NATO summit, KXL Pipeline, Porter Ranch Methane blow-out and many more. He can be reached at: live-on-scene@gmx.com. Prior articles can be viewed at his archive: www.watchingromeburn.uk (http://www.watchingromeburn.uk). He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Title: 🌍 Theresa May halts Brexit deal vote to avoid defeat, causing Chaos
Post by: RE on December 11, 2018, 12:16:44 AM
https://www.vox.com/2018/12/10/18134242/theresa-may-brexit-deal-postpone-vote (https://www.vox.com/2018/12/10/18134242/theresa-may-brexit-deal-postpone-vote)

Theresa May halts Brexit deal vote to avoid defeat, throwing British politics into chaos
May’s decision to postpone a vote on her deal adds even more uncertainty to the future of Brexit.
By Jen Kirbyjen.kirby@vox.com Dec 10, 2018, 2:20pm EST

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/POlSyCqe0t4ija1hQpdKw3w3hfE=/0x0:4744x3163/920x613/filters:focal(2421x681:3179x1439)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/62657450/1080368958.jpg.1544467840.jpg)
Prime Minister Theresa May on December 10, 2018, after she announced that she would delay the vote on her Brexit deal. Photo by Jack Taylor/Getty Images

British Prime Minister Theresa May is postponing the vote on her Brexit deal, a last-minute move to avoid almost certain defeat in the UK Parliament on Tuesday.

May’s decision confirmed what many had already predicted: that not only does she lack the votes to pass her agreement that outlines Britain’s divorce from the European Union, but that it would have gone down with a humiliating margin, potentially putting her government in jeopardy.

“If we went ahead and held the vote tomorrow, the deal would be defeated by a significant margin,” May told Parliament on Monday. “We will therefore defer the vote scheduled for tomorrow and not proceed to divide the house at this time.”

May is ostensibly pushing the vote to buy more time to win support, though where that support could come from is stubbornly unclear. Her deal is deeply unpopular with just about everyone — from the hard Brexiteers who want a clean split with Europe to the pro-Remain camp who want to maintain close ties to the EU.

And there’s only so much she can delay. The Brexit deadline is March 29, 2019, and the closer the UK gets to that date without a deal, the more likely the possibility of a no-deal Brexit, where the UK leaves the bloc without any contingency plans.

Members of Parliament have proposed other solutions — holding another referendum to let the British people decide Brexit, or negotiating an even softer Brexit — but there’s no political consensus behind any one of those remedies right now.

This vote postponement means Britain will remain in Brexit limbo for just a little bit longer — with really no idea of what comes next. Or as one UK political editor put it: “Dear lord above what a fucking shambles.”
May postponed the vote. What is going on?

May’s Brexit deal was headed for defeat on December 11, but it started to become increasingly obvious that the vote would be a massive loss and prove hugely embarrassing for May. We’re talking triple digits, in a 650-member Parliament.

So just one day before the vote, May pulled the deal — though there are still some questions on whether she can do this.

Opposition has hardened against the withdrawal agreement. The hard Brexiteers — those who want a clean break from the EU — see this document as potentially trapping the UK in a dependent relationship with the bloc indefinitely. Those who are pro-Europe, or ultimately want to Remain, view the deal as weakening the UK and leaving it in a much worse position economically and politically.

At issue is part of the Brexit deal referred to as the “Irish backstop,” which is basically an insurance policy to guarantee that the border between Northern Ireland (which is part of the UK) and the Republic of Ireland (part of the EU) remains open as the UK and EU try to negotiate their future relationship.

May’s deal seeks to preserve this open border through a complicated arrangement whereby the UK remains part of the EU customs union and Northern Ireland joins in some elements of the single market, which refers to the four fundamental freedoms of the EU: free movement of people, services, capital, and goods. The UK can’t unilaterally pull out of this setup, and opponents see this as potentially hitching the UK to the EU without an end date.

The government’s own legal advice, which May’s government was forced to publish after a historic contempt vote last week, confirmed those fears by warning that the UK could end up stuck in “protracted and repeated rounds of negotiations” for years.

May, addressing Parliament on Monday, made clear that any withdrawal agreement required protections for the Irish border. She said she would take the concerns of the UK MPs to EU leaders this week, ahead of an already scheduled summit meeting in Brussels with EU leaders on Thursday and Friday. But she reiterated that any deal had to include a backstop, and was very vague on her strategy.

“I spoke to a number of EU leaders over the weekend, and in advance of the European council I will go to see my counterparts in other member states and the leadership of the council and the commission,” May told Parliament in her Monday remarks. “I will discuss with them the clear concerns that this House [of Commons] has expressed.”

It’s doubtful the EU will give concessions on the backstop. It took more than a year of tortured negotiations to reach this compromise deal. The EU has repeatedly said it’s this deal or no deal at all — whether by breaking up without an agreement or canceling Brexit altogether. On the Irish border, they’ve also been firm: A backstop must be in place in any withdrawal agreement to prevent a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Even if May can eke out a few concessions from the Europeans, they will be minor. The fundamentals of the agreement won’t change — which means the deal’s defeat has been delayed but probably not averted.
May delays vote as Brexit deadline looms

May defended her decision to postpone the vote, though she didn’t really offer a great solution for this mess. She repeated arguments she’s made before: She’s entrusted to make a Brexit deal that works for the UK, and that even though she personally wanted to Remain, it is her “duty is to honor the result of that vote.”

It’s this deal or no deal, she said, and she reiterated her stance that other options, such as a second referendum, would divide the country even further.

When MPs will vote on the Brexit deal still isn’t clear, and there are legal questions over how late a vote can be held ahead of the March 29, 2019, Brexit deadline. The latest guess is for sometime after Christmas, possibly in January, but no date has been scheduled so far.

This is important for a number of reasons. For one, the UK Parliament voted last week to give itself a meaningful say on a Brexit “plan B” if May’s deal failed. If May forces the vote into January or later, that will limit the time a (very divided) Parliament can even come up with or implement a fallback plan.

This again raises the specter of a no-deal Brexit, which would be bad for the EU but potentially catastrophic for the UK. The UK’s membership in the EU will expire, deal or no deal: 3 million EU citizens living in the UK and 1 million Britons living in other EU countries would lose all automatic rights and protections overnight. Air travel in the UK would grind to an immediate halt. British supermarkets could run out of food. And that’s just a few of the dramatic outcomes.

May, in her address to Parliament, said she was stepping up no-deal contingency planning, according to the Guardian, even as she warned that such a scenario would be very, very bad.

“If you want to leave without a deal, be upfront that in the short term, this would cause significant economic damage to parts of our country who can least afford to bear the burden,” she said.
What happens next? Honest answer: No one knows.

In November, after May and the EU agreed to the Brexit deal, Anand Menon, director of an independent Brexit research institute called UK in a Changing Europe, told me that British politics “faced a number of very implausible outcomes.”

“We might have an election. We might have a referendum. We might have no deal. The prime minister’s deal might be accepted,” he said. “They’re all massively implausible, okay? But what we know is that one of them is going to happen.”

A Brexit-deal vote delay wasn’t on his list then, but his thesis still stands: Anything can happen, and no one really knows what that might be.

Here is what we do know: Parliament likely won’t be voting on the Brexit deal Tuesday. It seems almost impossible that the EU will reopen negotiations with the UK. As one expert told me, the EU might finesse some language, but the substance of the withdrawal agreement isn’t changing.

The UK remains seriously split over what to do next. Some are calling for a second referendum — another “people’s vote” to decide the future of Brexit. It’s still not clear what such a referendum would look like, though, or what it would ask: a vote on May’s Brexit deal? A Leave or Remain do-over vote?

Proponents of a second referendum believe that enough voters will have witnessed the Brexit mess and will opt to Remain on a second try. Their case has been bolstered by a Monday decision by the European Court of Justice that said the UK could unilaterally revoke Article 50 — the mechanism of the EU treaty that the UK used to withdraw from the bloc — and basically cancel Brexit altogether, without the approval of the other 27 EU member states and as long as it remained consistent with UK laws.

Other MPs are arguing to just go back and argue for a softer Brexit — what you’ll hear referred to as the Norway-style deal — which means the UK would remain a member of the single market. This, however, won’t fly with the hard Brexiteers, as they’d have to follow all the EU rules, including accepting the free movement of people.

Then there’s May’s future as prime minister. Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the opposition Labour Party, has said May’s government is in “disarray” and she should step aside and call general elections. That could put Labour in power, though it’s not clear the party has a real solution to Brexit that the EU would accept.

Other opposition parties, including the Scottish National Party (SNP), are pushing Corbyn to move on a no-confidence vote in Parliament, which could remove May from power and potentially trigger general elections. For a no-confidence vote in Parliament to succeed, Conservatives or members of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), the 10 members of the Northern Ireland party that prop up May’s minority government, would have to join the opposition.

A number of Conservatives and the DUP may not support May’s deal, but they probably hate the possibility of a Corbyn prime ministership even more.

May could also resign, though her decision to postpone the vote seems to be a signal that she’s not quite ready to give up power.

As Parliament is tearing itself apart, the public is marching in the streets both for and against Brexit and the British pound is plummeting. Britain is no closer to figuring out Brexit, with just 109 days to go.
Title: 🌍 Brexit bust-up, things get heated in the studio - BBC Newsnight
Post by: RE on December 12, 2018, 02:14:36 AM
Another good on-camera fight from across the pond!

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/RhUOnkb230w
Title: 🌍 Theresa May Faces No-Confidence Vote Wednesday Over Brexit Anger
Post by: RE on December 12, 2018, 08:55:47 AM
If she loses this vote, all hell will break loose in the markets.

RE

Europe
Theresa May Faces No-Confidence Vote Wednesday Over Brexit Anger
3:53

    Download

December 12, 20186:59 AM ET
Bill Chappell

(https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2018/12/12/rtx6i86e_wide-2f9eff1525a3914c11fbd80ac2dc81c7c86577aa-s800-c85.jpg)
Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May faces a vote on her leadership Wednesday, as debate rages over how the U.K. should exit the European Union. She spoke about the vote to the media outside No. 10 Downing St. in London.
Toby Melville/Reuters

U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May is fighting to keep her job as members of her Conservative Party seek to oust her in a no-confidence vote Wednesday. May has been unable to shore up support for the Brexit deal she negotiated with the European Union.

"I will contest that vote with everything I've got," May said outside of No. 10 Downing St. The vote on her leadership that will take place from 6 to 8 p.m. local time (1 to 3 p.m. ET).

"If she wins, she can serve for another year without another challenge from her party," NPR's Frank Langfitt reports from London. "If she loses, this triggers a leadership contest within the Conservative Party. The winner of that contest would not immediately become prime minister, and there could be heavy pressure to call a general election."

If May loses her leadership post, it could trigger a "no-deal" exit when the U.K. leaves the EU on March 29, meaning the country would have few formal trading mechanisms in place to interact with the bloc it has belonged to for decades.
Sign Up For The NPR Daily Newsletter

Catch up on the latest headlines and unique NPR stories, sent every weekday.
E-mail address

By subscribing, you agree to NPR's terms of use and privacy policy.

With all eyes now on the U.K. Parliament, there is speculation over what the outcome might bring. You can watch the proceedings in the House of Commons online.

"Traditionally, winning a no-confidence vote by a small margin might force a Conservative leader to step down anyway," Langfitt reports, "but the United Kingdom is facing its biggest political crisis in decades, and past traditions seem to no longer apply."

To survive as prime minister, May must get the votes of 158 members of Parliament. According to the BBC, 174 lawmakers from her party "have publicly said they will vote for her, with 34 publicly against."

If May loses, the Conservatives would then hold a leadership election to select her replacement. Calling that an extra burden during a time of national crisis, Conservative Member of Parliament Ken Clarke asked May in the House of Commons on Wednesday, "Can my right honorable friend think of anything more unhelpful, irrelevant and irresponsible than for the Conservative Party to embark on weeks of a Conservative leadership election?"

May replied that a new election would likely extend well into January, meaning that "the new leader — were a new leader to come in — that one of the first things they would have to do would be to either extend Article 50 or rescind Article 50, and that would mean either delaying or stopping Brexit."

Article 50 is the exit clause in the EU's constitutional rules; it's the law May invoked in March 2017, setting up this March's Brexit deadline.

The call for a vote on May's political fate comes two days after she delayed a crucial vote on the Brexit deal she negotiated with the EU, acknowledging that the draft agreement had no chance of being approved in Parliament.
Buffeted By Brexit Woes, Theresa May Embarks On Whirlwind European Tour
Europe
Buffeted By Brexit Woes, Theresa May Embarks On Whirlwind European Tour

May left Britain on Tuesday to meet with European leaders, hoping to get help in changing the deal enough to win over the doubters back home. But she returned home empty-handed — and she was briefly trapped in her own car as German Chancellor Angela Merkel awaited her. With the U.K.'s leader unable to get out of a German sedan with an apparently sticky door, the moment was called both awkward and symbolic of her struggles in office.

The process of reaching a final Brexit deal has foundered, in large part, on the complicated and essential question of how the U.K. and EU will treat Northern Ireland (part of the U.K.) and the Republic of Ireland (an EU member) short of enforcing a hard border.

To trigger Wednesday's vote, Conservatives who are unhappy with the way May has managed Brexit submitted 48 no-confidence letters to the chairman of the 1922 Committee, a group that represents the Conservatives' rank-and-file membership.

Still, George Parker, political editor for the Financial Times, recently told NPR that the prime minister seems to be more popular than her Brexit deal:

"She's dogged. She's determined. She's got a real sense of duty. And it's interesting that although the Brexit deal she's negotiated seems to upset just about everyone, she herself has actually gone up in the public estimation over the last few weeks. I think people see her standing there hour after hour in the bear pit at the House of Commons being attacked by people on her own side — mainly men, it has to be said. And I think it — her sort of doggedness actually resonates with people.

"So although she's often seen as rather an unimaginative politician and just really blundering her way through this Brexit morass, in the end, people quite respect the fact that she's still there and she's still standing."

Both May and her political opponents have had an eye on the clock as the March 29 deadline approaches, with each side seeking to put pressure on the other to make concessions. And in the background, there has been a recognition that the Brexit process will not be a tidy and painless process, no matter who's in charge.

When asked Tuesday about a possible no-confidence vote, Parker said, "it will solve nothing. It will be an act of huge and damaging self-indulgence, I think."
Title: Re: 🌍 Brexit bust-up, things get heated in the studio - BBC Newsnight
Post by: Surly1 on December 12, 2018, 09:18:55 AM
Another good on-camera fight from across the pond!

RE
http://www.youtube.com/v/RhUOnkb230w

"Alistair, will you shut the fuck up and let me finish a sentence?"

Or words to that effect from Jenni.

Not so much of a "good on camera fight" as yet another example of a boorish man talking over a woman trying to make a point, just like we see here all the time. Just garden variety rudeness. And like Orange Jesus tried to do yesterday with his "Surprise! Televise!" meeting yesterday at the WH.

Pelosi handed him his orange ass, and Trumpi gave Nancy and Chuck an early Xmas gift by claiming and owning the pending government shutdown.
Title: 🌍 Theresa May, Facing the End, Makes a Last-Ditch Appeal for Moderation
Post by: RE on December 12, 2018, 10:28:17 AM
A "No Deal" Brexit would be VERY entertaining!  :icon_mrgreen:

http://www.youtube.com/v/hmZFHjQfx-o

RE

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/12/world/europe/theresa-may-no-confidence-brexit.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/12/world/europe/theresa-may-no-confidence-brexit.html)

Theresa May, Facing the End, Makes a Last-Ditch Appeal for Moderation
Video

Lawmakers Challenge Theresa May Ahead Of No Confidence Vote
By Reuters
Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain is fighting for her political life after a right-wing faction in her party triggered a no confidence vote. She then faced tough questions and criticisms from other lawmakers in Parliament.Published OnDec. 12, 2018CreditCreditBen Stansall/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

By Ellen Barry

    Dec. 12, 2018

LONDON — It was almost a relief, on Wednesday, to see Theresa May start yelling.

The British prime minister’s voice was hoarse and her face was pale, and who could blame her? That morning, a right-wing faction in her own party had triggered a no-confidence vote that would take place in the evening, so Mrs. May was possibly hours away from the end of her premiership. Her two years of negotiations on exiting the European Union were a hair’s breadth from ending in a meltdown.

At the weekly Question Time in Parliament, she leaned over the podium toward opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn and spat out her disdain for him. She was seething.

“All he wants to do is create chaos in our economy, division in our society and damage to our economy,” she said, hollering to be heard over the cheers from her backbenchers. And Mr. Corbyn raged right back, accusing Mrs. May of leading her fractured country into a deepening, increasingly risky political crisis.

“Many people in this country find planning ahead impossible,” he yelled, “because all they see is chaos at the heart of this government!”

For many months, Mrs. May had maintained a robotic calm about the unraveling of her Brexit negotiation, pretending not to see that it was speeding toward a brick wall.

That pretense came to an end this week, when she abruptly canceled a Parliamentary vote on her European Union withdrawal agreement rather than suffer a humiliating defeat. Now, not only was she facing a no-confidence vote, but enemies in her own party were so confident that they had set up a headquarters they called “The Kill Zone.”

Help us break the next big story.
Subscribe to The Times

In the few hours that remained to save her job, Mrs. May had one argument to put forward in her own defense: Changing leaders so close to the March 29 deadline for withdrawal from the European Union, she argued, could open the door to something worse, a Labour government or a reversal of Brexit. Further infighting between Conservatives, will “only create more division, just as we should be standing together to serve our country,” she argued.

“The British people want us to get on with it,” she said, not for the first time. “The Conservatives must not be a single-issue party. We are a party of the whole nation. Moderate, pragmatic, mainstream.”

Moderation has been Mrs. May’s selling point the whole time. In the chaotic wake of the 2016 referendum, she offered herself to the country as a pair of “safe hands,” the epitome of old-fashioned, small-c conservatism in a time of turmoil. She had devoted much of her life to the Conservative Party, stuffing envelopes for party events as a teenager and meeting her husband at a dance for Tory undergraduates.
Editors’ Picks
Lean In’s Sheryl Sandberg Problem
OpinionIn Praise of Mediocrity
Tonya Harding Would Like Her Apology Now

But upon taking power, she seemed perhaps a bit too old-fashioned for her country. The Conservative Party was no longer moderate, embracing an anti-European agenda that had been dismissed for 20 years as too radical. Mrs. May was reflexively secretive about the progress of negotiations. She tried hard to win over Conservative hard-liners, but made little effort to win allies among Remainers and centrists.

On Wednesday, facing her possible removal, Mrs. May did not even try to invoke loyalty, instead casting herself as the least-bad option.

“Delivering the Brexit people voted for, building a country that works for everyone,” she said. “I have devoted myself unsparingly to these tasks ever since I became prime minister. And I stand ready to finish the job.”

The debate with Mr. Corbyn, just hours before her party members were scheduled to vote on her future, revealed a flash of something not seen from Mrs. May in a long time.

“She has some fight left in her,” said Katie Perrior, who served briefly as Mrs. May’s director of communications when she became prime minister. “She didn’t looked scared or worried, she looked in control. Whenever her back’s against the wall politically, she comes out fighting.”

Then it was only a matter of numbers. Mrs. May needs the support of 158 of her party members to survive the evening no-confidence vote, and dozens of Tories took to Twitter to declare themselves on one side or the other.
Sign up for The Interpreter

Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

    I am backing @theresa_may tonight. Being PM most difficult job imaginable right now and the last thing the country needs is a damaging and long leadership contest. Brexit was never going to be easy but she is the best person to make sure we actually leave the EU on March 29
    — Jeremy Hunt (@Jeremy_Hunt) December 12, 2018

Others, like Henry Smith, promised to vote against her.

    Being very busy doesn’t necessarily mean an individual is being productive. I admire Theresa May’s stamina but as Conservative Leader and Prime Minister she’s seen Brexit as a problem to be mitigated not a global opportunity. Therefore, regrettably, I have lost confidence in her.
    — Henry Smith MP 🇬🇧 (@HenrySmithUK) December 12, 2018

Arch-Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg declared himself in Latin, remarking, “Hail and farewell,” a phrase used by the Latin poet Catullus in a eulogy for his brother.

    Ave atque vale. https://t.co/NiiCLlxztH (https://t.co/NiiCLlxztH)
    — Jacob Rees-Mogg (@Jacob_Rees_Mogg) December 12, 2018

At Question Time, noisy applause followed a remark by Kenneth Clarke, a Conservative who had argued passionately to remain in the European Union.

“At a time of grave national crisis on an issue which we all agree has huge importance to future generations, can my right honorable friend think of anything more unhelpful, irrelevant and irresponsible than for the Conservative Party to embark on weeks of a conservative leadership election?” he asked Mrs. May.

Mrs. May, with apparent relief, agreed.
Title: 🌍 Brexit latest: I'm confused... what just happened?
Post by: RE on December 15, 2018, 06:39:41 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46551986 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46551986)

Brexit latest: I'm confused... what just happened?
By Rob Watson UK political correspondent, BBC World Affairs Unit

(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_154456491410104.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=1&w=525)

    15 December 2018

    Brexit

Media captionBrexit battles: How May lived to fight another day

It's been an eventful week in UK politics, to put it mildly.

Prime Minister Theresa May began the week hoping to push through her vision for Brexit. Days later, she survived a coup from within her own Conservative party.

But how did this happen? What does it mean? And what comes next?

Politics is all about numbers and dates.

This week, 650 members of the UK parliament were supposed to vote on the deal Theresa May struck with EU members on how exactly the UK should leave the EU.

Instead, 317 Conservatives had a vote of no confidence in her leadership. She won, but by only 200 votes to 117, leaving her weakened and her party more divided than ever.

What's next?

The government must hold a vote on Mrs May's deal by 21 January or come up with another plan. But with little chance of her winning such a vote and no sign of a Plan B, this looks like a profound political crisis.
How significant was this week?

With little more than 100 days to go there's still no certainty as to how, or even if, the UK will leave the European Union.

This week, Theresa May delayed a parliamentary vote on her deal with the EU, knowing she would lose. She narrowly survived a vote of no confidence in her leadership and then failed to win major concessions from fellow European leaders after a desperate plea for help.

All this leaves the UK in a profound political crisis with no end to it in sight.
How did this come about?

As British politics appeared to descend into chaos this week, one senior Conservative MP remarked that Brexit had sparked nothing short of a revolution that had engulfed both the country's major parties.

Whether that's precisely the right word or not, it's clear this "revolution" or current crisis was indeed sparked on 23 June 2016 when the majority of voters voted for something - in Brexit - many elected British politicians then and now think is a catastrophic mistake.

    Brexit: A really simple guide
    Runners and riders: Who could replace Theresa May?

Two and half years on, as Mrs May is finding to her cost, there's still no consensus among those politicians as to what to do about the result of that referendum. It's as simple but as seismic as that.
What was all that nonsense with the mace?

This chaotic and revolutionary-seeming period in British politics was symbolised best, perhaps, by an MP from the opposition Labour Party dramatically grabbing and making off with the ceremonial mace in the House of Commons after Mrs May called off the much-expected vote on her Brexit deal.
Media captionHow the mace drama unfolded

The mace represents the Queen in Parliament and debate cannot continue if it is removed.

In any normal week, such a violation of parliamentary decorum would have stolen all the headlines, but these are not normal times. Instead, this week is likely to be remembered as the one where the divisions within the governing Conservative Party over Europe became more vicious than ever.

They certainly became more public, with the ultimately failed political coup against the prime minister from the hardest of hard Brexiteers in her party who want the hardest of hard breaks from Europe.
What happens next?

At this point only two things, or should I say dates, are certain.

By law, Theresa May is obliged to put her deal to a vote by 21 January 2019, or go to Parliament with a Plan B.

    How long can Theresa May survive as PM?

The other date of course is Brexit day: 29 March 2019. Mrs May's strategy appears to be to delay putting her unloved plan to a vote until the very last minute, hoping the ticking Brexit clock will be enough to frighten MPs into finally backing it.

If that fails, she'll be facing a terrible dilemma.

On the one hand she could somehow cancel, delay, soften or hold another referendum on Brexit and risk alienating the 17.4 million people who voted Leave.

But on the other hand, she could go for a so-called Hard Brexit (where few of the existing ties between the UK and the EU are retained) and risk causing untold damage to the UK's economy and standing in the world for years to come.
Title: Re: 🌍 Brexit latest: I'm confused... what just happened?
Post by: Surly1 on December 15, 2018, 10:38:40 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46551986 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46551986)

Brexit latest: I'm confused... what just happened?
By Rob Watson UK political correspondent, BBC World Affairs Unit

I wish to hell I understood this better. To  the extent that I understand, if the current trends continue, the due date will result in a "hard" Brexit. Or perhaps May could go to Brussels hat in hand and beg for forgiveness. Apparently the Eurotypes are ill inclined to make any concessions.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Eddie on December 15, 2018, 10:47:33 AM
My Australian crypto mentor explained it this way.

The British couldn't organize a root in a brothel.

Apparently this is an old Australian saying.
Title: 🌍 Brexit: Jeremy Corbyn tables Theresa May no-confidence motion
Post by: RE on December 18, 2018, 12:45:51 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46599895 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46599895)

Brexit: Jeremy Corbyn tables Theresa May no-confidence motion

(https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2018/11/12/14/jeremy-corbyn.jpg?w968h681)

Related Topics

    Brexit

Media captionTheresa May announces Brexit vote date

Jeremy Corbyn has tabled a motion of no confidence in Theresa May, after she said MPs would not vote on her Brexit deal until the week of 14 January.

The PM had delayed the vote from last week, admitting she was set to lose.

Labour leader Mr Corbyn said on Monday it was unacceptable for MPs to wait a month to vote, adding the PM had led the UK into a "national crisis".

But No 10 sources told the BBC the government would not make time for the no-confidence vote.

Ministers would not "go along with silly political games", they added.

    Brexit: A really simple guide
    Reality Check: How could new referendum work?
    Kuenssberg: Don't forget there is actually a deal

Mr Corbyn tabled the motion calling on MPs to declare they have "no confidence in the prime minister due to her failure to allow the House of Commons to have a meaningful vote straightaway" on the Brexit deal.

The motion focuses on Mrs May personally, rather than the government.

BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg said the motion could have been embarrassing for Mrs May, but as things stood, ministers would not allow time for it to be debated.
ADVERTISEMENT

She said No 10 had effectively "batted the ball back to Labour to see if they have the guts" to call for a vote of no confidence in the government as a whole.

Unlike a vote targeting the PM, a motion of no confidence in the government could bring about an early general election if it is supported by a majority of MPs.
Media captionJeremy Corbyn wants MPs to get a Brexit deal vote before Christmas

The SNP, the Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru and the Greens have tried to force Labour to bring about that situation, by trying to amend Mr Corbyn's motion.

But Mr Corbyn said his aim in tabling the motion was to put pressure on her to have a vote on her Brexit deal this week.

Mrs May's Brexit deal sets out the terms of Britain's exit from the EU - on 29 March 2019 - and includes a declaration on the outline of the future relations between the UK and the EU.

But the deal only comes into force if both parliaments approve it.

Mrs May told MPs they would have the chance to vote on the deal she negotiated with Brussels in the third week of January.
A 'wasted' month

Mr Corbyn said by then a month would have been wasted since the original 11 December vote was postponed, with "not a single word renegotiated and not a single reassurance given".

"The deal is unchanged and is not going to change," he said.

"The House must get on with the vote and move on to consider the realistic alternatives."

However, Mr Corbyn came under fire from other opposition parties for limiting his no-confidence motion to the prime minister.

SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon tweeted: "Labour tabling a motion just in the PM rather than in the entire government begs the question, which Tory do they want to see as PM?"

And Nigel Dodds, of Northern Ireland's DUP, which has propped up the Conservative government since June 2017, said: "We are not interested in the parliamentary antics or play-acting of the Labour Party."

But Mr Corbyn told reporters late on Monday: "We haven't failed to trigger any process. It's this government that is denying Parliament the right to vote on this process, that's why I tabled the motion."
Media captionJeremy Corbyn: May taking shambolic government to new level

Mrs May appeared to have the support of pro-Brexit backbench critics who last week failed in a bid to oust her as Tory leader.

One of them, Steve Baker, said: "Eurosceptic Conservatives are clear that we accept the democratic decision of our party to have confidence in Theresa May as PM. We will vote against Labour in any confidence motion."

In other Brexit-related news:

    The SNP's Westminster leader Ian Blackford was granted an emergency debate on Brexit for Tuesday, having said Parliament needed to "take control of the situation and find a solution"
    Theresa May rejected reports she was taking advice from predecessor David Cameron on what to do in the event of a Brexit deadlock in Parliament
    More than 60 MPs from various parties wrote to the PM urging her to rule out a no-deal Brexit, saying it would do "unnecessary economic damage" to manufacturers
    Irish foreign affairs minister Simon Coveney said Brexit might have to be delayed if the UK submitted an "entirely new" withdrawal proposal

In a Commons statement, Mrs May said MPs would resume the debate - halted last week - in the week of 7 January. The "meaningful" vote is due to take place the following week.
Media captionPM on EU: "There is no plot to keep us in backstop."

Mrs May told MPs: "It is now only just over 14 weeks until the UK leaves the EU and I know many members of this House are concerned that we need to take a decision soon."

She said she had won fresh guarantees at last week's EU summit over measures to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland and she hoped to secure additional "political and legal assurances" in the coming weeks.

Q&A: The Irish border Brexit backstop

Earlier on Monday, an EU spokesman said it had provided the "clarifications" requested on the contentious issue of the Northern Ireland border backstop and "no further meetings were foreseen".
'Parliamentary shenanigans'

By Laura Kuenssberg, BBC political editor

Keeping up? I don't blame if you if it all seems like procedural nonsense. And frankly, you might not be completely wrong.

But what it suggests is that despite widespread frustration on all sides, Jeremy Corbyn is so far stopping short of taking a real shot at toppling May's administration, and is unlikely to do so unless, and until, he thinks he can win.

For her part, Theresa May is unlikely to budge on her plan, unless and until she is forced to do so.

To the immense irritation of both their supporters and their rivals, even though the Brexit clock is running down, neither of the main party leaders are willing to take the kind of radical move that might unblock the gridlock.
Title: 🌍 Monumental defeat for Brexit sparks chaos
Post by: RE on January 16, 2019, 03:18:26 AM
This is going to be hilarious for the next month.  ;D

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/0pvrcSejDjI
Title: 🌍 The British Parliament’s Day of Magical Brexit Thinking
Post by: RE on January 30, 2019, 02:03:51 AM
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/brexit-parliament-sends-may-back-to-brussels-with-little-time-and-an-unclear-mandate.html

The Slatest
The British Parliament’s Day of Magical Brexit Thinking

By Joshua Keating
Jan 29, 20195:18 PM

(https://compote.slate.com/images/9f224b0a-7037-4d0b-a96b-7a718ba1d472.jpeg?width=780&height=520&rect=7813x5209&offset=0x0)
Pro-EU and pro-Brexit protesters discuss the vote and ongoing political processes as they demonstrate near to the Houses of Parliament on Tuesday in London.
Leon Neal/Getty Images

Popular in News & Politics

    Howard Schultz’s Appearance on Gwyneth Paltrow’s Podcast Should Tank His Presidential Candidacy
    The Trump Administration Will Let Adoption Agencies Turn Away Jews and Same-Sex Couples. Thank SCOTUS.
    Kamala Harris Has a Message That Can Beat Trump—Whether or Not She’s the One Delivering It
    If the Supreme Court Doesn’t Stay a Louisiana Law Next Week, Roe v. Wade Will Be All but Dead

There may not be any good outcomes for Brexit at this point, but the British Parliament at least had several semi-coherent ways forward this month. It could have approved the deal Prime Minister Theresa May negotiated with EU leaders—but Parliament rejected that two weeks ago. It could have kicked May out and started with a new prime minister, but it didn’t do that either. With the clock ticking down until March 29, when Britain is scheduled to exit the EU whether a new deal has been negotiated or not, it basically had three remaining options: Accept the inevitability of a no-deal Brexit, hold a new referendum on whether to go through with Brexit at all, or ask the EU for more time to negotiate something else.

Parliament decided it didn’t want to do any of those, either.

On Tuesday, May put forward a neutral motion designed to allow discussion on the steps forward for Brexit, allowing members of Parliament to propose amendments expressing their preferences on that path forward. Speaker John Bercow allowed votes on seven of those amendments. (If you haven’t been watching, Bercow alone has made these debates into thrilling and hilarious TV.) The House of Commons voted down a Labour Party motion that would allow for debate on alternative ideas, including a new public vote or a permanent customs union with the EU. It also rejected several amendments that would have instructed May to ask for an extension of the Brexit deadline if she’s unable to get her plan approved.

The House approved a nonbinding amendment rejecting the idea of a no-deal Brexit. And in the most-watched vote of the day, it approved an amendment from Conservative MP Graham Brady that requires May’s “Irish backstop” to be replaced with vaguely defined “alternative arrangements.” (The backstop is a controversial provision in the original deal that would keep the U.K. in a customs union with Europe, at least initially, in order to prevent the imposition of a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.)

The tl;dr of all this is that May is going to Brussels to try to solve a problem she hasn’t been able to solve for the last two years, and now she has only two months. Also, the EU has already rejected the idea of reopening negotiations. Despite the passage of the amendment rejecting a no-deal Brexit, that scenario probably became more likely on Tuesday.

Not surprisingly, markets didn’t react well:

A group of Conservative Party MPs—both Brexiteers and Remainers—see a light at the end of the tunnel in what’s being called the “Malthouse Compromise.” What sounds like a particularly dull Sherlock Holmes story is actually a plan, named after housing minister Kit Malthouse, that involves May negotiating with Brussels to replace the Irish backstop with something more palatable to Brexiteers who worry the backstop would lock Britain indefinitely into a customs union with Europe. The replacement would rely on technology to inspect goods for compliance with EU standards as they cross the border, without need for customs posts. (Important caveat: This technology probably doesn’t exist yet.) If May can’t get that deal, Plan B is a “managed no deal,” where Britain would ask the EU to extend its transition period to allow it to plan for a complete divorce.

The British government has often been accused of kicking the can down the road when it comes to Brexit. But with the no-deal deadline looming, it’s now basically kicking it directly into a wall.
Support our journalism

Help us continue covering the news and issues important to you—and get ad-free podcasts and bonus segments, members-only content, and other great benefits.

Brexit Europe United Kingdom
Title: Re: 🌍 The British Parliament’s Day of Magical Brexit Thinking
Post by: Eddie on January 30, 2019, 07:55:24 AM
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/brexit-parliament-sends-may-back-to-brussels-with-little-time-and-an-unclear-mandate.html

The Slatest
The British Parliament’s Day of Magical Brexit Thinking

By Joshua Keating
Jan 29, 20195:18 PM

(https://compote.slate.com/images/9f224b0a-7037-4d0b-a96b-7a718ba1d472.jpeg?width=780&height=520&rect=7813x5209&offset=0x0)
Pro-EU and pro-Brexit protesters discuss the vote and ongoing political processes as they demonstrate near to the Houses of Parliament on Tuesday in London.
Leon Neal/Getty Images

Popular in News & Politics

    Howard Schultz’s Appearance on Gwyneth Paltrow’s Podcast Should Tank His Presidential Candidacy
    The Trump Administration Will Let Adoption Agencies Turn Away Jews and Same-Sex Couples. Thank SCOTUS.
    Kamala Harris Has a Message That Can Beat Trump—Whether or Not She’s the One Delivering It
    If the Supreme Court Doesn’t Stay a Louisiana Law Next Week, Roe v. Wade Will Be All but Dead

There may not be any good outcomes for Brexit at this point, but the British Parliament at least had several semi-coherent ways forward this month. It could have approved the deal Prime Minister Theresa May negotiated with EU leaders—but Parliament rejected that two weeks ago. It could have kicked May out and started with a new prime minister, but it didn’t do that either. With the clock ticking down until March 29, when Britain is scheduled to exit the EU whether a new deal has been negotiated or not, it basically had three remaining options: Accept the inevitability of a no-deal Brexit, hold a new referendum on whether to go through with Brexit at all, or ask the EU for more time to negotiate something else.

Parliament decided it didn’t want to do any of those, either.

On Tuesday, May put forward a neutral motion designed to allow discussion on the steps forward for Brexit, allowing members of Parliament to propose amendments expressing their preferences on that path forward. Speaker John Bercow allowed votes on seven of those amendments. (If you haven’t been watching, Bercow alone has made these debates into thrilling and hilarious TV.) The House of Commons voted down a Labour Party motion that would allow for debate on alternative ideas, including a new public vote or a permanent customs union with the EU. It also rejected several amendments that would have instructed May to ask for an extension of the Brexit deadline if she’s unable to get her plan approved.

The House approved a nonbinding amendment rejecting the idea of a no-deal Brexit. And in the most-watched vote of the day, it approved an amendment from Conservative MP Graham Brady that requires May’s “Irish backstop” to be replaced with vaguely defined “alternative arrangements.” (The backstop is a controversial provision in the original deal that would keep the U.K. in a customs union with Europe, at least initially, in order to prevent the imposition of a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.)

The tl;dr of all this is that May is going to Brussels to try to solve a problem she hasn’t been able to solve for the last two years, and now she has only two months. Also, the EU has already rejected the idea of reopening negotiations. Despite the passage of the amendment rejecting a no-deal Brexit, that scenario probably became more likely on Tuesday.

Not surprisingly, markets didn’t react well:

A group of Conservative Party MPs—both Brexiteers and Remainers—see a light at the end of the tunnel in what’s being called the “Malthouse Compromise.” What sounds like a particularly dull Sherlock Holmes story is actually a plan, named after housing minister Kit Malthouse, that involves May negotiating with Brussels to replace the Irish backstop with something more palatable to Brexiteers who worry the backstop would lock Britain indefinitely into a customs union with Europe. The replacement would rely on technology to inspect goods for compliance with EU standards as they cross the border, without need for customs posts. (Important caveat: This technology probably doesn’t exist yet.) If May can’t get that deal, Plan B is a “managed no deal,” where Britain would ask the EU to extend its transition period to allow it to plan for a complete divorce.

The British government has often been accused of kicking the can down the road when it comes to Brexit. But with the no-deal deadline looming, it’s now basically kicking it directly into a wall.
Support our journalism

Help us continue covering the news and issues important to you—and get ad-free podcasts and bonus segments, members-only content, and other great benefits.

Brexit Europe United Kingdom

There is a reasonable solution to this whole issue. If the EU decided to let members have some say about immigration into their own countries, it would completely remove the primary driver of the whole Brexit movement. Brexit is a poison pill for the whole EU, not just Britain. Too bad TPTB in the EU are delusional about borders. There is a middle way here, that hasn't been explored, and probably won't be...but it's unfortunate.
Title: Brexit: No Reverse Gear for the EU
Post by: JasonHep on February 01, 2019, 02:26:25 AM


youtube-Logo-4gc2reddit-logoOff the vidcam of Jason Heppenstall



Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666

Friend us on Facebook



Published on 22 Billion Energy Slaves on January 20,  2019






Discuss this article at the Geopolics Table inside the Diner



2019 Collapse Survey still OPEN.



Time is running out before we close it!  Time is running out to get your opinions counted. Vote today!



 






Brexit: No Reverse Gear for the EU




 


 



 






 


The daily Brexit spectacle in this country grows ever more surreal. Since Theresa May had her EU leaving agreement ground into the tarmac like a discarded cigarette butt by MPs last week, and then narrowly avoided a vote of no-confidence launched by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, the complexity of the situation has exploded exponentially.


 


Politicians have had the best part of two years to find a solution to walking away from the European Union, which is what a majority of people voted to do, but now find themselves set back to square one. This time however there’s only 10 weeks left on the clock, which perhaps explains all the headless chickens running around.


 


Politics at the national level is usually mostly froth and can be safely ignored while more interesting pursuits are followed – after all, during the good times, aren’t politicians merely surfers catching the waves of popular opinion? Remember, these are the good times, for now.


 


But then there are times when serious underlying stresses in society and the economy have built up to a point where they threaten to cause devastating earthquakes. This is when politicians are put to the test – and usually found wanting. You expect them to solve serious national problems, but all they can do is spout platitudes and sound bites. It’s as if they are simply not designed to do the right job – like buying a dishwasher and expecting it to heat your dinner; what you get instead is a blocked outlet pipe and no dinner.


 


The political and social phenomena that arise at these times of stress have two aspects, that is they are both important and unimportant at the same time. I see them as being ‘unportent’.


 


Brexit, for example, is unimportant at face value. It is simply a country reconfiguring its trading arrangements into a more efficient format from the point of view of its people. True, there will likely be a period of adjustment when some prices of goods will be higher and some services could be unavailable, but demand and supply will iron out these problems in the medium term, like they always do. These are minor issues; Europe isn’t physically going anywhere, Britain isn’t going anywhere either, we’ll still be able to drink French wine and eat Italian cheese and go on holiday to the Alps … what’s the problem?


 


In fact, compared to the real crises of out time, such as the insect apocalypse, decaying infrastructure, mass mental breakdown etc. Brexit is hardly even worthy of consideration. Of course, the media have ways of amplifying the trivial and ignoring the important, so the whole situation may seem like a catastrophe if you get your information from those sources, but that doesn’t actually make it so.


 


At the same time, while it may not be important from a whole systems point of view, it can be important to the people within the system affected. For instance, given that the EU is both undemocratic when it comes to the important policy decisions, and a consolidator of centralised power, it matters a great deal to Brits whether or not their children will be conscripted into some future Euro army and forced to fight Russia for its resources at the behest of ‘chicken hawk’ politicians in Brussels, Paris and Washington.


 


Thus the whole Brexit saga is both unimportant and important at the same time i.e. unportent. I suspect unportent things will crop up with greater regularity as humanity continues to slide down the depletion curve of easy-to-get at energy sources.


 


Governing parties not fit for purpose?


It’s curious that Europe has seen the rise of a wave of new populist parties either swept into power, or finding themselves in prominent positions in coalitions over the last handful of years, and yet Britain still clings to the two-party tribal warfare system.


 


Italy has the 5 Star Movement, which is now forms a partner in government, and Germany has the AfD (Alternative for Germany) which has stolen support away from Angela Merkel, while Sweden has the Sweden Democrats, which were just yesterday denied a place in central government despite coming within a whisker of doing so. All of these so-called populist parties are derided in the mainstream media and described in varying tones of invective. 


 


It’s true that most of them are right-wing, driven primarily by concerns about unchecked immigration, but there’s no particular reason why they couldn’t be left-wing populists (apart from the fact that left-wing parties are currently preoccupied by issues of ‘social justice’ and are unable to coherently formulate policies that people might vote for). 


 


Britain, of course, has UKIP (the United Kingdom Independence Party) whose raison d'être was to force a vote on leaving the EU – something it can be said to have achieved. But due to the ‘winner takes it all’ system of democracy over here it was never destined to achieve great power. Instead it merely managed to exert enough political leverage to shift the Conservatives away from their cosy relationship with big business and extract the promise of a referendum. The fact that David Cameron thought British voters could be railroaded into voting to remain in the EU turned out to be a critical error on his part.


 


But, for the main part, British people are either Labour or Conservative voters, and these two parties have enjoyed a joint monopoly on power for over a hundred years, if you set aside the National Government of the inter-war years.


 


America is in a similar situation, with the Republicans and the Democrats the only two parties worthy of consideration for the majority of voters. While the two-party system gives an advantage in terms of stability, it is looking less suitable in the modern age with all its myriad power struggles and fragmented constituencies. Indeed, perhaps there's some kind of Anglo Saxon ‘two tribes’ mentality playing out here.


 


So what gives? Both parties in both countries are internally conflicted, with the neoliberal element in each having had the upper hand for the past four decades, which coincidentally I’m sure, is the same time period over which the financialisation and globalisation of the world economy took place.


 


During this period, money has dominated politics, because parties could woo big business with the promise of rewards in the form of contracts, reduced regulation and a lower tax burden … just as soon as they got into power. They could easily do this because, once in power, governments in industrialised countries have had the privilege of being able to create money out of thin air without somehow having to earn it.


 


This worked well, up to a point. After conventional oil production peaked in 2005 and the real economy stopped growing, it became an awful lot harder to service all the debt that had been built up, leading to the financial heart attack of 2008. Since then, the global economy has been kept alive as ‘first responder’ central bankers performed CPR and mainlined dizzying amounts of ‘money’, i.e. debt, into the languid white arm of the economy in the hope that the corpse would get up off the floor and start walking again. So far, apart from a few twitches and convulsions, it’s still lying there.


 


With dismal growth, the spoils of financialisation and globalism have become a lot scarcer. Those with access to what remains are fleeing to their citadels and pulling up the drawbridge behind them, while the vast majority of us are left as ‘tax donkeys’, working two or three jobs and dealing with hidden inflation, punitive regulations and reduced prospects. Life just ain’t the same as it used to be.


 


Instead of an easy life we get Donald Trump, Brexit and the Gilets Jaunes – all manifestations of ‘the people’ of industrialised countries trying to claw back some of the wealth and resources they feel are theirs. Can't we just back up a little and go back to simpler systems that redistribute the wealth a bit more evenly?


 


It turns out, however, that there is no reverse gear in over-developed financialised economies. They are built on the concept of exponentially expanding economic growth – something that is neither possible nor, arguably, desirable. To stop growing is to die and consolidation of financial power is a one-way kind of thing. 


 


Perhaps this is why the political classes are doing everything in their power to overturn Brexit and to impeach Trump and fob off the Gilets Jaunes with delays to tax hikes. They may well be successful in all of their attempts but it doesn’t change the dynamic forces behind the scenes that led to the popular rebellions in the first place. As one Gilet Jaune protester succinctly put it "We don't want Macron's crumbs, we want the whole baguette."


 


But are ‘the people’ right?


Most people in these damp islands have a vague and confused idea about the EU. Like Marmite, you are supposed to either love it or hate it. Those in favour of it generally have a ‘rainbows and unicorns’ vision of a benign distant force for good that occasionally arrives on our shores to disgorge its cornucopia of cash, and give our crooked politicians a well-deserved kick up the backside. Others have the polar opposite view, imagining Brussels to be a nest of villainous meddlers who spend day and night concocting schemes to straighten bananas, ban toasters and forbid the use of feet and inches.


 


The truth, of course, lies somewhere in the middle. Yes, the EU has had some success in forcing Britain to clean up its beaches and make it easier to study abroad, and the last time I checked there were still bent bananas in my local grocery store being sold by the pound.


 


Fans of the EU also like to point to various initiatives and projects that are funded by the bloc, claiming that these would never have been undertaken without EU funding. While this may be true, many of these projects could be considered ‘white elephants’. Not long after the EU has built them, cut the ribbon, erected their large blue “This project was funded by the EU” signs and buggered off, it’s usually the local community that is forced to pay for their upkeep and eventual decommisioning with their local taxes.


 


One such example is an industrial heritage mining site near where I live in Cornwall that was part-funded by the EU and given World Heritage status when it opened in 2012. Not only have I never visited it, I’ve never even heard of anyone visiting it, and looking at its website today the ‘Latest Happenings’ section hasn’t been updated in nine months.  Its Wikipedia page is four sentences long (by comparison, Cambodia’s Angkor Wat entry has 8,000 words) – to be honest, it’s not even very good at being a white elephant.


 


However, mention the EU to some of the locals around here and they won’t talk about prestige projects like the Heartlands Heritage Mining Centre, they’ll talk about how Brussels devastated the local fishing industry and destroyed their children’s future. They will tell you how an army of trucks awaits at the docks at dawn each morning to load up the contents of the fishing boats and immediately ship it off to continental Europe, while their own families are forced to shop at Poundland and eat frozen fish fingers. It’s narratives like this that may have had a hand in Cornwall’s decision to vote ‘No’ in the referendum, although they were roundly mocked for doing so, called ‘stupid’ and other less than pleasant names.


 


The kind of disconnect between two entirely different versions of reality throws a sharp light on the struggle between the winners and losers in the globalised economy.


 


As I finish off writing this, it’s Sunday morning and the newspapers are saying that a group of MPs is planning either to sabotage the Brexit process and keep the UK in the EU, or to push through some kind of dismal deal that will effectively sell off the country for a fistful of euros. It would be a mistake to do so. The forces that have been unleashed are not about to meekly get back into Pandora’s box and agree to shut up.


 


EU elections are coming up in May that will likely see a populist right-wing ‘anti EU’ bloc forming at the very centre of political-power, and with Eurozone industrial production and growth plummeting it won’t be long before Europe enters a steep recession – and by then it won’t be just France that goes up in flames. To try and prevent this, ECB president Mario Draghi is doing the only thing he knows how to do – cranking up the money printing press – just in time to feed the thousands of moribund ‘zombie’ corporations dotted across Europe that can only survive if free money is hosed their way. 


 


The banking industry isn’t looking too stable either, with German banks – led by Deutsch – losing most of their value, Italian ones already starting to implode and Denmark’s biggest bank implicated in one of the biggest money laundering scandals in banking history …


 


 


Meanwhile, EU figureheads Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron are both spent political forces, the latter unable to show his boyish face in public, preferring instead to address the hordes of angry left-behinds from his golden Élysée Palace. Italy’s deputy PM, Matteo Salvini, is openly trolling permadrunk EC President Jean Claude Juncker, and Hungarian pariah PM Viktor Orban is the kind of political ghoul who must give the Euro power elite nightmares.


 


Will the UK be able to break away from this sinking ship in time before the acrid smell of smoke from burning capitals wafts across the English Channel to London, polluting the rarefied air of the political bubble in Westminster? Perhaps the smell will simultaneously put the virtue-signalling Islington Guardianistas off their flat whites and the money-grubbing City speculators off their glasses of Chablis?


 



 


Who knows, stranger things have happened.


 



 



 



 



 




 



 



 



 



 




 



 



 



 



 




 



 



 



 



 




 




 


Title: 🌍 George III Lost America. Theresa May Could Lose the UK Over Brexit
Post by: RE on February 03, 2019, 12:01:45 AM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/george-iii-lost-america-theresa-may-could-lose-the-united-kingdom-over-brexit (https://www.thedailybeast.com/george-iii-lost-america-theresa-may-could-lose-the-united-kingdom-over-brexit)

George III Lost America. Theresa May Could Lose the United Kingdom Over Brexit.

(https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/c_crop,d_placeholder_euli9k,h_2812,w_5000,x_0,y_0/dpr_1.0/c_limit,w_2999/fl_lossy,q_auto/v1548964619/190125-Irving-Theresa-May-tease_dpuwmc)
Photo Illustration by Kelly Caminero/The Daily Beast

Brexit has shown the world a British parliament and a political class that resembles a ship of fools without a captain.
Clive Irving
02.01.19 10:59 PM ET

Britain is locked in the most serious peacetime crisis in its modern history, the increasingly desperate attempt to secure the nation’s orderly departure from the European Union.

Brexit has shown the world a British parliament and a political class that resembles a ship of fools without a captain. One veteran of Margaret Thatcher’s cabinet said that voters are looking at parliament “with something rather near to contempt.”

We speak of the oldest parliamentary democracy in the Western world. Since 1721 it has seen 74 prime ministers of highly varied competence and backgrounds but few if any as incapable of steering the country through perilous times as the current incumbent, Theresa May, who could end up being compared to George III because of the consequences of her ineptitude.

The ultimate test of a prime minister in a crisis is always the same—how well do they measure up to the moment?

The answer to that depends on a combination of skills. Quite often they are skills that politicians do not find in themselves until they are called upon by destiny to prove them. Different times need different abilities. Sometimes a prime minister who at the time seems mediocre is later reassessed and seen to have been more consequential than anyone realized because he was overshadowed by a predecessor.

In British history there is a classic instance of this: In 1945 Winston Churchill was rudely and unexpectedly removed from office in a general election and replaced by the leader of the Labour Party, Clement Attlee.

Churchill, the country’s greatest ever war leader, was contemptuous of his successor whom he described as “a modest little man with a lot to be modest about.”
Related in World
Theresa May’s Brexit Deal Suffers Biggest Defeat in History
Labour Left Sees a Socialist PM in the Wreckage of Brexit
Theresa May Limps On After Surviving No-Confidence Vote

It turned out that Attlee (who was deputy prime minister during the war) was precisely what the nation needed, not only to get through years of austerity imposed by the near-bankruptcy created by the war effort, but as the parliamentary leader with the skills to re-engineer British society and provide its people with a comprehensive safety net including, notably, free universal health care for life.

So here were two men equally indispensable in their abilities, one to lead and the other to heal. In each case their mastery reflected their character, Churchill who was able to project himself as the living embodiment of a great national narrative of obdurate resistance and victory and Attlee as the quiet but systematic architect of change.

And today Britain has Theresa May.

It is too generous to say that May has had trouble measuring up the to moment. She has trouble explaining what the moment actually is—the utterance that will forever be her epitaph in the history of political discourse will be “Brexit means Brexit.”

Imagine Churchill saying “war means war.” OK, let’s be reasonable. When it comes to oratory nobody can hold a candle to Churchill. Every prime minister since Churchill has carefully avoided getting into that kind of contest.

But when the qualities of leadership are under scrutiny it’s important to understand that Churchill was as courageously decisive in private as he was in public.

    THE DARKEST HOURS
    The Torture of Being Winston Churchill’s Son
    Clive Irving

There is a passage in Andrew Roberts’ sweeping new biography, Churchill, Walking With Destiny, describing a moment where the prime minister speaks ad lib and without leaving his own record of what was, literally, one of the statements that saved Britain. He was speaking to men not as resolved as himself who needed to believe in him as an army needs to believe in its generals.

It came in the early summer of 1940 when Churchill, who had taken over only a week before, was resisting attempts to negotiate with Hitler. He told his new cabinet: “I have thought carefully in these last days whether it was part of my duty to consider entering into negotiations with That Man. But it was idle to think that, if we tried to make peace now, we should get better terms than if we fought it out. The Germans would demand our fleet—that would be called ‘disarmament’—our naval bases and much else. We should become a slave state… If this long island story of ours is to end at last, let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground.”

No official minute was taken of that statement—Roberts quotes it as recorded later in the diary of a cabinet member.

What is new now is that Theresa May brings to the office a background like no other before her. She is the first person to hold that office who is by both experience and instincts a bureaucrat.

Her rise to the Tory party leadership owed much to her success as a bureaucrat. She ran a government department that was so large and so challenging to master that some prime ministers were known to have deliberately given it to rivals in order to destroy their careers: the Home Office, a Whitehall edifice that could perhaps be compared to a nightmare package embracing the U.S. Department of Justice, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Homeland Security.

She was put there by David Cameron, a prime minister who was himself notoriously bored by administrative details and, as his decision to hold a national referendum on Brexit demonstrated, not too smart at judging outcomes.

May survived with a mixed record at the Home Office. She acquired something of the reputation of a control freak, devoted to organizational charts and preferring to run the department through a small and tight-knit clique of loyal aides and Tory Party law-and-order zealots.

Churchill, famous for asking for opinions “on one half sheet of notepaper,” said that a camel is what you end up with if you ask a committee to design a horse. May was fond of setting up committees and official inquiries to avoid taking action and produced many camels. One of her former cabinet ministers despaired that “it’s a fantastic skill, her ability to do nothing.”
Alas, because May is a bureaucrat she has the bureaucrat’s particular gift of killing language. The English language, so rich in its ability to move people, dies in her mouth.

Later she managed to swat away responsibility for an ugly debacle during her watch. West Indians who immigrated to Britain in the 1950s were threatened with mass deportation because they had no record of legally arriving—then it turned out that the Home Office itself had discarded the documentation.

On the face of it her bureaucratic cast of mind should have been an asset when facing the complexities involved in negotiating Britain out of all the political, legal and commercial attachments to the European Union. After all, the country was not facing a lethal existential threat. This was a self-initiated unraveling of laws and treaties.

But the EU is the world’s largest assembly of bureaucrats, a characteristic often damned by the pro-Brexit campaign, as well as by more reasoned critics.

A negotiation of this complexity had never been attempted by anyone before. It needed a team that combined a complete command of administrative detail, a shrewd sense of the national interest, an equally shrewd assessment of the opposing interests, and an ability to understand the difference between bottom-line economic interests and the EU’s loftier moral values as an alliance committed to protecting constitutional democracy in a continent with an unhappy history of autocracies.

This was a tough deal for anyone to successfully achieve. But any leader who was able not only to pull it off but to sell it to their people—in the case of the UK to a people divided by a referendum margin as close as 52 to 48 percent—needed to have something else. They had to be able to bring eloquence and vision to their argument.

Alas, because May is a bureaucrat she has the bureaucrat’s particular gift of killing language. The English language, so rich in its ability to move people, dies in her mouth.

The closest she has ever come to articulating the case for the Brexit deal she negotiated that set up a 21-month transition period for achieving a new free trade agreement with the EU (the deal that she is again stuck with trying to amend and resuscitate despite that fact that the EU has warned it will not renegotiate) was to say, repetitively, “It is in the national interest for everyone to get behind it.”

Basically when the narrow majority of Brits voted for Brexit they voted for something that didn’t actually exist. There was not even the vaguest outline of the real impact that Brexit would have on British life. Its proponents, even if they had any sense of the outcome (which is doubtful) weren’t interested in pesky details. They were appealing to raw emotions, largely anti-immigrant xenophobia, not advancing a rational argument.

    ‘DODGIER THAN EVER’
    It’s Official: Brexit Campaign Cheated Its Way to Victory
    Jamie Ross

The Brexit deal that May presented to parliament went down in the biggest defeat any prime minister has suffered, 432 votes to 202.

All along she had been trying to reconcile elements that are not reconcilable: keeping the support of her party’s lunatic fringe that is undismayed by the prospect of a “no deal” exit that would bring extreme self-harm while also holding the loyalty of the center of the party—and doing this while satisfying the terms the EU is prepared to allow. (“Allow” is the realistic term because Britain has always been a supplicant.) At the same time she survived a parliamentary no-confidence vote that leaves her in power while seriously wounded and without a new deal that is likely to fly.

Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party leader, is similarly ineffectual and unready to meet the leadership tests of his time. His party includes a rump of Brexiters and his cabinet is in thrall to fossilized Marxist ideas. His rhetorical skills are, if anything, less evident than May’s.

Given two clueless party leaders it often seems that all the politicians are overcome by the kind of helpless rapture that sent Thelma and Louise driving blissfully over the cliff.

In 1940 Churchill’s freedom of action was greatly helped by the fact that he did not have to bow to any party’s dictates. He was appointed prime minister without being leader of the Tory party—the leader remained his predecessor as prime minister, Neville Chamberlain. Uniquely, Churchill led a coalition of the Tory, Labour and Liberal parties at a time when none of those parties would probably have accepted him as their party leader.

As a result of this freedom he was able to isolate and negate the influence of the appeasers who did not like the prospect of choking in their own blood. He could and did appeal directly to the spirit of a parliament and a people who set aside partisan interests in favor of a higher purpose, victory that was by no means assured.

The irony now is that Brexiters represent only 15 percent of the 650 members of the House of Commons. A large majority is opposed to Britain crashing out of Europe without a deal. A prime minister not constrained by party loyalties could easily get support for a “soft” Brexit—meaning a measured transition from full membership to one that keeps the country in a permanent customs union without disruption.

Instead, by trying vainly to satisfy everyone May is satisfying nobody except people like the loony Little Englanders who say that such a deal would leave Britain as a “slave state.”

If they get their way May could well go down in history as the prime minister who lost the kingdom—the United Kingdom. Scotland wants nothing to do with Brexit and if it is imposed on them the Scottish parliament will probably vote to end the Acts of Union of 1707 that created the United Kingdom in order to leave them free to join the EU.

The implications are wider than that. Leaders in the European Union—including Germany’s Angela Merkel—are now fretting that the EU without Britain will be less able to clamp down on the kind of populist taste for autocrats that is afflicting Poland and Hungary.

George III went down in history as the king who lost America. Nobody in particular was held culpable for losing the empire—that was an inevitability of history that imposed its own logic and timing. If the United Kingdom becomes Little England (albeit including Wales and Northern Ireland) it will have reverted to the boundaries of the land it was in 40 A.D. when the Romans made a coherent colony out of a rabble of warring tribes. And this fiasco will be owned by a parliament that allowed a deranged minority to win and a prime minister who was never remotely equal to the greatest challenge of her time.

    RUDE BRITANNIA
    The Rise of Hateful Little England
    Clive Irving

Sponsored Stories

    Vintage Photos That Captured More Than Expected Vintage Photos That Captured More Than Expected Definition
    3 Ways Your Cat Asks For Help 3 Ways Your Cat Asks For Help Dr. Marty
    How Older Men Get Tighter Looking Skin [do this daily] How Older Men Get Tighter Looking Skin [do this daily] The Modern Man Today
    Rare “Ultimate Buy” Alert Rare “Ultimate Buy” Alert The Motley Fool

    This Is What Vikings Were Actually Like. The Photos Are Strikingly Scary This Is What Vikings Were Actually Like. The Photos Are Strikingly Scary Past Factory
    The Weirdest Amazon Products That Will Change Your Life The Weirdest Amazon Products That Will Change Your Life Definition
    Palmer, Alaska: This Tiny, Unknown Company Is Disrupting A $200 Billion Industry Palmer, Alaska: This Tiny, Unknown Company Is Disrupting A $200 Billion Industry EverQuote
    Gut Doctor "I Beg Americans To Throw Out This Vegetable Now" United Naturals

Recommended by
MIND CONTROL
How Fox News Pushes Trump to Make Every Bad Decision

No story has demonstrated the power of this unending Trump-Fox feedback loop like the partial government shutdown.
Matthew Gertz
Matthew Gertz
02.02.19 9:25 PM ET

President Donald Trump’s announcement last Friday that he would end the longest partial government shutdown in U.S. history without securing funding from congressional Democrats for his long-promised border wall came after weeks of brutal headlines and sagging poll numbers.

But when Trump arose the following morning, he did not devote his time to convening his White House advisers to figure out what went wrong or reaching out to Republican congressional leaders to plot their next move.

Instead, he did the same thing he’s done on countless days of his administration: He turned on his television, tuned in to his favorite program, Fox & Friends, and started tweeting about what he saw.

For more than a year, I’ve studied this Trump-Fox feedback loop, the president’s habit of live-tweeting his favorite shows on the right-wing cable news network. I’ve tracked several hundred of the president’s often-hyperaggressive tweets back to particular segments on Fox News and its sister network, Fox Business, that caught the president’s eye.

Fox helped build Trump’s political brand and fuel his electoral rise, and in recent years has remade itself as a propaganda outlet in support of his presidency. Trump, in turn, has long been obsessed with the network. His worldview and decision making are shaped by the former network personalities with whom he has stocked his administration, the “Fox cabinet” of current stars he reaches out to for advice, and the hours of Fox programming he reportedly watches each day.

Having a superfan in the White House has given Fox outsized influence over both the news cycle and federal policy. The network’s efforts to infuriate its audience—over everything from NFL players kneeling in protest during the national anthem to a caravan of migrants slowly approaching the U.S. southern border—can trigger outraged presidential tweets, instantly turning the network’s particular fixations into national news.

And because Fox’s staff and guests are aware that Trump could be watching at any time, they often use the network’s platform to try to reach him directly, seeking to shape his decisions on political strategy, legal tactics, pardons, personnel, and more.
Related in Politics
WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 08: U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to the nation in his first-prime address from the Oval Office of the White House on January 8, 2019 in Washington, DC. A partial shutdown of the federal government extended to 17 days following the president's demand for $5.7 billion for a border wall while Democrats have refused. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch-Pool/Getty Images)
Trump Channels Hannity and Fearmongers for the Wall
‘Fox & Friends’ Lashes Out: Ann Coulter Is ‘Off Her Rocker’
Trump Is Now Presiding Over the Longest Shutdown Ever

No story has demonstrated the power of this Trump-Fox feedback loop like the partial government shutdown.

Trump’s incessant craving for validation from the network’s conservative commentators triggered his initial refusal to sign any legislation funding the government that did not include money for a border wall, and then that need sustained his intransigence over the following weeks. His eventual cave shows the limitations of prioritizing the whims of right-wing infotainers during congressional negotiations. But there is no evidence Trump has learned anything from the crushing defeat, suggesting that he will continue trying to make policy with respect to the wall and other issues, on the basis of whether it pleases Fox hosts.

    DONNY & FRIENDS
    Even Fox News Doesn’t Think ‘Fox & Friends’ Is News
    Andrew Kirell

In September, I argued that Trump’s Fox affinity made a government shutdown inevitable. The same pattern kept playing out: House and Senate leaders would agree to a spending bill, Fox commentators would claim the bill betrayed the president’s base because it didn’t include wall funding, Trump would angrily tweet about the Fox segments and send Washington into chaos, and Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan would have to talk him into supporting the legislation. With Trump publicly declaring that a shutdown was a “great political issue” and explicitly citing Fox hosts as his inspiration for the tactic, the situation seemed untenable.

Three months later, it finally came to a head. As the December deadline to renew government spending loomed, Fox personalities again began urging Trump to shut down the government rather than sign a spending bill that didn’t include money for the wall. Once again, Fox’s influence was matched against that of Republican congressional leaders, who warned the president that a shutdown would be a grave tactical mistake.

But this time, Fox News won.

    LIFE AFTER DEATH
    How the Cult of Roger Ailes Continues to Rule Fox News
    Matt Wilstein

When the White House signaled that it was backing away from its wall-funding demand, furious network commentators insisted that Trump reconsider and instead shut down the government. The calls were loudest on Fox & Friends, the president’s favorite morning cable show. “If there's not a shutdown,” declared co-host Steve Doocy, “he’s going to look like a loser.”

Goaded by those he typically counts on for support, Trump reportedly “seethed and panicked” about the criticism, and then took their advice.

The president’s propagandists were jubilant. As portions of the government shuttered and hundreds of thousands of federal employees worked without pay for weeks, Fox’s airwaves were filled with cheers for the president and exhortations for him to remain firm. The hosts gave little indication of Trump’s grave political peril—to the contrary, they urged the rest of his party to stick with him regardless of the consequences. “If this takes 150 days, I think the Republican Party needs to stand united with the president,” argued Sean Hannity.

Trump made clear throughout the shutdown that he was prioritizing the support of Fox’s hosts over all other considerations. He consulted with Hannity and Dobbs for strategic advice about how to handle the shutdown, gave a national address in which he ripped language from their shows, and showed up on Fox programs to make his pitch directly to their audiences.

And as federal workers missed paychecks and his poll numbers plummeted, the president kept his television turned to the fawning reports of his favorite network and his iPhone open to Twitter. Trump sent at least 60 tweets parroting the network’s programming over the course of the shutdown.

The president trumpeted the polls Fox cherry-picked to suggest he was winning the shutdown:

He cribbed statistics the network aired about “Walls Around The World”:

He claimed that “Only a Wall” could protect Americans from a caravan of migrants the network repeatedly reported on:

He pushed Fox’s attacks on congressional Democrats who refused to support wall funding:

And he promised Doocy that he wouldn’t “cave”:

Cozying up to Fox News may have made Trump president. But as a legislative strategy, it was a total failure. It proved impossible for Trump to simultaneously ensure the support of far-right media figures accountable only to their audience and make a deal that attracted Democratic votes.

Fox’s own personalities understood the dynamic at play: During one heated debate, political analyst Juan Williams declared that Hannity was one of the right-wing commentators “running the government.” And Republican senators knew it too: One told Axios that Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner’s reported effort to try to end the stalemate with a major deal was impossible, saying, “Trump can withstand Ann Coulter. He can't lose Hannity and the rest.”

Hampered by these tensions, the president’s strategy eventually collapsed. With Democrats refusing to negotiate until he agreed to reopen the government, some federal workers beginning to revolt, and Republican senators on the verge of abandoning him, Trump finally gave in after 35 days, agreeing to reopen the government for three weeks while Congress attempts to negotiate an immigration package.

Trump’s decision to fold divided his Fox allies—even the hosts who had counseled the president on his shutdown strategy. Hannity offered a vigorous defense of his decision, arguing that “anyone out there” who is “thinking President Trump caved today, you don't really know the Donald Trump I know.” For Dobbs, however, the news was “a victory for Nancy Pelosi ... and to deny it is to try to escape from reality.”

But neither Dobbs nor the president appeared to hold a grudge—by Thursday morning, Trump was tweeting about the previous night’s episode of Dobbs’ show, using the Fox host’s talking points as evidence that a border wall is necessary. Based on that program, Trump argued that Republicans negotiating an immigration deal “are wasting their time” because Democrats will not provide money for the “DESPERATELY needed WALL.” “I’ve got you covered,” he ominously added.

That seemed to be a reference to Trump’s likely endgame: declaring a national emergency in order to divert previously appropriated federal funds to wall construction. Ever since Trump first suggested that he might take that step in early January, Fox hosts have been urging him to do it, claiming that, in Dobbs’ words, the “only way forward” is for Trump to “simply sweep aside the recalcitrant left in this country” and do so.

Republican congressional leaders keep warning Trump that declaring a national emergency is a terrible idea that won’t serve his ends, and up until now, he’s listened to him. But we’ve seen how this played out before. The president will continue to wallow in Fox’s programming, as night after night its hosts tell him that the declaration is his only way to win. And eventually, he will listen.

    Matthew Gertz
    @MattGertz
Title: 🌍 Brexit Deadlock Continues as EU Rebuffs Theresa May’s Demands
Post by: RE on February 08, 2019, 02:21:17 AM
The  Clown Show across the pond continues...

RE

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-07/may-is-said-to-seek-time-limit-on-contentious-brexit-backstop (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-07/may-is-said-to-seek-time-limit-on-contentious-brexit-backstop)

economics
Brexit Deadlock Continues as EU Rebuffs Theresa May’s Demands
By Ian Wishart
and Jess Shankleman
February 7, 2019, 7:31 AM AKST Updated on February 7, 2019, 8:00 PM AKST

    PM is said to have asked EU for time limit to Brexit backstop
    EU refuses to compromise on post-Brexit Irish border measure

Mute
Current Time 0:08
/
Duration Time 3:14
 
Captions
Will May Leave Brussels Empty-Handed After Tusk `Hell' Jibe?

    Brexit Pressure Weighs on British Manufacturers
    Tusk: There's a 'Special Place in Hell' for Brexiteers Who Didn't Have a Plan

Will May Leave Brussels Empty-Handed After Tusk `Hell' Jibe?
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Share
Tweet
Post
Email

Follow @Brexit, sign up to our Brexit Bulletin, and tell us your Brexit story.

U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May and her top lawyer will travel to Dublin on Friday as she races to forge a breakthrough with European leaders resisting changes to their Brexit plan.

Following a day of tense talks in Brussels on Thursday, May plans to dine with Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar on Friday evening, while her attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, will meet counterpart Seamus Woulfe in the morning to discuss the contentious issue of the Irish border.
U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May Seeks Escape From Brexit Backstop 'Trap'

Theresa May and Jean-Claude Juncker on Feb. 7.
Photographer: Jasper Juinen/Bloomberg

On Thursday, May and senior EU officials set a new deadline in an attempt to break the impasse that threatens to push the U.K. crashing out of the bloc next month without an agreement. The two sides agreed their negotiating teams would get back round the table by the end of February for further talks.

With just 49 days to go until the U.K.’s scheduled departure from the EU, getting Varadkar on side will be crucial for May’s efforts to find a solution for the future of the Irish border that has become the biggest obstacle to a deal.
‘Do Everything’

May and her cabinet will spend the coming days meeting leading EU figures to convince them to change the divorce deal in a way that would be supported by a majority of politicians in the U.K. Parliament.

In London on Friday, Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond will host German Vice Chancellor Olaf Scholz, a day after Chancellor Angela Merkel said the EU must “do everything” to avoid a no-deal Brexit. On Monday, U.K. Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay will meet with EU chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier for further talks.
EU Chief Negotiator Michel Barnier News Conference

Michel Barnier
Photographer: Jasper Juinen/Bloomberg

After U.K. parliamentarians last month rejected the agreement May brought back from Brussels in November, she is demanding changes to the so-called Irish border backstop arrangement. While the backstop was designed as an insurance policy to prevent a hard border on the divided island of Ireland, it’s also become the most contentious part of the divorce deal because it effectively keeps the U.K. bound to EU rules.
Time Limit

But, with the EU rebuffing May’s requests on Thursday, there’s no clear solution in sight. European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker told May he didn’t want to reopen their divorce deal, according to a U.K. official.

“We must secure legally binding changes to the withdrawal agreement to deal with the concern Parliament has over the backstop,” May told reporters in Brussels. “Taking back changes to the backstop, together with the other work we’re doing on workers’ rights and other issues, will deliver a stable majority in Parliament and that’s what I’ll continue to work for.”

According to three European officials, May asked several times for the EU to include a time limit on the backstop in a meeting with Juncker and Barnier on Thursday. They rejected the idea.
Down to the Wire

Another person, familiar with the U.K. side of the negotiations, had a different summary of the meeting. May raised all three options that she’s considering for changing the backstop: alternative arrangements including technological solutions; a time limit; and a unilateral exit clause. She didn’t express a preference for any of the three, the person said.

The deadlock raises the prospect of the negotiations going down to the wire. EU officials said there are currently no plans to arrange an emergency EU summit -- necessary if there are changes to the deal or if May asks for Brexit to be delayed -- before a scheduled gathering of leaders March 21-22.

That would be just a week before exit day, and would further fuel the sense of panic and despair among British and European businesses that are pouring resources into contingency measures they hope they’ll never have to use. A no-deal exit would plunge businesses into a legal limbo, snarling trade and damaging economies on both sides.
Title: 🌍 Brexit chaos: Theresa May loses yet another Brexit vote
Post by: RE on February 15, 2019, 12:36:34 AM
Meanwhile, across the Pond...

RE

https://www.vox.com/world/2019/2/14/18225098/brexit-theresa-may-parliament-vote-negotiations (https://www.vox.com/world/2019/2/14/18225098/brexit-theresa-may-parliament-vote-negotiations)

Brexit chaos: Theresa May loses yet another Brexit vote
The hardline Brexiteers in her party have said they don’t like her approach, undercutting her (already weak) position with the European Union.
By Jen Kirbyjen.kirby@vox.com Feb 14, 2019, 4:50pm EST

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/GKOFiM2o_D9NBL5VTwpwmPq1UdE=/0x0:5472x3648/920x613/filters:focal(3310x253:4184x1127):format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/63055680/1094820900.jpg.0.jpg)
UK Prime Minister Theresa May in February 2019. Dean Mouhtaropoulos/Getty Images

British Prime Minister Theresa May asked Parliament earlier this week to give her a little more time to renegotiate part of her unpopular Brexit deal with the European Union.

Parliament just responded with a resounding “nope,” voting down the motion 303 to 258, and leaving the Brexit impasse as intractable as ever.

May’s defeat was mostly symbolic, and doesn’t change anything practically. But her loss was still remarkable — and yet, somehow, not all that surprising given the complete and utter shambles that the Brexit debate is in.

Most critically for the prime minister, the vote undercuts her pitch to the European Union that if it offers concessions on the Brexit deal — specifically, renegotiating the so-called “Irish backstop” — she’ll finally be able to rally enough support in Parliament to get a Brexit agreement passed.

But the defeat of her government’s motion — led by pro-Brexit members of her own Conservative Party, no less — made it clear that May is still struggling to get her party to back a Brexit deal and likely won’t be able to even if the EU were to offer some concessions.
This latest chaos shows the future of Brexit is as uncertain as ever

May’s government lost this vote on Thursday because the hardcore Brexiteers — those who really want to abandon the EU and all of its rules — in her party abstained from voting.

They’re angry with May because, they argued, her motion potentially rules out a no-deal Brexit and weakens the UK’s negotiating power when it comes to the Irish backstop.

The Irish backstop is an insurance policy to prevent border checks between Northern Ireland (which is part of the UK) and the Republic of Ireland (which is an independent country that’s also an EU member state) if the UK and EU can’t agree on the terms of a future trade relationship after Brexit.

That’s because an open border is a key part of the 1998 peace agreement that ended decades of conflict in the region. There are serious concerns that if customs checks and other barriers go up on the border as a result of the UK leaving the EU — and thus no longer being part of the EU customs union and single market that allows for free movement of goods and people — that tensions could reignite.

The backstop, then, basically says that if EU and UK struggle to agree to the terms of their future relationship after Brexit, the UK will simply stay in close alignment with EU customs regulations. That way, both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland would be operating under the same rules and regulations for trade and thus there wouldn’t be a need for customs checks at the border.

The hardcore Brexiteers hate this, though, and see it as trapping the UK in a relationship with the EU indefinitely, and so they don’t want any sort of binding backstop in any Brexit deal.

Brexiteers also argued that the prime minister’s approach to the negotiations suggested she’s ruling out a no-deal Brexit. A no-deal Brexit means the UK would leave the EU without any plan or arrangements in place, a scenario that would deliver a catastrophic blow to the economy and trade. May actually hasn’t ruled out a no-deal Brexit, but she’s expressed her desire to avoid that scenario and reach an agreement instead. Brexiteers, meanwhile, believe a no-deal Brexit should remain an option.

The Brexiteers’ protest on Thursday doesn’t change the fact that the EU has insisted that the backstop isn’t renegotiable anyway. May has tried to get the EU to budge on that position by making the case that if it gives just a few concessions on the backstop issue, she could get the necessary support in Parliament to pass a Brexit deal.

But this latest vote proves her party is as fractured as ever, and it’s unlikely the EU, even if it were willing to tweak the backstop, would be able to offer anything that would appease the most hardline members of May’s party.

That’s even less of an incentive for the EU to negotiate. Which means, yet again, that the impasse prevails and the UK is still barreling toward the March 29 Brexit deadline. If no deal has been passed by then, the UK drops out of the EU and chaos will ensue.

There will be at least one critical pitstop along the way: May has promised that Parliament will get another chance to vote on February 27. Members of Parliament may be able to take more control of the Brexit process then, with just one month to go.
Title: Re: 🌍 George III Lost America. Theresa May Could Lose the UK Over Brexit
Post by: Eddie on February 15, 2019, 07:15:37 AM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/george-iii-lost-america-theresa-may-could-lose-the-united-kingdom-over-brexit (https://www.thedailybeast.com/george-iii-lost-america-theresa-may-could-lose-the-united-kingdom-over-brexit)

George III Lost America. Theresa May Could Lose the United Kingdom Over Brexit.

(https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/c_crop,d_placeholder_euli9k,h_2812,w_5000,x_0,y_0/dpr_1.0/c_limit,w_2999/fl_lossy,q_auto/v1548964619/190125-Irving-Theresa-May-tease_dpuwmc)
Photo Illustration by Kelly Caminero/The Daily Beast

Brexit has shown the world a British parliament and a political class that resembles a ship of fools without a captain.
Clive Irving
02.01.19 10:59 PM ET

Britain is locked in the most serious peacetime crisis in its modern history, the increasingly desperate attempt to secure the nation’s orderly departure from the European Union.

Brexit has shown the world a British parliament and a political class that resembles a ship of fools without a captain. One veteran of Margaret Thatcher’s cabinet said that voters are looking at parliament “with something rather near to contempt.”

We speak of the oldest parliamentary democracy in the Western world. Since 1721 it has seen 74 prime ministers of highly varied competence and backgrounds but few if any as incapable of steering the country through perilous times as the current incumbent, Theresa May, who could end up being compared to George III because of the consequences of her ineptitude.

The ultimate test of a prime minister in a crisis is always the same—how well do they measure up to the moment?

The answer to that depends on a combination of skills. Quite often they are skills that politicians do not find in themselves until they are called upon by destiny to prove them. Different times need different abilities. Sometimes a prime minister who at the time seems mediocre is later reassessed and seen to have been more consequential than anyone realized because he was overshadowed by a predecessor.

In British history there is a classic instance of this: In 1945 Winston Churchill was rudely and unexpectedly removed from office in a general election and replaced by the leader of the Labour Party, Clement Attlee.

Churchill, the country’s greatest ever war leader, was contemptuous of his successor whom he described as “a modest little man with a lot to be modest about.”
Related in World
Theresa May’s Brexit Deal Suffers Biggest Defeat in History
Labour Left Sees a Socialist PM in the Wreckage of Brexit
Theresa May Limps On After Surviving No-Confidence Vote

It turned out that Attlee (who was deputy prime minister during the war) was precisely what the nation needed, not only to get through years of austerity imposed by the near-bankruptcy created by the war effort, but as the parliamentary leader with the skills to re-engineer British society and provide its people with a comprehensive safety net including, notably, free universal health care for life.

So here were two men equally indispensable in their abilities, one to lead and the other to heal. In each case their mastery reflected their character, Churchill who was able to project himself as the living embodiment of a great national narrative of obdurate resistance and victory and Attlee as the quiet but systematic architect of change.

And today Britain has Theresa May.

It is too generous to say that May has had trouble measuring up the to moment. She has trouble explaining what the moment actually is—the utterance that will forever be her epitaph in the history of political discourse will be “Brexit means Brexit.”

Imagine Churchill saying “war means war.” OK, let’s be reasonable. When it comes to oratory nobody can hold a candle to Churchill. Every prime minister since Churchill has carefully avoided getting into that kind of contest.

But when the qualities of leadership are under scrutiny it’s important to understand that Churchill was as courageously decisive in private as he was in public.

    THE DARKEST HOURS
    The Torture of Being Winston Churchill’s Son
    Clive Irving

There is a passage in Andrew Roberts’ sweeping new biography, Churchill, Walking With Destiny, describing a moment where the prime minister speaks ad lib and without leaving his own record of what was, literally, one of the statements that saved Britain. He was speaking to men not as resolved as himself who needed to believe in him as an army needs to believe in its generals.

It came in the early summer of 1940 when Churchill, who had taken over only a week before, was resisting attempts to negotiate with Hitler. He told his new cabinet: “I have thought carefully in these last days whether it was part of my duty to consider entering into negotiations with That Man. But it was idle to think that, if we tried to make peace now, we should get better terms than if we fought it out. The Germans would demand our fleet—that would be called ‘disarmament’—our naval bases and much else. We should become a slave state… If this long island story of ours is to end at last, let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground.”

No official minute was taken of that statement—Roberts quotes it as recorded later in the diary of a cabinet member.

What is new now is that Theresa May brings to the office a background like no other before her. She is the first person to hold that office who is by both experience and instincts a bureaucrat.

Her rise to the Tory party leadership owed much to her success as a bureaucrat. She ran a government department that was so large and so challenging to master that some prime ministers were known to have deliberately given it to rivals in order to destroy their careers: the Home Office, a Whitehall edifice that could perhaps be compared to a nightmare package embracing the U.S. Department of Justice, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Homeland Security.

She was put there by David Cameron, a prime minister who was himself notoriously bored by administrative details and, as his decision to hold a national referendum on Brexit demonstrated, not too smart at judging outcomes.

May survived with a mixed record at the Home Office. She acquired something of the reputation of a control freak, devoted to organizational charts and preferring to run the department through a small and tight-knit clique of loyal aides and Tory Party law-and-order zealots.

Churchill, famous for asking for opinions “on one half sheet of notepaper,” said that a camel is what you end up with if you ask a committee to design a horse. May was fond of setting up committees and official inquiries to avoid taking action and produced many camels. One of her former cabinet ministers despaired that “it’s a fantastic skill, her ability to do nothing.”
Alas, because May is a bureaucrat she has the bureaucrat’s particular gift of killing language. The English language, so rich in its ability to move people, dies in her mouth.

Later she managed to swat away responsibility for an ugly debacle during her watch. West Indians who immigrated to Britain in the 1950s were threatened with mass deportation because they had no record of legally arriving—then it turned out that the Home Office itself had discarded the documentation.

On the face of it her bureaucratic cast of mind should have been an asset when facing the complexities involved in negotiating Britain out of all the political, legal and commercial attachments to the European Union. After all, the country was not facing a lethal existential threat. This was a self-initiated unraveling of laws and treaties.

But the EU is the world’s largest assembly of bureaucrats, a characteristic often damned by the pro-Brexit campaign, as well as by more reasoned critics.

A negotiation of this complexity had never been attempted by anyone before. It needed a team that combined a complete command of administrative detail, a shrewd sense of the national interest, an equally shrewd assessment of the opposing interests, and an ability to understand the difference between bottom-line economic interests and the EU’s loftier moral values as an alliance committed to protecting constitutional democracy in a continent with an unhappy history of autocracies.

This was a tough deal for anyone to successfully achieve. But any leader who was able not only to pull it off but to sell it to their people—in the case of the UK to a people divided by a referendum margin as close as 52 to 48 percent—needed to have something else. They had to be able to bring eloquence and vision to their argument.

Alas, because May is a bureaucrat she has the bureaucrat’s particular gift of killing language. The English language, so rich in its ability to move people, dies in her mouth.

The closest she has ever come to articulating the case for the Brexit deal she negotiated that set up a 21-month transition period for achieving a new free trade agreement with the EU (the deal that she is again stuck with trying to amend and resuscitate despite that fact that the EU has warned it will not renegotiate) was to say, repetitively, “It is in the national interest for everyone to get behind it.”

Basically when the narrow majority of Brits voted for Brexit they voted for something that didn’t actually exist. There was not even the vaguest outline of the real impact that Brexit would have on British life. Its proponents, even if they had any sense of the outcome (which is doubtful) weren’t interested in pesky details. They were appealing to raw emotions, largely anti-immigrant xenophobia, not advancing a rational argument.

    ‘DODGIER THAN EVER’
    It’s Official: Brexit Campaign Cheated Its Way to Victory
    Jamie Ross

The Brexit deal that May presented to parliament went down in the biggest defeat any prime minister has suffered, 432 votes to 202.

All along she had been trying to reconcile elements that are not reconcilable: keeping the support of her party’s lunatic fringe that is undismayed by the prospect of a “no deal” exit that would bring extreme self-harm while also holding the loyalty of the center of the party—and doing this while satisfying the terms the EU is prepared to allow. (“Allow” is the realistic term because Britain has always been a supplicant.) At the same time she survived a parliamentary no-confidence vote that leaves her in power while seriously wounded and without a new deal that is likely to fly.

Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party leader, is similarly ineffectual and unready to meet the leadership tests of his time. His party includes a rump of Brexiters and his cabinet is in thrall to fossilized Marxist ideas. His rhetorical skills are, if anything, less evident than May’s.

Given two clueless party leaders it often seems that all the politicians are overcome by the kind of helpless rapture that sent Thelma and Louise driving blissfully over the cliff.

In 1940 Churchill’s freedom of action was greatly helped by the fact that he did not have to bow to any party’s dictates. He was appointed prime minister without being leader of the Tory party—the leader remained his predecessor as prime minister, Neville Chamberlain. Uniquely, Churchill led a coalition of the Tory, Labour and Liberal parties at a time when none of those parties would probably have accepted him as their party leader.

As a result of this freedom he was able to isolate and negate the influence of the appeasers who did not like the prospect of choking in their own blood. He could and did appeal directly to the spirit of a parliament and a people who set aside partisan interests in favor of a higher purpose, victory that was by no means assured.

The irony now is that Brexiters represent only 15 percent of the 650 members of the House of Commons. A large majority is opposed to Britain crashing out of Europe without a deal. A prime minister not constrained by party loyalties could easily get support for a “soft” Brexit—meaning a measured transition from full membership to one that keeps the country in a permanent customs union without disruption.

Instead, by trying vainly to satisfy everyone May is satisfying nobody except people like the loony Little Englanders who say that such a deal would leave Britain as a “slave state.”

If they get their way May could well go down in history as the prime minister who lost the kingdom—the United Kingdom. Scotland wants nothing to do with Brexit and if it is imposed on them the Scottish parliament will probably vote to end the Acts of Union of 1707 that created the United Kingdom in order to leave them free to join the EU.

The implications are wider than that. Leaders in the European Union—including Germany’s Angela Merkel—are now fretting that the EU without Britain will be less able to clamp down on the kind of populist taste for autocrats that is afflicting Poland and Hungary.

George III went down in history as the king who lost America. Nobody in particular was held culpable for losing the empire—that was an inevitability of history that imposed its own logic and timing. If the United Kingdom becomes Little England (albeit including Wales and Northern Ireland) it will have reverted to the boundaries of the land it was in 40 A.D. when the Romans made a coherent colony out of a rabble of warring tribes. And this fiasco will be owned by a parliament that allowed a deranged minority to win and a prime minister who was never remotely equal to the greatest challenge of her time.

    RUDE BRITANNIA
    The Rise of Hateful Little England
    Clive Irving

Sponsored Stories

    Vintage Photos That Captured More Than Expected Vintage Photos That Captured More Than Expected Definition
    3 Ways Your Cat Asks For Help 3 Ways Your Cat Asks For Help Dr. Marty
    How Older Men Get Tighter Looking Skin [do this daily] How Older Men Get Tighter Looking Skin [do this daily] The Modern Man Today
    Rare “Ultimate Buy” Alert Rare “Ultimate Buy” Alert The Motley Fool

    This Is What Vikings Were Actually Like. The Photos Are Strikingly Scary This Is What Vikings Were Actually Like. The Photos Are Strikingly Scary Past Factory
    The Weirdest Amazon Products That Will Change Your Life The Weirdest Amazon Products That Will Change Your Life Definition
    Palmer, Alaska: This Tiny, Unknown Company Is Disrupting A $200 Billion Industry Palmer, Alaska: This Tiny, Unknown Company Is Disrupting A $200 Billion Industry EverQuote
    Gut Doctor "I Beg Americans To Throw Out This Vegetable Now" United Naturals

Recommended by
MIND CONTROL
How Fox News Pushes Trump to Make Every Bad Decision

No story has demonstrated the power of this unending Trump-Fox feedback loop like the partial government shutdown.
Matthew Gertz
Matthew Gertz
02.02.19 9:25 PM ET

President Donald Trump’s announcement last Friday that he would end the longest partial government shutdown in U.S. history without securing funding from congressional Democrats for his long-promised border wall came after weeks of brutal headlines and sagging poll numbers.

But when Trump arose the following morning, he did not devote his time to convening his White House advisers to figure out what went wrong or reaching out to Republican congressional leaders to plot their next move.

Instead, he did the same thing he’s done on countless days of his administration: He turned on his television, tuned in to his favorite program, Fox & Friends, and started tweeting about what he saw.

For more than a year, I’ve studied this Trump-Fox feedback loop, the president’s habit of live-tweeting his favorite shows on the right-wing cable news network. I’ve tracked several hundred of the president’s often-hyperaggressive tweets back to particular segments on Fox News and its sister network, Fox Business, that caught the president’s eye.

Fox helped build Trump’s political brand and fuel his electoral rise, and in recent years has remade itself as a propaganda outlet in support of his presidency. Trump, in turn, has long been obsessed with the network. His worldview and decision making are shaped by the former network personalities with whom he has stocked his administration, the “Fox cabinet” of current stars he reaches out to for advice, and the hours of Fox programming he reportedly watches each day.

Having a superfan in the White House has given Fox outsized influence over both the news cycle and federal policy. The network’s efforts to infuriate its audience—over everything from NFL players kneeling in protest during the national anthem to a caravan of migrants slowly approaching the U.S. southern border—can trigger outraged presidential tweets, instantly turning the network’s particular fixations into national news.

And because Fox’s staff and guests are aware that Trump could be watching at any time, they often use the network’s platform to try to reach him directly, seeking to shape his decisions on political strategy, legal tactics, pardons, personnel, and more.
Related in Politics
WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 08: U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to the nation in his first-prime address from the Oval Office of the White House on January 8, 2019 in Washington, DC. A partial shutdown of the federal government extended to 17 days following the president's demand for $5.7 billion for a border wall while Democrats have refused. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch-Pool/Getty Images)
Trump Channels Hannity and Fearmongers for the Wall
‘Fox & Friends’ Lashes Out: Ann Coulter Is ‘Off Her Rocker’
Trump Is Now Presiding Over the Longest Shutdown Ever

No story has demonstrated the power of this Trump-Fox feedback loop like the partial government shutdown.

Trump’s incessant craving for validation from the network’s conservative commentators triggered his initial refusal to sign any legislation funding the government that did not include money for a border wall, and then that need sustained his intransigence over the following weeks. His eventual cave shows the limitations of prioritizing the whims of right-wing infotainers during congressional negotiations. But there is no evidence Trump has learned anything from the crushing defeat, suggesting that he will continue trying to make policy with respect to the wall and other issues, on the basis of whether it pleases Fox hosts.

    DONNY & FRIENDS
    Even Fox News Doesn’t Think ‘Fox & Friends’ Is News
    Andrew Kirell

In September, I argued that Trump’s Fox affinity made a government shutdown inevitable. The same pattern kept playing out: House and Senate leaders would agree to a spending bill, Fox commentators would claim the bill betrayed the president’s base because it didn’t include wall funding, Trump would angrily tweet about the Fox segments and send Washington into chaos, and Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan would have to talk him into supporting the legislation. With Trump publicly declaring that a shutdown was a “great political issue” and explicitly citing Fox hosts as his inspiration for the tactic, the situation seemed untenable.

Three months later, it finally came to a head. As the December deadline to renew government spending loomed, Fox personalities again began urging Trump to shut down the government rather than sign a spending bill that didn’t include money for the wall. Once again, Fox’s influence was matched against that of Republican congressional leaders, who warned the president that a shutdown would be a grave tactical mistake.

But this time, Fox News won.

    LIFE AFTER DEATH
    How the Cult of Roger Ailes Continues to Rule Fox News
    Matt Wilstein

When the White House signaled that it was backing away from its wall-funding demand, furious network commentators insisted that Trump reconsider and instead shut down the government. The calls were loudest on Fox & Friends, the president’s favorite morning cable show. “If there's not a shutdown,” declared co-host Steve Doocy, “he’s going to look like a loser.”

Goaded by those he typically counts on for support, Trump reportedly “seethed and panicked” about the criticism, and then took their advice.

The president’s propagandists were jubilant. As portions of the government shuttered and hundreds of thousands of federal employees worked without pay for weeks, Fox’s airwaves were filled with cheers for the president and exhortations for him to remain firm. The hosts gave little indication of Trump’s grave political peril—to the contrary, they urged the rest of his party to stick with him regardless of the consequences. “If this takes 150 days, I think the Republican Party needs to stand united with the president,” argued Sean Hannity.

Trump made clear throughout the shutdown that he was prioritizing the support of Fox’s hosts over all other considerations. He consulted with Hannity and Dobbs for strategic advice about how to handle the shutdown, gave a national address in which he ripped language from their shows, and showed up on Fox programs to make his pitch directly to their audiences.

And as federal workers missed paychecks and his poll numbers plummeted, the president kept his television turned to the fawning reports of his favorite network and his iPhone open to Twitter. Trump sent at least 60 tweets parroting the network’s programming over the course of the shutdown.

The president trumpeted the polls Fox cherry-picked to suggest he was winning the shutdown:

He cribbed statistics the network aired about “Walls Around The World”:

He claimed that “Only a Wall” could protect Americans from a caravan of migrants the network repeatedly reported on:

He pushed Fox’s attacks on congressional Democrats who refused to support wall funding:

And he promised Doocy that he wouldn’t “cave”:

Cozying up to Fox News may have made Trump president. But as a legislative strategy, it was a total failure. It proved impossible for Trump to simultaneously ensure the support of far-right media figures accountable only to their audience and make a deal that attracted Democratic votes.

Fox’s own personalities understood the dynamic at play: During one heated debate, political analyst Juan Williams declared that Hannity was one of the right-wing commentators “running the government.” And Republican senators knew it too: One told Axios that Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner’s reported effort to try to end the stalemate with a major deal was impossible, saying, “Trump can withstand Ann Coulter. He can't lose Hannity and the rest.”

Hampered by these tensions, the president’s strategy eventually collapsed. With Democrats refusing to negotiate until he agreed to reopen the government, some federal workers beginning to revolt, and Republican senators on the verge of abandoning him, Trump finally gave in after 35 days, agreeing to reopen the government for three weeks while Congress attempts to negotiate an immigration package.

Trump’s decision to fold divided his Fox allies—even the hosts who had counseled the president on his shutdown strategy. Hannity offered a vigorous defense of his decision, arguing that “anyone out there” who is “thinking President Trump caved today, you don't really know the Donald Trump I know.” For Dobbs, however, the news was “a victory for Nancy Pelosi ... and to deny it is to try to escape from reality.”

But neither Dobbs nor the president appeared to hold a grudge—by Thursday morning, Trump was tweeting about the previous night’s episode of Dobbs’ show, using the Fox host’s talking points as evidence that a border wall is necessary. Based on that program, Trump argued that Republicans negotiating an immigration deal “are wasting their time” because Democrats will not provide money for the “DESPERATELY needed WALL.” “I’ve got you covered,” he ominously added.

That seemed to be a reference to Trump’s likely endgame: declaring a national emergency in order to divert previously appropriated federal funds to wall construction. Ever since Trump first suggested that he might take that step in early January, Fox hosts have been urging him to do it, claiming that, in Dobbs’ words, the “only way forward” is for Trump to “simply sweep aside the recalcitrant left in this country” and do so.

Republican congressional leaders keep warning Trump that declaring a national emergency is a terrible idea that won’t serve his ends, and up until now, he’s listened to him. But we’ve seen how this played out before. The president will continue to wallow in Fox’s programming, as night after night its hosts tell him that the declaration is his only way to win. And eventually, he will listen.

    Matthew Gertz
    @MattGertz

Germany is now entering a recession. They just aren't calling it that yet. They have elections in 2021 and Merkel is not running, and her party is getting fragmented too. If the Trump-like elements there win, there won't BE a Eurozone for long. Brexit is a sideshow now.
 
You heard it from me first.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Eddie on February 15, 2019, 07:17:22 AM
I'll be running for office in 2024 on the Gold and Cryptos ticket.
Title: 🌍 Disorderly Brexit Increasingly Likely, EU Blinks on Derivatives...
Post by: RE on February 24, 2019, 02:05:08 AM
https://wolfstreet.com/2019/02/22/with-disorderly-brexit-increasingly-likely-eu-blinks-on-derivatives-clearing-in-london/ (https://wolfstreet.com/2019/02/22/with-disorderly-brexit-increasingly-likely-eu-blinks-on-derivatives-clearing-in-london/)

Disorderly Brexit Increasingly Likely, EU Blinks on Derivatives-Clearing in London

(http://prod-upp-image-read.ft.com/f6667ce0-d36b-11e6-b06b-680c49b4b4c0)

by Don Quijones • Feb 22, 2019 • 52 Comments   
No one can afford even the smallest hiccup in derivatives.
By Don Quijones, Spain, UK, & Mexico, editor at WOLF STREET.

After months of furious lobbying, the City of London Corporation has finally got what it wanted: recognition by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) of the three biggest clearing houses it hosts, LCH, ICE Clear Europe and LME Clear. This will allow the three to continue providing services throughout the EU even in the event of a no-deal Brexit, which is looking increasingly likely. It will also limit the potential for disruption in central clearing and prevent any negative impact on the financial stability of the EU, says ESMA.

Clearing is where a company acts as a middleman between financial trades, collecting collateral and standing between derivatives and swaps traders to prevent a default from spiraling out of control. Since the 2008 Financial Crisis and the inexorable expansion of derivatives trading, clearing has become an integral part of the global financial infrastructure.

For the City of London, clearing is the jewel in its crown providing thousands of jobs, billions of pounds in annual profits and a vital strategic edge over rival financial hubs. London is the global leader for the clearing of all kinds of currency-denominated derivatives, particularly the euro. The London Clearing House (LCH) says it clears €927 billion ($1.05 trillion) worth of euro-denominated contracts a day, roughly three quarters of the entire global market. The second-largest operator in the sector, Paris, clears just 11% of the transactions.

For years, the French government, together with the European Central Bank, have tried to wrest control of the clearing of euro-denominated transactions from the City of London, for largely justifiable reasons. And Brexit was supposed to provide the perfect alibi. But alas, it hasn’t happened.

Instead, with just five weeks left until Brexit Day (March 29), a number of major EU Member States, including Germany, France, the Netherlands and Italy, are fast-tracking national legislation to enable bankers to continue to service the 18 trillion pounds ($23 trillion) of derivative contracts that could be disrupted if the UK crashes out of the EU without an agreement. According to Bloomberg, the Dutch legislation may even allow brokers and high-speed traders to conduct new business from London, at least for a while.

It wasn’t meant to be like this. Since the day the British people voted to leave the EU, rival European capitals, in particular Paris, have done everything they can to lure London’s financial service providers across the Channel. Many banks have indeed moved some of their operations to other cities, in particular Berlin, Paris and Dublin, but not remotely on the scale many think tanks had predicted. Paris has even made moves on London’s gold market.

But the most coveted prize of all was London’s clearing business. However, any attempt to move euro clearing away from London to the continent was likely to take years to implement, ramp up costs for companies across the region and be hugely disruptive to a market that had already played a leading role in the last global financial crisis. As it turns out, two and a half years is not nearly enough time to uproot and move en masse such a large, complex market that took decades to develop in one of the world’s most bank-friendly jurisdictions.

In October 2018, the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) and six national trade bodies within the EU released a paper on “The impact of Brexit on OTC [over-the-counter] derivatives.” It features a summary table of 16 steps EU authorities can take to “mitigate adverse impacts of Brexit”. The table contains eight items marked in red as “immediate/high-impact”, seven in orange as “immediate/low impact”, and only one in yellow as “delayed impact”.

In other words, if done badly, bad things could quickly ensue. With a disorderly Brexit looking increasingly likely, the EU appears to have taken note. Last week German Finance Minister Olaf Sholz even said that “everyone in the financial market is totally calm” about a possible no-deal Brexit. “Because they know it’s well done, well prepared and well thought through and it will work somehow. For the transport of goods, it will be more complicated.”

For the City of London and the myriad interests it represents, the latest concession by Brussels and national EU government is a move in the right direction. But it’s still only “a partial and temporary fix,” says Miles Celic, the chief executive of the City’s most influential lobbying group, City UK. “Time is running out to resolve these technical issues, and while such temporary fixes are essential, long-term stable solutions are needed to provide the certainty that customers and clients across the whole of Europe and beyond need.” By Don Quijones.

“If you are looking to buy a house in Q1 you will have the market to yourself.” Read… London Housing Meltdown Spreads as Pre-Brexit Angst Batters Market Sentiment
Title: 🌍 May Raises the Stakes Before Brexit Showdown as EU Hatches Plot
Post by: RE on February 24, 2019, 11:51:52 PM
Sounds like another Can-Kick is coming.  Big Surprise.  ::)

RE

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-24/may-raises-the-stakes-before-brexit-showdown-as-eu-hatches-plot (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-24/may-raises-the-stakes-before-brexit-showdown-as-eu-hatches-plot)

May Raises the Stakes Before Brexit Showdown as EU Hatches Plot
By Tim Ross
and Ian Wishart
February 24, 2019, 11:28 AM AKST Updated on February 24, 2019, 3:00 PM AKST

(https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/iys3pNMirhrc/v0/800x-1.jpg)

    Premier pushes deadline for final vote to days before exit
    EU floats new tactic: the alternative could be a long delay

0:15
U.K.'s May Delays Brexit Vote to Buy Time

U.K.'s May Delays Brexit Vote to Buy Time
LISTEN TO ARTICLE
3:25

Theresa May once again postponed a final vote on her Brexit divorce agreement, raising the stakes in a battle with members of her own cabinet who are fighting to avert a no-deal exit.

The prime minister set a new deadline of March 12 -- just 17 days before Brexit day -- for Parliament to vote on the accord she’s still trying to renegotiate.

Her gamble could make those who are seeking to avoid a catastrophic no-deal departure even more determined to defeat her. They’ll have a chance to do that on Wednesday, when they’ll try to force her to delay exit day to avoid the economic damage of crashing out. If they succeed, the pound is expected to rally.

May wants to keep the no-deal threat on the table as she thinks it will help get her unpopular agreement through the House of Commons at the 11th hour. But the prospect horrifies businesses and members of May’s own Cabinet. Meanwhile, it emerged on Sunday at a summit in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, that European Union officials are also working on a new plan that could help get the deal over the line at the last minute.
U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May Presents Brexit Plan B to Parliament

Theresa May
Photographer: Luke MacGregor/Bloomberg

EU officials are considering telling the U.K. that any extension must keep Britain inside the bloc until 2021. The move could force pro-Brexit hardliners to back May’s plan to avoid extended membership and the risk that the whole divorce could be reversed.

Three European officials said a long extension made sense as a few months wouldn’t be enough to break the deadlock. A fourth said the idea sounded like a scare tactic. There is no consensus yet among the 27 remaining governments over the length of a postponement.

Read more: EU Is Said to Mull 21-Month Delay If May Can’t Get Brexit Done

May’s proposed divorce agreement was rejected in an overwhelming defeat in the Commons last month. She’s trying to re-write the most contentious part of the agreement -- the so-called Irish border backstop.

May has already asked Parliament to give her more time to negotiate twice and ministers in her own government are running out of patience. Several ministers indicated on Friday they were ready to vote against her to prevent a cliff-edge departure -- joining with Labour members of Parliament to do so. Business groups were dismayed on Sunday at May’s latest attempt at delay.

“She cannot just keep drifting and dithering like this or there is a real risk our whole country tumbles off a cliff edge into a chaotic no-deal that no one is ready for,” said Labour MP Yvette Cooper, who will propose an amendment this week to force May’s hand. “The prime minister is making it completely impossible for businesses, public services and families to plan.”

Another amendment by rank-and-file Conservative MPs is also being drawn up that would call for an extension if May can’t secure a deal, according to an official.

Three Cabinet ministers -- Amber Rudd, David Gauke and Greg Clark -- wrote a joint article on Saturday warning they cannot allow the U.K. to leave without a deal and suggesting they will vote to stop it on Wednesday. May made no attempt to censure them on Sunday.
‘Within our Grasp’

May met European leaders at the summit, but both sides played down the chances of a breakthrough. European Council President Donald Tusk had more bad news for May, according to an official: He said the EU wouldn’t call a new summit of leaders to sign off on changes to the deal until it’s clear that the U.K. Parliament would back them. The next summit is scheduled for March 21 -- days before Britain is due to leave.

The EU has said it won’t renegotiate the treaty, but can offer reassurances or legal interpretations. May is also expected to meet German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar in Egypt.

“We still have it within our grasp to leave the European Union with a deal on the 29th of March and that’s what I’m going to be working at,” she told reporters on Sunday.

— With assistance by Ian Wishart, and Lin Noueihed
Title: 🌍 May Says Brexit Might Never Happen If Parliament Rejects Her Deal
Post by: RE on March 09, 2019, 12:11:02 AM
How about another referendum?  We'll keep voting on it until we get the outcome we want!

RE

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-08/may-says-brexit-might-never-happen-if-parliament-rejects-deal (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-08/may-says-brexit-might-never-happen-if-parliament-rejects-deal)

May Says Brexit Might Never Happen If Parliament Rejects Her Deal
By Tim Ross
and Robert Hutton
March 8, 2019, 4:40 AM AKST Updated on March 8, 2019, 5:34 AM AKST

    Prime Minister tells EU to act now to avoid ‘moment of crisis’
    Euroskeptics risk soft Brexit if they vote down deal, May Says

(https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/i5BflmOccOD8/v1/1000x-1.jpg)
Theresa May speaks in Grimsby on March 8.

Theresa May speaks in Grimsby on March 8. Photographer: Darren Staples/Bloomberg
LISTEN TO ARTICLE
2:55

Follow @Brexit, sign up to our Brexit Bulletin, and tell us your Brexit story.

U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May warned that Brexit could be delayed, diluted, or even canceled if members of Parliament reject her deal in a crunch vote next week.

The prime minister urged euro-skeptics in her own Conservative Party to compromise for the sake of delivering on the result of the 2016 Brexit referendum by backing the divorce agreement she’s brokered with the bloc in a vote on March 12.

If these Tories refuse to back down because they want a cleaner break with the EU than her deal allows, they risk achieving the opposite -- an even softer, Norway-style accord, she said.

“Back it and the U.K. will leave the European Union. Reject it and no one knows what will happen,” May told an audience in Grimsby, northeast England, on Friday. “We may not leave the EU for many months. We may leave without the protections that the deal provides. We may never leave at all.”
Second Vote

May issued her warning just four days before Parliament votes for a second time on whether to accept or reject the separation agreement she’s spent two years negotiating with the EU. In January, the Commons threw out the deal, defeating May by a record 230-vote majority.

In the two months since, the premier has been trying to extract changes to the deal to address MPs’ concerns that the so-called Irish border backstop will indefinitely lock Britain into EU trade rules. She faces stubborn opposition from a hard core of pro-Brexit Conservatives who dislike her deal because it keeps Britain tied too closely to the bloc.

May raised the specter of an even softer Brexit. If her deal falls, Parliament would then vote on whether to leave without an agreement and is almost certain to reject that option. Then there would be another vote on delaying the divorce, penciled in for Thursday March 14.

Such a delay would lead to a fresh round of horse-trading with the EU. “That might lead to a form of Brexit that does not match up to what people voted for,” May said.

The result could be the U.K. staying in the bloc’s single market and customs union permanently, an option known as Norway Plus, she suggested.
Norway Plus

“It could mean no end to free movement, no ability to strike our own trade deals, no end to the big annual payments, no taking back control -- which is what the British people voted for,” she told her audience.

The talks with the EU have at times been “difficult and robust,” May said on Friday. She appealed to EU leaders to act now to prevent more uncertainty and the threat of an economically damaging split with no new trade terms in place.

“Now is the moment for us to act,” May said. “It needs just one more push to address the final specific concerns of our Parliament.”

European officials have been planning to wait until the last moment before the U.K. is due to exit the bloc on March 29 before making any concession -- but May said that would be too late.

“So let’s not hold back. Let’s do what is necessary for MPs to back the deal on Tuesday,” May said. “Because if MPs reject the deal, nothing is certain. It would be at a moment of crisis.”
(Updates with detail throughout.)

politics
Brexit Talks Stall as EU Makes Offer the U.K. Already Rejected
By Ian Wishart
and Tim Ross
March 8, 2019, 9:16 AM AKST

    EU negotiator tells ambassadors the blame game has started
    If Parliament votes down deal on Tuesday, exit will be delayed

Brexit talks grew more hostile as the European Union unveiled a new concession aimed at breaking the deadlock which U.K. negotiators had already rejected.

With just four days to go until British Prime Minister Theresa May has to take her Brexit deal back to the parliament that vetoed it by a historic margin in January, there’s no sign of a breakthrough in talks and the tone is increasingly acrimonious. Chief EU negotiator Michel Barnier told ambassadors on Friday the blame game had started, according to a person familiar with the situation.
EU Chief Negotiator Michel Barnier News Conference Following Latest U.K. Brexit Proposal

Michel Barnier
Photographer: Jasper Juinen/Bloomberg

If the deal is rejected next week, Britain will be plunged into political chaos as the plan to exit the bloc will likely be delayed, redefined or even scrapped.

Barnier announced on Twitter a new package of concessions to resolve the contentious issue of the Irish border backstop. The most striking was to allow it to apply just to Northern Ireland, rather than the whole of the U.K. But May has long said this would be unacceptable, and negotiators had already rejected it on Tuesday, according to another person familiar with the talks.

The EU also offered to strengthen other provisions in the deal -- on arbitration and good-faith clauses -- but the U.K. side said it wasn’t enough.

“Now is not the time to rerun old arguments,” U.K. Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay said on Twitter. “The U.K. has put forward clear new proposals. We now need to agree a balanced solution that can work for both sides.”
Growing Pessimism

Officials from both the U.K. and EU are growing pessimistic that a deal can be done in time for Tuesday, when May puts the deal to Parliament. One European diplomat said there had been a complete breakdown in trust. The EU may now be taking it for granted that British politicians will reject the deal, and vote to extend the exit day deadline instead as a way of avoiding the chaotic no-deal exit that both sides want to avoid.

Briefings have become more aggressive as frustration mounts. Attorney General Geoffrey Cox -- sent in by May to renegotiate the backstop because his views were respected by Brexiteers at home -- has riled negotiators in Brussels, according to European officials. The U.K., meanwhile, accuses the EU of intransigence.

Read more: May’s Larger-Than-Life Lawyer Becomes EU’s Brexit Villain No. 1

May used a speech on Friday to put the ball in the bloc’s court, saying “the EU has to make a choice too.” Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt bolstered that message, calling on the EU to avoid making a historic mistake, and poisoning future relations. “If this ends in acrimony, people will say the EU got this moment wrong,” he said.
Title: 🌍 UK’s Theresa May clinches legally binding Brexit ‘backstop’ changes
Post by: RE on March 12, 2019, 01:50:33 AM
Legally Binding".  Right.  Can I sell you some Swampland in FL?

Sad Brinkmanship.

RE

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/11/uks-theresa-may-clinches-legally-binding-brexit-backstop-changes-deputy-says.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/11/uks-theresa-may-clinches-legally-binding-brexit-backstop-changes-deputy-says.html)

UK’s Theresa May clinches legally binding Brexit ‘backstop’ changes, deputy says
Published Mon, Mar 11 2019 • 6:29 PM EDT | Updated Mon, Mar 11 2019 • 8:39 PM EDT
Reuters
   
(https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/105704269-1548699966360rts2aycz.jpg?v=1548700032&w=740&h=)
   
Key Points

    “Today we have secured legal changes,” May said in a late night news conference in Strasbourg beside Juncker, exactly 17 days before the United Kingdom is due to leave the EU.
    May announced three documents — a joint instrument, a joint statement and a unilateral declaration — which she said were aimed at addressing the most contentious part of the divorce deal she agreed in November: the Irish backstop.

RT: Theresa May speaking 190116
Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May makes a statement following winning a confidence vote, after Parliament rejected her Brexit deal, outside 10 Downing Street in London, Britain, January 16, 2019.
Clodagh Kilcoyne | Reuters

Prime Minister Theresa May won legally binding Brexit assurances from the European Union on Monday in a last ditch attempt to sway rebellious British lawmakers who have threatened to vote down her divorce deal again.

Scrambling to plot an orderly path out of the Brexit maze just days before the United Kingdom is due to leave on March 29, May rushed to Strasbourg to agree additional assurances with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker.

Brexiteers in May’s party have accused her of surrendering to the EU and it was not clear if the assurances she agreed would be enough to win over the 116 additional lawmakers she needs reverse the crushing defeat her deal suffered on Jan. 15.

“Today we have secured legal changes,” May said in a late night news conference in Strasbourg beside Juncker, exactly 17 days before the United Kingdom is due to leave the EU.

“Now is the time to come together to back this improved Brexit deal and to deliver on the instruction of the British people,” May said.

May announced three documents — a joint instrument, a joint statement and a unilateral declaration — which she said were aimed at addressing the most contentious part of the divorce deal she agreed in November: the Irish backstop.

The backstop is an insurance policy aimed at avoiding controls on the sensitive border between the British province of Northern Ireland and EU member Ireland, though some British lawmakers worry it could trap the United Kingdom in the EU’s orbit indefinitely.

On news of the breakthrough, sterling, which has see-sawed on Brexit headlines, jumped 0.8 percent to $1.3250 in Asian trade and rallied to the strongest against the euro since mid-2017.
Last chance?

After two-and-a-half years of haggling with Britain over Brexit, Juncker cautioned that this was the last chance for Britain.

“There will be no third chance,” he said. “There will be no further interpretations of the interpretations; no further assurances of the re-assurances — if the meaningful vote tomorrow fails.”
watch now
VIDEO03:18
Here’s what UK PM Theresa May needs to do to save her Brexit deal

“It is this deal or Brexit might not happen at all,” he said. He said in a letter to EU summit chair Donald Tusk that if Britain didn’t leave by the May 23-26 elections, it would have to elect its own EU lawmakers.

The United Kingdom’s tortuous crisis over EU membership is approaching its finale with an extraordinary array of outcomes still possible, including a delay, a last-minute deal, a no-deal Brexit, a snap election or even another referendum. The country voted to leave the EU in a 2016 plebiscite.

The British parliament on Jan. 15 voted to reject May’s deal by 230 votes, the biggest defeat for a government in modern British history.
Brexit votes

May has promised lawmakers a vote on her deal on Tuesday. The motion put forward by the government said that the joint instrument “reduces the risk” that the United Kingdom would be trapped in the backstop.

The immediate reaction was cautious from Brexit-supporting lawmakers in her own party and from the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party which props up her minority government.

After Cabinet Office Minister David Lidington, who May’s de facto deputy, updated the British parliament on the talks, Brexit supporting lawmaker Steve Baker told BBC Radio: “It’s not for the first time that David has had to put a very good gloss on something which falls short of what was expected.”

Lidington said that Britain and the EU had agreed an instrument to prevent the EU seeking to “trap” Britain in any backstop, work to replace the backstop by December 2020 and confirming pledges Britain has made for a lock on new EU laws applying to Northern Ireland.

He also said that they had agreed a second document, a joint statement to expedite the negotiation of the future relationship.

The DUP said it would study the documents.

May was instructed by lawmakers to replace the backstop with alternative arrangements. The opposition Labour Party said she had fallen far short of her promises to parliament.

If the backstop comes into force and talks on the future relationship break down with no prospect of an agreement, May said the unilateral declaration would make clear there was nothing to stop London from moving to leave the backstop.
Brexit in peril?

The British government’s top lawyer, Attorney General Geoffrey Cox, is due to set out his legal analysis of the assurances ahead of Tuesday’s vote. Many pro-Brexit lawmakers will wait to see that before deciding how to vote.

If she loses the vote, May has said lawmakers will get a vote on Wednesday on whether to leave without a deal and, if they reject that, then a vote on whether to ask for a limited delay to Brexit.

Senior British government ministers have warned rebellious lawmakers that if May’s deal is voted down then there is a chance that Brexit could be thwarted.

Brexit will pitch the world’s fifth largest economy into the unknown and many fear it will serve to divide the West as it grapples with both the unconventional presidency of Donald Trump and growing assertiveness from Russia and China.

Supporters of Brexit say that while the divorce might bring some short-term instability, in the longer term it will allow the United Kingdom to thrive and also enable deeper EU integration without such a powerful reluctant member.
Title: 🌍 Theresa May's EU withdrawal deal has been rejected by MPs
Post by: RE on March 13, 2019, 02:57:51 AM
Not a good day to quite drinking for Teresa.

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47547887 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47547887)

    Brexit

Media caption: Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn address MPs after her Brexit deal is voted down again

Theresa May's EU withdrawal deal has been rejected by MPs by an overwhelming majority for a second time, with just 17 days to go to Brexit.

MPs voted down the prime minister's deal by 149 - a smaller margin than when they rejected it in January.

Mrs May said MPs will now get a vote on whether the UK should leave the EU without a deal and, if that fails, on whether Brexit should be delayed.

She said Tory MPs will get a free vote on a no-deal Brexit.

    LIVE: Reaction as May's deal is voted down
    'People must decide' Brexit - Sturgeon
    Brexit: What could happen next?
    Brexit: A really simple guide

That means they can vote with their conscience rather than following the orders of party managers - an unusual move for a vote on a major policy, with Labour saying it showed she had "given up any pretence of leading the country".

The PM had made a last minute plea to MPs to back her deal after she had secured legal assurances on the Irish backstop from the EU.

But although she managed to convince about 40 Tory MPs to change their mind, it was not nearly enough to overturn the historic 230 vote defeat she suffered in January, throwing her Brexit strategy into fresh disarray.
ADVERTISEMENT

In a statement after the defeat, Mrs May said: "I continue to believe that by far the best outcome is the UK leaves the European Union in an orderly fashion with a deal.

"And that the deal we have negotiated is the best and indeed only deal available."

Setting out the next steps, she said MPs will vote on Wednesday on whether the UK should leave the EU without a deal or not.

If they vote against a no-deal Brexit, they will vote the following day on whether Article 50 - the legal mechanism taking the UK out of the EU on 29 March - should be extended.

Mrs May said MPs would have to decide whether they want to delay Brexit, hold another referendum, or whether they "want to leave with a deal but not this deal".

She said that the choices facing the UK were "unenviable", but because of the rejection of her deal, "they are choices that must be faced".

Mrs May also told MPs the government would announce details of how the UK will manage its border with Ireland in the event of a no-deal Brexit on Wednesday.

    'Avoid no-deal Brexit own goal,' say business groups
    Disgraced MP back to vote on Brexit deal
    Brexit deal: What do the documents say?

Mrs May said leaving without a deal remained the UK's default position but Downing Street said she will tell MPs whether she will vote for no-deal when she opens Wednesday's Commons debate on it.

The prime minister did not discuss resigning after her latest defeat because a government led by her had recently won a confidence vote in the Commons, added the PM's spokesman.

She has no plans to return to Brussels to ask for more concessions because, as she told MPs, she still thinks her deal is the best and only one on offer, he added.
Cabinet divided on next move

What isn't clear is how the prime minister actually intends to dig herself out of this dreadful political hole.

Some of her colleagues around the Cabinet table think it shows she has to tack to a closer deal with the EU.

Some of them believe it's time now to go hell-for-leather to leave without an overarching deal but move to make as much preparation as possible, and fast.

Other ministers believe genuinely, still with around two weeks to go, and an EU summit next week, there is still time to try to manoeuvre her deal through - somehow.

Read more from Laura

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the prime minister should now call a general election.

"The government has been defeated again by an enormous majority and it must accept its deal is clearly dead and does not have the support of this House," he told MPs.

He said a no-deal Brexit had to be "taken off the table" - and Labour would continue to push its alternative Brexit proposals. He did not mention the party's commitment to back another referendum.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, chairman of the European Research Group of Brexiteer MPs, said "the problem with the deal was that it didn't deliver on the commitment to leave the EU cleanly and that the backstop would have kept us in the customs union and de facto in the single market".
Media captionChris Mason: "A huge defeat for the tweaked Brexit deal"

The Tory MP, who voted against Mrs May's deal, told BBC News: "The moral authority of 17.4 million people who voted to leave means that very few people are actually standing up and saying they want to reverse Brexit. They're calling for a second referendum, they're calling for delay.

"But actually very few politicians are brave enough to go out and say they want to overturn the referendum result."

Leading Conservative Remainer Dominic Grieve, who backs another referendum, said Mrs May's deal was now "finished".

The Tory MP, who voted against the prime minister's plan, said he was confident the majority of MPs would now vote against a no-deal Brexit - and he hoped they would then vote to ask for an extension to Article 50.
Media captionCorbyn: PM's Brexit plan "is dead"

The EU's chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier said in a tweet: "The EU has done everything it can to help get the Withdrawal Agreement over the line. The impasse can only be solved in the UK. Our 'no-deal' preparations are now more important than ever before."

A spokesman for European Council president Donald Tusk echoed that message, saying it was "difficult to see what more we can do".

"With only 17 days left to 29 March, today's vote has significantly increased the likelihood of a no-deal Brexit," added the spokesman.

The EU would consider an extension to Brexit if the UK asked for one, he added, but the 27 other EU member states would expect "a credible justification" for it.
Media captionMPs voted by 391 to 242 against Theresa May's Brexit plan

The PM's deal was defeated by 391 to 242.

Some 75 Conservative MPs voted against it, compared with 118 who voted against it in January.

The Democratic Unionist Party's 10 MPs also voted against the deal, as did the Labour Party, SNP and other opposition parties.

Three Labour MPs - Kevin Barron, Caroline Flint and John Mann - voted for the prime minister's deal.
Title: 🌍 UK MPs reject a no-deal Brexit
Post by: RE on March 14, 2019, 01:24:33 AM
Haven't played the Brexit Theme Song in a while... ::)

http://www.youtube.com/v/yYkL5igsG4k

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/PSO4ndj04KM
Title: 🌍 What could a no-deal Brexit actually mean for YOU?
Post by: RE on March 14, 2019, 01:33:57 AM
The FEAR CAMPAIGN swings into high gear!

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/EpYrclfgX2I
Title: Re: 🌍 What could a no-deal Brexit actually mean for YOU?
Post by: Surly1 on March 14, 2019, 04:09:48 AM
The FEAR CAMPAIGN swings into high gear!

RE
http://www.youtube.com/v/EpYrclfgX2I

Here's hoping Robert Mercer and the other funders of the Brexit referendum will enjoy the blood on their hands from the resumption of The Troubles.
Title: Re: 🌍 What could a no-deal Brexit actually mean for YOU?
Post by: RE on March 14, 2019, 04:18:09 AM
The FEAR CAMPAIGN swings into high gear!

RE
http://www.youtube.com/v/EpYrclfgX2I

Here's hoping Robert Mercer and the other funders of the Brexit referendum will enjoy the blood on their hands from the resumption of The Troubles.

Nice 2 C U back in the Saddle.  :icon_sunny:

RE
Title: Re: 🌍 What could a no-deal Brexit actually mean for YOU?
Post by: Surly1 on March 14, 2019, 06:52:10 AM
The FEAR CAMPAIGN swings into high gear!

Here's hoping Robert Mercer and the other funders of the Brexit referendum will enjoy the blood on their hands from the resumption of The Troubles.

Nice 2 C U back in the Saddle.  :icon_sunny:

RE
Thanks. good to be back.
Helped plan and attended a surprise 90th birthday party for my mother. Huge success, especially since she didn't core out at seeing 40+ people in the party room. Got to see cousins I hadn't seen in 40 years, and meet some I'd never known before. And then the following night, I met up with a friend since college and we drank Irish Car Bombs until the wee smalls. THAT left a mark. Too old these days.
Anyhow, discussion seems to be brisk as the Iditarod has come to an end. Guess we won't be seeing you on Sportscenter.
Title: Re: 🌍 What could a no-deal Brexit actually mean for YOU?
Post by: RE on March 14, 2019, 07:38:45 AM
Guess we won't be seeing you on Sportscenter.

You never know.  One of the Iditarod Broadcasts has gone Triple Digits now also.  112 Views in undr a week! :icon_sunny:

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/menqtm2ZLEM/hqdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEjCNACELwBSFryq4qpAxUIARUAAAAAGAElAADIQj0AgKJDeAE=&rs=AOn4CLAOoafx8takFGYq1L6SGg8UunRxbw)
2019 Iditarod - The Top 4 Mushers Contend for the Title

112 views 3 days ago

The race now features 4 Mushers in contention for the Reddington Trophy, with Nic Petit the odds on favorite with an 18 mile lead.
Title: The Bollocks on This Guy
Post by: Surly1 on March 14, 2019, 02:07:30 PM
Master dealmaker throws shade.

Donald Trump criticizes Theresa May for 'how badly' Brexit talks have gone (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/14/trump-brexit-theresa-may-uk-criticism-talks-latest-news)
The president was critical of Brexit negotiations but says the US will stay out of Britain’s talks over its exit from the EU


(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/ca36358846d713bc1f240f4a177c0c5dedb7b6a1/0_39_4800_2880/master/4800.jpg?width=1200&height=630&quality=85&auto=format&fit=crop&overlay-align=bottom,left&overlay-width=100p&overlay-base64=L2ltZy9zdGF0aWMvb3ZlcmxheXMvdGctb3BpbmlvbnMucG5n&s=8937b3729f3cfb167e35d2c45c57d4ec)

Donald Trump has renewed his criticism of Theresa May’s handling of Brexit, claiming that she ignored his advice on how to negotiate and now “it’s tearing a country apart”.

The US president, a self-anointed master deal maker, also insisted that a second referendum on Britain’s departure from the European Union would be “unfair” and said he looks forward to making a bilateral trade agreement.

Trump, who is friendly with the former UK Independence party leader Nigel Farage, has long been a cheerleader for Brexit and alive to its domestic parallels. During his presidential election campaign in 2016,he tweeted: “They will soon be calling me MR. BREXIT!”

Speaking in the Oval Office alongside the Irish prime minister,Leo Varadkar, on Thursday, Trump said: “It’s a very complex thing right now, it’s tearing a country apart, it’s actually tearing a lot of countries apart and it’s a shame it has to be that way but I think we will stay right in our lane.”

Trump said on Thursday: “I’m surprised at how badly it’s all gone from the standpoint of a negotiation. I gave the prime minister my ideas on how to negotiate it and I think you would have been successful.

“She didn’t listen to that and that’s fine – she’s got to do what she’s got to do. I think it could have been negotiated in a different manner, frankly. I hate to see everything being ripped apart now.”

May and Trump’s dialogues are a study in contrasting styles, with May preferring to work through bullet points, and Trump opting for freewheeling and dwelling on his achievements. But their relationship is said to have steadily improved, whereas Trump’s interactions with France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, tend toward soaring highs and jarring lows.

On the prospect of a second Brexit referendum, Trump said: “I don’t think another vote would be possible because it would be very unfair to the people that won. They’d say: ‘What do you mean, you’re going to take another vote?’ So that would be tough.

“I thought it would happen, it did happen, and both sides are very, very cemented in. It’s a tough situation. It’s a shame. There was no reason for that to happen. They could have had the vote and it should have gone smoothly and unfortunately it didn’t.”

UK MPs voted in favour of extendingArticle 50beyond its 29 March deadline on Thursday. Earlier in the day, Trump said he believed Brexit was likely to be delayed. “I think they are probably going to have to do something because right now they are in the midst of a very short period of time – the end of the month – and they are not going to be able to do that.”

If and when the UK leaves the EU, it will negotiate its own trade deals, including with the US, for the first time in decades. Trump said: “We are talking with them about trade and we can do a very big trade deal with the UK.”

Turning to Varadkar, visiting the White House to celebrate St Patrick’s Day, he said: “Leo, I’m sure you agree on that. Would you like to express your feelings on Brexit? Maybe I shouldn’t let you do it, I’ll just get you in trouble.”

The taoiseach replied: “We have a different opinion, Mr President. I regret that Brexit’s happening.”

Varadkar said Brexit should not affect Northern Ireland, and that he would like to see a trade deal cemented between the EU and the US. “I think it will be a few years until the United Kingdom sorts itself out, but in the meantime the European Union is available to talk trade with the US.”

American presidents have been unable to resist dipping into Brexit. In April 2016, Barack Obama visited London andmade an impassioned pleato Britons to remain in the EU, warning that the UK would be at the “back of the queue” in any trade deal with the US.

Trump has often relished taking positions opposite to Obama and his election campaign was apolitical cousinof Brexit with similar anti-immigration and anti-elite themes.

Last year, Trump claimed that he was at his golf course in Scotland “the day before Brexit” and correctly predicted the result of the referendum. In truth, he arrived a day later and welcomed the result, saying: “I said this was going to happen, and I think that it’s a great thing. Basically they took back their country.”

The White House is known to contain some strong Brexit supporters who admire May’s tenacity, although many in the US business community are baffled and bemused. Earlier on Thursday,Trump had tweeted:“My Administration looks forward to negotiating a large scale Trade Deal with the United Kingdom. The potential is unlimited!”

Liam Fox, the British trade minister, responded: “Greater trade between us reinforces a comprehensive alliance that goes far beyond the economic, providing for our national security and bringing prosperity to our people.”

The US trade representative’s office has said it will launch negotiations with Britain after its exit from the EU. Last month, it laid out its objectives for a deal that included reduced tariff and non-tariff barriers for US industrial and agricultural goods.

The UK has not yet published its own negotiating mandate, which will probably take a couple of months and a possible parliamentary date. If Brexit goes ahead on schedule, negotiations could begin around September but it will be difficult to complete them before the end of next year, when a presidential election will sow fresh uncertainty. Among the British priorities would be an agreement to sell more military hardware to the Pentagon

Title: 🌍 March Brexit almost certainly out of reach
Post by: RE on March 16, 2019, 03:38:00 AM
Welcome to the Hotel Brussels.  ::)

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47577742 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47577742)

March Brexit almost certainly out of reach
Laura Kuenssberg Political editor @bbclaurak on Twitter

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/01F7/production/_106030500_5bee745f-e4cc-4b01-8f8b-f296961cdd4d.jpg)
Image copyright Getty Images

More than 80 times Theresa May vowed we would leave the European Union at the end of this month.


As the days, then weeks, then months passed with first delays in reaching a deal, and then MPs rejecting it twice, slowly, but surely, that date became less and less realistic.

But it was disquiet in Parliament that forced her to relinquish it publicly.

Now, it is still technically possible that we could leave at the end of this month - the law has not changed.

But politically it is now almost entirely out of reach.

    MPs vote to seek delay to Brexit
    Brexit delay: What just happened?

The prime minister is accepting she will miss one of the biggest targets she has ever set herself.

Tonight's vote is awkward for another reason, as it again displays the Conservatives' fundamental divisions.

This is more than a quarrel among friends, but a party that is split down the middle on one of the most vital questions this administration has posed, with cabinet ministers, as well as backbench Brexiteers, lining up to disagree with Theresa May.

But it matters that Number 10 escaped an attempt by MPs from different parties to grab hold of this process in a formal way, in tonight's votes.
ADVERTISEMENT

Assumptions have often been made about the power of former Remainers whose strength in numbers, even if narrowly, often falls short.

Now two tracks continue - Number 10 will keep working, pushing and grinding on to try again to make the case for their Brexit compromise.

And MPs will carry on hunting - and arguing - for alternatives that could take the place of that compromise if it ultimately fails.
Related Topics

    Theresa May
    Brexit
Title: 🌍 Another big Brexit week begins. What's expected?
Post by: RE on March 19, 2019, 12:31:16 AM
...and the farce plays on across the pond...

RE

Another big Brexit week begins. What's expected?

And why are the European Parliament elections so important?
by Ylenia Gostoli
5 hours ago

(https://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdxxlarge/mritems/Images/2019/3/14/7cc507320bbe42949897d9745f71844d_18.jpg)
A pro-Brexit leave the European Union supporter takes part in a protest outside the House of Parliament in London [File: Kirsty Wigglesworth/The Associated Press]


London, United Kingdom - Last week's Brexit drama led to MPs opting to delay the European Union divorce at least until the end of June.

However, the decision is not unilateral and any extension of Article 50 of the EU treaty - which allows members to leave the bloc - must be approved unanimously by all 27 remaining states.

The next opportunity for EU leaders to discuss the issue will be at a two-day European Council (EC) meeting starting on Thursday - just a week before the current Brexit deadline of March 29.

But it is not yet clear whether this meeting will prove decisive, or how long the granted extension will be.

After Prime Minister Theresa May's deal with the EU was voted down by parliament for the second time this year, MPs also cast a non-binding vote to rule out a no-deal Brexit.

The option of a disorderly departure at the end of March remains on the table, however, as no deal is the default legal position under Article 50.

Looking further ahead, European Parliament elections are expected to take place between May 23 and 26.
Extending, but what for?

May aims to make a third attempt, on Tuesday, at getting her deal through Parliament.

If it is a case of third time lucky, she will ask for an extension ending before the European elections, which should be granted at that stage.

If it doesn't, or if Tuesday's vote is pulled as some British media have speculated, the scenarios will be more complex. And so will the choices facing the EU.

A number of EU leaders have said they remain open to an extension as long as the United Kingdom can provide a valid justification for it.

"They will want to make sure an extension is a price worth paying, that it's going to make a difference," Georgina Wright, a senior researcher at the Institute for Government in London, told Al Jazeera. "If there's a general election, a second referendum, or a change in the government's own red lines, then there might be more appetite for a longer extension."

May is hoping to avoid this and has been trying to get the Eurosceptic wing of her own Conservative Party and Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) behind her deal, saying a long delay might lead to Brexit being cancelled.

They have so far voted down the deal over concerns for the "backstop" protocol of the withdrawal agreement, which aims to keep an open border in the island of Ireland. Critics, however, argue it could "trap" the UK within EU's trade rules indefinitely.

The opposition Labour Party wants to see a "softer" Brexit, including a permanent, UK-wide customs union and close alignment with the single market.

Over the weekend, it emerged that Labour, which has recently announced its official support for a second referendum, will push an amendment to the so-called "meaningful vote" that would make support for May's deal conditional on putting it to the people.

    The EU has no interest in making it easy to leave the bloc. With the rise of populism in the European Parliament, you do not want to give the impression that the EU is a bad negotiator.

    Sarah Wolff, director of the Centre for European Research

The amendment doesn't specify whether remain or leave without a deal could be other options on the ballot paper.

Eurosceptics believe no deal is better than a bad deal, and Leave campaigners have talked about events in Parliament this week as a "betrayal" of the public's will.

Former UKIP leader and current MEP Nigel Farage urged EU leaders this week to veto the extension.

The European Parliament's lead Brexit spokesman, Guy Verhofstadt, spoke out against a long extension beyond the European elections, arguing it could be "hijacked" by the Brexiters.

"We will talk only about [Brexit], and not about the real problems, and the real reforms we need in the European Union," said Verhofstadt.

If May's third attempt does not pass but there's a significant improvement in the consensus for it, a fourth "meaningful vote" is tipped as a possibility.
An existential problem

The EU has made clear that if the UK wants a longer extension, it will have to take part in the European Parliament elections at the end of May.

The new assembly's first sitting is on July 2, and should the UK still be part of the EU by then, it will be required to have representation.

According to some British media reports, a leaked document to EU ambassadors claimed that legal issues could arise if the UK was still part of the bloc by that date without participating in elections.

The document said the EU would "cease being able to operate in a secure legal context" - meaning it would have to terminate the UK's membership to prevent the functioning of EU institutions from being affected.

While legal opinion remains divided on this issue, "purely from a technical point of view, the EU needs to know now if the UK is going to participate because currently they're drawing up their party lists on the basis of a new European Parliament that doesn't have UK seats in it", Wright explained.

"Secondly, you'd be denying UK and EU citizens living in the UK the right to stand and vote in the elections."

Sarah Wolff, a lecturer and director of the Centre for European Research at Queen Mary, University of London, argued that without further guarantees on a way forward, the EU has little to gain in granting a long extension or watching the UK take part in the European Parliament elections.

"The EU has no interest in making it easy to leave the [bloc]. With the rise of populism in the European Parliament, you do not want to give the impression that the EU is a bad negotiator and that you can actually come back to it.

"[Brexit is] the third crisis we have faced in the past decade," Wolff said, adding that while the eurozone and migration crises caused rifts between the members, there hasn't been much divergence on the issue of Brexit.

"EU leaders have understood that with Brexit, it is important to show coherence and unity. And they are already moving forward."

Robert Ford, a politics professor at the University of Manchester, points out that while the UK participation in the European elections could provide a contingent of additional allies for other eurosceptic forces - who are likely to do well - in the European Parliament, "it won't make a difference to EU institutions or campaigns everywhere else".

"The European Parliament elections aren't about Europe anywhere," Ford said, "people tend to vote according to national agendas and national political context."

Title: 🌍 Brexit: Bercow chucks a hulking great spanner in the works
Post by: RE on March 19, 2019, 12:45:24 AM
Spanner = Monket Wrench in Brit-Speak.  ::)

Jolly good show, mate!

RE

    Brexit

Brexit: Bercow chucks a hulking great spanner in the works
Laura Kuenssberg Political editor @bbclaurak on Twitter

    3 hours ago

http://www.youtube.com/v/LTvqjCceHZc
BREXIT CHAOS: John Bercow blocks Theresa May's third vote, Anna Soubry asks Mister Speaker's advice

"He's breaking the constitution" - quite the accusation, laid at the door of John Bercow's grand speaker's apartments.

It's notable because it's the view of a government minister who is not one of those whose pulse quickens when discussing leaving or trying to stay in the European Union.

There is, of course, precedent in the very well-thumbed copies of Erskine May, the parliamentary rules, for the speaker's decision.

Quoting decisions as far back as 1604, John Bercow was quite clear that governments are not meant to be able to keep asking parliament the same question, in the hope of boring MPs into submission if they keep saying no.

But as another member of the government put it mildly, the speaker has a reputation for being "interventionist", and he has, this afternoon, chucked a hulking great spanner in the works.
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption After the speaker's intervention, Theresa May's way forward is far from clear

The government seems to have been cooling all day on the idea of getting MPs to vote again on Theresa May's Brexit deal this week, for a whole shopping list of reasons.

But before Number 10 had a chance to make that decision, the speaker took it out of their hands.

There will be no "MV3", to use the terrible jargon - there won't be another vote on the prime minister's Brexit deal unless it changes.
'Anger and astonishment'

Strangely, MPs who hate Theresa May's compromise, for different reasons, agree to an extent that it's the right call.

But there is anger and astonishment too, partly because MPs will have to explain another potential delay to the process, when many of them sense the public's desire is to crack on.

But there is festering concern about John Bercow's suspected wish to stop Brexit - always denied.

This time the speaker, whose job it is stand up for parliament, has - with no warning - made a decision that some in government believe veers too close to trying to block the government from what it seeks to do.

The way around it for Theresa May is far from clear.
Title: 🌍 Europe offers British lawmakers chance to delay Brexit
Post by: RE on March 22, 2019, 12:45:11 AM
Another big surprise.  ::)

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/SHw14XOJTpI
Title: Re: 🌍 Europe offers British lawmakers chance to delay Brexit
Post by: Eddie on March 22, 2019, 05:27:25 AM
Another big surprise.  ::)

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/SHw14XOJTpI

Theresa May increasingly looks to be completely out of her depth.
Title: Re: 🌍 Europe offers British lawmakers chance to delay Brexit
Post by: RE on March 22, 2019, 05:30:44 AM
Theresa May increasingly looks to be completely out of her depth.

Her solution appears to be to keep scheduling votes until she gets the result she wants.  ::)

RE
Title: Re: 🌍 Europe offers British lawmakers chance to delay Brexit
Post by: Eddie on March 22, 2019, 06:16:40 AM
Theresa May increasingly looks to be completely out of her depth.

Her solution appears to be to keep scheduling votes until she gets the result she wants.  ::)

RE
(https://poster.keepcalmandposters.com/default/5835257_the_beatings_will_continue_until_morale_improves.png)

Title: 🌍 British Prime Minister Theresa May Faces New Pressure To Quit As Brexit Deadl
Post by: RE on March 25, 2019, 12:02:51 AM
https://www.npr.org/2019/03/24/706319859/british-prime-minister-theresa-may-faces-new-pressure-to-quit-as-brexit-deadline (https://www.npr.org/2019/03/24/706319859/british-prime-minister-theresa-may-faces-new-pressure-to-quit-as-brexit-deadline)

Europe
British Prime Minister Theresa May Faces New Pressure To Quit As Brexit Deadline Looms

March 24, 201911:20 AM ET

Samantha Raphelson

(https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2019/03/24/gettyimages-1132404066_wide-64adaf15542ddbfba9674c7a6a4ec7ae61363b03-s800-c85.jpg)
British Prime Minister Theresa is reportedly facing pressure from within the Conservative Party to quit over her handling of the Brexit process. Here she attends a church service on Sunday in Aylesbury, England.
Jack Taylor/Getty Images

Updated at 1:38 p.m. ET

British Prime Minister Theresa May is facing new challenges to her leadership the day after protesters packed the streets of London to demand a second referendum on Britain's exit from the European Union.

A number of British parliamentarians, including senior members of May's own Conservative Party, have wanted her out for some time, NPR's Frank Langfitt tells Weekend Edition Sunday. British newspapers on Sunday reported that senior members of May's cabinet could resign to force her resignation.
March In London Demanding A Second Brexit Vote Draws Huge Crowds
Europe
March In London Demanding A Second Brexit Vote Draws Huge Crowds

If that were to happen, May would be replaced by an interim prime minister. But two cabinet ministers who were named by British media as possible replacements touted their support for May on Sunday.

David Lidington, the prime minister's de facto deputy, who voted to remain in the EU, denied rumors of a plot to oust May, telling reporters that he was "100 percent behind" her. Michael Gove, the secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs, who was also named in the papers as a possible caretaker prime minister, said that it was "not the time to change the captain of the ship."

Another option for Parliament would be to ask May to commit to a date to step down in exchange for an approval of her Brexit deal, though that seems unlikely given the unpopularity of her plan, which has been soundly defeated in two votes.

May has not responded to the reports, but No. 10 Downing St. insists that she is going nowhere. Fellow Conservatives and pro-Brexit lawmakers, including Boris Johnson, met with May at her country residence, Chequers, on Sunday.
Sign Up For The NPR Daily Newsletter

Catch up on the latest headlines and unique NPR stories, sent every weekday.
E-mail address

By subscribing, you agree to NPR's terms of use and privacy policy.

Despite the pressure she is facing to step down, May has survived two no-confidence votes in Parliament, the most recent being in this January. She cannot face another leadership challenge from within her own party until December, according to party rules, but if several members of her cabinet resigned, she could be convinced to quit.

"Changing the players doesn't solve the problem," Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond told Sky News on Sunday morning. "The problem is that we as a nation have to decide how to deliver Brexit."

Still, May angered lawmakers last week when she delivered a speech blaming Parliament for the Brexit stalemate. And if Saturday's demonstrations are any indication, May is also losing support among voters. An Ipsos MORI poll released this past week shows that 86 percent of Britons are dissatisfied with her leadership.

Protesters told Langfitt that they want a second chance to vote on Brexit because they believe the vote in 2016 was flawed.
Petition To Cancel Brexit Breaks U.K. Government Website, Tops 1 Million Signatures
Europe
Petition To Cancel Brexit Breaks U.K. Government Website, Tops 1 Million Signatures

"This country's in grave danger of shooting itself in the foot," Tim Parsons, who works in finance in London, told Langfitt. "There was a vote. Nobody knew what they were voting for at the time, so I think it should be put back for another vote. At least it will have been an informed decision."

The chances of a second referendum are considered low because it would enrage the 52 percent of voters who supported Brexit. Even some who voted to remain in the European Union feel a second vote would be anti-democratic, Langfitt says.

The leadership drama comes as May is running out of time to get a new Brexit deal approved by Parliament. She has until the end of next week to secure an agreement, after winning an extension from EU leaders. Britain was originally scheduled to leave the EU on March 29.

May could present her Brexit plan for a third vote next week, but she has said she would do that only if she were certain it had enough support to win. If Parliament can agree on a plan next week, the United Kingdom will have until May 22 to leave the EU. But if Parliament can't get a deal done, it will have to devise a new plan or leave the EU with a "no-deal" Brexit on April 12, which most experts say would be a nightmare scenario.
Title: 🌍 Theresa May: No third vote on Brexit deal yet - BBC News
Post by: RE on March 26, 2019, 12:07:13 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/d8gZkDqTxi8
Title: 🌍 Nigel Farage Disagrees with New Brexit Survey Results
Post by: RE on March 27, 2019, 03:40:49 AM
Nigel is BACK!

(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/EuphoricWeightyFieldmouse-size_restricted.gif)

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/lyofaI0KxyQ
Title: 🌍 Brexit: No majority for any options after MPs' votes
Post by: RE on March 28, 2019, 12:27:45 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47728333 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47728333)

Brexit: No majority for any options after MPs' votes

    5 hours ago

    Brexit


Media captionSpeaker John Bercow announced the results of the eight Brexit indicative votes

None of MPs' eight proposed Brexit options have secured clear backing in a series of votes in the Commons.

The options - which included a customs union with the EU and a referendum on any deal - were supposed to help find a consensus over how to leave the EU.

Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay said the results strengthened ministers' view their deal was "the best option".

The results capped a day of drama in which Theresa May promised to stand down as PM if her deal was passed.

The prime minister told a meeting of Tory MPs she would leave office earlier than planned if it guaranteed Parliament's backing for her withdrawal agreement with the EU.

Her announcement prompted a number of Tory opponents of her deal to signal their backing but the Democratic Unionists suggested they would continue to oppose the agreement.

    How did my MP vote on Brexit options?
    Brexit: What just happened?
    May vows to quit if Brexit deal passed
    Brexitcast: Come on Arlene

MPs hoped Wednesday's unprecedented series of "indicative votes" would help break the parliamentary deadlock over Brexit.

The failure to identify a clear way forward led to angry exchanges in the Commons with critics of the process saying it had been "an abject failure".
ADVERTISEMENT
How MPs voted

    Confirmatory referendum - For: 268 Against: 295
    Customs union - For: 264 Against: 272
    Labour's Brexit plan - For: 237 Against: 307
    Common Market 2.0 - For: 188 Against: 283
    Revoking Article 50 to avoid no deal - For: 184 Against: 293
    No-deal exit on 12 April - For: 160 Against: 400
    Malthouse Plan B - For: 139 Against: 422
    EFTA and EEA membership - For: 65 Against: 377

The proposal which came closest to commanding majority support was a cross-party plan - tabled by former Conservative chancellor Ken Clarke - for the whole of the UK to join a new customs union with the EU to ensure tariff-free trade after the UK's exit.

Its supporters included five Conservative ministers: Mark Field, Stephen Hammond, Margot James, Anne Milton and Rory Stewart.

All Conservative MPs - excluding cabinet ministers - were given a free vote, meaning they were not ordered to vote in a certain way.

Eight Conservatives voted for a referendum to endorse the deal, the proposal which secured the most affirmative votes. Labour controversially whipped its MPs to back the proposal but 10 shadow ministers abstained and Melanie Onn quit her job to vote against.

Labour's own alternative plan for Brexit - including "close alignment" with the single market and protections for workers' rights - was defeated by 307 votes to 237.

Five other propositions - including backing for a no-deal exit, the so-called Common Market 2.0 plan, a separate proposal to remain in the European Economic Area and one to stop the Brexit process by revoking Article 50 - all failed to secure the backing of a majority of MPs.
What's the reaction been?

Brexiteer Mark Francois said "this attempt to seize the order paper" by MPs had failed and the public would be looking on "with amazement".

But Conservative MP Sir Oliver Letwin, who oversaw the unprecedented process of indicative votes, said the lack of a majority for any proposition was "disappointing".

While he said he believed MPs should be allowed to have another go at reaching a consensus on Monday, he said this would not be needed if the PM's deal was approved before then.

Independent Group MP Anna Soubry said more people had voted for the idea of another referendum than voted for Mrs May's deal on the two times it had been put to Parliament.

And Labour MP Dame Margaret Beckett, who put forward the motion for a confirmatory referendum, said the objective had not been to identify a single proposition at this stage but to get a sense of where a compromise may lie by, in her words, "letting a thousand flowers bloom".

The prime minister offered to pay the ultimate price, and leave office - the grandest of gestures any leader ever really has.

For a moment it seemed it might work and line up the support she so desperately needs.

But within a couple of hours her allies in Northern Ireland were refusing to unblock the progress of Theresa May's main mission.

That might not be terminal - one cabinet minister told me the PM may yet have another go at pushing her deal through Parliament against the odds on Friday.

But if Plan A fails, Parliament is not ready with a clear Plan B that could yet succeed.

For our politics, for businesses trying to make decisions, for all of us, divisions and tensions between and inside our government - and our Parliament - are too profound to bring this limbo to an end.

    Read Laura's thoughts in full

Commons Speaker John Bercow said the process agreed by the House allowed for a second stage of debate on Monday and there was no reason this should not continue.

While it was up to MPs, he said there was an understanding Wednesday's objective was to "shortlist" a number of options before moving on to consider the "most popular".

Mr Barclay appealed to MPs to back the PM's deal "in the national interest" when it returns to the House for a third time - which could happen as soon as Friday.

"The House has considered a wide variety of options as a way forward," he said.

"And it demonstrates there are no easy options here. There is no simple way forward. The deal the government has negotiated is a compromise...That is the nature of complex negotiations.

"The results of the process this House has gone through today strengthens our view that the deal the government has negotiated is the best option."
Title: 🌍 Jeremy Corbyn with Yanis Varoufakis at the Edinburgh Book Festival, 8/20/2018
Post by: RE on March 29, 2019, 12:00:12 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/cLLoSzNn6xg
Title: 🌍 Brexit: MPs asked to vote on withdrawal agreement only
Post by: RE on March 29, 2019, 01:47:52 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47740158 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47740158)

Brexit: MPs asked to vote on withdrawal agreement only

    28 minutes ago


Related Topics

    Brexit

Media captionAndrea Leadsom explains the timetable for Friday's Brexit vote

MPs will be asked to vote again on Brexit on Friday but only on part of the deal negotiated with the EU.

They will vote on the withdrawal agreement on the Irish "backstop", divorce bill and citizens' rights.

But it will not amount to a third "meaningful vote" on the deal, as it will not include a vote on the UK's future relationship with the EU.

Amid anger from MPs, Andrea Leadsom said it was "crucial" if the UK wanted to secure a Brexit delay until 22 May.

    Reaction as government plans fresh vote
    Brexit vote: What are MPs doing on Friday?
    How did my MP vote on Brexit options?

MPs will be debating the motion on the day the UK was supposed to leave the European Union - 29 March.

BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg said Theresa May was essentially asking MPs to turn it into a game of two halves - just voting on the first part of the deal which sorts out the UK's departure and leaving the longer term part for the next few weeks.

But it is still not certain it will get through - both Labour and the Democratic Unionist Party say they will vote against the withdrawal agreement on Friday.
ADVERTISEMENT

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the withdrawal agreement could not be separated from the political declaration "because otherwise you move into a blindfold Brexit".

The PM's deal includes a withdrawal agreement - setting out how much money the UK must pay to the EU as a settlement, details of the transition period, and the backstop arrangements - and a political declaration on the way the future EU-UK relationship will work.

Last week the European Council agreed to postpone Brexit beyond the expected date of 29 March - offering an extension until 22 May, if MPs approved the withdrawal agreement by the end of this week.

If not, it offered a shorter delay until 12 April - the date by which the UK would have to indicate whether it would stand candidates in the 2019 European Parliament elections - allowing the UK time to get the deal through or to "indicate a way forward".

BBC Brussels reporter Adam Fleming said the official conclusions from last week's summit only mention the need to pass the withdrawal agreement by Friday, not the political declaration.
Skip Twitter post by @adamfleming

    European Council conclusions say U.K. only has to pass Withdrawal Agreement by 29/3 to get extension to 22/5. No mention of Political Declaration. Hidden in plain sight yet again. pic.twitter.com/P3ooEeOzIs
    — Adam Fleming (@adamfleming) March 28, 2019

Report

End of Twitter post by @adamfleming

Leader of the Commons Mrs Leadsom told MPs that the European Council would only agree to the 22 May extension if MPs approved the withdrawal agreement by 23:00 GMT on Friday.

"It's crucial therefore that we make every effort to give effect to the council's decision and tomorrow's motion gives Parliament the opportunity to secure that extension," she said.

"I think we can all agree that we don't want to be in the situation of asking for another extension and facing the potential requirement of participating in European Parliament elections."

But she faced anger from some MPs. Labour's Mary Creagh described it as an "extraordinary and unprecedented reverse ferret of the commitments that have been made... that we should have our say on both items together".

Friday's vote would not allow Parliament to ratify the withdrawal package, because Brexit legislation allows this only after the passage of a "meaningful vote" on both the Withdrawal Agreement and a Political Declaration on the future relationship.

    What do voters make of Brexit now?

The government would either have to pass part two of the deal - the political declaration on the future relationship - at a later date, or change the law so that it is not needed to ratify the treaty.

Some MPs questioned the government's motion, with Labour's Valerie Vaz saying "on the face of it breaks the law".

"This is no way to run a government," she told MPs.

And the Labour chairman of the Brexit select committee, Hilary Benn, asked if Brexit was delayed to 22 May, whether at that point it would "no longer be possible" to apply for a further extension beyond that - because it would be too late to take part in the European Parliamentary elections.

Attorney General Geoffrey Cox said he would address this point on Friday.

Commons Speaker John Bercow said the government's "new" motion complied with his ruling that he would not allow a third "meaningful vote" on the motion MPs have already rejected twice by large margins.

On Wednesday, the Commons failed to find a majority for a way forward after voting for eight different options to take Brexit forward - including leaving without a deal, creating a customs union and backing a confirmatory referendum on any deal.

Brexit votes: What happens next?

Mrs May told a meeting of Conservative backbenchers on Wednesday that she would not lead the talks with Brussels over the future relationship between the UK and EU and would resign as party leader after 22 May if her deal was passed, but stay on as PM until a new leader is elected.

While she has won over some, including former foreign secretary Boris Johnson, a number of Brexiteers are still refusing to vote for the deal. She needs to win over 75 rebels to overturn the 149-vote rejection of her deal when it was last voted on, on 13 March.

Meanwhile a petition calling for Brexit to be halted by revoking Article 50, which has attracted nearly six million signatures - is to be debated by MPs on Monday.

They will also debate a petition calling for another EU referendum, which has more than 160,000 signatures, and another - with 165,000 signatures - demanding that "Parliament must honour the referendum result".
Title: 💩 MPs debate May's final deal on original leave day | Brexit LIVE
Post by: RE on March 29, 2019, 04:23:27 AM
LIVE Brexit Bullshit for Breakfast! 💩

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/dE8zy2LMgUY
Title: 💩 No-deal Brexit fears rise as parliament sinks May's deal
Post by: RE on March 29, 2019, 03:18:17 PM
Big fucking surprise here!  ::)

Anybody else watch the livestream?  HILARIOUS! 🤣

Don't miss the Sunday Morning Collapse Wake-Up Call.  Here's the Coming Attractions:

http://www.youtube.com/v/dDU-Hqm3atY


RE

World News
March 29, 2019 / 12:56 AM / Updated an hour ago
No-deal Brexit fears rise as parliament sinks May's deal
William James, Kylie MacLellan, Elizabeth Piper

6 Min Read

LONDON (Reuters) - Lawmakers rejected Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit deal for a third time on Friday, sounding its probable death knell and leaving Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union in turmoil on the very day it was supposed to quit the bloc.

The decision to reject a stripped-down version of May’s divorce deal has left it totally unclear how, when or even whether Britain will leave the EU, and plunges the three-year Brexit crisis to a deeper level of uncertainty.

“I fear we are reaching the limits of this process in this House,” May told parliament after the defeat. “The implications of the House’s decision are grave.”

Within minutes of the vote, European Council President and summit chair Donald Tusk said EU leaders would meet on April 10 to discuss Britain’s departure from the bloc.
Related Coverage

    Chance of UK 'no-deal' Brexit has risen 'sharply', says France
    Chance of UK 'no-deal' Brexit has risen 'sharply', says France
    EU Commission says no-deal Brexit on April 12 'likely'
    EU Commission says no-deal Brexit on April 12 'likely'
    Risk of no deal Brexit 'very real': Dutch PM Rutte
    Risk of no deal Brexit 'very real': Dutch PM Rutte

A succession of European leaders said there was a very real chance Britain would now leave without a deal, a scenario that businesses fear would cause chaos for the world’s fifth-biggest economy.

May had framed the vote as the last opportunity to ensure Britain actually left the EU, making a passionate plea to lawmakers to put aside party differences and strongly-held beliefs.

But in a special sitting of parliament, they voted 344-286 against the EU Withdrawal Agreement, agreed after two years of tortuous negotiations with the bloc.

“The legal default now is that the United Kingdom is due to leave the European Union on April 12,” May said.

She cautioned that any further delay to Brexit would probably be a long one beyond the current deadline, and would mean Britain holding elections to the European Parliament.

The British pound, which has been buoyed in recent weeks by hopes that the likelihood of an abrupt ‘no-deal’ Brexit is receding, fell half a percent after May lost, to as low as $1.2977, but then recovered some of its losses.

“If the deadline is extended longer, we will re-engage with sterling because that will be the start of the slow death of Brexit,” said Salman Ahmed, global investment strategist at Lombard Odier Investment Managers.

May's rejected Brexit deal: tmsnrt.rs/2V4on0S
British Prime Minister Theresa May speaks at the House of Commons in London, Britain March 29, 2019. ©UK Parliament/Mark Duffy/Handout via REUTERS ATTENTION EDITORS - THIS IMAGE WAS PROVIDED BY A THIRD PARTY
TALKS TO CONTINUE

May had offered on Wednesday to resign if the deal passed, in a bid to win over eurosceptic rebels in her Conservative Party who support a more decisive break with the EU than the divorce her deal offers.

The vote leaves her Brexit strategy in tatters. With no majority in parliament for any Brexit option so far, it is unclear what May will now do. Options include asking the EU for a long delay, parliament forcing an election, or a “no-deal” exit.

However, May’s spokesman said she would continue talks with opponents of the deal and some political correspondents said she could bring it back a fourth time, perhaps in a “run-off” against any alternative that parliament itself came up with.

Britain now has under two weeks to convince the 27 capitals of the EU that it has an alternative path out of the impasse, or see itself cast out of the bloc on April 12 with no deal on post-Brexit ties with its largest trading ally.

French President Emmanuel Macron, speaking as parliament voted, said the EU needed to accelerate no-deal planning and Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz said that unless Britain came up with a plan, there would be a “hard” Brexit.

“The risk of a no-deal Brexit is very real,” Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte told reporters.

May’s deal had twice been rejected by huge margins this year and, although she was able to win over many Conservative rebels, a hard core of eurosceptics, who see “no-deal” as the best option, and the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party, which props up her minority government, refused to back it.
ANOTHER ELECTION?

On Monday, lawmakers who have tried to grab control of the process will attempt to agree on an alternative Brexit plan that could command majority cross-party support in parliament. The options that have so far gathered most support involve closer ties to the EU, and a second referendum.

A first attempt at non-binding “indicative votes” on Wednesday failed to produce a majority for any of the eight options on offer.
Slideshow (19 Images)

Many lawmakers believe the only way to solve the crisis will be a snap election - even though it would throw up a host of unknowns for the major parties.

“The last thing this country needs right now is a general election,” transport minister Chris Grayling told Sky News. “We’ve actually got to sort out the Brexit process, we can’t throw everything up in the air.”

The 2016 referendum vote to leave the EU revealed a United Kingdom divided over many more issues, and has provoked impassioned debate about everything from secession and immigration to capitalism, empire and what it means to be British.

Hundreds of thousands of Britons marched through London last Saturday demanding a second referendum, while on Friday thousands of angry Brexit supporters protested in the capital.

“What should have been a celebration is in fact a day of betrayal,” Nigel Farage, a leading Brexit campaigner, told Reuters.

The uncertainty around Brexit, the United Kingdom’s most significant political and economic move since World War Two, has left allies and investors aghast.

Opponents fear Brexit will make Britain poorer and divide the West as it grapples with both the unconventional U.S. presidency of Donald Trump and growing assertiveness from Russia and China.

Supporters say that, while the divorce might bring some short-term instability, in the longer term it will allow the United Kingdom to thrive if cut free from what they cast as a doomed project to forge European unity.

Writing by Michael Holden and Guy Faulconbridge; Additional reporting by Costas Pitas, Kate Holton, Alistair Smout, Andrew MacAskill, Andrew R.C. Marshall, Andy Bruce, William Schomberg, Tom Finn and Tommy Wilkes; Editing by Kevin Liffey
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

This is a modal window.
Failed to load video. You may not have permission to view it or a network error has occurred
Sponsored video by
Trending

    U.S. Attorney General Barr will release redacted copy of Mueller report by mid-April
    White House warns Russia over troops in Venezuela, threatens sanctions
    Trump threatens to close U.S.-Mexico border to trade because of immigrant surge
    No-deal Brexit fears rise as parliament sinks May's deal
    EU Commission says no-deal Brexit on April 12 'likely'

Title: 💩 UK's May risks 'total collapse' of government in Brexit impasse: Sunday Times
Post by: RE on March 31, 2019, 03:48:14 AM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-may-cabinet-idUSKCN1RB0R4 (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-may-cabinet-idUSKCN1RB0R4)

World News
March 30, 2019 / 2:28 PM / Updated 11 hours ago
UK's May risks 'total collapse' of government in Brexit impasse: Sunday Times
William Schomberg, David Milliken

4 Min Read

LONDON (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Theresa May risks the “total collapse” of her government if she fails to get her battered Brexit deal through parliament, the Sunday Times newspaper said, amid growing speculation that she might call an early election.

(https://s4.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20190330&t=2&i=1371875867&w=&fh=545px&fw=&ll=&pl=&sq=&r=LYNXNPEF2T0TR)
Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May is seen in a car outside the Houses of Parliament as she faces a vote on alternative Brexit options in London, Britain, March 27, 2019. REUTERS/Dylan Martinez/File Photo

Underscoring the tough choices facing May to break the Brexit impasse, the newspaper said at least six pro-European Union senior ministers will resign if she opts for a potentially damaging no-deal departure from the EU.

But at the same time, rival ministers who support Brexit were threatening to quit if May decides to stay close to the EU with a customs union or if she sought a long delay to Brexit, the Sunday Times said.

May’s Brexit strategy is in tatters after the exit deal she hammered out with other EU leaders was rejected for a third time by the House of Commons on Friday, the day that Britain was supposed to leave the bloc.

Nearly three years after Britons voted by 52-48 percent to end the country’s EU membership after 46 years, what Brexit will look like or whether it will even happen remains up in the air.

May now has less than two weeks to convince the 27 other EU countries that she can break the deadlock. Otherwise she will have to ask the bloc for a long extension or take Britain out of the EU on April 12 with no deal to soften the economic shock.

May has said she will step down if her Brexit deal gets through parliament, offering her critics the chance of a different prime minister to lead the next round of negotiations with Brussels about Britain’s future ties to the bloc.

But that last-gasp offer has failed to break the impasse, leading to talk of an election.

The Mail on Sunday newspaper said May’s advisors were divided over whether she should call an early election if she fails to win support for her Brexit deal from parliament in the coming week.

The newspaper said a possible “run-off” vote could take place on Tuesday in parliament between May’s deal and whatever alternative emerges as the most popular from voting by lawmakers on Monday.

That meant an election could be called as early as Wednesday, the newspaper said, without citing sources.

An early election would need the support of two thirds of members of parliament, and the Observer newspaper said Conservative lawmakers were reluctant to let May lead them into another election after she lost their majority in 2017.

The Sunday Telegraph said senior members of the Conservative Party did not want May to lead them into a snap election, fearing the party would be “annihilated” at the polls if she faced down parliament over Brexit in the coming months.

An opinion poll in the Mail on Sunday gave the opposition Labour Party a lead of five percentage points over the Conservatives. That lead fell to three points if voters were offered the chance to vote for a new group of independent lawmakers who have not yet created an official party.

One of the most popular alternatives among lawmakers, including Labour members, is Britain staying in a customs union with the EU, an option also favored by many business leaders.

Brexit supporters say a customs union would deny Britain the opportunity to strike trade deals around the world.

Earlier on Saturday, one lawmaker said Conservative members of parliament had written to May telling her to lead Britain out of the EU in the coming months, even if it means a potentially damaging no-deal Brexit.

The Sun newspaper said the letter was signed by 170 of the 314 Conservative lawmakers in parliament, including 10 cabinet ministers.

Reporting by William Schomberg and David Milliken; Editing by Daniel Wallis
Title: 💩 Brexit in meltdown - May under pressure to forge softer divorce deal
Post by: RE on April 01, 2019, 01:17:54 AM
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/brexit-in-meltdown-may-under-pressure-to-forge-softer-divorce-deal-idUSKCN1RC0EE (https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/brexit-in-meltdown-may-under-pressure-to-forge-softer-divorce-deal-idUSKCN1RC0EE)

March 31, 2019 / 3:38 AM / Updated 5 hours ago
Brexit in meltdown - May under pressure to forge softer divorce deal
Kylie MacLellan, Guy Faulconbridge

4 Min Read

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain’s exit from the European Union was in disarray after the implosion of Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit strategy left her under pressure from rival factions to leave without a deal, go for an election or forge a much softer divorce.

(https://radiocms-images.us1.eldarioncloud.com/resize/750/https://storage.googleapis.com/media.mwcradio.com/mimesis/2019-03/31/2019-03-31T113439Z_1_LYNXNPEF2U0I7-OUSTP_RTROPTP_3_NEWS-US-BRITAIN-EU.JPG)
Small toy figures are seen in front of a Brexit logo in this illustration picture, March 30, 2019. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration

After one of the most tumultuous weeks in British politics since the 2016 referendum, it was still uncertain how, when or even if the United Kingdom will ever leave the bloc it first joined 46 years ago.

A third defeat of May’s divorce deal, after her pledge to quit if it was passed, left one of the weakest leaders in a generation grappling with a perilous crisis over Brexit, the United Kingdom’s most significant move since World War Two.
Related Coverage

    EU has been patient over Brexit but patience runs out - Juncker
    EU has been patient over Brexit but patience runs out - Juncker
    Germany to let Britons stay if UK leaves EU without deal - report
    Explainer - Breaking the deadlock over Brexit: Is Britain heading for a general election?
    Explainer - Breaking the deadlock over Brexit: Is Britain heading for a general election?

Parliament will vote on different Brexit options on Monday and then May could try one last roll of the dice by bringing her deal back to a vote in parliament as soon as Tuesday.

“There are no ideal choices available and there are very good arguments against any possible outcome at the moment but we are going to have to do something,” said Justice Secretary David Gauke, who voted in the 2016 referendum to stay in the EU.

“The prime minister is reflecting on what the options are, and is considering what may happen but I don’t think any decisions have been made,” he told BBC TV.

Many in May’s party, though, have lost patience. The Sun newspaper reported that 170 of her 314 Conservative lawmakers had sent her a letter demanding that Brexit take place in the next few months - deal or no deal.

The United Kingdom was due to leave the EU on March 29 but the political deadlock in London forced May to ask the bloc for a delay. Currently, Brexit is due to take place at 2200 GMT on April 12 unless May comes up with another option.
“IT IS A MESS”

The labyrinthine Brexit crisis has left the United Kingdom divided: supporters of both Brexit and EU membership marched through London last week. Many on both sides feel betrayed by a political elite that has failed to show leadership.

Parliament is due to vote at around 1900 GMT on Monday on a range of alternative Brexit options selected by Speaker John Bercow from nine proposals put forward by lawmakers, including a no-deal exit, preventing a no-deal exit, a customs union, or a second referendum.

“We are clearly going to have to consider very carefully the will of parliament,” Gauke said.

With no majority yet in the House of Commons for any of the Brexit options, there was speculation that an election could be called, though such a vote would be unpredictable and it is unclear who would lead the Conservatives into it.

The Sunday Times said May’s media chief, Robbie Gibb, and her political aide Stephen Parkinson were pushing for an election against the will of her chief enforcer in parliament, Julian Smith.
Slideshow (7 Images)

The Conservative Party’s deputy chair, James Cleverly, said it was not planning for an election. But the deputy leader of the opposition Labour Party, Tom Watson, said his party was on election footing.

Labour’s foreign affairs spokeswoman, Emily Thornberry, said it could try to call a vote of no confidence in May’s government.

“We don’t know if she is going to remain prime minister, if we are going to get somebody else, who that other person is going to be - it is a mess,” Thornberry said.

Opponents of Brexit fear it will make Britain poorer and divide the West as it grapples with both the unconventional U.S. presidency of Donald Trump and growing assertiveness from Russia and China.

Supporters of Brexit say while the divorce might bring some short-term instability, in the longer term it will allow the United Kingdom to thrive if cut free from what they cast as a doomed attempt in European unity.

Reporting by Kylie MacLellan and Guy Faulconbridge; Editing by Raissa Kasolowsky
Title: 💩 MOAR Brexit Kabuki Theater LIVE from Parliament!
Post by: RE on April 01, 2019, 11:11:47 AM
Your Collapse Laugh of the Day.

Note how few MPs are on the benches.

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/qPiSOu9OvcA
Title: 💩 Brexit: What just happened?
Post by: RE on April 02, 2019, 02:32:39 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47776512 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47776512)

Brexit: What just happened?

    4 hours ago

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/0ACD/production/_106256720_mediaitem106256719.jpg)
The votes on the four alternatives came after hours of debate

Members of Parliament have again rejected all the options placed before them, as they tried to find a compromise that would help end the Brexit impasse.

The rejections came during a second round of votes in the House of Commons on alternative proposals to Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit deal.

Mrs May's deal has been rejected on three separate occasions so far and the Commons has been attempting to find a strategy that can gain majority support.

    A really simple guide to Brexit

What did MPs reject?

The second series of votes on Brexit options - known as "indicative" votes, designed to see what MPs might support amid the deadlock - were held on Monday evening in the House of Commons, the main decision-making body of the UK Parliament, following hours of debate.

MPs rejected all four votes committing the government to:

    negotiating "a permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union with the EU" as part of any Brexit deal
    joining the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and remaining in the European Economic Area (EEA)
    giving the public a vote to approve any Brexit deal passed by Parliament before it could be implemented
    a series of steps to prevent the UK leaving the EU without a deal, including a final vote on whether to scrap Brexit altogether

The option that came closest to being passed, which was defeated by just three votes, was remaining in a customs union with the EU - a key plank of the so-called "soft Brexit" option, under which the UK would leave the EU but retain very close trading links with the bloc.
ADVERTISEMENT

Its supporters say it would mitigate the damage caused to the British economy by Brexit, particularly if combined with staying in the EU's single market.

Detractors say such an option in effect means not really leaving at all, as the UK would be subject to EU rules and regulations it had no say over - and would have no right to strike its own trade deals with non-EU countries.

Nick Boles, the Conservative MP who proposed the EFTA/EEA motion - the so-called "Common Market 2.0" option - resigned from the party immediately after the vote results were announced.

    Full details of what MPs voted on

Mrs May and her government would not have been obliged to act on any of the MPs' decisions - even if they were passed by a majority - as they do not have the force of law.

However, the prime minister is under pressure to chart a new course after failing to get the withdrawal agreement her government has negotiated with the EU passed by the Commons on three separate occasions.

She has gone so far as to say she will step down if her deal gets through the Commons.

Her Cabinet is scheduled to hold a mammoth five-hour meeting on Tuesday.
Title: 💩 Today in Brexit: Seems Like Theresa May Really, Really, Really, Really Doesn’
Post by: RE on April 03, 2019, 12:42:22 AM
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/today-in-brexit-may-extension-corbyn.html

Today in Brexit: Seems Like Theresa May Really, Really, Really, Really Doesn’t Want to Do a No-Deal Brexit

By Joshua Keating
April 02, 20195:15 PM

(https://compote.slate.com/images/b3b67bbf-3b14-47e2-aef8-657cff000d4d.gif)
British Prime Minister Theresa May gives a press conference inside Downing Street on Tuesday in London.
Animation by Lisa Larson-Walker. Photo by Jack Taylor/Getty Images.

Today in Brexit is a daily feature that will attempt to keep track of the chaotic mess playing out in the U.K. If you’re just tuning in, here’s a brief explainer on what you’ve been missing.
More on Brexit

    Today in Brexit: Parliament Couldn’t Decide on a New Brexit Plan, but They Did Get to See Some Naked Butts
    How Brexit Descended Into Chaos: a Brief Guide for the Perplexed
    Theresa May Offers to Resign in Last-Ditch Effort to Save Her Brexit Deal
    Theresa May Says Parliament Has No Choice but to Approve Her Brexit Deal. Why Should It Believe Her Now?

After Parliament again failed to approve any of a wide variety of Brexit options in a series of votes Monday, Prime Minister Theresa May held seven hours of meetings with her Cabinet on Tuesday to try to figure out a way forward. May emerged from the meetings to make a public statement, in which she said, “This debate, this division, cannot drag on much longer. It is putting members of Parliament and everyone else under immense pressure and it is doing damage to our politics.”

The statement contained two major pieces of concrete news. Let’s take them separately.

Today’s extension: May said that the U.K. would “need a further extension of Article 50,” the legal mechanism under which countries exit the EU. As you may recall, the original two-year Article 50 deadline was March 29—Friday—but was then extended to April 12. As it stands now, if no deal is in place by the end of next week, Britain will exit the EU with no agreement on future economic relations with Europe.

May said that the extension should be “one that is as short as possible and which ends when we pass a deal.” She is still resisting calls to ask for a longer extension, which would require Britain to take part in European Union elections in May.

The U.K. doesn’t get an extension just by asking for one, though. EU leaders would still have to approve the request, and their patience is running thin. The last time the U.K. asked for an extension was in mid-March, when May requested three more months. The EU said it would only grant the extension if Parliament passed May’s withdrawal agreement, which did not happen. Given the deadlock in London, European leaders don’t want to keep granting new extensions and allow this to drag on forever.

In a statement this morning, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, said that if Parliament won’t pass May’s deal, the only other options are a no-deal Brexit or a longer delay that would require Britain to take part in European Parliament elections. In a meeting with Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, French President Emmanuel Macron suggested that there’s no guarantee the EU would even grant the longer delay. (Macron has taken to the role of Brexit Bad Cop with an impressive level of gusto.)
ADVERTISEMENT
inRead invented by Teads

Still, in a tweet following May’s statement, European Commission President Donald Tusk seemed to suggest the EU would cooperate:

Today’s bipartisanship:

May also said in her statement that she was offering to “sit down with the leader of the opposition”—that would be Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn—“to try to agree a plan that we would both stick to.” The two of them could then present this plan to Parliament together. She said this plan would have to include the now-thrice-rejected withdrawal agreement she negotiated with the EU.

Is there any chance Labour would agree to this after voting against May’s deal three times? It’s possible.

Remember that the withdrawal agreement doesn’t actually define the future relationship between Britain and Europe—it sets out the terms under which that relationship will be negotiated. Corbyn has previously suggested that Labour might be willing to support the agreement if it included a permanent customs union between Britain and the EU to allow frictionless trade and avoid a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. He also wants to see Britain stay in alignment with EU rules, which would likely include the freedom of movement for EU citizens into the U.K. May has previously ruled out these options, but all indications are that she’s now coming around to the idea of a much softer Brexit.

Hard-line Brexiteers will lose their minds if this turns out to be the deal: Shedding EU rules and regaining control of immigration were the big reasons for doing Brexit in the first place. Already, there are complaints that May has “handed the future decisions over Brexit to the Labour Party” and that the people didn’t vote for a “May-Corbyn coalition government.” Former Foreign Minister Boris Johnson said Brexit is now becoming “soft to the point of disintegration.”
ADVERTISEMENT
inRead invented by Teads

Corbyn, who has agreed to the talks, will be under pressure as well, from the growing ranks of voters and politicians demanding a “people’s vote” on whatever arrangement they work out. This offer could also be a way for May to shift some of the blame for a no-deal Brexit onto Labour if they can’t work anything out by April 12.

Today in ominous warnings: Barnier said in his speech Tuesday that a no-deal scenario is becoming more likely by the day. May, whose Cabinet is divided on whether to accept no-deal, said that “we could make a success of no-deal in the long term,” but she appears to be doing everything in her power to avoid that scenario.

The Spectator’s Katy Balls reports that ministers were given background reading for Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting that included “decisions that need to be taken soon regarding no-deal preparations.” These included the possibility of London reasserting direct rule over Northern Ireland, as was the case during the late-20th century Troubles, and potentially recalling troops from overseas to prepare for the possibility of unrest. Perhaps, as May suggests, the long term would work out, but the short term sounds pretty scary.

Today’s reality check: The New York Times’ Peter Goodman writes that “for much of the business world, Britain’s departure from the European Union has effectively happened,” noting that multinational financial services companies and auto manufacturers have already cut back on investment in the country, in anticipation of it losing its status as a hub for trade with Europe. The article cites estimates that the British economy is now 1 percent to 2.5 percent smaller than it would have been without Brexit and that the pound has lost more than 10 percent of its value against the dollar since the referendum.

Ironically, the impact of this lost investment could fall most heavily on the manufacturing-dependent communities that voted in high numbers for Brexit.

Today’s quip:

Days left until next deadline: 10   
Support our journalism
Title: 💩 What would a No Deal Brexit Look Like?
Post by: RE on April 03, 2019, 12:51:57 AM
It would look likeCOLLAPSE!

RE

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/02/world/europe/brexit-no-deal-outcomes.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/02/world/europe/brexit-no-deal-outcomes.html)

What Would a No-Deal Brexit Look Like?

What Would a No-Deal Brexit Look Like?

A lorry is driven past dozens of others parked after traveling by ferry between Britain and France at the Port of Dover, Britain, in February.CreditToby Melville/Reuters
Image
A lorry is driven past dozens of others parked after traveling by ferry between Britain and France at the Port of Dover, Britain, in February.CreditCreditToby Melville/Reuters
  • April 2, 2019

Michel Barnier, the European Union’s chief Brexit negotiator, warned on Tuesday that Britain’s seeming inability to decide on an orderly departure agreement has made a so-called no-deal Brexit more likely with less than two weeks until April 12, the latest deadline.

While a further extension of the deadline was possible, nothing was certain. Here’s what could happen if Britain leaves the bloc without a deal.

Ferries and trains zip back and forth between southeast England and Calais in France carrying food, goods and people between Britain and the rest of the European Union. If Britain leaves without a divorce agreement, many worry that issues with new customs arrangements could lead to miles of traffic jams, forcing trucks to sit for hours on highways as food rots and manufacturing processes grind to a halt.

“I expect to see long queues at the ports because traders, importers and exporters and the logistics supply chain are not prepared for the new customs arrangements here or in the E.U.,” said Duncan Buchanan, the policy director at Britain’s Road Haulage Association. “We will get a massive slowdown in the supply chain.”

Advertisement

Britain has said that it will allow trucks to drive off ferries and trains without extra checks and declarations, but other European Union countries have not said the same about traffic from Britain. British haulers arriving at ports could find themselves turned away if they have not completed correct paperwork.

Buffalo making their way to the milking parlor at Laverstoke Park Farm near Overton, Hampshire, in February.CreditAdrian Dennis/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Image
Buffalo making their way to the milking parlor at Laverstoke Park Farm near Overton, Hampshire, in February.CreditAdrian Dennis/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Farmers and food producers have warned that supplies could dwindle.

Nearly a third of the food consumed in Britain comes from the European Union, but if the trucks bringing that food in are stuck, consumers might find it harder to purchase perishables like lettuce and tomatoes.

Food producers also have warned that the extra paperwork, a weaker British currency and tariffs on food could increase prices. Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of England, said that food prices could rise as much as 10 percent.

Advertisement

A no-deal Brexit could also lead to company closings in the food industry. One in four food exporters could be out of business in six weeks, according to the Food and Drink Federation.

Minis pass along a robotic assembly line at the BMW Mini plant in Oxford, west of London. BMW said it was shutting down the factory for maintenance during the month of April in case a no-deal Brexit outcome disrupts production.CreditGeoff Caddick/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Image
Minis pass along a robotic assembly line at the BMW Mini plant in Oxford, west of London. BMW said it was shutting down the factory for maintenance during the month of April in case a no-deal Brexit outcome disrupts production.CreditGeoff Caddick/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

A large part of Britain’s manufacturing industry relies on just-in-time manufacturing, which means that parts travel between Britain and Europe constantly and arrive within minutes of being used in factories.

This process could collapse if traffic comes to a standstill at Dover or Calais, and the parts that manufacturers need are stuck in transit. Several auto manufacturers said they would shut down factories temporarily to adjust to such disruptions.

Some manufacturers halted work temporarily after March 29, the original deadline for Britain to depart, fearful of a no-deal Brexit. But the idling of their plants had been planned months in advance. If Britain departs on April 12 without a deal, factories that have reopened could still be hit by disruptions.

The pharmaceutical industry has expressed concern that a no-deal Brexit, which could cause the British pound to plunge, could in turn make medicine supplies in Britain far more valuable — and profitable — to sell overseas, leading to severe shortages in the country. Manufacturers have called on the government to impose a temporary export ban on vital medicines to protect against that possibility.

“We’ve built all these stockpiles. Now we need to make sure that if in the next month the pound should collapse, that middle men don’t sell those stockpiles to people in the E.U. in order to make money,” Mike Thompson, the chief executive of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, said in a statement.

The European Commission has urged E.U. member states to ensure that British citizens living within their boundaries can continue to be legal residents, but this depends on each nation.

Editors’ Picks

‘Dog Suicide Bridge’: Why Do So Many Pets Keep Leaping Into a Scottish Gorge?

It’s Possible Leggings Are the Future. Deal With It.

People Don’t Bribe College Officials to Help Their Kids. They Do It to Help Themselves.

Advertisement

The British residents of other European Union countries may also find themselves ineligible for health care, and the government has advised them to take out separate health insurance until they have residency permits.

Theresa May, Britain’s prime minister, has said that European Union citizens in Britain will be able to stay even if the country leaves without a deal, and that she has a settlement proposal for them. But a parliamentary human rights committee has questioned whether the government has adequately protected their rights.

Traffic signs at the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.CreditNeil Hall/EPA, via Shutterstock
Image
Traffic signs at the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.CreditNeil Hall/EPA, via Shutterstock

Ireland, a European Union member, wants to avoid a physical border with Northern Ireland, which is part of Britain, because such a barrier could undermine the 1998 Good Friday agreement that helped end sectarian violence. But a no-deal Brexit could abruptly impose restrictions on the people, goods and services crossing between Ireland and Northern Ireland.

The Irish government has proposed allowing people and services to move across the border in the event of a no-deal Brexit, but not goods.

The financial sector has been preparing for a no-deal Brexit since shortly after Britain voted to leave the European Union in 2016, so few expect a visible effect on the sector in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

Many banks have set up offices in cities like Frankfurt, Paris and Dublin, so that they can continue to provide the same services seamlessly.

Title: 💩 Brexit: MPs push to prevent no-deal in law
Post by: RE on April 03, 2019, 05:19:17 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47789298 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47789298)

Brexit: MPs push to prevent no-deal in law

Media captionYvette Cooper: "We're in a very dangerous situation"

A cross-party group of MPs has put forward a bill to prevent a no-deal Brexit in 10 days' time.

If passed into law, the bill would require the PM to ask for an extension of Article 50 - which mandates the UK's exit from the EU - beyond the current 12 April deadline.

Labour MP Yvette Cooper presented the bill - which supporters hope they can pass through the Commons in one day.

The prime minister is expected to make a statement shortly.

It comes after the cabinet, which remains split over Brexit, met for eight hours in No 10.

The BBC's John Pienaar said Theresa May's ministers considered plans to "ramp up" no-deal Brexit preparations and a snap general election was also discussed.

    What could happen next?
    How did my MP vote on Brexit options?

Ms Cooper's bill would make it UK law for the PM to ask for an extension to prevent a no-deal, but it would be up to the EU to grant it - or not.

In March, MPs voted against leaving the EU without a deal, but it was not legally binding.
ADVERTISEMENT

Meanwhile, the EU's chief negotiator has said a no-deal Brexit is now more likely but can still be avoided.

Michel Barnier said a long extension to the UK's 12 April exit date had "significant risks for the EU" and a "strong justification would be needed".

France's President Emmanuel Macron and Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar are meeting in Paris to discuss the impact of Brexit.
Media captionTaoiseach Leo Varadkar said the EU should be open to any "credible proposals" the UK put forward

President Macron told reporters that the EU "cannot be hostage to the political crisis in the UK", and the government must come forward with "credible" reasons for an extension.

He said these could include an election, second referendum, or alternative proposals for the future relationship, such as a customs union.

Mr Varadkar said the UK was "consumed by Brexit", but the EU should not be.

He said the EU "needs to be open" about any proposals the UK brings, including a longer extension, and they will do what they can to "assist".

But he added: "We gave the UK some time, some space and some opportunity to come up with a way forward... [but] as things stand, they will leave on 12 April without a deal."

    Brexit deadlock: The Commons in numbers
    EU 'will not be hostage to Brexit crisis'
    What does a soft Brexit mean?
    Ex-Tory MP hits out at 'cowardly' cabinet

Tory MP Sir Oliver Letwin, who supports Ms Cooper's bill, said: "This is a last-ditch attempt to prevent our country being exposed to the risks inherent in a no-deal exit.

"We realise this is difficult. But it is definitely worth trying."

Ms Cooper said the UK was "in a very dangerous situation" and MPs "have a responsibility to make sure we don't end up with a catastrophic no deal".

Speaking to BBC Radio 4's World At One, she added: "We have been attempting to squeeze into just a couple of days a process that really should have been happening for the last two years - a process of trying to build a consensus around the best way forward.

"It is what the prime minister should be doing. It is the prime minister's responsibility to ensure we don't leave the country less safe."
Why is this bill unusual?
Image copyright AFP/Getty Images

Normally the government chooses which bills to present to Parliament in order for them to become law.

But - much to the government's disapproval - MPs voted to allow backbenchers to take charge of business in the Commons on Wednesday.

This gives backbenchers the opportunity to table their own bills, such as this one from Yvette Cooper.

A copy of the bill shows that they want to push it through the commons in one day.

As the backbenchers will be in charge, they will also be able to vote to set aside more time on another day, if they need to complete the process or hold further indicative votes.

However, the bill would also have to be agreed by the House of Lords and receive Royal Assent before it became law - which if the Commons agrees it on Wednesday, could happen as soon as Thursday.

Brexiteer Tory Sir Bill Cash said trying to go through these stages in one day made it a "reprehensible procedure".

But Speaker John Bercow said that, while it was "an unusual state of affairs", it was "not as unprecedented as he supposes" - citing recent bills on Northern Ireland that have been passed at the same speed.

In the latest round of indicative votes on Monday, MPs voted on four alternatives to the PM's withdrawal deal, but none gained a majority.

MPs rejected a customs union with the EU by three votes. A motion for another referendum got the most votes in favour, but still lost.

The votes were not legally binding, but they had been billed as the moment when Parliament might finally compromise.

The Independent MP Chris Leslie tweeted that MPs would be seeking more time for indicative votes to take place on Monday.
Image Copyright @ChrisLeslieMP @ChrisLeslieMP
Report

Liberal Democrat MP Norman Lamb said he is considering resigning the whip after his party refused to back proposals for a customs union and Common Market 2.0 on Monday.

He told BBC News: "If you are seen to be unreasonable, not engaging to find solutions, I don't think it is very attractive to the people."

Earlier, Mr Barnier said: "No deal was never our desire or intended scenario but the EU 27 is now prepared. It becomes day after day more likely."
Media captionBarnier: "No-deal Brexit has become more likely"

Mrs May's plan for the UK's departure has been rejected by MPs three times.

Last week, Parliament took control of the process away from the government in order to hold a series of votes designed to find an alternative way forward.

Eight options were put to MPs, but none was able to command a majority, and on Monday night, a whittled-down four were rejected too.
What next?

    Tuesday 2 April: A five-hour cabinet meeting
    Wednesday 3 April: Potentially another round of indicative votes, and Yvette Cooper's bill to be debated
    Thursday 4 April: Theresa May could bring her withdrawal deal back to Parliament for a fourth vote, while MPs could also vote on Ms Cooper's bill
    Wednesday 10 April: Emergency summit of EU leaders to consider any UK request for further extension
    Friday 12 April: Brexit day, if UK does not seek / EU does not grant further delay
    23-26 May: European Parliamentary elections
Title: 💩 Brexit: Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn hold 'constructive' talks
Post by: RE on April 04, 2019, 03:28:49 AM
JCs spin was not quite so upbeat.

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47807622 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47807622)

Brexit: Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn hold 'constructive' talks


Media captionCorbyn: May meeting "useful but inconclusive"

Talks between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn to break the Brexit deadlock have been called "constructive".

The two leaders met on Wednesday afternoon and agreed a "programme of work" to try to find a way forward to put to MPs for a vote.

It is understood that each party has appointed a negotiating team, which will meet later tonight before a full day of discussions on Thursday.

A spokesman for No 10 said both sides were "showing flexibility".

And he added that the two parties gave "a commitment to bring the current Brexit uncertainty to a close".

Speaking after the meeting, Mr Corbyn said there had not been "as much change as [he] had expected" in the PM's position.

He said the meeting was "useful, but inconclusive", and talks would continue.
Media captionCox: "Once we are out, we are out"

This evening, MPs are debating legislation which would require Mrs May to seek an extension to Article 50 and give the Commons the power to approve or amend whatever was agreed.

The bill passed its first parliamentary hurdle by 315 to 310 votes, with further stages - including consideration of amendments - set to continue until 22.00 BST.
ADVERTISEMENT

Supporters of the bill, tabled by Labour's Yvette Cooper, are trying to fast-track the bill through the Commons in the space of five hours, in a move which has angered Tory Brexiteers.

    Kuenssberg: PM chooses a deal over party unity
    Carney: No deal risk 'alarmingly high'
    Brexitcast: Theresa's Choice
    We must leave the EU, says attorney general

Mr Corbyn said he raised a number of issues with Mrs May, including future customs arrangements, trade agreements and the option of giving the public the final say over the deal in another referendum.

The Labour leader is coming under pressure from senior colleagues to make a referendum a condition of signing up to any agreement.

Demanding the shadow cabinet hold a vote on the issue, Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry said not backing a confirmatory vote would be a "breach" of the policy agreed by party members at its last conference.

The UK has until 12 April to propose a plan to the EU - which must be accepted by the bloc - or it will leave without a deal on that date.

The PM proposed the talks in a statement on Tuesday night. She wants to agree a policy with the Labour leader for MPs to vote on before 10 April - when the EU will hold an emergency summit on Brexit.

If there is no agreement between the two leaders, Mrs May said a number of options would be put to MPs "to determine which course to pursue".

In either event, Mrs May said she would ask the EU for a further short extension to hopefully get an agreement passed by Parliament before 22 May, so the UK does not have to take part in European elections.

The two leaders also met Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

The SNP leader said she had "good" and "open" conversations with both, and while she believed Mr Corbyn would "drive a hard bargain", she was "still not entirely clear" where the prime minister was willing to compromise.

The SNP leader, who backs a further referendum and wants to remain in the EU, told reporters: "My concern is that in the rush to reach some compromise with the clock ticking, what will happen over the next few days... is a bad compromise will be reached."

The SNP, Liberal Democrats, Green Party, Plaid Cymru and the Independent Group have also held a joint press conference, calling for any decision made by the leaders to be put to a public vote.

But some Tory Brexiteers have condemned the talks, with two ministers resigning over the issue.

Chris Heaton-Harris quit on Wednesday afternoon, claiming his job at the Department for Exiting the European Union had become "irrelevant" if the government is not prepared to leave without a deal.

Wales Minister Nigel Adams also resigned earlier, saying the government was at risk of failing to deliver "the Brexit people voted for".
Related Topics
Title: 💩 Brexit: House suspended due to WATER LEAK in Parliament
Post by: RE on April 05, 2019, 12:00:03 AM
Pretty CONVENIENT time for a "leak" forcing an evacuation of Parliament, wouldn't you say?

Also check out how FEW MPs were actually attending this session even BEFORE the supposed "leak"!

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/l2MsBIbaMwE
Title: 💩 Today in Brexit: Looks Like Theresa and Jeremy Might Not Be Able to Work This
Post by: RE on April 05, 2019, 04:58:01 AM
The Clown Show that keeps on Giving.

RE

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/today-in-brexit-may-corbyn-talks.html

Today in Brexit: Looks Like Theresa and Jeremy Might Not Be Able to Work This Out on Their Own

By Joshua Keating
April 04, 20195:36 PM

(https://compote.slate.com/images/3a98cdda-7526-4bc8-8bae-14ca06788391.gif)
Jeremy Corbyn leaves his home in North London on Thursday.
Animation by Lisa Larson-Walker. Photo by Tolga Akmen/AFP/Getty Images.


Today in Brexit is a daily feature that attempts to keep track of the chaotic mess playing out in the U.K. If you’re just tuning in, here’s a brief explainer on what you’ve been missing.

One striking thing about British politics for an American observer is that bipartisanship and “reaching across the aisle” are not fetishized there like they are here. This is probably for structural reasons: In the American system, the White House and the legislature are often controlled by different parties—Donald Trump has to sit down with “Chuck and Nancy” on a regular basis if he wants to pass anything through Congress. In the U.K., the party controlling Parliament also controls the executive, and can usually rely on its own votes, sometimes with a coalition partner, to pass legislation.

So the prime minister sitting in a room haggling with the leader of the opposition to pass her bill—as Theresa May did with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn this week—is not how things are supposed to work. It’s even weirder when the governing party’s official position for the past four years has been that the leader of the opposition is an anti-Semitic Stalinist who poses a grave threat to national security. But with the prime minister’s party terminally split over Brexit, that’s where we are.

Today’s meeting: Corbyn and May wrapped up a second day of talks after four and half hours Thursday. May is now hoping to forge an agreement with Corbyn that the two of them can present jointly to Parliament, meaning she’s hoping that she can get enough votes from the opposition to overcome resistance from the hard-liners in her own party and her coalition partners, who have continuously opposed the withdrawal agreement she negotiated with the EU.

No concrete deal came out of the talks, but they plan to meet again and May’s side described the session as “constructive.” That’s also what they said about Wednesday’s meeting, but there have been reports suggesting it was a little frostier than that:
ADVERTISEMENT
inRead invented by Teads

Today in intra-party squabbles: The Labour Party is split on whether Corbyn should demand a new public referendum on whatever deal is passed. Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign minister, issued a statement Wednesday calling on the party to insist that “any deal agreed by Parliament must be subject to a confirmatory public vote, and yes, the other option on the ballot must be Remain.” But Thursday, 25 Labour MPs wrote an open letter to Corbyn warning him against calling for a new referendum, insisting on the importance of “respecting the 2016 vote.” The shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer, who participated in the May-Corbyn talks, said a new vote would be discussed, but it’s not clear how strongly Labour will push for it. This whole debate will be academic if Corbyn and May can’t reach an agreement at all.

Today’s in Lords: Wednesday night, the House of Commons passed a bill, by one vote, that attempts to prevent a no-deal Brexit by requiring May to ask the EU for an extension on the current Brexit deadline, which is April 12. (Coming up soon!) It would also give Parliament the power to determine the length of the extension she asked for. The government opposes the bill, arguing that it would actually increase the risk of an “accidental” no-deal Brexit: EU leaders are meeting on Wednesday where they will likely consider the U.K.’s request for a delay. If they approve a different date than the one proposed by Parliament, May would then have to bring it back for approval by Parliament the next day, which is April 11, one day before the deadline. That’s cutting it pretty close.

The bill still needs to be approved by the House of Lords, where it is being debated Thursday under a special expedited process. (Most bills take weeks to pass.) Pro-Brexit lords are fighting the bill, with one calling the expedited process “tyranny.”

Today in Ireland: German Chancellor Angela Merkel visited Ireland on Thursday, where she met with Prime Minister Leo Varadkar and spoke with people living near the Republic of Ireland–Northern Ireland border. Merkel was seeking a “clearer picture” of how Ireland is preparing for the possibility of a no-deal Brexit, according to the German ambassador. “We will do everything in order to prevent a no-deal Brexit,” Merkel said in a press conference, which could indicate she’s open to granting the U.K. another extension next week. But a lot still has to happen before then.

The visit seemed to have some personal resonance for Merkel, who grew up in East Germany during the era of the Berlin Wall. “I lived behind the Iron Curtain—and I know what it means when walls fall. The discussion with citizens from the border region has shown that everything must be done in order to maintain this peaceful coexistence,” she said.
Title: 💩 Today in Brexit: Give Us Just a Little More Time—Seriously, Please?
Post by: RE on April 06, 2019, 04:46:42 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/ZQNQg31NbFI

RE

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/today-in-brexit-may-asks-another-deadline-extension.html (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/today-in-brexit-may-asks-another-deadline-extension.html)

Today in Brexit: Give Us Just a Little More Time—Seriously, Please?

By Elliot Hannon
April 05, 20195:53 PM

(https://compote.slate.com/images/0d596146-aec4-44fb-9bd1-aab29cdc0727.gif)

Today in Brexit is a daily feature that will attempt to keep track of the chaotic mess playing out in the U.K. If you’re just tuning in, here’s a brief explainer on what you’ve been missing.

Welcome to Brexit purgatory, which on Friday started to look like it might last even longer than previously thought possible. With the U.K. set to depart the EU in exactly one week and no agreement in Parliament on what the relationship between the two should look like after the breakup, Prime Minister Theresa May formally requested from Brussels another extension to the Brexit deadline, proposing a new drop dead date of June 30.

Today in Desperation: Will Brussels agree to the 11-week extension for the U.K. to try again to reach consensus on a deal? It looks increasingly like not. The British prime minister requested the very same June 30 extension the first time around, and the EU shot it down, opting for a shorter reprieve. It appears likely to say no again, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be an extension of some kind. European Council President Donald Tusk is pushing a full-year extension! He’s pitching it as a “flextension,” meaning that the U.K. would have the full year to come to some sort of decision but could pull out earlier if it got its act together. In this scenario, the U.K. is a harried student begging a teacher (the EU) for one more day after pulling an all-nighter to finish an essay—and failing. And the teacher, after taking a look at the state of the paper, replies: “How about you take a week. Trust me, you’ll need it.”

Today’s Emergency: What now? EU and U.K. leaders are scheduled to meet for an emergency summit Wednesday that will almost certainly revolve around the terms of an extension, rather than the nature of Britain’s exit. It is not a certainty, however, that the EU will grant an extension at all. There are rumblings from within the European member states, the loudest coming from France, that granting another extension won’t do anything other than kick the can down the road—yet again. It’s a hard argument to counter considering the lethargic pace of the Brexit negotiations until a deadline focused the mind. Those deadlines haven’t yet produced any new results, but they have sufficiently motivated British parliamentarians to engage on the issue.

Today’s Reminder This Is Still a Negosh: It’s important to remember that Brexit is a negotiation, and rumblings from France, for instance, could be a “bad cop” routine, serving as a stick to keep the U.K. moving. The European Union’s line has generally been that it would like the U.K. to stay as closely aligned with the bloc as possible, and as the deadline nears, British parliamentarians have been drifting toward a more centrist compromise that would see the country more closely aligned than even under May’s negotiated withdrawal. Would the EU want to halt this momentum just to prove a point about deadlines? Seems unlikely.

The brinkmanship of sticking to the current April 12 deadline or bust, without the ability to grant some sort of extension, might help keep British leaders on task. But it also makes very real the chance that the U.K. would be unable to come to an internal agreement about its future relationship with the EU and would leave the bloc with no deal at all. A no-deal Brexit, which would see the country revert to WTO trade rules, is favored by a sizable and vocal portion of the right wing of British politics. This non-negotiated style of Brexit, however, is seen as carrying substantial economic risks, as it would essentially rip the U.K. economy from the European economy in one week’s time, requiring new customs arrangements, trade deals, and on and on. The operating assumption is that the EU will do what it takes to avoid that scenario, even grant an extension that perhaps wasn’t exactly earned.

Today’s Lame Duck: Complicating matters on Friday’s extension request is the fact that European parliamentary elections are set to be held on May 23. That puts the U.K. in the potentially awkward position of going to the polls to elect representatives to a government they don’t plan participating in, long-term. May has assured Brussels the country will go through the steps to hold the election, a move that has laid the groundwork for a longer extension. From the EU’s point of view, having lame duck British MEPs isn’t all that appealing for the obvious reason that they may have different long- and short-term interests on matters before the European Parliament. This may seem like a far-fetched threat of internal sabotage by British MEPs should Brexit negotiations stretch on through another session of parliament in Europe, but it’s one that right-wing pro-Brexit MP Jacob Rees-Mogg made explicitly on Friday.

Will that happen? We’re not there yet. Rees-Mogg, like many other so-called Brexiteers, favors a hard Brexit, which is seen as more likely if no extension is granted.

Days left until next deadline: Still 7!  But watch this space.
Title: 💩 Europe|May’s Compromise Talks With Corbyn Hit Snag as She Asks for Brexit Ext
Post by: RE on April 06, 2019, 05:16:36 AM
Really making progress here!  ::)

RE

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/05/world/europe/brexit-extension-theresa-may.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/05/world/europe/brexit-extension-theresa-may.html)

Europe|May’s Compromise Talks With Corbyn Hit Snag as She Asks for Brexit Extension

(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/04/05/world/05brexit/merlin_153000123_b80e6600-ccad-4d4b-9ccd-f7fe5cdbcec9-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
In asking for a Brexit extension until June 30, Prime Minister Theresa May was bowing to pressure from her Conservative Party not to be seen as forcing Britain into a long delay.CreditCreditJack Taylor/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

By Benjamin Mueller

    April 5, 2019

LONDON — Talks on a compromise Brexit plan between Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain and the opposition Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, hit a snag on Friday, just as Mrs. May sought a nearly two-month delay in the deadline for leaving the European Union.

Labour leaders said Mrs. May had so far refused to budge from her original plan, but the government said it was still prepared to propose changes.

The developments illustrated the challenges confronting the leaders in reaching an agreement for Britain’s withdrawal, with both Mrs. May and Mr. Corbyn facing difficulties within their parties if they compromise.

News of the deadlock came on the same day Mrs. May asked for a second extension of the deadline for departure, to June 30. The original March 29 deadline had been extended once, to April 12 — one week away.

Commenting on the negotiations so far between Mrs. May and Mr. Corbyn, Keir Starmer, Labour’s lead lawmaker on Brexit, said the government was so far not allowing “any changes to the actual wording of the political declaration,” the part of Mrs. May’s deal that outlines Britain’s future relationship with Europe and that would be the centerpiece of any compromise.

He said talks would continue only if the government changed its position.

“So far, the government isn’t proposing any changes to the deal,” Mr. Starmer told reporters on Friday. “We want the talks to continue and we’ve written in those terms to the government, but we do need change if we’re going to compromise.”

What Is Brexit? A Simple Guide to Why It Matters and What Happens Next

The basics of Brexit, the troubled plan for Britain to quit the European Union.

A minister in Mrs. May’s government, Rory Stewart, said the government was prepared to compromise on the political declaration, saying the negotiations with Labour had run into problems but were not dead.

“In truth, the positions of the two parties are very, very close and where there’s good will it should be possible to get this done and get it done relatively quickly,” Mr. Stewart said in an interview on BBC Radio 4.

In a statement, Downing Street said, “We have made serious proposals in talks this week, and are prepared to pursue changes to the political declaration in order to deliver a deal that is acceptable to both sides.”

No further talks were scheduled, a Labour official said, but the party was willing to reopen negotiations if the government’s position changed.

After seeing her Brexit deal rejected three times by Parliament, Mrs. May earlier this week sought to break months of deadlock by meeting with Mr. Corbyn.

Mrs. May’s plan was to eventually take Britain out of Europe’s main economic structures but give it control over immigration from continental Europe.

Mr. Corbyn has been reluctant to be pinned down on a single alternate plan, but Labour’s policy is to keep Britain more closely tied to European regulations and leave the door open to a second public vote on Brexit.

(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/04/05/world/05brexit2/merlin_153053904_9fd230c8-0f5f-467e-bf30-dd65f09686c7-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
Pro-Brexit protesters outside the Parliament in London.Credit Henry Nicholls/Reuters

One of the compromise plans that has been most popular in Parliament is Britain’s agreeing to remain in the European customs union, meaning it would not charge tariffs on European products.

But Mrs. May would risk a rebellion of hard-line, pro-Brexit lawmakers in her Conservative Party if she accepts a compromise that keeps Britain tied closely to Europe.

Meanwhile, a compromise would force Mr. Corbyn to face the wrath of pro-European lawmakers in Labour, who want nothing less than another public vote that could reverse Brexit altogether.

Mrs. May already seemed to be contemplating difficulties in talks when she wrote on Friday morning to Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, asking to again delay Britain’s departure from the bloc.

She said in the letter that if talks with Mr. Corbyn did not produce a compromise, she would hold a series of votes in Parliament on alternative paths, in the hopes that lawmakers would settle on one.

Parliament has already tested support among lawmakers for various plans, only for none to win a majority. But the government is expected to try to use a somewhat different voting process, were it to try again.

“This impasse cannot be allowed to continue,” Mrs. May wrote. “In the U.K. it is creating uncertainty and doing damage to faith in politics, while the European Union has a legitimate desire to move on to decisions about its own future.”

(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/04/05/world/05brexit3/merlin_152453277_f68ba5ff-35bf-45f3-aab6-dee10b5dec7f-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
Donald Tusk, center-left, president of the European Council, and Jean-Claude Juncker, center-right, president of the European Commission, in Brussels last month.CreditJohn Thys/Agence France-Presse — Getty

Mrs. May also conceded in the letter that Britain was preparing to take part in elections for the European Parliament in May.

Analysts said Brussels would probably reject her proposed date of June 30 for a Brexit postponement — and some countries said they had yet to see a sufficient reason to support any extension.

Britain was originally scheduled to leave the bloc on March 29, but European leaders granted a short extension to give Parliament more time to approve a withdrawal deal.

Mr. Tusk was pushing European leaders to offer Mrs. May a one-year extension for Brexit while leaving the door open to an earlier withdrawal if Britain ratifies a deal, according to a senior European Union official familiar with his thinking. The official spoke on condition of anonymity, in keeping with standard practice.

That plan, described as a “flextension,” would eliminate the need for European leaders to repeatedly consider British requests for a delay. And in allowing Britain to leave sooner if an agreement is reached, Mr. Tusk appears to be trying to make it clear that Brussels is not trying to trap Britain in the bloc.

Mr. Tusk’s plan would still need the backing of European Union member states, and there were some signs of resistance from France, which typically takes the hardest line in these matters, as well as Austria and the Netherlands.

“The French president has made very clear that if we want to grant an extension: What for?” the French finance minister, Bruno Le Maire, said before a meeting of European finance ministers in Bucharest, Romania, on Friday. He added, “It is up to the British government to give an answer to that key question.”

In a Twitter post, Jacob Rees-Mogg, center, recommended that, if “stuck” in the European Parliament over the next year, Britain should be “as difficult as possible.”CreditFacundo Arrizabalaga/EPA, via Shutterstock
Image
In a Twitter post, Jacob Rees-Mogg, center, recommended that, if “stuck” in the European Parliament over the next year, Britain should be “as difficult as possible.”CreditFacundo Arrizabalaga/EPA, via Shutterstock

The cross-party talks had been cited by some as reason enough for the bloc to offer an extension. Further difficulties in the talks throw that into question, and any new extension may depend on what Parliament manages to accomplish next week.

The Netherlands has generally been more sympathetic to Britain, but Mark Rutte, the Dutch prime minister, expressed exasperation with the British negotiating approach. “I keep being amazed at how the fifth economy of the world handles its interests,” he said.

In asking for an extension until June 30, Mrs. May was bowing to pressure from within her Conservative Party not to be seen as forcing the country into a longer delay.

But she was also laying the ground for a more protracted extension by agreeing that Britain was prepared to participate in European elections in May. That was seen in Brussels as a condition for another Brexit postponement.

Those moves have not gone over well with hard-line Brexit supporters. That rancor was reflected in a Twitter post on Wednesday by the lawmaker Jacob Rees-Mogg, who recommended that, if “stuck” in the European Parliament over the next year that Britain be “as difficult as possible.”

The Labour Party received a glimmer of good news in a by-election in South Wales, retaining a traditional Labour seat in an area that had backed Brexit in the 2016 referendum.

But amid low turnout, the margin was relatively slim, with the winner, Ruth Jones, receiving 39.5 percent of the vote, compared with 31 percent for the Conservatives and 9 percent for the rejuvenated far-right U.K. Independence Party.

Milan Schreuer contributed reporting from Brussels.
Title: 💩 Brexit: I had no choice but to approach Labour - May
Post by: RE on April 07, 2019, 12:41:55 AM
Considering she is a Nazi who thinks he is a Stalinist, that must have been tough for her.  lol.

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47842572 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47842572)

Brexit: I had no choice but to approach Labour - May

    26 minutes ago
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/175E1/production/_106331759_compcopy.jpg)
Mrs May has been criticised by some Conservatives for reaching out to Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn

Prime Minister Theresa May has insisted she had to reach out to Labour in a bid to deliver Brexit or risk letting it "slip through our fingers".

In a statement on Saturday night, Mrs May said there was a "stark choice" of either leaving the European Union with a deal or not leaving at all.

Some Conservatives have criticised her for seeking Labour's help after MPs rejected her Brexit plan three times.

Three days of talks between the parties ended without agreement on Friday.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said he was "waiting to see the red lines move" and had not "noticed any great change in the government's position".

He is coming under pressure from his MPs to demand a referendum on any deal he reaches with the government, with 80 signing a letter saying a public vote should be the "bottom line" in the negotiations.

    Hammond 'optimistic' over Brexit talks
    Brexit: A really simple guide
    Brexit explained in flowcharts

In her statement, Mrs May said that after doing "everything in my power" to persuade her party - and its backers in Northern Ireland's DUP - to approve the deal she agreed with the EU last year, she "had to take a new approach".
ADVERTISEMENT

"We have no choice but to reach out across the House of Commons," the PM said, insisting the two main parties agreed on the need to protect jobs and end free movement.

"The referendum was not fought along party lines and people I speak to on the doorstep tell me they expect their politicians to work together when the national interest demands it."

Getting a majority of MPs to back a Brexit deal was the only way for the UK to leave the EU, Mrs May said.

"The longer this takes, the greater the risk of the UK never leaving at all."
Image copyright Reuters
Image caption Former Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab says the talks could help Mr Corbyn into No 10

The UK is due to leave the EU on 12 April and, as yet, no withdrawal deal has been approved by the House of Commons.

Labour says it has had no indication the government will agree to its demand for changes to the political declaration - the section of Mrs May's Brexit deal which outlines the basis for future UK-EU relations.

The document declares mutual ambitions in areas such as trade, regulations, security and fishing rights - but does not legally commit either party.

Downing Street has indicated it is "prepared to pursue changes" in order to secure a deal, and Chancellor Philip Hammond said on Saturday he was "optimistic" the talks could reach "some form of agreement".
'Open revolt'

However, Tory Brexiteers have reacted angrily to the prospect of Mrs May accepting Labour's demands, particularly for a customs union with the EU which would allow tariff-free trade with the bloc but prevent the UK from striking its own trade deals.

Leaving the EU's customs union was a Conservative manifesto commitment, and former party whip Michael Fabricant predicted "open revolt" among Tories and Leave voters if MPs agreed to it.

However, Downing Street has described the prospect as "speculation".

The Sunday Telegraph reported some activists were refusing to campaign for the party, while donations had "dried up".

And former Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab writes in the Mail on Sunday that Mrs May's approach "threatens to damage the Conservatives for years".

"There is now a danger that Brexit could be lost and that the government could fall - handing the keys to Downing Street to Corbyn," he says.

BBC political correspondent Jonathan Blake said the government would not be drawn on what it was willing to offer Labour.

"No 10 described as speculation reports that it would... enshrine in a law a promise to give Parliament a say on the terms of further negotiations with the EU, as a way of stopping a new Tory leader shifting to a harder Brexit."

In a letter to Mr Corbyn, some Labour MPs have pointed out that - because the political declaration is not legally binding, and with Mrs May having promised to stand down - a future Tory PM could simply "rip up" any of her commitments.

Four shadow ministers were among 80 signatories of the Love Socialism Hate Brexit campaign letter pressing for a further public vote.
'No legitimacy'

Any compromise deal agreed by Parliament will have "no legitimacy if it is not confirmed by the public", it argues.

However, Labour is split on the subject, with a letter signed by 25 Labour MPs on Thursday arguing the opposite.

They warned it would "divide the country further and add uncertainty for business" and could be "exploited by the far-right, damage the trust of many core Labour voters and reduce our chances of winning a general election".

The Commons Leader Andrea Leadsom argues in the Sunday Telegraph that a further referendum would be "the ultimate betrayal".

"It would require lengthy delay, it would reignite the divisive debate, and since Parliament has so far failed to follow the first result, there is no reason to believe it would honour a second referendum either," she writes.
Title: 💩 Brexit: T-5 Days & Counting Down
Post by: RE on April 07, 2019, 07:36:07 AM
5 Days left before...

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQuEClEMiBAbOjwXWPHMv66C-jfYWaBm2dscfKbh7hDeoSVk0sj)

What kind of Stick Save can they pull off in 5 days?  ???  :icon_scratch:

RE

Brexit
April 7, 2019 / 3:47 AM / Updated an hour ago
Compromise? Time ticking down for Britain to come to Brexit agreement
Elizabeth Piper

5 Min Read

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain’s government held out the possibility of compromise with the opposition Labour Party on Sunday to try to win support in parliament for leaving the European Union with a deal, just days before the latest Brexit date.

(https://s3.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20190407&t=2&i=1374441685&w=1200&r=LYNXNPEF360CO)
Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May arrives at church, as Brexit turmoil continues, near High Wycombe, Britain April 7, 2019. REUTERS/Simon Dawson

Prime Minister Theresa May, weaker than ever after her Brexit deal was rejected by parliament three times, has been forced to turn to Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn after giving up on winning over eurosceptics in her Conservative Party, whose opposition has hardened.

With Britain’s departure now set for April 12, May’s government is running out of time to get a deal through a divided parliament, and must come up with a new plan to secure another delay from EU leaders at a summit on Wednesday.

Britain’s biggest shift in foreign and trade policy in more than 40 years is mired in uncertainty, with ministers saying Brexit may never happen, businesses worried the country could leave without a deal, and others just wanting to reverse it.

In a last-ditch bid to get her deal through parliament, May opened talks with Corbyn last week to try to strike a deal on Britain’s future ties with the EU in exchange for his support for her divorce deal, the Withdrawal Agreement.

So far those talks have failed to yield any kind of accord, with Labour policy chiefs saying the government has yet to move from its “red lines”, above all over a customs union, which sets tariffs for goods imported into the EU.

Advertisement

“Specifically provided we are leaving the European Union then it is important that we compromise, that’s what this is about and it is through gritted teeth,” said Andrea Leadsom, the Brexit-supporting leader of the House of Commons (lower house of parliament).

“But nevertheless the most important thing is to actually leave the EU,” she told the BBC’s Andrew Marr show, adding that May’s proposal for a customs arrangement after Brexit was not too far from Labour’s desire for a customs union.

Germany’s finance minister, Olaf Scholz, called on the two sides to find what he called “a sensible agreement to end the paralysis in British politics and to avoid a disorderly Brexit”.
NO REAL CHANGE

But, while describing the talks so far as positive, Labour’s business policy chief Rebecca Long-Bailey said there had as yet been no “real changes” to the deal.

“I think both sides are committed to working quite rigorously to compromise as much as possible so that we can provide that compromise Brexit deal that I think parliament desperately needs at the moment,” she told the BBC.

Advertisement

Shami Chakrabarti, Labour’s legal policy chief, was more blunt. “It’s hard to imagine that we are going to make real progress now without either a general election or a second referendum on any deal she can get over the line in parliament,” she told Sky News.

May has opposed remaining in the EU’s customs union saying it would mean that Britain could not secure free trade deals with other countries - a key plank to her Brexit strategy that saw her create a new government department for trade.

Britain voted by 52 to 48 percent in 2016 to leave the EU, and parliament, May’s cabinet and the country at large remain deeply polarised over the terms of Brexit and even whether to depart at all.

Despite the lack of convergence between the two major parties over a deal, there was one thing they did agree on - time is running out for Brexit to be secured.

May, who has been verbally mauled by members of her own party for turning to Labour, herself warned Brexit-supporting lawmakers that “the longer this takes, the greater the risk of the UK never leaving at all”.

In an attempt to avoid falling out of the EU without a deal, she again heads to Brussels this week to ask for a further delay until June 30 - something EU leaders have said requires her setting out an alternative path to getting her deal approved.

Any extension would require unanimous approval from the other EU countries, all weary of Britain’s Brexit indecision, and could come with conditions. EU summit chair Donald Tusk plans to propose an extension of a year, which could be shortened if Britain’s parliament eventually ratifies the deal.
Slideshow (6 Images)

But even the threat of losing Brexit has so far failed to change the minds of hardline eurosceptic Conservative lawmakers, and some are now suggesting that Britain make the EU’s life a misery if Britain is forced to accept a long delay.

“If we are forced to remain in we must be the most difficult member possible,” Jacob Rees-Mogg, leader of the European Research Group, a Conservative eurosceptic group, told Sky News.

“When the multi-annual financial framework comes forward, if we’re still in, this is our one in seven year opportunity to veto the budget and to be really very difficult.”

Reporting by Elizabeth Piper and Raissa Kasolowsky in London, Madeline Chambers in Berlin; Editing by Mark Heinrich
Title: 💩 Brexit: Deal or No-Deal?
Post by: RE on April 08, 2019, 01:52:10 AM
We're in the final stretch run here for this round, and the big question now is it Deal, No-Deal or Kick-the-Can?  What's the over-under here?  What's your pick?  I'm going to bet on No-Deal.

http://www.youtube.com/v/o7fAKH4Ve0I

RE

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/08/brexit-uk-faces-reckoning-with-no-deal-deadline-just-days-away.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/08/brexit-uk-faces-reckoning-with-no-deal-deadline-just-days-away.html)

UK faces Brexit reckoning with no-deal deadline just days away
Published an hour ago Updated 28 min ago
Holly Ellyatt
   
(https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/105838143-1554705902021gettyimages-878500612.jpeg?v=1554705925&w=740&h=559)
European Council President Donald Tusk shows the way to Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May after posing for photographers within a bilateral meeting during the Eastern Partnership summit at the European Council headquarters in Brussels, on November 24, 2017.
CHRISTIAN HARTMANN | AFP | Getty Images
   
Key Points

    The U.K.’s political environment continues to look as disjointed and uncertain as ever this week with cross-party talks over Brexit still bearing no compromise.
    All eyes are on the EU which meets on Wednesday and must decide whether to grant the U.K. more time over Brexit.
    The U.K. is meant to leave the EU on April 12 if the EU does not grant the country an extension to Brexit.

Premium: EU-BRITAIN-POLITICS-ECONOMY-DIPLOMACY-BREXIT


The U.K.’s political future looks as uncertain as ever this week with cross-party talks over Brexit still bearing no compromise ahead of crucial decisions that need to be made.

Meanwhile on the continent, all eyes are on EU leaders who will meet Wednesday and must decide whether to grant the U.K. more time to leave the bloc, or not.

Last week, Prime Minister Theresa May requested an extension to Brexit to June 30 but there are strong signals of dissent in Europe over granting the U.K. more time; France, in particular, is not keen. The U.K. is due to leave the EU on April 12 if the EU does not grant the country an extension to Brexit.

A majority of U.K. lawmakers have rejected her Brexit deal three times, while also rejecting a no-deal Brexit and failing to reach a consensus for any alternative options. May has now resorted to holding talks with her political rival, Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn, to find a way out of the Brexit impasse.

Talks have so far yielded little agreement, however, and are expected to continue Monday.

As it stands, if the EU refuses to grant the U.K. an extension to June 30 (or counter-propose a longer extension) the U.K. could be faced with a stark choice on Friday April 12 — leave the EU without a deal in place or revoke the whole departure process (known as Article 50) entirely.
watch now
VIDEO05:03
BNY’s Derrick: Every move in the pound for months has been tied directly to Brexit news

The political uncertainty and confusion in the U.K. has riled politicians and the public alike with frustration over the length of time that Brexit is taking. Britain was originally due to leave the bloc on March 29 but was granted more time as no deal had been ratified.

European Parliament elections in late May are a key focus for the EU and Brexit is a complicated and unwanted distraction. There is therefore no certainty over what decision EU leaders will take Wednesday.

EU Council President Donald Tusk has suggested a one-year extension to Brexit but French President Emmanuel Macron has said there should be tough conditions imposed on the U.K. if it’s given any further time.

Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said Saturday that he considered it highly unlikely that EU leaders would veto a proposal to grant Britain more time, however, and that any country that did “wouldn’t be forgiven for it.”

Holger Schmieding, chief economist at Berenberg Bank, said the bank expects the EU to “reluctantly grant the U.K. a further Brexit delay” just because the alternative — “a hard Brexit with even more political chaos in a country that will remain a close neighbour, is just too bad.”

“Most of the cautious comments by EU27 decision makers point that way. Still, deciding unanimously at the 10 April emergency summit to give the U.K. even more time to sort itself out will not come easy for the EU27. It raises serious concerns and a grave tail risk,” he said in a note Monday.

“The EU27 may ask why a new delay should finally help the U.K. to get its act together if the first delay has not done the trick.”

May has been criticized by pro-Brexit members of her own Conservative Party and Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) on whose support she has relied upon in a minority government.

She has defended her decision to talk to Labour, however, tweeting a video Sunday in which she said she could not see Parliament accepting her Brexit deal after it was rejected three times and that “the choice that lies ahead of us is either leaving the European Union with a deal or not leaving at all.”

‘Schrodinger’s Cat’

Brexit has been the main focus point for sterling for months and the currency fell to a one-week low of $1.2987 on Friday as France and the Netherlands expressed doubt about May’s plan to further delay Brexit. It had rebounded Monday to trade at $1.3064. London’s FTSE 100 index trading lower Monday morning.

Simon Derrick, the chief currency strategist at BNY Mellon, likened sterling’s state of limbo to the thought experiment called “Schrodinger’s Cat” — the paradox of a cat being placed in a box with something that could kill it — but the observer not knowing whether it is alive or dead (and thus the cat is both alive and dead) before the box is opened.

Similarly, sterling’s fate can’t be known until the end of the week, Derrick told CNBC on Monday.

”(Sterling is like) Schrodinger’s currency,” he told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe.”

“It’s worth either $1.50 or $1.10 dependent on the outcome of Brexit but you don’t know until that happens. Until you open the box you don’t know and Brexit is the box.”

Derrick noted that the $1.30 price has been the average price against the dollar since the 2016 referendum “and here we are stuck to it.”

“It is entirely possible that by the end of the week we get to the point of finding out that we’ve actually opened the box,” he added.

There’s “a perfectly reasonable chance” that the prime minister goes to the European Council with no plan on Wednesday, Derrick said, and it was also “entirely possible that France, Spain and possibly Belgium go ‘no plan, no extension’ and that at the end of the week we’re looking at making a choice,” Derrick added.

“The choices are between a no-deal Brexit or revocation … It’s by no means clear what the actual result would be … It’s entirely possible that you could have a no deal Brexit, it’s equally possible that it might be revoked,” he said.
Title: 💩 The price of Brexit has been £66 billion so far, plus an impending recession
Post by: RE on April 08, 2019, 03:38:06 AM
I'll be getting together with Hepp and another Brit Mystery Guest to do a follow up report on the latest when maybe things get a little less murky?  ::)

RE

https://www.businessinsider.com/price-of-brexit-66-billion-recession-2019-4 (https://www.businessinsider.com/price-of-brexit-66-billion-recession-2019-4)

The price of Brexit has been £66 billion so far, plus an impending recession — and it hasn't even started yet

The price of Brexit has been £66 billion so far, plus an impending recession — and it hasn't even started yet

 
 
theresa may Prime Minister Theresa May reacts to the rain as she leaves a church with her husband Philip. REUTERS/Simon Dawson

Analysis banner

  • Brexit has cost the UK economy £66 billion ($86 billion) so far, according to S&P Global Ratings.
  • Brexit triggered a decline of the pound, an increase in inflation, the erosion of household spending power, a decline in house prices, and weak exports, S&P says.
  • The United Kingdom is now teetering at the brink of a new recession: Economic data published last week show UK GDP growth may have slipped to 0%.

The damage to the UK economy due to Brexit has cost £66 billion ($86 billion) so far, and left the United Kingdom teetering at the brink of a new recession, according to economic data published last week.

An analysis by S&P Global Ratings analyst Boris Glass found that the decline of the pound, increase in inflation, erosion of household spending power, decline in house prices, and weak exports led to a 3% reduction in GDP. "That translates into average forgone economic activity of £6.6 billion (in 2016 prices) in each of the 10 quarters since the referendum," Glass said in a research note.

uk gdp 5ca77099c6cc501b41026014 960 567The yellow line represents Britain's actual GDP growth trend. The dotted line represents the "doppelganger" data, which was unaffected by Brexit. S&P Global Ratings

The chart shows the results of Glass's calculations. He took real data (yellow line) and compared it to a statistical "doppelganger" economy (dotted line). The doppelganger consisted of a weighted basket of countries whose economies are comparable to the UK. So, for instance, the US is marked as 28.4% of the model, Hungary at 24.1%, Canada at 21.3%, and so on. The mixture produced a GDP growth trend that was almost identical to Britain's — until late 2016 when the Brexit effect kicked in.

investmentFixed Investment declined in Britain after the Brexit vote but it did not in the doppelganger countries. S&P Global Ratings

At that point, after the EU referendum, UK GDP slowed down while the doppelganger continued its growth trend.

The lost £66 billion implies that the country is £1,000 poorer, per person, on average, than it would have been had the vote never taken place.

The decline is showing up in the real-life data, too. A weighted average of Purchasing Manager Index data — which correlates closely with GDP growth — implies that British GDP was exactly zero in Q1, according to Pantheon Macroeconomics analyst Samuel Tombs.

"On past form, the weighted average PMI in Q1 as a whole points to quarter-on-quarter GDP growth falling to zero, from 0.2% in Q4," he told clients. "These surveys have tended to be too downbeat during previous bouts of high economic uncertainty," he said, because they do not capture all economic data.

PMIPMI data imply that GDP growth in the UK dropped to 0% in Q1. Pantheon Macroeconomics

In the global PMI data, a rank of 50 implies growth is flat. Below that is a decline, above is growth. Right now, the UK is exactly on the line at 50, the PMI data say. Here is a comparison map from HSBC analysts James Pomeroy and Vardhan Bhatia.

"As we'd expect, Brexit concerns were cited as 'the main cause' leading to the general level of economic weakness as firms delay spending," they told clients. "The only respite came in from the labour market bouncing back, as it has been the one consistent area of strength for the UK economy in recent months."

HSBCThe UK is doing worse than other large economies, according to HSBC. HSBC

"Disappointing PMI surveys indicate that the UK economy stalled in the first quarter and is at risk of sliding into a deepening downturn in coming months," warned Chris Williamson of IHS Markit, the company that publishes the PMI data.

Our Brexit Insider Facebook group is the best place for up-to-date news and analysis about Britain's departure from the EU, direct from Business Insider's political reporters. Join here.

SEE ALSO: The closer we get to Brexit, the more solid the majority against it is

Title: 💩 Brexit: Parliament votes through bill to prevent no-deal - as it happened
Post by: RE on April 09, 2019, 01:40:40 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/apr/08/brexit-latest-news-live-theresa-may-union-most-likely-outcome-if-labour-and-government-can-compromise-says-minister-live-news (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/apr/08/brexit-latest-news-live-theresa-may-union-most-likely-outcome-if-labour-and-government-can-compromise-says-minister-live-news)

Politics live with Andrew Sparrow

Brexit: Parliament votes through bill to prevent no-deal - as it happened

http://www.youtube.com/v/aFf7pVXgfpI

Rolling coverage of the day’s political developments as they happen

    May to resume Brexit talks with Labour to find compromise
    Analysis: can May keep her deal alive?
    Downing Street lobby briefing - Summary
    Barnier/Varadkar press appearance - Summary

Updated 9h ago
UK House of Commons debate European Union withdrawal bill - watch live

Andrew Sparrow and Kevin Rawlinson

Mon 8 Apr 2019 19.20 EDT
First published on Mon 8 Apr 2019 04.22 EDT

Shares
1,972
Comments
18,233

    11h ago Commons passes bill designed to prevent no-deal Brexit
    16h ago 1922 Committee has ruled out call for a fresh no confidence vote in May, says Brady
    16h ago Cooper bill supporters win first Lords vote today with majority of 234
    16h ago Barnier/Varadkar press appearance - Summary
    16h ago Government and Labour officials to hold further talks tonight about possible Brexit compromise, No 10 says
    17h ago Barnier says EU would refuse trade talks with UK after no-deal unless backstop addressed
    17h ago Barnier says EU happy to offer UK a customs union

9h ago 19:20
Closing summary

That’s all from us this evening. Thanks for reading and commenting. Here’s a summary of the day’s events:

    MPs will debate the prime minister’s plan to ask for a Brexit delay until 30 June on Tuesday. Parliamentarians will be able to suggest alternative dates, raising the prospect that Brexit could be pushed back yet further.
    The debate was set up when Parliament passed legislation designed to prevent the UK crashing out with no deal. The legislation, proposed by the Labour MP Yvette Cooper and others, required the prime minister to present her plan to request a delay in the form of an amendable motion and prevented her from suggesting any date before 22 May. Any delay would still require the consent of the EU, which has said it must come with a workable plan, but – if granted – it would stave off the prospect of what Cooper called an “inadvertent no-deal” Brexit.
    The EU said it would refuse to open trade talks with the UK after a no-deal Brexit unless the backstop issue was addressed. Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator said the situation would persist until the EU got assurances on the Irish border, citizens’ rights and money. Barnier added that he would be happy to offer the UK a customs union.
    Cross-party talks are due to continue on Tuesday, Labour said. The opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn, repeated a call for the prime minister to show more willingness to compromise after discussions resumed on Monday.
    Signs of division within the hard Brexit-supporting ERG came to the fore. One of its members, Daniel Kawczynski, resigned and accused a “hardcore element of ‘Unicorn’ dreamers” within the ERG of putting Brexit at risk.

If you’d like to read more, my colleague Rowena Mason has the full story:
May risks wrath of Tory Brexiters to plead with EU for more time
Read more
Facebook
Twitter

10h ago 18:33

Brexit talks between Labour and the Tories will continue on Tuesday, a spokesman for the former says.

    Following meetings between Labour party and government officials today, ministerial and shadow ministerial negotiating teams will meet tomorrow to attempt to secure a Brexit compromise.

Facebook
Twitter
Advertisement

10h ago 18:33

As Brexit looms, The Guardian is here to help guide you through whatever lies ahead. Unlike many news organisations, we haven’t put up a paywall – our journalism remains accessible to all, so more people have access to accurate information with integrity at its heart. This is The Guardian’s model for open, independent journalism.

Our model enables people to support us in a way that works for them. Readers’ support safeguards our essential editorial independence.

For as little as $1 you can support the Guardian – and it only takes a minute. Thank you. Make a contribution - The Guardian

10h ago 18:30

More than 70 Tory MPs rebelled on each vote linked to amendments to Cooper’s legislation, according to the division lists. The Labour Brexiter, Kate Hoey, and the DUP joined forces with them.

The Tory former Brexit secretaries, David Davis and Dominic Raab, along with the ERG chairman, Jacob Rees-Mogg, were also among those who rebelled.
Facebook
Twitter

10h ago 18:11

The legislation to extend the Brexit process in a bid to avoid a no-deal scenario has received royal assent and has become law.

Updated at 6.14pm EDT
Facebook
Twitter

11h ago 17:59

The Labour MP, Yvette Cooper, is addressing MPs after her victory. She thanks the clerks of the House for facilitating the process in “unusual and fast-moving circumstances”.

Cooper adds that the vote should be taken as an expression by parliament that there is no support for what she says would be a damaging no-deal Brexit and backing for the prime minister to get a deal through.

Hilary Benn asks if royal assent can be obtained tonight. The Commons Speaker, John Bercow, says he is “cautiously optimistic on that front”.

    UK House of Commons (@HouseofCommons)

    The House of Commons approves Lords Amendment 5 to the #EUWithdrawal5Bill by 390 votes to 81. This concludes debate on Lords amendments to the #EUWithdrawal5Bill. The Bill now awaits Royal Assent.
    April 8, 2019

In reaction to the vote, Labour says the government has proposed asking for a Brexit delay until 30 June. This is due to be debated for about 90 minutes on Tuesday.

    Labour Whips (@labourwhips)

    The Government have tabled the section 1 motion under the #CooperLetwinBill which is now required to agree the length of extension the PM will seek from the EU. This is debatable tomorrow. pic.twitter.com/I3jFerAxEV
    April 8, 2019

As the Financial Times’ Whitehall correspondent, Sebastian Payne, points out – the government can expect MPs to seek to amend that date.

    Sebastian Payne (@SebastianEPayne)

    Following the success of Cooper-Letwin bill - 1st piece of backbench legislation to receive Royal Assent in living memory - government is tabling this motion to seek Commons support for short Brexit delay tomorrow.

    Get ready for amendments, forcing the PM into a longer delay 😬 pic.twitter.com/yvj20vpGyw
    April 8, 2019

Updated at 6.10pm EDT
Facebook
Twitter

11h ago 17:55
Commons passes bill designed to prevent no-deal Brexit

MPs have voted in favour of the Cooper-Letwin bill, which requires the prime minister to seek an extension to article 50, thus staving off the prospect of the UK crashing out of the EU with no deal by accident.

They voted to accept the final Lords amendment by 390 votes to 81 – a majority of 309.
Facebook
Twitter

11h ago 17:37

MPs have rejected Cash’s amendment to the amendment, which sought to stop Brexit being delayed beyond 22 May, by 392 votes to 85 – a majority of 307. “The numbers are holding up,” says a disembodied voice caught by the Commons microphone.

MPs move to voting on the final Lords amendment. The result is expected at about 10.50pm.

Updated at 5.39pm EDT
Facebook
Twitter

11h ago 17:23

MPs are voting on whether or not the Lords’ fifth and final amendment to the Cooper-Letwin bill will be further amended. That move has been proposed by the Conservative MP, Bill Cash, who opposes the passage of the bill altogether.

    Labour Whips (@labourwhips)

    We expect the House of Commons to debate the #CooperLetwin Bill around 9pm for up to an hour, with votes at the end. pic.twitter.com/0leLoH8gZQ
    April 8, 2019

    Faisal Islam (@faisalislam)

    First mainly ERG attempt to resist the Lords amendments to Cooper Letwin Bill heavily defeated by 396-83.

    Division now forced on Cash-Baker amendment seeking to rule out EU elections that were just announced in law by Government this morning...
    April 8, 2019

Updated at 5.52pm EDT

11h ago 17:18

The tellers are back in the Commons chamber. MPs have accepted amendments two and three by 396 votes to 83 – a majority of 313.

Next, we’re on to amendment four: It’s agreed on the nod.

Updated at 5.37pm EDT

11h ago 17:13

While MPs are voting, Daniel Kawczynski is on LBC radio explaining his decision to leave the hard Brexit-supporting Tory backbench ERG group this evening:

    Tom Swarbrick (@TomSwarbrick1)

    .@DKShrewsbury “some of my colleagues are...threatening #brexit.”

    “They (the “hardcore ERG) are the greatest impediment to #Brexit taking place.”

    “I have tried to make them see sense and realise that their actions are endangering #brexit. I have failed.”@LBC
    April 8, 2019

11h ago 17:00

The government has said it supports the Lords’ amendments to the Cooper-Letwin bill. The Speaker is now asking MPs whether they agree to them. They accept the first but reject the second and third, meaning the Commons will go to a vote.

A result is expected in about 10 minutes.

Here’s what MPs are voting on:

    Steve Baker MP (@SteveBakerHW)

    In case you are wondering why we divided the Commons 👇 pic.twitter.com/3OM5recpHO
    April 8, 2019

After this vote, there are two more amendments to be considered before the bill can pass.

Updated at 5.53pm EDT

12h ago 16:59

The Tory MP, John Redwood, has just told the Commons:

    This Parliament needs to ... accept this (Brexit) was decided by the public, it was our duty to implement it. Leaving without this agreement is just going to be fine, we are prepared for it, business is ready for it, business has spent money, business has done whatever it needed to do and business now, in many cases, feels very let down that they are not being able to use all their contingencies, which they have spent good money on.

Some points to consider when reading those comments: The government’s no-deal Brexit analysis suggested such a scenario would likely produce huge delays at Dover, increased food prices and a £13bn extra cost to business.

On business’ preparedness, the analysis said:

    Despite communications from the government, there is little evidence that businesses are preparing in earnest for a no deal scenario, and evidence indicates that readiness of small and medium-sized enterprises in particular is low.

Business groups have called on MPs to provide certainty over Brexit by passing a deal:
Business leaders react with dismay to Brexit 'circus'

12h ago 16:45

Brexit-backing Tory MPs, among them Bill Cash and John Redwood, have made impassioned pleas for the Commons not to pass the Cooper-Letwin bill, which would instruct the prime minister to avoid a no-deal Brexit.

They have characterised the bill as an attempt to prevent the UK leaving the European Union because it would only allow for the UK to leave with a deal. And they have denounced the emergency bill, which is being rushed through parliament, as an attack on the UK’s constitutional norms and as anti-democratic.

Its supporters counter that it can hardly be considered undemocratic to pass a bill through both houses of parliament.

Updated at 5.53pm EDT
Facebook
Twitter

12h ago 16:06

MPs are now debating amendments to Cooper-Letwin. A result is expected within an hour or so.

    Labour Whips (@labourwhips)

    We expect the House of Commons to debate the #CooperLetwin Bill around 9pm for up to an hour, with votes at the end. pic.twitter.com/0leLoH8gZQ
    April 8, 2019

Updated at 5.47pm EDT
Facebook
Twitter

13h ago 15:59

There’s been a split in the hard Brexit-supporting Tory backbench ERG group this evening: The MP, Daniel Kawczynski, has announced his resignation.

There have been recent rumblings of disquiet among the group; some of whom believe others are so determined to deliver the hardest of Brexits that they are actually imperiling the whole project. Kawczynski is one of them.

    Daniel Kawczynski (@DKShrewsbury)

    Have decided to resign from ERG. Despite excellent Chairmanship by @Jacob_Rees_Mogg who has accommodated all views I can no longer be a member of caucas which is preventing WA4 from passing. Hardcore element of ‘Unicorn’ dreamers now actually endangering #Brexit
    April 8, 2019

Kawczynski voted against the deal the first two times it came to the Commons and for it the third. He is calling on MPs to back it in a fourth vote.

Updated at 4.18pm EDT
Facebook
Twitter

13h ago 15:00

The Cooper-Letwin bill has been given an unopposed third reading in the Lords and now goes back to the Commons.

The Leader of the Commons has said the government will not stand in its way and will schedule time for debate tomorrow if the bill gets royal assent this evening. But Andrea Leadsom has denounced the bill as a “huge dog’s dinner”.

She told MPs that it “seems inconceivable that Parliament has looked at this bill for the first time last Tuesday, and has had just a few hours of debate across both Houses”.

Updated at 5.53pm EDT
Facebook
Twitter

14h ago 14:47
Daniel Boffey

Daniel Boffey

Britain’s new exit date from the EU, and the conditions attached to a Brexit delay, will likely be fixed in the gilded rooms of the Belgian prime minister’s 16th century Egmont Palace hours before Theresa May addresses the leaders.

Under emerging plans, a small group of EU leaders whose countries will be most affected by the UK’s departure will be hosted by the Belgian PM, Charles Michel, on Wednesday afternoon. The guest list is likely to include the leaders of France, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Denmark and Ireland.
UK's new Brexit date could be fixed by small group of EU leaders

14h ago 14:12

The Irish prime minister, Leo Varadkar, has had a phone call with Theresa May this evening. Varadkar spoke to May about her recent letter to Donald Tusk seeking an extension of the article 50 deadline and her ongoing preparations for the summit on Wednesday. The Taoiseach repeated his openness to an extension of the deadline.
Title: 💩 No-Deal Brexit? Yes, if Macron Vetoes an Extension
Post by: RE on April 09, 2019, 02:56:16 AM
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/no-deal-brexit-yes-if-macron-vetoes-an-extension/ (https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/no-deal-brexit-yes-if-macron-vetoes-an-extension/)

No-Deal Brexit? Yes, if Macron Vetoes an Extension
By John O'Sullivan

April 8, 2019 5:00 PM

(https://i1.wp.com/www.nationalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/macron.jpg?resize=789%2C460&ssl=1)
French President Emmanuel Macron in N.Y., September 26, 2018. (Shannon Stapleton/Reuters)

This week European leaders will meet in solemn conclave, with and without Prime Minister Theresa May, to determine whether or not to extend the U.K.’s membership of the European Union and, if so, for how long. Brits have until recently paid relatively little attention to this occasion since it was generally agreed that the other EU members wanted the Brits to stay in. All doubts were on the British side, where a heated debate now seems to be moving towards a cross-party Con–Lab agreement to strike a pretend Brexit that would keep Britain inside most of the EU’s economic institutions, regulations, and tariffs for an indefinite period. There’s a lot to play for still — half the Tory party hates May’s deal — but for the moment the ball is in the court of Brussels.

And for the first time, one of the Europeans may say no. Not just any old European either, but the French president, Emmanuel Macron.
3   

The actual choice before the European Council asks should Britain be allowed to remain in the EU for a short time (i.e., until June 30) ,to sign off on May’s withdrawal deal or nearest equivalent; or a long time (another year or even longer), to enable a different  deal to be negotiated; or no time at all, being shown the door on Friday. All Europeans except Macron favor some version of the first two options. If you’re interested in such matters, Wolfgang Munchau in today’s FT has an informative analysis that suggests that if Corbyn and May can agree on the general principles of leaving the EU, then the good ship BRINO (Brexit in Name Only) can sail between the Scylla of No Deal and the Charybdis of Another Referendum to reach an agreed departure date in December. Macron, however, is reportedly tired of these endless discussions and skeptical that the Brits will ever agree on a bipartisan deal that has public support and a chance of survival. He is thinking of exercising the French veto to prevent any extension at all, and so in effect bringing about a no-deal Brexit from outside.

That would delight the U.K. Brexiteers, horrify May and Remainers covert and overt, effectively end Britain’s long-running political crisis over Brexit, and put everyone in Britain on emergency stations to keep the roads busy, the ports open, and goods flowing in and out of the U.K. All that sounds fine to me and, according to the latest polls, to a modest majority of the Brits. Many would hail Macron as their country’s liberators. But they don’t vote in French elections. So the question is: Why would that be good for France and for Macron?
Title: 💩 Theresa May visits Paris and Berlin to seek backing for Brexit delay
Post by: RE on April 10, 2019, 01:16:57 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/Bc2VnCDyyFQ
Title: 💩 Brexit: Donald Tusk suggests 'flexible' delay of up to a year
Post by: RE on April 10, 2019, 01:35:31 AM
Can Kick!

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47874367 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47874367)

Brexit: Donald Tusk suggests 'flexible' delay of up to a year

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/2217/production/_106372780_fc92a9e9-885d-45ff-9d00-b118cd0cc685.jpg)
European Council president Donald Tusk says the EU should consider offering the UK a "flexible" delay to Brexit of up to a year, with the option of leaving earlier if a deal is ratified.

He said there was "little reason to believe" a Brexit deal would be approved by the extension deadline UK PM Theresa May has requested - 30 June.

Writing to EU leaders, he said any delay should have conditions attached.

It is up to EU members to vote on the proposals at a summit on Wednesday.

A draft EU document circulated to diplomats ahead of the emergency summit also proposes an extension but leaves the date of the proposed new deadline blank.

The BBC's Brussels correspondent Adam Fleming said the document referred to an extension lasting "only as long as is necessary and, in any event, no longer than XX.XX.XXXX and ending earlier if the withdrawal agreement is ratified".

The UK is currently due to leave the EU at 23:00 BST on Friday.

So far, UK MPs have rejected the withdrawal agreement Mrs May reached with other European leaders last year, so she is now asking for the leaving date to be extended.

Meanwhile, Mrs May has been meeting French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin for talks ahead of the summit.

Afterwards, Ms Merkel said a delay that ran until the end of this year or the start of 2020 was a possibility.

    Kuenssberg: Brexit delay proves lesser evil for May
    Adler: EU keen to quiz May ahead of Brexit summit
    A really simple guide to Brexit

Mr Tusk said granting the 30 June extension that Mrs May is seeking "would increase the risk of a rolling series of short extensions and emergency summits, creating new cliff-edge dates".

And if the European Council did not agree on an extension at all, "there would be a risk of an accidental no-deal Brexit", he said.

"One possibility would be a flexible extension, which would last only as long as necessary and no longer than one year, as beyond that date we will need to decide unanimously on some key European projects."
Media captionThere was no-one to greet the PM as she arrived to meet the German chancellor for Brexit talks in Berlin

Mr Tusk said the EU would need to agree on a number of conditions to be attached to any proposed extension, including that there would be no re-opening of negotiations on the withdrawal agreement.

He said the UK should be treated "with the highest respect" and "neither side should be allowed to feel humiliated".

BBC Europe editor Katya Adler said the EU's draft conclusions "should be taken with a big pinch of salt" as EU leaders could "rip up the conclusions and start again" on Wednesday.

She said the fact that the length of delay had been left blank in the conclusions shows EU leaders were still divided on the issue.
Image copyright Reuters
Image caption Theresa May met French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris for last-minute talks ahead of Wednesday's EU summit

Downing Street said Mrs May had discussed the UK's request for an extension of Article 50 - the process by which the UK leaves the EU - until 30 June, with the option to make it shorter if a deal is ratified earlier, with both Ms Merkel and Mr Macron.

The prime minister and Chancellor Merkel agreed on the importance of ensuring Britain's orderly withdrawal, a statement said.

Mrs May and Mr Macron also discussed next month's European Parliamentary elections, with the prime minister saying the government was "working very hard" to avoid the need for the UK to take part as it is supposed to if it is still a member of the EU on 23 May.

    Brexit explained in flowcharts
    Brexit Basics: The customs union
    DUP says PM's 'pleading is humiliating'
    Kuenssberg: Significant hurdles for cross-party talks

Following a meeting of the EU's General Affairs Council in Luxembourg, diplomats said "slightly more than a handful" of member states spoke in favour of delaying Article 50 until 30 June but the majority were in favour of a longer extension.

EU leaders are curious to hear the prime minister's Plan B. They hope there is one, although they're not convinced.

They want to know, if they say, "Yes," to another Brexit extension, what it will be used for.

And they suspect Theresa May wants them to do her dirty work for her.

EU diplomatic sources I have spoken to suggest the prime minister may have officially asked the EU for a short new extension (until 30 June) as that was politically easier for her back home, whereas she believed and hoped (the theory goes) that EU leaders will insist instead on a flexible long extension that she actually needs.

The bottom line is: EU leaders are extremely unlikely to refuse to further extend the Brexit process.

Read more from Katya

Meanwhile, the latest round of talks between Labour and the Conservatives aimed at breaking the impasse in Parliament have finished for the day with both sides expressing hope there would be progress.

They are hoping to reach compromise changes to the Brexit deal agreed by Mrs May that could be accepted by the Commons, with Labour pushing for the inclusion of a customs union.

That would allow tariff-free trade in goods with the EU but limit the UK from striking its own deals. Leaving the arrangement was a Conservative manifesto commitment.

Environment Secretary Michael Gove said the talks had been "open and constructive" but the sides differed on a "number of areas".

Labour's shadow business secretary Rebecca Long Bailey said they were "hopeful progress will be made".

Further talks will be held on Thursday.

On Tuesday afternoon, MPs also approved a government motion for Mrs May to ask the EU to delay Brexit until June 30, required after a bill from Labour's Yvette Cooper became law.

If Labour and the government cannot agree on a way forward, Mrs May has promised to put a series of Brexit options to the Commons to vote on - with the government to be bound by the result.

These options could include holding another referendum on any Brexit deal agreed by Parliament.
Title: 💩 Brexit: UK and EU agree delay to 31 October
Post by: RE on April 11, 2019, 02:31:48 AM
To do this can kick, Parliament has to repeal Article 50 and the Brits have to vote reps in for EU Parliament.  Still moe drama to come.

RE

Brexit: UK and EU agree delay to 31 October

(https://o.aolcdn.com/images/dims?image_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fimage.assets.pressassociation.io%2Fv2%2Fimage%2Fproduction%2Ff67c4936bec9acb2c8486f5afde02c1eY29udGVudHNlYXJjaCwxNTU1MDI4MjQy%2F2.42259650.jpg&format=jpg&quality=85&resize=640%2C427&client=14d356460ccd1a3da7ce&signature=edd4e2b1b8f9440bac4950d61cf39969bf0e8e84)

    8 minutes ago

Media captionMay on Brexit extension: "The UK should have left the EU by now"

European Union leaders have granted the UK a six-month extension to Brexit, after five hours of talks in Brussels.

The new deadline - 31 October - averts the prospect of the UK having to leave the EU without a deal on Friday, as MPs are still deadlocked over a deal.

European Council president Donald Tusk said his "message to British friends" was "please do not waste this time".

Theresa May, who had wanted a shorter delay, said the UK would still aim to leave the EU as soon as possible.

The UK must now hold European elections in May, or leave on 1 June without a deal.

The prime minister will later make a statement on the Brussels summit to the House of Commons, while talks with the Labour Party, aimed at reaching consensus on how to handle Brexit, are set to continue.

Mrs May tweeted: "The choices we now face are stark and the timetable is clear. So we must now press on at pace with our efforts to reach a consensus on a deal that is in the national interest."
ADVERTISEMENT

    What happens next?
    Brexit: A really simple guide
    Trick or treat? Halloween deadline is both

So far, MPs have rejected the withdrawal agreement Mrs May reached with other European leaders last year and they have voted against leaving the EU without a deal.

The EU has ruled out any renegotiation of the withdrawal agreement.

Before the summit, Mrs May had told leaders she wanted to move the UK's exit date from this Friday to 30 June, with the option of leaving earlier if Parliament ratified her agreement.
What is the reaction in the UK?

For Labour, shadow justice secretary Richard Burgon told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that Mrs May was being "inflexible" during negotiations with his party, and that, if this continued, "a public vote of some description, whether it's a general election or some sort of referendum, actually becomes necessary as a way out of this crisis".

BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg said one government minister had told her that the latest delay to Brexit could mean a Conservative Party leadership contest after Easter, with a new prime minister potentially in place by June.

Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said: "There's been no progress whatsoever, really."

He added that it was still "difficult to see how" Mrs May could get her deal with the EU through Parliament and said: "The pressure on her to go will increase dramatically now, I suspect."
What was agreed?

    A Brexit extension "only as long as necessary" and "no longer than 31 October" to allow for the ratification of the withdrawal agreement
    The UK "must hold the elections to the European Parliament" and if it fails to do this, the UK will leave on 1 June
    The European Council reiterates there can be no reopening of the withdrawal agreement negotiations

Read the EU's conclusions here.
What was the EU's message?

Donald Tusk emerged from the talks - and a subsequent meeting with Mrs May - to address reporters at a news conference at 02:15 local time (01:15 BST).

"The course of action will be entirely in the UK's hands," he said. "They can still ratify the withdrawal agreement, in which case the extension can be terminated."
Media captionTusk on Brexit extension: "Please do not waste this time"

Mr Tusk said the UK could also rethink its strategy or choose to "cancel Brexit altogether".

He added: "Let me finish with a message to our British friends: This extension is as flexible as I expected, and a little bit shorter than I expected, but it's still enough to find the best possible solution. Please do not waste this time."
Image copyright EPA
Image caption Jean-Claude Juncker - who is due to leave his job on 1 November - joked that if there is a late-night meeting on the 31 October he "may have to leave at midnight"

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said: "There will probably be a European election in the UK - that might seem a bit odd, but rules are rules and we must respect European law and then we will see what happens."
What was Theresa May's response?

Mrs May spoke to reporters at 02:45 local time (01:45 BST). She said that although the delay extends until 31 October, the UK can leave before then if MPs pass her withdrawal deal.

"I know that there is huge frustration from many people that I had to request this extension," she said. "The UK should have left the EU by now and I sincerely regret the fact that I have not yet been able to persuade Parliament to approve a deal."

She added: "I do not pretend the next few weeks will be easy, or there is a simple way to break the deadlock in Parliament. But we have a duty as politicians to find a way to fulfil the democratic decision of the referendum, deliver Brexit and move our country forward. Nothing is more pressing or more vital."

The PM said the UK would "continue to hold full membership rights and obligations [of the EU]" during the delay.
Trick or treat? Halloween deadline is both

You couldn't quite make it up. The new Brexit deadline is, you guessed it, Halloween.

So to get all the terrible metaphors about horror shows, ghosts and ghouls out of the way right now, let's consider straight away some of the reasons why this decision is a treat in one sense, but could be a trick too.

A treat? First and most importantly, the EU has agreed to put the brakes on. We will not leave tomorrow without a deal.

The prime minister's acceptance that leaving the EU without a formal arrangement in place could be a disaster won out.

And there are quite a few potential tricks. This new October deadline might not solve very much at all.

This could, although I hate to say it, just make way for months of extra gridlock before the UK and the EU find themselves back here in a similar situation in the autumn.

Read Laura's blog here
How did the EU leaders decide?

The EU had been split over the length of delay to offer the UK and by law its other 27 member states had to reach a unanimous decision.

Although other countries backed a longer delay, French President Emmanuel Macron pushed for a shorter extension.

The BBC's Katya Adler said that the date of 31 October was an indication that Mr Macron had "won the day", as his was the most hard-line voice in the room.

Speaking afterwards, Mr Macron said: "For me, this is a good solution."
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption German Chancellor Angela Merkel had argued for a longer delay

He said EU leaders had partly decided to back a delay because Mrs May had explained she had started talks with Labour - "a first in decades in the British political system".

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar, the Irish prime minister, said the extension gave the UK time "to come to a cross-party agreement".

Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon tweeted her "relief" that the UK wouldn't be "crashing out" on Friday, adding that "allowing people to decide if they still want to leave is now imperative".
Risk of no-deal postponed

Fudge and can-kicking are the EU-familiar words that spring to mind at the end of this Brexit summit.

After all the drama and speculation leading up to the meeting, effectively all that happened here is that the threat of a no-deal Brexit has been postponed for another six months.

Time enough for the EU to hold European parliamentary elections, choose a new president of the European Commission and pass a new budget - without EU leaders having to keep one eye at least on the day-to-day dramas in the House of Commons.

Despite EU leaders' rhetoric beforehand, they granted this extension without hearing a convincing plan of Brexit action from Theresa May.

In the summit conclusions there is no evidence of the punitive safeguards mooted to ensure the UK "behaves itself" - refraining from blocking EU decisions - as long as it remains a club member.

Yes, EU leaders worry about who might replace Theresa May as prime minister. Yes, they're concerned these six months could fly past with the UK as divided as ever but their message to the UK tonight was: "We've done our bit. Now you do yours. It's up to you. Please use the time well."
Title: 💩 Brexit: Theresa May defends 31 October delay to MPs
Post by: RE on April 11, 2019, 10:25:01 AM
Still haven't read that they have repealed Article 50.

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47897784 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47897784)

Brexit: Theresa May defends 31 October delay to MPs

(https://www.cartoonmovement.com/depot/cartoons/2018/12/18/brexit_no_matter_what__paolo_calleri.jpeg)

Media captionTheresa May: "If we want to get on with leaving, we need to start this process soon."

Theresa May has told MPs it remains her "priority" to deliver Brexit, defending the decision to delay the UK's exit from the EU by more than six months.

The new deadline of 31 October, set following late-night talks in Brussels, means the UK is likely to have to hold European Parliament elections in May.

The prime minister promised to pursue an "orderly" Brexit, adding that the "whole country" was "frustrated".

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn called the latest delay a "diplomatic failure".

Brexit was originally set to happen on 29 March. But after MPs repeatedly rejected Mrs May's withdrawal agreement with the EU, the deadline was put back to 12 April.

The new 31 October deadline averts the prospect of the UK having to leave the EU without a deal this Friday.

    What happens next?
    Brexit: A really simple guide
    Trick or treat? Halloween deadline is both

But, under EU rules, the UK will have to hold European Parliament elections in May, or face leaving on 1 June without a deal.

In a statement to the House of Commons, Mrs May said she "profoundly" regretted her deal not being agreed to by MPs.

She said: "The whole country is intensely frustrated that this process of leaving the European Union has not been completed."

On the latest delay, she said: "The choices we face are stark and the timetable is clear. I believe we must now press on at pace with our efforts to reach a consensus on a deal that is in the national interest."

Mrs May also told MPs that backing her deal would mean there was no need for European Parliament elections.
Talks with Labour

The government is continuing to hold talks with Labour aimed at achieving a consensus on how to break the deadlock in Parliament.
Media captionJeremy Corbyn says the Article 50 delay is a "diplomatic failure"

Mrs May said: "Reaching an agreement will not be easy, because to be successful it will require both sides to make compromises.

"But however challenging it may be politically, I profoundly believe that in this unique situation where the House is deadlocked, it is incumbent on both front benches to seek to work together to deliver what the British people voted for."

In response, Mr Corbyn said: "The second extension in the space of a fortnight represents not only a diplomatic failure but is another milestone in the government's mishandling of the entire Brexit process."

    Can the UK revoke Article 50?
    How could another Brexit referendum work?
    What is Theresa May's withdrawal agreement?
    How UK is gearing up for European elections
    How do European elections work?

He added: "The prime minister has stuck rigidly to a flawed plan and now the clock has run down, leaving Britain in limbo and adding to the deep uncertainty of business, workers and people all across this country."

Mr Corbyn said cross-party talks were "serious, detailed and ongoing", but warned that the government would "have to compromise".

If no agreement was possible, he said: "We believe all options should remain on the table, including the option of a public vote."
What happens next?

Shortly - Talks continue between the Conservatives and Labour on how to end the Brexit impasse

23 April - MPs return from Parliament's Easter recess

2 May - Local elections take place in England and Northern Ireland

23 May - European Parliament elections are scheduled to happen in the UK, if MPs do not back Theresa May's agreement with the EU in time to avert them

31 October - The UK leaves the EU, unless MPs back the withdrawal agreement in advance of this deadline

Ian Blackford, the SNP's Westminster leader, urged Mrs May to use the extra time to hold a second EU referendum.
Media captionAfter Bill Cash calls on her to resign, Theresa May replies: "I think you know the answer to that."

"It's now a very real possibility that we can remain in the European Union," he said.

"As of today, there are 204 days until the new Brexit deadline on the 31 October, so will the prime minister now remove the ridiculous excuse that there isn't enough time to hold a second referendum with remain on the ballot paper?"

And Brexiteer Conservative MP Sir Bill Cash accused the prime minister of "abject surrender" to the EU in allowing the delay and said she should resign.

Before the Brussels summit, Mrs May had told leaders she wanted to move the UK's exit date from this Friday to 30 June, with the option of leaving earlier if Parliament ratified her agreement.
What was agreed in Brussels?

    A Brexit extension "only as long as necessary" and "no longer than 31 October" to allow for the ratification of the withdrawal agreement
    The UK "must hold the elections to the European Parliament" and if it fails to do this, the UK will leave on 1 June
    The European Council reiterates there can be no reopening of the withdrawal agreement negotiations

    Read the EU's conclusions here.

European Council President Donald Tusk said future developments were "entirely in the UK's hands", adding: "They can still ratify the withdrawal agreement, in which case the extension can be terminated."

Mr Tusk said the UK could also rethink its strategy or choose to "cancel Brexit altogether", but urged: "Please do not waste this time."

The EU had been split over the length of delay to offer the UK, and by law its other 27 member states had to reach a unanimous decision.
Title: 💩 Jeremy Corbyn's Brexit Stance Is Sensible, Varoufakis Says
Post by: RE on April 25, 2019, 04:46:46 AM
Yanis drops in his 2 cents on Brexit.   ::)

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/seKO_s_Rl-o
Title: 💩 Theresa May urges Jeremy Corbyn to do a Brexit deal
Post by: RE on May 05, 2019, 02:20:21 PM
Put their differences aside?  They HATE EACH OTHER'S GUTS!

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48165373 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48165373)

Theresa May urges Jeremy Corbyn to do a Brexit deal

Theresa May has called for Jeremy Corbyn to "put their differences aside" and agree a Brexit deal.

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/50DB/production/_106799602_mediaitem106799598.jpg)

The UK was supposed to leave the EU on 29 March - but the deadline was delayed until 31 October, after MPs rejected Theresa May's withdrawal agreement three times.

Mrs May is now seeking Labour support to get an agreement through Parliament.

Writing in the Mail on Sunday, she said they should "listen to what voters" said in Thursday's local elections.

The Conservatives lost 1,334 councillors, while Labour failed to make expected gains, instead losing 82 seats.

The Liberal Democrats benefited from Tory losses, gaining 703 seats, with the Greens and independents also making gains.

    Davidson: Tories face Brexit 'wake-up call'
    Tories call for unity after election drubbing
    May must go now, says former Tory leader

The prime minister blamed the Brexit impasse for the losses - but said the elections gave "fresh urgency" to find a way to "break the deadlock".

Mrs May said she hopes to find a "unified, cross-party position" with Labour - despite admitting that her colleagues "find this decision uncomfortable" and that "frankly, it is not what I wanted, either".

Talks between Labour and the Conservatives are to resume on Tuesday.

According to the Sunday Times, Mrs May will comprise on three areas: customs, goods alignment and workers' rights.

The paper says she could put forward plans for a comprehensive, but temporary, customs arrangement with the EU that would last until the next general election.

The BBC's political correspondent Chris Mason said reaching a deal was "fraught with risk" for both Mrs May and Mr Corbyn.

"A deal on a customs union would be deeply divisive for the Conservatives," he said. "Accepting there'd be no new referendum would split Labour."
Reuters

The public is fed up with the failure of both of the two main parties to find a way to honour the result of the referendum [and] take the UK out of the EU

    Prime Minister Theresa May
    Writing in the Mail on Sunday

Sir Graham Brady, the chairman of the 1922 committee of Tory backbenchers, told the Telegraph that staying in a customs union could lead to a "catastrophic split" in the Conservative Party.

And, in the same paper, Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage said: "If the Tories do a deal with Labour on the customs union they will be going into coalition with the opposition against the people."

On Saturday, former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith said a deal with Labour would not be legitimate.

"As a result of the devastating [local] election result, the PM has in effect become a caretaker," he told the BBC.

"As such, she is not empowered to make any deal with the Labour Party which itself suffered a very similar result. Two discredited administrations making a discredited deal is not the answer to the electorate."

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/A2ED/production/_106790714_final_change-nc.png)
Title: 💩 Deja Vu the "Troubles" in Northern Ireland
Post by: RE on May 06, 2019, 01:11:07 AM
"It's da same old ting since 1916..."

http://www.youtube.com/v/6Ejga4kJUts

RE

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/05/03/irish-return-to-political-violence/ (https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/05/03/irish-return-to-political-violence/)

May 3, 2019
Irish Return to Political Violence?
by J.P. Linstroth

(https://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk/files/styles/full/public/image/71-2014-001-armed-soldier-and-boy-running-down-street.jpg?itok=UnPchuUi)

This past week, I had a conversation with a friend of mine from Belfast, Northern Ireland about the so-called ‘New’ Irish Republican Army (IRA) and its murder of Irish journalist, Lyra McKee, 29 years old, April 18th. Both of us expressed outrage. After all, the ‘Good Friday Agreement’ for peace in Northern Ireland was signed almost exactly 21 years ago, finally ending ‘The Troubles’, which cost nearly 3,500 lives.

Most believed that such extrajudicial killings were relics of the past. The Northern Irish murders ended, or so we thought, with the ‘peace accords’ at Stormont Palace and House of Commons in 1998. Even so, some observers of the Northern Irish Troubles knew IRA hardliners remained after the peace deal had been signed—those who could not accept peace in Northern Ireland, who would not stop the violence until a utopic vision for a ‘unified Ireland’ was achieved.

The tumultuous years of the Troubles lasted in Northern Ireland from the 1960s until 1998, but historically speaking, the violence between Irish Catholics and Irish Protestants has deep roots in the sectarian divide of Irish history to the 17thcentury ‘Plantation Era’.

The early years of the conflict between native Catholics against the settler Protestant British and Scottish ‘planter class’ resulted in the Confederate Wars (1641-1653) and the Williamite War (1689-1691), and then to 1916, a bit more than a century ago, and the ‘Easter Rising’ in Dublin, Ireland, where a concerted effort was undertaken to win Irish independence from Great Britain and establish the Irish Republic. It was led by the Irish Republican Brotherhood, the Irish Volunteers, and the Irish Citizen Army, when the British were heavily engaged in fighting World War I. This historical period was instrumental in Irish history when political party Sinn Féin garnered a majority of Irish votes in 1918 and later would evolve into the political arm of the IRA.

From the 1960s to 1990s, the Troubles were a period of convoluted killings between Catholic-Republican paramilitaries and Protestant Ulster-Loyalist paramilitaries, as well as the IRA against the British military and the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), a time of reprisals and counter-reprisals, resulting in assassinations, car bombings, civilian casualties, death threats, disappearances, hunger strikes, petrol bombs, political-jockeying for power, political murals, prison sentences, sectarian community-divisions, and continual terrorism.

Both Unionists and Republicans have united against dissident ‘New’ IRA paramilitaries because of the murder of the journalist Lyra McKee in Derry during Easter Week. After 21 years of relative peace, their willingness to dialogue is welcome and signifies that we are undeniably in a new era where sectarian violence has no place in this ‘new’ Northern Ireland. Talks about power-sharing between Sinn Féin and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) have been revived since the breakdown of such discussions in 2017.

A statement by the ‘New’ IRA’s political party Saoradh, claimed: “Tragically a young journalist, Lyra McKee, was killed accidentally”—was not good enough to the Northern Irish majority who supported the peace process and the Good Friday Agreement in 1998.

After all, it was in the city of Derry where the infamous ‘Blood Sunday’incidents happened some 47 years beforehand on January 30th, 1972. It revolved around the British Army shooting at 48 unarmed Irish-Catholic marchers, 13 of whom were killed, protesting political internment.

Astonishingly, the investigations of Bloody Sunday continue nearly half a century later, with 150 or moreBritish or Northern Irish ex-soldiers under scrutiny and three on trial currently.

Prior to the journalist’s slaying, the Police Service of Northern Ireland/Royal Ulster Constabulary (PSNI/RUC) conducted a raid on the Creggan Estate—a large housing development with a violent history—in Derry searching for explosives and weapons as preventative measures against terrorism during this past Easter weekend.

What ensued was a political riot. Its original intent evolving from a Saoradh demonstration commemorating the Easter Rising of 1916. To protest the police raid, dissident Republican militants set two cars ablaze with Molotov cocktails and began firing live rounds in the direction of police and gathered crowds. During the melee, Lyra McKee, was gunned down by some masked gunman among the New IRA paramilitary-rioters. The New IRA admitted it and apologized.

This so-called New IRA was formed from those Republican paramilitaries who did not believe in the Northern Irish peace process, along with young, impoverished, and unemployed youth who were born after the Good Friday Agreementand raised with sectarian beliefs. The PSNI believe the New IRA may have several hundred members. The political situation in Northern Ireland worsened since 2016 from a potential BREXITfailure and the threat of ‘borders’ and ‘police checks’ returning to Northern Ireland.

Fortunately, the majority of former Provisional Republicans, and Sinn Féin politicians, do not support the New IRA nor the Saoradh, and their unrealistic goals for unification of Northern Ireland with the rest of the island.

On Wednesday, April 24th, McKee’s funeral was well-attended by British and Irish politicians, including British Prime Minister Theresa May, Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn, the Irish President Michael Higgins, Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, and Irish Minister of Foreign Affairs Simon Coveney. All the Northern Irish political parties were equally represented.

McKee was survived by her mother, two brothers, and three sisters. She was described as an LGBT activist and also survived by her partner Sara Canning. The service was at the Protestant St. Anne’s Cathedral in Belfast, even though McKee was from a Catholic family. Her family wished her funeral to be well-attended by the entire community. Her family described Lyra as a woman with a “warm and innocent heart” and who was a “great listener,” who was also “smart” and “strong-minded,” and who believed in “inclusivity, justice, and truth.”

We can only hope McKee’s death will not be in vain. We can only hope the Good Friday Agreement remains in place and the political parties believe again in the peace process and not a return to violence.

As the Irish Nobel Laureate, novelist, playwright, and poet, Samuel Beckett, once declared: “Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.”
Title: 💩 UK PM May's party slumps to fifth place as pressure mounts for her to go
Post by: RE on May 13, 2019, 09:33:23 AM
Not gonna have a deal by Halloween.  I wonder if Nigel is heading back to EU Parliament?

RE

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu/uk-pm-mays-party-slumps-to-fifth-place-as-pressure-mounts-for-her-to-go-idUSKCN1SJ0IB (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu/uk-pm-mays-party-slumps-to-fifth-place-as-pressure-mounts-for-her-to-go-idUSKCN1SJ0IB)

World News
May 12, 2019 / 10:50 PM / Updated 24 minutes ago
UK PM May's party slumps to fifth place as pressure mounts for her to go
Guy Faulconbridge

(https://static.standard.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2019/05/11/16/nigelfarage1105.jpg?w968)

LONDON (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Theresa May’s Conservatives have fallen to fifth place in an opinion poll ahead of the May 23 European parliamentary election as pressure grows for her to set a date for her own departure.

Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party was in the lead, up four percentage points, on 34% while May’s Conservative Party had just 10%, the YouGov poll for the Times newspaper showed. The opposition Labour Party was down five points on 16%.
Related Coverage

    In Brexit quagmire, UK parliament session hits longest in over 350 years

Two parties which support staying in the EU, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens, were on 15% and 11% respectively.

The collapse in support for the Conservative Party is piling pressure on May to set a date for her departure. Senior Conservatives want May to set out her plans this week.

Nearly three years since the United Kingdom voted 52% to 48% to leave the European Union, there is still no agreement among British politicians about when, how or even if the divorce should take place.

“The reason I am back today doing what I am doing is because frankly we’ve been betrayed by our career political class,” Farage told TalkRadio.

“If the Brexit Party comes out on top in a couple of weeks time, we must have a place at the negotiating table with the government to help put together our strategy.”
Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May arrives at church, as Brexit turmoil continues, in Sonning, Britain May 12, 2019. REUTERS/Simon Dawson

Britain was due to have left the European Union on March 29, though May has been unable to get her divorce deal approved by parliament so she has turned to the Labour Party, led by socialist Jeremy Corbyn, in a bid to court his support.

Labour’s Brexit pointman, Keir Starmer, told The Guardian newspaper that any cross-party deal lacking a confirmatory referendum would not pass parliament as about 150 Labour lawmakers would oppose such a deal.

MAY CLARITY

May, who secured the leadership in the chaos that followed Britain’s 2016 vote to leave the European Union, has promised to step down if lawmakers back the deal she struck with Brussels to leave the bloc.

But the prime minister has lost heavily on three attempts to get it through parliament.

Graham Brady, chairman of the 1922 Committee, which can make or break party leaders, said that May had been asked to give “clarity” about her future at a meeting this week.
Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage appears on BBC TV's The Andrew Marr Show in London, Britain, May 12, 2019. Jeff Overs/BBC/Handout via REUTERS

The new deadline for leaving the EU is Oct. 31 though many Brexit supporters fear that the whole divorce could be derailed.

“We are at real risk of sleepwalking into remaining in the EU,” Brexit Secretary Steven Barclay wrote in the Sun newspaper.

“That is why I believe that it would be inexcusable for the Government to not use the coming months to continue to prepare for the real risk we leave the EU without a deal.”

He later wrote in Twitter that in a choice between a no-deal exit or staying in the EU, he would vote to leave without agreement.

Reporting by Guy Faulconbridge; editing by Michael Holden and Angus MacSwan
Title: 💩 Nigel back in the Catbird Seat
Post by: RE on May 15, 2019, 12:28:24 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/world/europe/nigel-farage-brexit-party.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/world/europe/nigel-farage-brexit-party.html)

Nigel Farage, Brexit’s Loudest Voice, Seizes Comeback Chance

(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/07/world/xxfarage1sub/merlin_149342133_ce61657c-f704-41b5-969b-8e6b64b9e6e6-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
Nigel Farage in London in January. After two decades promoting withdrawal from the European Union, Mr. Farage formed the new Brexit Party.CreditCreditLeon Neal/Getty Images

By Stephen Castle

    May 14, 2019

CLACTON-ON-SEA, England — The campaign bus draws up and out steps a familiar figure in a smart suit and tie, who strides down the street, stopping at a pub, where he poses for pictures grinning with his pint, as he has done countless times before.

Nigel Farage — Britain’s most famous and pugilistic populist — is back on the trail.

Mr. Farage spent two decades promoting withdrawal from the European Union. When Britons voted for it in a 2016 referendum, and Prime Minister Theresa May and her Conservatives promised to see it through, he shifted his focus to media work, hosting a radio show and appearing on television news programs.

But the shambolic failure of attempts to deliver Brexit has given Mr. Farage another opening, and his newly founded Brexit Party threatens to become a guided missile aimed at Britain’s two main parties. Both are badly split over the question of Europe and both are already facing a backlash from voters.

Mr. Farage’s target is the elections to the European Parliament, normally a low-key contest in Britain. This time, it was not supposed to happen in the country at all, because Brexit was scheduled for March 29.

Advertisement

But with the departure deadline delayed until at least Halloween, the election is going ahead. That is bad news for the Conservative and Labour parties, which suffered losses in local elections this month that the Brexit Party did not contest.

But it is particularly awful for the Conservatives, many of whose usual supporters are livid that Mrs. May has failed to deliver on Brexit; voters could desert the party in droves. In one recent poll on the European elections, the Conservatives were buried in third place, with 13 percent, well behind the 30 percent for the Brexit Party and 21 percent for Labour.
Pro-Brexit demonstrators gathered for a speech by Mr. Farage in London in March.CreditDan Kitwood/Getty Images
Image
Pro-Brexit demonstrators gathered for a speech by Mr. Farage in London in March.CreditDan Kitwood/Getty Images

Into that crucible has stepped Mr. Farage, perhaps the most divisive figure on the British political landscape, but also among the most effective. He has taken to the stump and to social media with a simple message: that Britain should leave the European Union even without any agreement. In the process, he excoriates what he calls a Brexit betrayal by mendacious elites.

Most lawmakers and analysts think a no-deal Brexit would be economically disastrous. Before the referendum, Mr. Farage breezily assured voters that securing a favorable trade deal with the European Union would be easy because German automakers would demand the right to sell their cars in Britain. Nowadays, he prefers to focus on issues of identity and sovereignty.

Advertisement

An admirer of President Trump, Mr. Farage was certainly popular among the mainly graying supporters who gathered one recent day on the pier at Clacton-on-Sea, once a thriving vacation spot in Essex, east of London, and now an unfashionable outpost at the end of a slow rail line.

What, he asked them rhetorically, would Brexit do for towns like this? “It would make us proud of who we are as a nation once again,” he roared, “and you can’t put a price on that.”

Performances such as this have propelled Mr. Farage back to prominence, which has meant greater scrutiny and some awkward headlines, too. Questions about the Brexit Party’s funding were raised after Mr. Farage refused to identify its biggest donor, though Jeremy Hosking, a financier, later said he had made a large donation. And there was criticism of a speech Mr. Farage gave in the United States in which he claimed that entire streets in one British town were divided on racial lines.

Newspapers have also reported claims that he walked away from a car crash without checking on the welfare of others involved, and that his beer-drinking pose is a gimmick, intended to make him appear down to earth, saying that he really prefers wine.

On Sunday, Mr. Farage seemed to lose his cool during a BBC interview when challenged about past comments on immigration, climate change, gun control and President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
Editors’ Picks
From ‘Smallville’ to a Sex Cult: The Fall of the Actress Allison Mack
How Volunteer Sleuths Identified a Hiker and Her Killer After 36 Years
The Aperol Spritz Is Not a Good Drink
Mr. Farage during a session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, in March. His Brexit Party presents problems for both main British parties, which have stumbled over their handling of the pullout from the European Union.CreditFrederick Florin/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Image
Mr. Farage during a session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, in March. His Brexit Party presents problems for both main British parties, which have stumbled over their handling of the pullout from the European Union.CreditFrederick Florin/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Nonetheless, experts acknowledge that Mr. Farage’s raucous brand of politics has proved effective.

“One of the consequences of Brexit and the way that it has been handled is a rebooting of populism,” said Matthew Goodwin, professor of politics at the University of Kent. “Leavers are incredibly disillusioned and frustrated with the positioning not just of the government but of Parliament.”

Advertisement

While the Brexit Party’s threat to the Conservatives is manifest and could accelerate Mrs. May’s promised departure from power, Mr. Farage also presents problems for the opposition Labour Party.

Labour is hampered by relying on the support of an awkward coalition: pro-Brexit voters in working-class areas in the middle and the north of the country; and younger, more liberal voters in London and other big cities who are ardent supporters of remaining in the European Union. Members have pressed the party to make a second Brexit referendum part of its election manifesto.

That split provides Mr. Farage with an opportunity.

“They feel they don’t need to target Conservatives because they have Conservatives anyway,” Professor Goodwin said. “They feel they need to win over Labour voters in pro-Brexit areas.”

As critics point out, Mr. Farage is hardly the political outsider and avatar of the common man that he presents himself as. He was educated at an expensive school and worked as a commodities trader before spending two decades as a member of the European Parliament and failing seven times to win election to the British Parliament.

But in Clacton-on-Sea, he talked of Brexit’s being “openly and willfully betrayed” by politicians and argued that “this political class, that these two parties, that Parliament now need to be swept aside and replaced by better people.” At times, the rally had a pantomime feel as Mr. Farage named members of Parliament, waiting for the crowd to boo or, in one case, yell “traitor!”

To fans like Eileen Kelly, 74, Mr. Farage is the man who “tells it like it is.”

She said she voted for Brexit in 2016 largely because she was unhappy about immigration, and she describes the current impasse in Parliament as a “desperate, awful, situation.”
Sign up for The Interpreter

Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.
Mr. Farage in the north of England in March, taking part in the first leg of a rally supporting Brexit.CreditAndy Buchanan/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Image
Mr. Farage in the north of England in March, taking part in the first leg of a rally supporting Brexit.CreditAndy Buchanan/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

As for Mr. Farage, she says, “He should be prime minister — definitely.”

Within days of its introduction, the Brexit Party said that it had signed up more than 70,000 supporters at 25 pounds, or about $32, a person, and that it had begun advertising online.

Advertisement

In truth, Mr. Farage had been preparing for this moment for months and had put together a machine far slicker than that of a new pro-European party, Change UK, which emerged from a group of lawmakers who left the Labour and Conservative parties this year.

The biggest problem for the Remain forces — and an advantage for the Brexit Party — is that Change UK has several strong rivals for the pro-European vote. Those include the centrist Liberal Democrats; the Greens; the Scottish National Party; and the Welsh nationalists, Plaid Cymru — not to speak of the Labour Party, despite its ambivalence over a second referendum.

Although the system for European Parliament elections is more proportional than that for most votes in Britain, it still punishes smaller groups. “If you knew these elections are coming up, why on earth don’t you decide to organize a pan-party Remain alliance?” Professor Goodwin said. “It beggars belief.”

Mr. Farage has some competition from the U.K. Independence Party, which he once led. It always contained some eccentric characters with the potential to cause embarrassment. Now it has taken a turn to the far right under its new leader, Gerard Batten, who appointed the notoriously anti-Islam activist Tommy Robinson as an adviser. (Mr. Robinson is running in the European elections, but as an independent.)

The split among Brexit supporters could cost Mr. Farage some votes. In Clacton-on-Sea, Chris Manning, 66, who voted for Brexit in 2016, said he was a supporter of Mr. Farage but had not followed the ins and out of whether or not Mr. Farage was still part of UKIP.

But Professor Goodwin said it would be unwise to underestimate Mr. Farage. “The story of the last five years,” he said, “is of nationalists and populists outperforming the others and mobilizing much more successfully than those trying to retain the status quo.”
Title: 💩 Nigel Gets Milkshaked!
Post by: RE on May 21, 2019, 01:58:20 AM
Maybe next time he'll luck out and get Beered.

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/T6xRm0QXKUE
Title: 💩 Prime Minister Theresa May offers a “new” Brexit plan, but nobody’s buying it
Post by: RE on May 22, 2019, 02:30:56 AM
https://www.vox.com/world/2019/5/21/18634579/brexit-news-theresa-may-10-plan-second-referendum (https://www.vox.com/world/2019/5/21/18634579/brexit-news-theresa-may-10-plan-second-referendum)

Prime Minister Theresa May offers a “new” Brexit plan, but nobody’s buying it

Her attempts to woo the opposition — including a proposed vote on a second referendum — backfired with Brexiteers.
By Jen Kirbyjen.kirby@vox.com May 21, 2019, 7:40pm EDT

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/yW7Z8luJLhu94VrysxL7EMe5DSU=/0x0:5472x3648/920x613/filters:focal(2103x692:2977x1566):format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/63876379/1145337599.jpg.0.jpg)
Prime Minister Theresa May gives a speech outlining a new Brexit deal, which is basically the same as the old Brexit deal, on May 21, 2019. Kirsty Wigglesworth-WPA Pool/Getty Images

British Prime Minister Theresa May offered a “new” Brexit plan Tuesday, in a last-ditch effort to get her still-unpopular Brexit deal approved.

But May largely failed to deliver on the “new” part. Instead, she outlined a 10-point strategy that repeated compromises or plans she’s previously offered. The prime minister did offer a few notable concessions, specifically a vote on a second referendum and a vote on a type of post-Brexit customs arrangement with the EU.

It’s noteworthy that May is giving members of parliament (MPs) a chance to decide whether they want to hold a second referendum — basically, some sort of public vote on Brexit — because this is something she’s staunchly resisted before. But the prime minister didn’t offer many specifics about the referendum, including whether she supported it, how it would be executed, or what the public would even be asked.

May’s other concession, on the customs union — where EU members trade without tariffs and minimal customs checks — offers a choice that will please neither the pro-Brexit camp in her Conservative Party or the opposition Labour Party. May proposed a vote on whether MPs want a temporary customs union membership after Brexit, or a plan for a “customs arrangement” that would allow the UK to trade with the EU, but still pursue its own independent trade policy.

The referendum and customs arrangement concessions are attempts to win over opposition Labour party members even after talks between May and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn broke down last week. But these offers likely don’t go far enough. Corbyn has already said nope, not a chance.

“It’s basically a rehash of what was discussed before,” Corbyn said Tuesday.

So this push to win over Labour failed — and it also backfired among the hardcore Brexiteers who already despise May’s Brexit deal and won’t like it any better now. Many only voted for it on the third try because they thought it was the only way to get her out of office. Brexiteers largely oppose any sort of customs arrangement with the EU after Brexit, and most don’t want to attempt a second referendum.

To be clear, May is only giving MPs the opportunity to vote on these options, so they can (and may) be voted down. But it’s still infuriated Conservatives MPs who don’t want these options on the table at all. May hasn’t gained any new backers, and nearly two dozen who voted for her deal the last time around have said they won’t support her on this latest attempt, according to the Guardian.

One minister told the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg that May has managed to “take something bad and make it truly worse.”

Of course, there were 10 points in May’s speech. Surely, you ask, there had to be something good in there? By way of an answer, I leave you with this analysis from the Guardian’s Peter Walker, which perfectly captures both the utter exasperation over Brexit and May’s impossible situation.

Walker notes that, in her speech, May repeated promises she already made before — including on workers’ and environmental rights. He points out May’s futile attempts to compromise. On the customs arrangement proposal, he writes: “who will like it? Potentially, no one.”

Put another way, May’s “serious offer” to MPs is pretty much doomed.

The prime minister had previously said that she would set a timetable for her departure after the vote on her Brexit plan and the necessary legislation to get the UK out of the European Union before the October 31, 2019 deadline.

That’s tentatively scheduled for the first week in June. Conservatives who are eager to replace May will want her out as soon as possible — even though whoever takes over as the next prime minister will inherit the exact same Brexit mess.
Title: Re: 💩 Prime Minister Theresa May offers a “new” Brexit plan, but nobody’s buying it
Post by: Surly1 on May 22, 2019, 02:40:02 AM
https://www.vox.com/world/2019/5/21/18634579/brexit-news-theresa-may-10-plan-second-referendum (https://www.vox.com/world/2019/5/21/18634579/brexit-news-theresa-may-10-plan-second-referendum)

Prime Minister Theresa May offers a “new” Brexit plan, but nobody’s buying it

Her attempts to woo the opposition — including a proposed vote on a second referendum — backfired with Brexiteers.

As you like to say, "who cooda node?" On her way out the door, no less.
"Turn off the lights... the party's over."
Title: 💩 May's Brexit gambit fails as her premiership fades
Post by: RE on May 22, 2019, 01:35:38 PM
Meanwhile, across the pond, TM is not doing a whole lot better than Trumpofsky.  ::)

RE

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/mays-brexit-gambit-fails-as-her-premiership-fades-idUSKCN1SS0GO (https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/mays-brexit-gambit-fails-as-her-premiership-fades-idUSKCN1SS0GO)

May 21, 2019 / 10:12 PM / Updated an hour ago
May's Brexit gambit fails as her premiership fades
Guy Faulconbridge, William James

(https://www.theglobeandmail.com/resizer/iKl4t1-AH2s6ddBWVCAdUJjgBBc=/620x0/filters:quality(80)/arc-anglerfish-tgam-prod-tgam.s3.amazonaws.com/public/ZELKEE2UBRAX5PRB57ZCA573OU.jpg)

LONDON (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Theresa May’s final Brexit gambit was in tatters on Wednesday after her offer of a vote on a second referendum and closer trading arrangements failed to win over either opposition lawmakers or many in her own party.

Nearly three years since Britain voted 52% to 48% to leave the European Union, May is trying one last time to get her divorce deal approved by the British parliament before her crisis-riven premiership ends.
Related Coverage

    Rumours ministers will move against May - ITV reporter
    Former Conservative minister asks May to consider delaying Brexit deal vote

See more stories

May again appealed to lawmakers get behind her, offering the prospect of a possible second referendum on the agreement and closer trading arrangements with the EU as incentives to what she called the only way to prevent a so-called no deal Brexit.

But the backlash was fierce. Both ruling Conservative and opposition Labour lawmakers criticised May’s Withdrawal Agreement Bill, or WAB, legislation which implements the terms of Britain’s departure. Some upped efforts to oust her and there were reports that her own ministers could move against her.

Advertisement

The impasse in London means it is unclear how, when or even if Britain will leave the European club it joined in 1973. The current deadline to leave is Oct. 31.

Despite the criticism, May stood firm, urging lawmakers to back the bill and then have a chance to make changes to it, so they can have more control over the final shape of Brexit.

“In time another prime minister will be standing at this despatch box,” May said, acknowledging that her time as prime minister was drawing to a close.
Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May is seen outside Downing Street, as uncertainty over Brexit continues, in London, Britain May 22, 2019. REUTERS/Toby Melville

“But while I am here, I have a duty to be clear with the House (of Commons) about the facts. If we are going to deliver Brexit in this parliament we are going to have to pass a Withdrawal Agreement Bill,” she told parliament, where many of her critics left the chamber allowing some of her backers to offer support for her argument to pass the Withdrawal Bill.

Asked by eurosceptic lawmaker Jacob Rees-Mogg whether she really believed in the new deal she had proposed or whether she was simply going through the motions, May said:

“I don’t think I would have been standing here at the despatch box and be in receipt of some of the comments I have been in receipt of from colleagues on my own side and across the house if I didn’t believe in what I was doing,” she said.

Advertisement
“GOT TO GO”

Britain’s crisis over Brexit has stunned allies and foes alike, and with deadlock in London, the world’s fifth largest economy faces an array of options including an exit with a deal to smooth the transition, a no-deal exit, an election or a second referendum.

The pound was on track for its longest ever losing streak against the euro as some traders said they saw the rising chance of a no-deal Brexit. Those fears pushed investors into the relatively safety of government bonds - particularly those that offer protection against a spike in inflation.
Slideshow (7 Images)

Despite the signs of some support in a near empty parliament, her move towards lawmakers who want to stay in the EU incensed many in her party.

“The proposed second reading of the WAB is clearly doomed to failure so there really is no point wasting any more time on the prime minister’s forlorn hope of salvation,” Andrew Bridgen, a Conservative lawmaker, told Reuters. “She’s got to go.”

More Conservative lawmakers handed over letters to the 1922 Committee, a Conservative group that can make or break party leaders, to demand a no confidence vote in May, whose strategy to leave the EU has been left in tatters.

Local reporters said there were rumours that cabinet ministers were starting a move against her.

Asked about the pressure to resign, her spokesman said: “The PM is focused on the job in hand and what the last 24 hours or so have proved, it is a big one.” Several lawmakers, including Labour’s Brexit policy chief Keir Starmer, said there was little point holding next month’s vote on her bill, which most agreed had no chance of passing a deeply divided parliament.

Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader, said his party would not be backing the bill and described the government as “too weak, too divided to get this country out of the mess that they have created”.

Additional reporting by Elizabeth Piper and Kylie MacLellan, Writing by Guy Faulconbridge and Elizabeth Piper; Editing by William Maclean and Alison Williams
Title: 💩 Suffering caused by austerity helped fuel Brexit – and will only get worse
Post by: RE on May 24, 2019, 01:22:57 AM
Collapse early and avoid the rush!

RE

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/23/austerity-brexit-suffering-eu-anger (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/23/austerity-brexit-suffering-eu-anger)

The suffering caused by austerity helped fuel Brexit – and will only get worse

Frances Ryan

Leaving the EU will make life worse for poor and disabled people – but the anger that led to the vote must be addressed
@drfrancesryan

Thu 23 May 2019 06.40 EDT
Last modified on Thu 23 May 2019 13.04 EDT

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/3713506a4a1b5525b7dc27c3dfb073c927b59256/0_72_1088_653/master/1088.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=59e13f4b2dd89c944d32d45d2257961b)
Philip Alston (left), the special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, in New Lodge, north Belfast during his official visit to the UK in November 2018. Photograph: Bassam Khawaja/United Nations/PA

Unless austerity ends, the UK’s poorest people face lives that are “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”. That was the finding on Wednesday from Philip Alston, the UN rapporteur on extreme poverty, who warned worse could be yet to come “for the most vulnerable, who face a major adverse impact” if Brexit proceeds.

Days earlier, down the line at BBC 5 Live, the Brexit party candidate Lucy Harris declared that the average leave voter wants Brexit “at any cost”. Pressed further by presenter Nicky Campbell, Harris admitted this could mean volunteering for “30 years” of economic downturn.

It’s as if we are watching two narratives of Brexit Britain play out simultaneously, an experience made all the more galling by the fact that one side has changed its script. While today’s European elections have seen the Brexit party embrace predicted economic shock as a romantic sacrifice for the greater good, the referendum campaign saw a land of milk and honey promised on the side of buses. Indeed, the infamous “project fear” slur was thrown at any remainer who dared to point out the risks of Brexit.
Britain is trapped in the purposeless austerity that gave us Brexit
Aditya Chakrabortty
Aditya Chakrabortty
Read more

Such hypocrisy is only made worse by the fact that the key proponents of “Brexit at any cost” will be unlikely to be suffering any such cost themselves. Economic downturns, by definition, hit poor and disabled people hardest, while those with the greatest wealth enjoy the profits.

Recent research shows families have already taken a hit from Brexit – household incomes are around £1,500 a year lower today than forecasts made before the referendum vote – and this doesn’t appear to have dampened the desire of sections of the public for even the hardest exit from the EU. Moreover, polls since the referendum have consistently shown a willingness to put the country through pain in order to achieve Brexit. Back in 2017, YouGov found a hefty 61% of leave voters said they thought that “significant damage” to the British economy would be “a price worth paying for bringing Britain out of the European Union”. I remember speaking to one particular leave voter in the days after the referendum. Unemployed and cut off from state support, 62-year-old Martin had walked through the rain to cast his vote. In the London rental he shared with eight strangers, he put it bluntly: “Leaving might make my life shit, but it’s shit anyway. So how much worse can it get?”
Advertisement

This desperate need for change – any change – is fertile ground for those who seek to exploit it. As a nationwide study showed this week that racism in Britain is continuing to grow in the wake of the Brexit referendum, Nigel Farage is lining himself up to be the great victor when the Euro votes are counted – while Tommy Robinson’s toxic brand will linger regardless of election results.

There are no easy answers here, nor neat boxes. There are many like Martin who feel they have nothing left to lose – but there were also plenty of wealthy families in the Shires who backed leave. Similarly, age and sex are as relevant as class: in the 2017 YouGov poll, women and young people were considerably less likely to want Brexit at “significant cost” to the economy than men and older people. In contrast, half of older people said their desire to leave the EU was so strong that they were even willing to accept a member of their own family losing their job.

This mindset may be incomprehensible to staunch remainers, but it is only by understanding it that we can have any hope of changing it. Much has been said in the past two years about the factors that led to the referendum result and yet somehow it still feels as if nothing much has been learned. Voters like Martin are often characterised as “the left behind” – a term that suggests the leave sentiment arose because they could not keep up. But as the academic Dr Lisa Mckenzie recently wrote for the London School of Economics, it is more accurate to say they are voters who know they have been “left out” – of jobs, of wealth, of opportunities.

That it is practically a cliche to point out that Brexit will likely cause further harm to the very people who cling to it, does not make such damage any less painful. As Alston says, at a time of growing hardship, leaving the EU is “a tragic distraction from the social and economic policies shaping a Britain that it’s hard to believe any political parties really want”.

There is a vacuum in British politics – and in a wider sense, society – that has long needed something different. This ground must be occupied by real change: from affordable housing and a strengthened safety net, to more power in local communities. If we do not fill it, Farage and his ilk are all too ready to do so.

• Frances Ryan is a Guardian columnist
The UK might be leaving Europe…

… but The Guardian definitely isn’t. In the current climate of uncertainty and tension, we remain deeply committed to our European coverage. In the coming weeks and months, we will continue our mission to look outwards rather than inwards, to stay connected and inclusive.

As the EU elections approach, we will hear daily from our correspondents across Europe, explore and investigate the themes that divide and unite the continent, with all its imperfections, challenges and strengths. The Guardian aims to offer its readers a global perspective on these important events.
Title: 💩 Theresa in the Toilet
Post by: RE on May 24, 2019, 03:49:57 AM
So who's next?  BoJo?

RE

Theresa May to resign as prime minister

    24 May 2019

http://www.youtube.com/v/UMWL_m4fIzE

Media captionIn a speech outside Downing Street, Theresa May said the failure to deliver Brexit was a matter of "deep regret"

Theresa May has said she will quit as Conservative leader on 7 June, paving the way for a contest to decide a new prime minister.

In an emotional statement, she said she had done her best to deliver Brexit and it was a matter of "deep regret" that she had been unable to do so.

Being prime minister had been the "honour of my life", she said.

Mrs May said she will continue to serve as prime minister while a Conservative leadership contest takes place.

It means she will still be prime minister when US President Donald Trump makes his state visit to the UK at the start of June.

Mrs May announced she would step down as Tory leader on 7 June and had agreed with the chairman of Tory backbenchers that a leadership contest should begin the following week.

    LIVE: Latest updates and reaction
    The Theresa May story
    Theresa May: Premiership in six charts

Boris Johnson, Esther McVey and Rory Stewart have said they intend to run for the party leadership, while more than a dozen others are believed to be seriously considering entering the contest.

The prime minister has faced a backlash from her MPs against her latest Brexit plan, which included concessions aimed at attracting cross-party support.
ADVERTISING

Andrea Leadsom quit as Commons leader on Wednesday saying she no longer believed the government would "deliver on the referendum result".

Mrs May met Home Secretary Sajid Javid and Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt at Downing Street on Thursday where they are understood to have expressed their concerns about her proposed withdrawal bill.

In her statement on Friday, she said she had done "everything I can" to convince MPs to support the withdrawal deal she had negotiated with the European Union but it was now in the "best interests of the country for a new prime minister to lead that effort".

She added that, in order to deliver Brexit, her successor would have to build agreement in Parliament.

"Such a consensus can only be reached if those on all sides of the debate are willing to compromise," she said.
PA
Theresa May at the top

    Nearly 3 years
    as prime minister, following David Cameron

    6 yearsbefore that, as home secretary

    Failed to win 2017 general election outright, but stayed PM

    Remainvoter in the 2016 EU referendum

    Brexit dominated her time at 10 Downing Street

BBC

Mrs May's voice shook as she ended her speech saying: "I will shortly leave the job that it has been the honour of my life to hold.

"The second female prime minister, but certainly not the last.

"I do so with no ill will, but with enormous and enduring gratitude to have had the opportunity to serve the country I love."

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn said she had been "right to resign" and that the Conservative Party was now "disintegrating".
Report

A series of Conservative MPs praised Mrs May following her statement.

Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said she was a "true public servant":
Skip Twitter post by @Jeremy_Hunt

    I want to pay tribute to the PM today. Delivering Brexit was always going to be a huge task, but one she met every day with courage & resolve. NHS will have an extra £20bn thanks to her support, and she leaves the country safer and more secure. A true public servant.
    — Jeremy Hunt (@Jeremy_Hunt) May 24, 2019

Report

End of Twitter post by @Jeremy_Hunt

Chief whip Julian Smith praised her commitment to the country as "outstanding":
Skip Twitter post by @JulianSmithUK

    The values, integrity & commitment of @theresa_may to the United Kingdom have been outstanding
    — Julian Smith MP (@JulianSmithUK) May 24, 2019

Report

End of Twitter post by @JulianSmithUK

And Chancellor Philip Hammond said it had been a "privilege" to serve alongside her:
Report

Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon wished her well despite "profound disagreements", including on Brexit, but added: "The prospect of an even more hardline Brexiteer now becoming PM and threatening a no-deal exit is deeply concerning.

"Added to the experience of the past three years, this makes it all the more important that Scotland is given the choice of becoming an independent country."

Following her emotional coda to her statement on the steps of Downing Street, expect the tributes to Theresa May to flood in, even from those pushing her from office.

Her resilience. Her determination. Her sense of duty.

Ultimately, though, her premiership fell apart in an attempt to bring people together.

Her Brexit deal stymied by too many of her own MPs, she tried to reach out across the Commons.

But in proposing a vote on a referendum - even though she expected MPs to reject another public vote - she over-reached.

Some members of her cabinet who are manoeuvring to replace her withdrew their consent from her latest plan, effectively throwing out its compromises and her leadership.

She pointed today to some of her achievements in office but frankly she has had to announce the timetable for her departure before securing the legacy she desired - leaving the EU with a deal.

In a hung parliament, the question now is whether the next Conservative leader will be able to succeed where she failed.

Or whether something more radical will be required: no deal, a new referendum, or a general election.
Title: 💩 Race to be new UK prime minister begins
Post by: RE on May 25, 2019, 01:45:23 AM
I'm rooting for BoJo.  That would be a hilarious shit show.  :icon_mrgreen:

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48403705 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48403705)

Race to be new UK prime minister begins

    Conservative Party leadership contest

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/DF2A/production/_107103175_contenders.jpg)
Image caption Jeremy Hunt, Boris Johnson, Rory Stewart and Esther McVey have already said they will run for the leadership

The race to become the next Conservative Party leader has begun, following Theresa May's announcement that she will step down next month.

The contest will not only result in a new party leader, but also in the next prime minister of the UK.

Party bosses expect a new leader to be chosen by the end of July.

Mrs May confirmed on Friday that she will resign as party leader on 7 June, but will continue as PM while the leadership contest takes place.

She agreed with chairman of the Tory backbench 1922 Committee, Sir Graham Brady, that the process to choose a new leader should begin the week after she stands down.

Four candidates have confirmed their intention to stand:

    Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt
    International Development Secretary Rory Stewart
    Former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson
    Former Work and Pensions Secretary Esther McVey

However, more than a dozen more are believed to be seriously considering running - including Sir Graham, who has resigned as chair of the 1922 Committee.

Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd has ruled herself out, telling the Daily Telegraph: "I don't think it is my time at the moment."

She also hinted that she could work with Mr Johnson in the future, saying: "I have worked with him before... we were able to work together."
ADVERTISEMENT

On Friday, Environment Secretary Michael Gove - another possible candidate - declined to say whether he would stand, saying it was "the prime minister's day".

Most bookmakers have Mr Johnson as favourite, in front of former Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab and Mr Gove.

    Who's standing?
    Kuenssberg: May was overwhelmed

Tory MPs have until the week commencing 10 June to put their name forward, and any of them can stand - as long as they have the backing of two parliamentary colleagues.

The candidates will be whittled down until two remain, and in July all party members will vote to decide on the winner.

The Conservative Party had 124,000 members, as of March last year. The last leader elected by the membership was David Cameron in 2005, as Theresa May was unopposed in 2016.

It will be the first time Conservative members have directly elected a prime minister, as opposed to a leader of the opposition.

Announcing her departure in Downing Street, Mrs May urged her successor to "seek a way forward that honours the result of the referendum".

She added: "To succeed, he or she will have to find consensus in Parliament where I have not.

"Such a consensus can only be reached if those on all sides of the debate are willing to compromise."

Mr Johnson told an economic conference in Switzerland on Friday that a new leader would have "the opportunity to do things differently".

Outlining his Brexit position, he told the conference: "We will leave the EU on 31 October, deal or no deal. The way to get a good deal is to prepare for a no deal."
Who are the Conservative members?

Most members of most parties in the UK are pretty middle-class. But Conservative Party members are the most middle-class of all: 86% fall into the ABC1 category.

Around a quarter of them are, or were, self-employed and nearly half of them work, or used to, in the private sector.

Nearly four out of 10 put their annual income at over £30,000, and one in 20 put it at over £100,000. As such, Tory members are considerably better-off than most voters.

Read more from Prof Tim Bale here

Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats have also begun their search for a new leader after Sir Vince Cable confirmed he would hand over the reins on 23 July.

Sir Vince announced in March that he would stand down after the local elections in May, but after a strong performance from the party some questioned whether he would stay on.

However, in a statement on Friday, he said: "We have rebuilt the Liberal Democrats. I will be proud to hand over a bigger, stronger party."
Title: 💩 In UK, Farage's Brexit party storms to EU election victory
Post by: RE on May 27, 2019, 12:05:53 AM
https://www.france24.com/en/20190527-uk-farage-brexit-party-storms-eu-election-victory (https://www.france24.com/en/20190527-uk-farage-brexit-party-storms-eu-election-victory)

In UK, Farage's Brexit party storms to EU election victory

Date created : 27/05/2019 - 01:16

(https://scd.france24.com/en/files/imagecache/home_1024/article/image/nigel_farage_-_m.jpg)
Tolga Akmen / AFP | Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage reacts after the European Parliament election results for the UK South East Region are announced at the Civic Centre Southampton, Southern England, on May 26, 2019.

Text by:
NEWS WIRES

Nigel Farage's Brexit Party was set to storm to victory in a European election, riding a wave of anger at the failure of Prime Minister Theresa May to take the United Kingdom out of the European Union, early results showed.
ADVERTISING

The country's two main parties, May's Conservatives and the opposition Labour Party, hemorrhaged support while smaller pro-EU parties did well: the Liberal Democrats were in second place, according to a BBC projection.

Nearly three years after the United Kingdom voted by 52% to 48% to leave the EU, it remains a member and its politicians are still arguing over how, when or even whether the country will leave the club it joined in 1973.

May quit on Friday, saying it was a matter of deep regret that she had been unable to deliver Brexit and arguing that the decision of the 2016 referendum should be honoured. That opened up a period of further uncertainty as the Conservatives decide on who will take over as party leader and prime minister.
ADVERTISING

BBC projections put the Conservatives on around 10 to 12%, down from 23% in 2014, likely to be one of the party's worst results in a nationwide election ever.

The Brexit Party was in first place, and was likely to do better than the UK Independence Party did in 2014, according to BBC projections.

"It looks like it's going to be a big win for the Brexit Party," Farage told reporters in Southampton in southern England where vote tallies from across the southeast region were being collated.

"The intelligence I get is that the Brexit party is doing pretty well," said Farage, who headed one of the two Brexit campaigns in the 2016 referendum.

While May was forced to delay Brexit after agreeing a deal that the British parliament and much of her party rejected, the Labour Party has voiced both support for another referendum and a promise to honour the result of the 2016 vote.

The impact of such a severe election drubbing for the major parties is unclear though potential successors to May are calling for a more decisive Brexit, while Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is under pressure to openly support another referendum.

Britain took part in the European Parliament elections because it had delayed the date of its exit from the EU, but its MEPs will leave the parliament when Brexit happens.

In total, Britain will elect 73 MEPs (Members of the European Parliament) to the 751-seat parliament. They will not contribute directly to British policymaking on domestic issues like Brexit, but will have a say in EU-wide policy.

'Brexit betrayal'

Farage casts Britain's political system as broken and says parliament and the government are trying to thwart Brexit. He wants the United Kingdom to leave the EU as soon as possible and says the damage of a no-deal departure has been blown out of proportion.

Farage, who as UKIP leader persuaded May's predecessor, David Cameron, to call the Brexit referendum and then helped lead the campaign to leave the EU, has said that failure to implement Brexit would show Britain not to be a democracy.

While the United Kingdom remains deeply divided over Brexit, most agree that it will shape the future of the United Kingdom for generations to come.

Pro-Europeans fear Brexit will undermine London's position as one of the world's top two financial capitals and weaken the West as it grapples with Donald Trump's unpredictable U.S. presidency and growing assertiveness from Russia and China.

The Liberal Democrats, who campaigned under the slogan "Bollocks to Brexit", oppose Brexit and want a second referendum to stop it.

The loss of Britain for the EU is the biggest blow yet to more than 60 years of efforts to forge European unity after two world wars, though the 27 other members of the bloc have shown surprising unity during the tortuous negotiations.

In the 2014 EU Parliament election, what was then Farage's UK Independence Party won with 26.8%, followed by Labour on 24.7% and the Conservatives on 23.3%. The Greens won 7.7% in 2014 and the Liberal Democrats 6.7%. Turnout was 35.6%.
Title: 💩 Nigel exercizes his new Muscle on Brexit
Post by: RE on May 27, 2019, 02:23:44 AM
We're going to hear a lot from Nigel between now and Halloween.  ::)

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/MXrhUh1K_bI
Title: 💩 Nigel Farage Insists He Will Not Stop Until Brexit Is Delivered
Post by: RE on May 30, 2019, 12:49:49 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/MQOgUVsUQJQ
Title: 💩 Meets 🤡: The Trans-Atlantic Clown Show Begins!
Post by: RE on June 03, 2019, 06:11:54 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/02/world/europe/trump-uk-visit-may.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/02/world/europe/trump-uk-visit-may.html)

Trump State Visit to U.K. Faces Turbulence Amid Brexit Chaos
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/06/02/world/02dc-prexy1/merlin_155650275_e063f3a1-cb5e-4557-a51f-9d6d1f857f49-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
President Trump will arrive in London on Monday for a state visit.CreditCreditTom Brenner for The New York Times

(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/06/02/world/02dc-prexy2/merlin_154094322_4a7de191-79c5-4894-8e46-08e12a594d65-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)

(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/06/02/world/02dc-prexy3/merlin_141211296_3093b488-6858-44ff-af46-dbc467cbeced-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)

(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/06/02/world/02dc-prexy4/merlin_155509638_008792e4-df3a-4474-af5e-419a3afbe339-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)

By Mark Landler and Maggie Haberman

    June 2, 2019

LONDON — President Trump prides himself on being the great disrupter, but when he arrives in London on Monday for a state visit, it’s not clear how much more he can shake up a country that is already convulsed, divided and utterly exhausted by the long debate over its departure from the European Union.

Still, Mr. Trump’s penchant for uncensored opinions and unsolicited advice is likely to capture as many headlines, if history is any guide, as the visit’s stately rituals: a banquet with Queen Elizabeth II at Buckingham Palace and afternoon tea with the Prince of Wales at his official residence, Clarence House.

Mr. Trump got an early start, telling The Sunday Times in an interview published before his arrival that Britain’s next leader should “walk away” from Brexit negotiations with Brussels to extract a better deal, and should make Nigel Farage, the fiery populist who was one of the leaders of the Brexit movement, the country’s chief negotiator.

Advertisement

The president proposed Boris Johnson, the pro-Brexit former foreign secretary and onetime mayor of London, as a good candidate to succeed Prime Minister Theresa May, who will step down as leader of her party on Friday. Her meeting with Mr. Trump on Tuesday will be one of the last acts of her star-crossed residency at 10 Downing Street.
Members of the British royal family, including Meghan Markle, now the Duchess of Sussex, in 2017.CreditAlastair Grant/Associated Press
Image
Members of the British royal family, including Meghan Markle, now the Duchess of Sussex, in 2017.CreditAlastair Grant/Associated Press

Mrs. May worked for months to arrange this visit, the first stop of a five-day tour for Mr. Trump that will also commemorate the 75th anniversary of the D-Day invasion with solemn ceremonies in Britain and France and will most likely squeeze in a round of golf at his club in Doonbeg, Ireland.

British and American officials said the White House had been deferential to 10 Downing Street in planning the trip, letting the British government set the program and avoiding demands, such as a presidential address to Parliament, which the hosts would have found difficult to grant.

“The ‘special relationship’ is in worse shape than either side will admit,” said Thomas Wright, an expert on Europe at the Washington-based Brookings Institution, a think tank. “The combination of Brexit, Farage and Huawei makes it particularly fraught,” he added, referring also to the Trump administration’s targeting of the Chinese telecommunications company. “This could be the tipping point where the problems become more public.”

Mr. Trump remains unpopular in Britain, not least with the newest member of the royal family, the Duchess of Sussex, formerly known as Meghan Markle. She told a television interviewer in 2016 that if Mr. Trump were elected president, she would consider staying in Canada, where her television series was filmed.

Advertisement

Asked about her comments in an Oval Office interview published on Friday by The Sun tabloid, Mr. Trump said: “What can I say? I didn’t know that she was nasty.” But he also said she would make “a very good” American princess.
Mr. Trump with Prime Minister Theresa May in Buckinghamshire, England, in 2018. Mrs. May worked for months to arrange the visit.CreditDoug Mills/The New York Times
Image
Mr. Trump with Prime Minister Theresa May in Buckinghamshire, England, in 2018. Mrs. May worked for months to arrange the visit.CreditDoug Mills/The New York Times

The duchess, who is married to Prince Harry and who is recovering after the birth of their first child, is not expected to meet the president. But the rest of the royal family will be on hand — including Harry’s brother, Prince William, and his wife, Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge. All four of Mr. Trump’s adult children are expected to accompany the president and the first lady, Melania Trump.

Despite Mrs. May’s lame-duck status, administration officials said that she and Mr. Trump would have a full list of issues to discuss, including Brexit, a trade deal with the United States and the threats posed by China and Iran.

The problem is that several of those issues are potentially divisive. Britain opposed Mr. Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Iran nuclear deal, while the United States has been pressuring Britain not to allow Huawei into its domestic market.

While Mr. Trump has promised to negotiate a trade deal with Britain if it makes a clean break from the European Union, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, has warned that such a deal would be a nonstarter in Congress if Brexit undermines the Northern Ireland peace agreement.

Before his last visit to Britain, in July 2018, Mr. Trump warned that Mrs. May’s proposed Brexit deal would kill off any hopes of a trade deal with the United States, startling American and British officials and creating another political headache for the prime minister as her cabinet was fracturing over the withdrawal plans.
Sign up for The Interpreter

Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

Advertisement
The Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage after his win in the European Union elections last week. In his interview with The Sunday Times, Mr. Trump called Mr. Farage “a very smart person.”CreditFacundo Arrizabalaga/EPA, via Shutterstock
Image
The Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage after his win in the European Union elections last week. In his interview with The Sunday Times, Mr. Trump called Mr. Farage “a very smart person.”CreditFacundo Arrizabalaga/EPA, via Shutterstock

Supporters of Brexit have held up a trade deal as one of the prizes of a complete break with Europe. It would be controversial, however: Some experts say it would force Britain to lower its food and agricultural standards to let in American products, and hand over too much influence to American companies in Britain’s health system.

The White House did not reveal a detailed policy agenda for the visit, and some officials have questioned the utility of having Mr. Trump meet Mrs. May three days before she relinquishes power. That has put more focus on whether he would meet Mr. Farage or Mr. Johnson, something that is not on the formal schedule but that could happen during Mr. Trump’s ample downtime.

In his interview with The Sunday Times, Mr. Trump was unstinting in his praise for Mr. Farage. “He is a very smart person,” the president said. “They won’t bring him in. Think how well they would do if they did.”

For Mr. Trump, the triumph of Mr. Farage’s Brexit Party in recent elections for the European Parliament could be seen as an endorsement of the Briton’s brand of populism. But the political picture across Europe is murkier, with new parties on the left and right advancing, while the mainstream parties, including the Conservative and Labour parties in Britain, shrank.

For all the potential static in London, Mr. Trump’s meetings here might be the most congenial of his trip. On his layover in Ireland, the president will meet with Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, who has spoken out passionately against Brexit. And while in Normandy for the D-Day commemoration, Mr. Trump will meet with President Emmanuel Macron of France, with whom his once warm relationship has chilled.

“They still have a functioning relationship, even if the romance is gone,” Mr. Wright of the Brookings Institution said of the American and French leaders. “If there is anything substantive on the agenda, it will be Macron trying to dissuade Trump from moving from China to Europe with tariffs.”

Mark Landler reported from London and Maggie Haberman from New York. Benjamin Mueller contributed reporting from London.
Title: 💩 Theresa May officially steps down as Tory leader
Post by: RE on June 07, 2019, 12:43:02 AM
Ding, Dong the Wicked Witch is Dead!  :icon_sunny:

http://www.youtube.com/v/kPIdRJlzERo

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48550452 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48550452)

Theresa May officially steps down as Tory leader

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/4EFA/production/_107281202_theresamay_pa.jpg)

Theresa May will officially step down as the leader of the Conservative Party on Friday, but will remain as prime minister until her successor is chosen.

Mrs May announced her resignation two weeks ago, saying it was a matter of deep regret that she had been unable to deliver Brexit.

Eleven Conservative MPs are vying to replace her as party leader and ultimately, prime minister.

Nominations open from 10:00 BST on Monday and close at 17:00 BST that day.

Mrs May remains acting leader while the contest takes place.
PA
Theresa May at the top

    Nearly 3 years
    as prime minister, following David Cameron

    6 yearsbefore that, as home secretary

    Failed to win 2017 general election outright, but stayed PM

    Remainvoter in the 2016 EU referendum

    Brexit dominated her time at 10 Downing Street

BBC

The UK was originally meant to leave the European Union on 29 March. That was then pushed back to 12 April and eventually 31 October after Mrs May failed to get MPs to approve her deal.

She announced her resignation, saying she had done everything she could to try to persuade MPs to support the withdrawal deal which she had negotiated with the European Union but it was now time for a new prime minister to try to deliver Brexit.

    The quirks of the Tory leadership process
    Tory leadership: Who will replace Theresa May?
    Brexit: Where do Conservative leadership candidates stand?

Leadership candidates need eight MPs to back them. MPs will then vote for their preferred candidates in a series of secret ballots held on 13, 18, 19 and 20 June.
ADVERTISEMENT

Charles Walker of the Conservative backbench 1922 committee, which sets the rules, said on Thursday: "We are aiming to have two people by Thursday 20 June."

The final two will be put to a vote of members of the wider Conservative Party, with a winner expected to be announced in the week of 22 July.

While the contest does not officially start until Mrs May steps down, candidates have already been jostling for position.

How the next prime minister gets a Brexit deal through Parliament and whether they would countenance a no-deal exit has been the dominant question of the campaign so far.

Dominic Raab's suggestion at a hustings on Wednesday that he would be prepared to shut down Parliament - the process known as prorogation - to ensure the UK leaves the EU on 31 October has been criticised by his rivals. And Commons Speaker John Bercow said on Thursday it was "simply not going to happen".

Conservative leadership contender Michael Gove has said the UK must not be bound by a "fixed" date if it needs slightly more time to get a deal.

Others, such as Mr Raab and Boris Johnson, insist the UK must leave on 31 October, whether it has approved a deal with Brussels or not.

Former trade minister Lord Digby Jones has called on Mrs May's successor to provide more "stability" for UK businesses over Brexit.

He told the BBC's Wake Up to Money programme that they should ensure the UK leaves the EU on 31 October "preferably with a deal - but without a deal rather than not coming out".
Title: 💩 Tory leadership: Final 10 contenders named in race to No 10
Post by: RE on June 11, 2019, 12:00:02 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48584011 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48584011)

Tory leadership: Final 10 contenders named in race to No 10

(https://compote.slate.com/images/6783bcc2-983f-41b3-a524-a64fd9e94cae.jpeg?width=780&height=520&rect=1560x1040&offset=0x0)

The names of candidates to officially enter the Conservative leadership race are announced by Dame Cheryl Gillan

The final candidates for the Tory leadership race have been confirmed, with 10 running to become the next PM.

Jeremy Hunt, Dominic Raab, Matt Hancock and Michael Gove - who launched their campaigns ahead of the nomination deadline - are all on the final list.

Conservative MPs will now take part in a series of votes to whittle the candidates down to the final two.

The two MPs will then face the wider Tory membership to decide on the next leader of their party, and the country.
Media captionWho decides who will be the next prime minister?

Vice chairman of the party's backbench 1922 committee Dame Cheryl Gillan announced the list.

The candidates are:

    Environment Secretary Michael Gove
    Health Secretary Matt Hancock
    Former Chief Whip Mark Harper
    Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt
    Home Secretary Sajid Javid
    Former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson
    Former Leader of the House Andrea Leadsom
    Former Work and Pensions Secretary Esther McVey
    Former Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab
    International Development Secretary Rory Stewart

To be allowed to run, the MPs needed to have a proposer, a seconder and the support of six other members.

Sam Gyimah, the only contender backing another referendum on Brexit, withdrew from the race shortly after nominations closed, saying there was not enough time to build support.
Media captionLidington on Hancock: He's got no Brexit baggage

Mrs May officially stepped down as the leader of the Conservative Party last week, but will remain as prime minister until her successor is chosen.

    Latest: Race to be Tory leader - and next PM
    The UK's next prime minister: What you need to know
    BBC to host Tory leader TV debates

A raft of candidates with different appeal

Analysis by Ben Wright, BBC political correspondent
Image copyright Getty Images

What are Tory MPs looking for in their next leader?

Someone who can win a general election and protect their seats, certainly. Someone who has a plausible plan for Brexit. Someone to breathe life into a glum and dejected party.

If parliamentary sparkle was the main qualification Michael Gove would probably romp this race - but after destroying the candidacy of Boris Johnson last time and recent revelations about his use of cocaine, his reputation has been harmed.

Mr Johnson is divisive among colleagues and his personal life has long been messy, but he remains one of the most recognisable and charismatic politicians in the country.

Jeremy Hunt has a focused, managerial manner, Dominic Raab has the intensity of a karate-chopping former lawyer and Sajid Javid has climbed to the top of the Tory party.

Esther McVey built a career in television that led to politics, Andrea Leadsom is making a second tilt at No 10, and Rory Stewart's social media campaign has brought him attention and plaudits from outside Conservative circles.

But in this contest, it's the judgement of Conservative MPs and party members that matters.

    Do Tory leadership tax plans add up?
    Where do the candidates stand on Brexit?

Environment Secretary Mr Gove, who has faced calls to drop out of the race after he admitted using cocaine several times more than 20 years ago, repeated at his campaign launch that he regrets "his past mistakes".

His speech focused on the policies he would introduce as leader, including the creation of a "national cyber crime task force" and more protection for the armed forces from legal challenges.
Media captionA Michael Gove-led government would take "back control of our money, our borders, and our laws".

He said he wants to "ensure that our NHS is fully-funded, properly funded" and that funding is protected under law.

In a swipe at Boris Johnson's earlier tax policy pledge to cut income tax bills for people earning more than £50,000 a year, he said: "One thing I will never do as PM is use our tax and benefits system to give the already wealthy another tax cut."

He also said the party leader needs to be someone who has been "tested in the heat of battle" and not one who has been "hiding in their bunker".

Mr Johnson has so far not conducted any broadcast interviews about his campaign.
Media captionLeadership candidate Jeremy Hunt: "We need tough negotiation, not empty rhetoric."

On Brexit, Mr Gove said it was "not enough to believe in Brexit you've also got to be able to deliver it", insisting he has "a proper plan".

Earlier, Health Secretary Matt Hancock told his launch the Conservatives and the country "need a fresh start", announcing one of his key pledges - to increase the national living wage to more than £10 an hour.

He has also won a high-profile backer, with the de facto deputy prime minister, David Lidington, pledging his support.

Mr Lidington told the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg that his colleague had "no baggage" from the 2016 Brexit referendum and had a clear vision for the future of the country.

Ex-Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab said he was "a committed Brexiteer" who could be trusted to secure the UK's departure. He also unveiled plans to redirect £500m a year from the aid budget to create an international wildlife fund.
Media captionDominic Raab: “I am the candidate who can be trusted to deliver on Brexit."

Foreign Secretary Mr Hunt, meanwhile, said a "very smart" approach was needed to break the Brexit impasse, saying an "experienced, serious leader" was needed, not "empty rhetoric".

He also attempted to end criticism of his stance on abortion by insisting he would not try to change the law if chosen as PM.

It was announced earlier that two cabinet ministers - Brexiteer Penny Mordaunt and Remainer Amber Rudd - back Mr Hunt.

Former Work and Pensions Secretary Esther McVey outlined her campaign at a think tank event, saying "we have nothing to fear" from a no-deal Brexit, and pledging to give a pay rise to public sector workers.
Media captionMatt Hancock rejects the idea that Brexit must be delivered by a "Brexiteer".

International Development Secretary Rory Stewart faced callers' questions during a live phone-in on BBC Radio 4's World at One.

He called for compromise over Brexit, and said he would give Parliament "a final chance" to vote through the existing deal that Mrs May negotiated with the EU.

But he ruled out supporting a further referendum, arguing "it wouldn't resolve anything".
Media captionEsther McVey says "non-engagement" with the cabinet made Theresa May's deal worse

Elsewhere:

    Home Secretary Sajid Javid picked up further support, with ministers Caroline Nokes and Victoria Atkins choosing to back him after Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson announced her support on Saturday
    Mark Harper and Andrea Leadsom also plan campaign launches.
    Earlier, Mrs Leadsom said she would find a way to bring about a "managed exit" from the EU, even without a deal

Whereas candidates in the past would have only needed two MPs supporting them, senior Tories decided to change the rules earlier this month in an effort to speed up the contest.

All 313 Conservative MPs will vote for their preferred candidate in a series of ballots held on 13, 18, 19 and 20 June to whittle down the contenders one by one until only two are left.

Due to another rule change, candidates will need to win the votes of at least 16 other MPs in the first ballot and 32 colleagues in the second to proceed.

The final two will be put to the 160,000 or so members of the wider Conservative Party in a vote from 22 June, with the winner expected to be announced about four weeks later.

On Tuesday 18 June BBC One will be hosting a live election debate between the Conservative MPs who are still in the race.

If you would like to ask the candidates a question live on air, use the form below. It should be open to all of them, not a specific politician.
Title: 💩 New-look Boris Johnson emerges as Tory frontrunner
Post by: RE on June 13, 2019, 12:05:06 AM
Same Bad Hair though.

RE

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/12/uk/boris-johnson-press-conference-analysis-intl-gbr/index.html

Updated 1346 GMT (2146 HKT) June 12, 2019
New-look Boris Johnson emerges as Tory frontrunner

(https://spectatorblogs.imgix.net/files/2019/06/GettyImages-1148877784-1.jpg?auto=compress,enhance,format&crop=faces,entropy,edges&fit=crop&w=820&h=550)

New-look Boris Johnson emerges as Tory frontrunner 02:51

"Luke McGee is a senior producer for CNN based in London. "

London (CNN)Long before Theresa May resigned as UK Prime Minister, Boris Johnson had been favorite to replace her.
In fact, the former journalist and occasional game-show host has eyed the top job for years. The trouble is, despite an expensive education at the UK's top private school and a solid political grounding as Mayor of London and UK foreign secretary, Johnson has an almost unrivaled ability to shoot himself in the foot.
It's why the people currently advising Johnson have largely kept him out of the public eye since he walked out of May's Cabinet over her Brexit strategy a year ago.

But anyone who wants to be Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland can't avoid the media forever. So on Wednesday, in a packed conference room in London, Johnson emerged into the spotlight and officially launched his campaign to succeed May as leader of the governing Conservative Party.
Michael Gove, British PM hopeful: 'I deeply regret' taking cocaine
Michael Gove, British PM hopeful: 'I deeply regret' taking cocaine
In his prepared remarks, Johnson worked hard to cement his position as frontrunner and made what appeared to be a firm commitment to take Britain out of the European Union on the latest deadline of October 31 -- with or without a deal.
"After three years and two missed deadlines, we must leave the EU on October 31. And we must do better than the current Withdrawal Agreement, which has been rejected three times," Johnson said.
Such solid support for a no-deal exit was designed for the ears of the people who will choose Britain's next Prime Minister -- the 150,000 or so members of the Conservative Party, who are largely, old, white, and, well, conservative.
But part of his tactic is to appeal to all sections of the party -- in particular some of the more moderate Members of Parliament whose support he needs in the initial stages of the contest. So Johnson clarified that he was "not aiming for a no-deal outcome," merely that is was "responsible to prepare for it."
And in a sign of what a Johnson negotiating strategy might look like, he said that taking no-deal off the table would rob the UK of an essential "negotiating tool" in getting concessions from Brussels.
Despite this lack of clarity on the most important question in British politics, the speech did nothing to quash the idea that this leadership contest is Johnson's to lose.
But in the question and answer session that followed, Johnson reminded the media exactly how he might still wreck his own chances.
By staying out of the public eye, Johnson left the field open for other candidates to score spectacular own goals. One of his main rivals, Michael Gove, has spent much of the past week plagued by accusations of hypocrisy, after revealing that he had taken cocaine while working as a journalist.
Johnson has also in the past admitted using the same drug, but by avoiding public scrutiny for so long, has not been pressed on the issue. When asked about on Wednesday, Johnson sheepishly sidestepped the question: "I think the canonical account of this event when I was 19 has appeared many times and I think what most people in this country really want us to focus on is what we can do for them."
trump praises theresa may brexit negotiations vpx_00003508

Trump: May's probably a better negotiator than me 00:56
This evasiveness stretched to a question on precisely how he planned to renegotiate the Brexit deal that May struck with the EU. Nor did he give any solid answers on how he would prepare the public for the possibility of a no-deal Brexit outcome.
And when pushed on controversial remarks he has made in the past, such as saying women who wear Islamic face veils look like "letter boxes," Johnson brushed off the question with a comment about people being afraid to speak their mind on sensitive issues.
Yet despite this perceived slipperiness, Johnson remains streets ahead of his rivals. His message to the largely pro-Brexit Conservative base is a powerful one. All other serious rivals have given even flakier answers on what they would do as the October 31 deadline looms. Johnson, at least for now, is the only candidate with a chance of winning who is prepared to say that the UK will be out of the EU by November, one way or another.
Johnson's supporters claim that his low profile strategy has been a sensible campaign move. They note that the frontrunner in these leadership contests seldom triumphs if they come racing out the blocks. But if keeping Johnson quiet is a campaign masterstroke, it comes with the grudging admission that this is a man who has a long history of gaffes.
This is what gives hope to the other leadership hopefuls. As Rory Stewart, one of Johnson's longer-shot rivals, tweeted: "I am trying to restrain myself from tweeting that I'm beginning to think there are only 2 candidates who can beat Boris -- me, and Boris himself."
A TV presenter summed up live on air what a lot of people think about British politics
A TV presenter summed up live on air what a lot of people think about British politics
But if Johnson's detractors are to take him down, they will need to do better than merely to accuse him of being untrustworthy and evasive. The Conservative Pparty is losing support to Nigel Farage's nascent Brexit Party, which openly advocates no-deal, and the pro-Remain Liberal Democrats. If repeated in a general election, this split would clear the path for the left-leaning Labour party to take the keys to 10 Downing Street and kick the Conservatives into the political wilderness.
Right now, all the opinion polls suggest that Johnson is the only person who can prevent electoral disaster for the Conservatives.

What does all this mean? Most significantly, a no-deal Brexit appears more likely by the day. It's not just the Conservative base and their Brexit hero, Boris Johnson, who are gearing up for a no-deal showdown. In Brussels, EU officials are increasingly relaxed about their own preparation for the UK crashing out of Europe.
It's not what they want, it's not what the majority of the UK wants and, apparently, it's not what Johnson wants. But with a new Prime Minister committed to leaving the EU at the end of October and an EU with little hope left of saving a Brexit deal, a no-deal creeps ever closer.
Title: 💩 Boris Johnson tops first ballot in Tory leadership contest
Post by: RE on June 14, 2019, 03:18:16 AM
Looks like BoJo has this in the bag.  This will be entertaining.  :icon_mrgreen:

RE



Boris Johnson tops first ballot in Tory leadership contest

    5 hours ago

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/2EB4/production/_107365911_optimised-tory_ballot-nc.png)

Cheryl Gillan announces the result with seven of the 10 candidates making it to round two

Boris Johnson has secured the highest number of votes in the first MPs' ballot to select the Conservative Party leader and next prime minister.

Three contenders - Mark Harper, Andrea Leadsom and Esther McVey - were knocked out in the secret ballot held in the House of Commons.

Mr Johnson received 114 votes, while Jeremy Hunt was second with 43 and Michael Gove was third with 37.

Seven candidates progress to the next round of voting next week.

The two who prove most popular after the last MPs' ballot will go to Conservative Party members in a final vote later this month.

The winner of the contest to succeed Theresa May is expected to be announced in the week of 22 July.

    Latest: First vote looms for Tory leadership candidates
    The UK's next prime minister: What you need to know
    Johnson out-fundraises Tory rivals

Mr Johnson, a former Foreign Secretary who served for eight years as Mayor of London, said he was "delighted" to win but warned that his campaign still had "a long way to go".

Foreign Secretary Mr Hunt also said he was "delighted" to have come second, adding: "This serious moment calls for a serious leader."

And Environment Secretary Mr Gove said it was "all to play for" and he was "very much looking forward" to candidates' TV debates on Channel 4 on Sunday and on BBC One next Tuesday.

All 313 Conservative MPs voted in the first ballot, including Mrs May, who refused to say whom she had backed.

The fourth-placed candidate, former Brexit secretary Dominic Raab, said he was "proud and honoured" and he had a "good base to build on".

Home Secretary Sajid Javid, who came fifth, said: "I look forward to continuing to share my positive vision and my plan for uniting the country."

Health Secretary Matt Hancock, placed sixth, thanked his supporters, saying it was "terrific to have more votes from colleagues than I could have hoped for".
Media captionRory Stewart: "I don't look anything like the previous PM", and he negotiates "in a completely different way"

And International Development Secretary Rory Stewart, the seventh-placed candidate, told the BBC's Politics Live he was "completely over the moon" to have got through the first vote.

He said he had had only six declared votes ahead of the poll, but "more than three times that" had voted for him in the secret ballot.

So is the Boris Johnson bandwagon unstoppable? It's worth remembering that the leading candidate at the same stage in the Conservative leadership contest in 2005 was David Davis... who went on to lose. And in 2001 it was Michael Portillo, who then failed to make the final two.

So opponents of Mr Johnson could still gang up and do him in.

But as one canny Conservative observer put it: "Backing Boris is the ambitious thing to do."

By being so far in front, MPs who want to climb the ministerial ladder may try to board the bandwagon now. But his relatively rare media appearances mean that, presumably, the former foreign secretary recognises he can be his own worst enemy.

His long-standing ally Conor Burns tells me he takes nothing for granted. Mr Johnson carries his lead like an impressive yet fragile precious vase - his opponents will be hoping if they can't trip him up he will fall over his own feet.

But on Brexit especially his detractors cannot unite around a single alternative vision - and that may be his best hope of avoiding disaster.

Justice Secretary David Gauke said Mr Stewart was now the main challenger to Mr Johnson, saying: "He's really in with a chance and the momentum is with Rory."

But Defence Secretary Penny Mordaunt, who is supporting Mr Hunt's campaign, said the foreign secretary is "attractive to many sides of the party because he's a serious individual".

And Schools Minister Nick Gibb told BBC Radio 4's World at One that Mr Gove was now "best placed as a Brexiteer to challenge the front runner" Mr Johnson in the final.
The UK's next prime minister
Image copyright AFP/Getty Images

    Read more about where the candidates stand on Brexit
    Quick profiles: Who's in the running for the top job?
    The people who will choose the UK's next prime minister

Further ballots are scheduled to take place on 18, 19 and 20 June to whittle down the contenders until only two are left.

The final pair will then be put to a vote of members of the wider Conservative Party from 22 June, with the winner expected to be announced about four weeks later.

After being knocked out of the contest, Mr Harper, a former Government Chief Whip, said he continued "to believe we need a credible plan that delivers Brexit" in order to "restore trust".

Mrs Leadsom's campaign team said they were "disappointed" but "wish all the other candidates well".

And Ms McVey, who gained nine votes, coming last in the first round of MPs' ballots, said she was "extremely grateful" to those who had supported her.
TV debates 'important'

Televised candidates' debates are scheduled to take place, but not all the remaining seven have confirmed they are taking part.

Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd, who is backing Mr Hunt, urged them to appear, saying the Conservative Party "needs to remember that we're not just choosing a leader, we're choosing a prime minister and the public need to see them".

And former Brexit Secretary David Davis, who is backing Mr Raab, said it was "very important" for the public to hear from the contenders.

Mr Johnson has previously been criticised by some of his rivals for not taking part in media interviews during the campaign.

The leadership race has so far been dominated by Brexit and arguments over whether a deal can be renegotiated with the EU by 31 October, and whether talking up a no-deal Brexit is a plausible promise.
Title: 💩 BoJo has the MoJo!
Post by: RE on June 15, 2019, 01:14:24 AM
https://www.ft.com/content/2273db26-8e8f-11e9-a24d-b42f641eca37 (https://www.ft.com/content/2273db26-8e8f-11e9-a24d-b42f641eca37)

Boris Johnson, the great pretender finally on the cusp of power
But the former UK foreign secretary still faces questions about his fitness for high office

(https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/http%3A%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-us.s3.amazonaws.com%2F6680b8ee-8eac-11e9-b8cb-26a9caa9d67b?fit=scale-down&source=next&width=700)

George Parker yesterday


Boris Johnson has one foot in 10 Downing Street. One week into the race to succeed Theresa May as Britain’s prime minister, the most charismatic, shambolic and divisive politician of his generation is sweeping the field, his route to power now clearly defined.

“We have a long way to go,” Mr Johnson said after securing a decisive victory in the first round of voting for the Conservative party leadership, winning the backing of 114 Tory MPs — more than the next three challengers combined. But he is now propelled by a momentum that threatens to crush his rivals.

Even George Osborne, the former chancellor and longtime political foe of Mr Johnson, can see the writing on the wall. Mr Osborne, editor of the London Evening Standard, splashed his front page this week with the headline: “Bojo: I’ve got mojo to unite Britain.”

That is a contentious claim. While Mr Johnson may possess political stardust, he seems an unlikely healer of a fractured country. The former London mayor led the 2016 referendum campaign to take Britain out of the EU and — if he becomes prime minister — will take on the task of delivering the Leave vote that split the nation.

Polls show he is both the most popular and least liked prospective Tory premier. Rivals question his “seriousness” at a momentous time for the country. Donald Tusk, European Council president, says “a special place in hell” awaits Mr Johnson and his fellow Brexiters.

“I think he’s probably going to win,” says Dominic Grieve, the pro-European former Conservative attorney-general. “That will have potentially dire consequences for the party and the country.” Rory Stewart, a rival for the leadership, said this week: “Is this the person you want writing the instructions to the nuclear submarines?”

Supporters of 54-year-old Mr Johnson privately admit that the only person who can halt his bid for power is the candidate himself. The Eton and Oxford-educated journalist is his own worst enemy, as his abortive bid for the Tory leadership in 2016 demonstrated.

Mr Johnson’s campaign team have tried to save him from himself. “Bozzie Bear”, as his new partner Carrie Symonds calls him, has been shackled and muzzled, held back from broadcast interviews and television debates so far because of fears the frontrunner has little to gain and much to lose from such exposure. (On Friday, Mr Johnson agreed to take part in a BBC debate next week, though he will not participate in Channel 4’s hustings on Sunday.)

Mr Johnson split last year from his wife Marina, his new relationship adding yet more tabloid colour to a career which has seen him sacked twice for lying: once as a journalist on The Times for making up a quote, and once as a Tory spokesman after misleading his party leader about an extramarital affair.

The 2019 version of Mr Johnson is very different to the 2016 version. Ms Symonds, a 31-year-old former Tory staffer, has put him on a diet, imposed order on his distinctive blond hair and kept a tight grip on his circle of advisers. “She knows who the sane people are,” says one close colleague.

At this week’s campaign launch Ms Symonds sat at the back of the hall as Mr Johnson went through his safety-first script, which focused on his two terms as London mayor (2008-16) while skirting over his unimpressive stint as foreign secretary. He resigned from the cabinet last year in protest at Mrs May’s “crazy” Brexit plan, before eventually backing it in a House of Commons vote.

“As foreign secretary he scored high on energy and profile, but less well on diplomatic skills, detailed concentration on the brief or lasting policy achievements,” says Simon Fraser, a former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office. Alan Duncan, a minister who served under Mr Johnson, says of his former boss: “Clearing up after him was quite a full-time activity.”

It is hard to discern how Mr Johnson intends to break the current Brexit impasse, although he insists that EU leaders will cut him a better deal in the autumn simply to get the issue resolved. If necessary he will take Britain out of the EU without a deal “as a last resort”.

The Mr Johnson vying to be prime minister is also very different from the unkempt Tory candidate who stood for London mayor in 2008, the eccentric who captured a Labour city by showing that a Conservative could be socially liberal and enthusiastic about a modern, cosmopolitan Britain.

As Mr Osborne noted in an editorial this week, the Mr Johnson who called for an immigration amnesty as London mayor then led an EU referendum campaign “that fuelled hostility to foreigners and stoked anger about modernity and social change”. Which Boris would become prime minister?

Mr Johnson’s answer throughout has been: “Which Boris do you want me to be?” In private meetings with Tory MPs, he is both a hard Brexiter comfortable with a no-deal exit and a compassionate Conservative eager to engineer the softest possible departure from the EU.

Like his friend Donald Trump, Mr Johnson is capable of holding contradictory positions simultaneously. Keith Simpson, a veteran Tory MP, says: “The thing about Boris is that he will always let you down.”

But many Conservatives will back Mr Johnson simply because he looks like a winner. For a traumatised party, he appears to be the only candidate capable of changing the political weather. Nobody can be sure which Boris they will get. But they do know they will be in for an interesting ride.

The writer is the FT’s political editor
Title: 💩 Tory leadership contest: Rory Stewart knocked out
Post by: RE on June 19, 2019, 01:28:59 PM
Looks like a pretty even split between BoJo and "Anyone BUT BoJo" going into the final rounds.

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48696619 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48696619)

Tory leadership contest: Rory Stewart knocked out

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/17026/production/_107464249_tory_all_ballots-nc.png)

Four men are left in the race to be next prime minister after Rory Stewart was knocked out.

The international development secretary was eliminated after coming last with 27 votes, 10 fewer than last time.

He said his warnings about a no-deal Brexit "probably proved to be truths people weren't quite ready to hear".

Boris Johnson topped the vote again with 143 votes, 17 more than last time. Jeremy Hunt came second with 54, Michael Gove got 51 and Sajid Javid 38.

A fourth round of voting will take place on Thursday.

    As it happened: Leadership contest latest
    Compare the candidates
    Can the contenders sum up their Brexit plans in 50 words?

Mr Stewart started as a rank outsider in the race but gained support on the back of an unusual campaign strategy.

Touring the country for pop-up meetings, which were promoted and recorded on social media, he drew large crowds and won the backing of several senior cabinet ministers.

He had accused other candidates, including Mr Johnson, of lacking realism over Brexit and making undeliverable promises.

After his elimination, he tweeted that he had been "inspired" by the support he received which had rekindled his faith and belief in politics.
ADVERTISEMENT
Image Copyright @RoryStewartUK @RoryStewartUK
Report

Mr Stewart's vote tally fell from Tuesday - following a live BBC TV debate in which he summed up his own performance as "lacklustre".

There have also been suggestions of tactical voting - "dark arts" as he called them - with candidates lending votes to others in order to help eliminate certain rivals.

One MP supporting Mr Stewart claimed he had been "let down" by "thieving, mendacious, lying" colleagues who had switched.

Following his exit, Mr Stewart - MP for Penrith and The Border - told the BBC he was "disappointed" and believed his party "didn't seem ready to hear his message" about Brexit and the need to seek out the centre ground.

He said his arguments during the campaign that an alternative Brexit deal was not on offer from the EU, and a no deal would be catastrophic, were "probably truths people were not quite ready to hear, but I still think they are truths".
Media captionStewart: Tories 'not ready' for no-deal warnings

He defended his attacks on Mr Johnson, saying the gravity of the situation meant it was right to warn that the frontrunner risked "letting down" his supporters over Brexit.

"These are the times to ask these questions, but I agree they are uncomfortable questions," he said.

"People felt they were exposing divisions in the party they were not comfortable with.

"My conclusion is that you don't unify a family or a party by pretending to agree when you disagree. You unify through honesty and trust."

    Fact-checking the candidates' claims
    What is a no-deal Brexit?

Mr Stewart, who has ruled out serving under Mr Johnson because of their differences over Brexit, added "I appear to have written my cabinet resignation letter."

He said he had not decided who to now support.

Home Secretary Mr Javid, who leapfrogged Mr Stewart in Wednesday's poll after gaining five votes on his second round tally, thanked Mr Stewart for his contribution to the campaign.
Image Copyright @sajidjavid @sajidjavid
Report

Mr Javid said he was pleased to make it through into the next round, adding that he could provide "constructive competition" to frontrunner Boris Johnson if he made it into the final two.

"People are crying out for change, if we don't offer change ourselves, they'll vote for change in the form of Corbyn - and I can be that agent of change", he said.

Reacting to his third consecutive second place, Mr Hunt said the "stakes were too high to allow someone to sail through untested".
Image Copyright @Jeremy_Hunt @Jeremy_Hunt
Report

Liam Fox, who is backing Foreign Secretary Mr Hunt, said the surviving candidates were the four most experienced men in the field and this is what people expected all along.

Tory MP Johnny Mercer, who is backing Mr Johnson, insisted there was "no complacency" despite his large lead, telling BBC News "there is still work to do".

Education Secretary Damian Hinds said Mr Gove had "closed the gap" on Mr Hunt in second place and was gaining momentum.

He said the environment secretary had the experience, the vision and the plan to deliver Brexit that could unite the country.
Image Copyright @michaelgove @michaelgove
Report

Unless another candidate drops out, there will be a fifth ballot on Thursday evening to determine the final two candidates who will go forward into a run-off of the party's 160,000 or so members.

The winner will be announced in the week of 22 July.
Title: 💩 BoJo's got it in the Bag!
Post by: RE on June 21, 2019, 01:41:50 AM
Hilarity will ensue.  ;D

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48711077 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48711077)

Tory leadership: Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt are final two

(https://static.standard.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2019/06/20/19/Hunt-and-Johnson.jpg?w968)

Cheryl Gillan announces Michael Gove is voted out of the Conservative leadership race,

Jeremy Hunt has promised Boris Johnson "the fight of his life" as the two compete to become the next Conservative leader and PM.

Mr Johnson said he was "honoured" to get the backing of 160 MPs in the final ballot of the party's MPs - more than half of the total.

Mr Hunt got 77 votes - two more votes than the next candidate Michael Gove.

Mr Johnson and Mr Hunt now face a vote involving up to 160,000 Tory members, with a result due by late July.

All 313 Conservative MPs took part in the final ballot in the House of Commons, with one paper spoilt.

Mr Johnson's victory in the latest round of the contest had been widely expected, but Environment Secretary Mr Gove and Foreign Secretary Mr Hunt had been engaged for several days in a fight for second place.

In the penultimate MPs' ballot, earlier on Thursday, Mr Gove overtook his rival, only to see his lead reversed in the final vote.

There's no doubt that Mr Johnson is, at this stage (and there's a long way to go), widely expected to end up in Number 10.

But this result is an enormous relief to his camp, for the simple reason that they think Mr Hunt is easier to beat.

Forget any differences in style between the two challengers and their comparative talents - Jeremy Hunt voted Remain in the EU referendum.

And for many Tory members it is a priority for the next leader to have been committed to that cause, rather than a recent convert, however zealous.

Read Laura's blog in full

Before the final vote, a source close to Mr Hunt warned against reigniting the "personal psychodrama" between Mr Gove and Mr Johnson - who spearheaded the Vote Leave campaign together in 2016, but fell out after Mr Gove abandoned Mr Johnson's previous leadership bid to launch his own.

Following the result of the final ballot, read out by Caroline Spelman, co-chair of the 1922 Committee of Conservative backbench MPs, Mr Johnson said he was "deeply honoured" by his level of support.
Image Copyright @BorisJohnson @BorisJohnson
Report

Meanwhile, Mr Hunt, acknowledged Mr Johnson as frontrunner to become party leader and prime minister, tweeting that he was the "underdog" but in politics "surprises happen".
Skip Twitter post by @Jeremy_Hunt
Report

End of Twitter post by @Jeremy_Hunt

He went on to praise Mr Gove as one of the "brightest stars in the Conservative team", adding: "We are going to give Boris the fight of his life."

Mr Gove congratulated his rivals and said he was "naturally disappointed but so proud of the campaign we ran".
Image Copyright @michaelgove @michaelgove
Report

His campaign manager, Mel Stride, said he believed that Mr Gove's admission that he had taken cocaine during the 1990s had damaged his bid, adding: "It stalled us and meant momentum was lost at that time."

Mr Johnson and Mr Hunt will now take part in hustings in front of Conservative Party members around the country, before the votes are counted, with the final result to be announced during the week of 22 July.

They will also take part in a head-to-head debate on ITV on 9 July, following previous leadership debates hosted by Channel 4 and the BBC.

Labour's national campaigns co-ordinator Andrew Gwynne said: "What a choice: the man who broke the NHS or the man who wants to sell it to Donald Trump.

"A handful of unrepresentative Conservative members should not be choosing our next prime minister. People should decide through a general election."

The ballot of MPs earlier on Thursday saw Home Secretary Sajid Javid eliminated from the contest.
Title: 💩 BoJo's or NoJo?
Post by: RE on June 22, 2019, 02:27:14 AM
https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnsons-extraordinary-leap-to-power-could-quickly-collapse-2019-6 (https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnsons-extraordinary-leap-to-power-could-quickly-collapse-2019-6)

Boris Johnson's extraordinary leap to power could soon come crashing down
Thomas Colson

(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5d0cfd1be3ecba2be742fd15-960-480.jpg)

    Boris Johnson is the overwhelming favourite to become Britain's next prime minister.
    He has successfully persuaded both Leave and Remain-supporting Conservative MPs that he is their best bet.
    But some Conservative MPs fear this coalition of support will quickly collapse once he enters Downing Street.
    An early election could soon be on the cards later this year.
    Visit Business Insider's home page for more stories.

LONDON —The conventional wisdom among Conservative MPs since Boris Johnson resigned as foreign secretary, was that he had little chance of ever becoming Britain's next prime minister.

"Three-quarters of the Cabinet and at least half of the party would do anything to stop Boris becoming leader," one Conservative MP told Business Insider in January this year. "He's got no chance."

Yet in the final round of this week's selection process, Johnson won the support of over half the Conservative parliamentary party, ensuring his place in the final two alongside the current foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt, and all but guaranteeing that he will ultimately win.

The speed and success of Johnson's campaign has been nothing short of extraordinary.

He picked up 160 votes from colleagues in Thursday's three-way leadership ballot, more than half the 313 available, with second-placed Jeremy Hunt receiving just 77. He now faces a month-long series of hustings after which he appears almost certain to be crowned prime minister.

    Read more: Boris Johnson published poem joking about the 'extermination' of the 'verminous' Scottish people

Yet even among those who now back his campaign, there are fears that the coalition of support which has lifted him almost to the door of 10 Downing Street, could very quickly crumble to the ground once he walks through it.
Conservative MPs hope Johnson can save them from Farage
Conservative MPs are reluctantly backing Johnson following the rise in charismatic populist politicians around the world Getty
The key to the shift in Johnson's fortunes came in the recent European elections where Nigel Farage's Brexit party surged into first place, leaving the Conservatives in a distant fifth place.

With polls now putting the party as low as fourth nationally, many Conservative MPs, who still hold deep reservations about Johnson, have decided to park those reservations in the hope that Johnson could yet save them from electoral oblivion

"It was in the bag for Boris from the night of the European election results," one former Conservative minister, who is a critic of Johnson told Business Insider.

"One of my friends, a Boris supporter, said: 'backing him is a risk but we're in such a hole, sometimes you have no choice apart from turning over the table and seeing what happens.'"

    Read more: Boris Johnson's long record of sexist, homophobic and racist comments

Another Brexit-supporting MP, who opposed Theresa May's deal once then backed it twice, echoed many colleagues when he said he was supporting Johnson because he believes he can win the Tories an election.

"My support for Boris is not primarily about Brexit," said the MP. "Brexit is important but keeping Corbyn out of Downing Street is much more important to me."

Echoing the lines trotted out by his campaign team and backers on the news, many MPs point to his two election wins as London Mayor, a city where a majority of voters traditionally back Labour.
But Boris's coalition of support could soon implode
Getty
The key to Johnson's success has been his remarkable success at persuading Conservative MPs on both sides of the Brexit divide to back him.

He has the support of diehard Brexiteers like Dominic Raab, Steve Baker, and Jacob Rees-Mogg, who have lent Johnson their support on the grounds that he is best placed to take the UK out of the EU with or without a deal on October 31.

But he is also supported by many dozens of Remain-supporting MPs who are desperate to avoid no-deal in October, such as the Conservative MPs Robert Buckland and Damian Green.

How Johnson, who led the campaign to leave the EU, has managed this is unclear. However, the simple answer appears to be that, in a series of one-on-one meetings, he has simply told both Brexiteers and Leavers very different things.

One Brexit-supporting MP who backed May's deal told Business Insider: "I had a one-to-one conversation with Boris. The view there was much more about changing the current deal — not just about the backstop, although that was the most significant part."

This suggests that Johnson's plan is really just to make some changes to Theresa May's withdrawal deal and push it through parliament, rather than rip it up altogether, as some of his Brexit-supporting backers expect.

    Read More: All of the times Boris Johnson has broken his promises

Other moderates have jumped on the Boris bandwagon because they believe that Theresa May's personal unpopularity was the reason why she failed to pass her Brexit deal and that the more charismatic Johnson will be much more successful at persuading MPs.

However, that belief clashes strongly with what Steve Baker, who lent his support to Johnson two weeks ago, appears to believe about Johnson's plan.

"Boris Johnson is crystal clear that under his leadership, we would leave the EU by October 31, with or without a deal," he said. "The Withdrawal Agreement is dead. A Clean Managed Brexit is the way forward."

That has led some to conclude that Johnson's coalition of support could quickly collapse just as Theresa May's did before him, with the main difference being that Johnson starts off from a much weaker position than his predecessor.

While Johnson's team were keen to point out that he won the support of more than half the parliamentary party, Theresa May had significantly more support from her parliamentary colleagues when she was elected as Conservative leader back in 2016.

She hoovered up the support of 60.5% of her colleagues in the second and last round of voting, while Johnson managed just 51%.

For this reason Johnson's time at the top of his party could be short-lived.

As one Conservative MP told Business Insider: "It's going to implode."

"A campaign that includes Robert Buckland and Steve Baker? Someone's going to be disappointed."
Title: 💩 BoJo's got Domestic Problems
Post by: RE on June 23, 2019, 12:00:21 AM
Pitching Dishes in the 10 Downing Street kitchen?  What an image! lol.

He'll give Trumpovetsky a run for his money on who is the bigger Clown.

RE

Boris Johnson's Brush With Police Puts Leadership Bid in Turmoil
By Robert Hutton and Tim Ross
June 21, 2019, 11:54 PM AKDT

(https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/iwyF1zGC93Fk/v0/-1x-1.jpg)

Boris Johnson
Photographer: Luke Dray/Getty Images

    Spat with partner prompts concerned neighbors to phone police
    Incident revealed as Johnson prepares to face Hunt in hustings

LISTEN TO ARTICLE
1:51

Follow @Brexit on Twitter, join our Facebook group and sign up to our Brexit Bulletin.

Boris Johnson’s bid to become the U.K.’s next prime minister was thrown into turmoil after an argument with his partner prompted police to visit his London residence.

Officers were called to the home Johnson shares with Carrie Symonds shortly after midnight on Friday, six hours after he was confirmed as the front-runner in the race to succeed Theresa May.

Police said they found no cause for action as both Johnson and Symonds were safe and well after a neighbor raised concerns for her safety. But the incident dominated Saturday’s U.K. newspapers and threatened to damage Johnson’s campaign at a critical time in the Conservative Party leadership contest.

The front-runner is set to face his first public questions over the episode in front of an audience of Tory party members on Saturday. Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, his only remaining rival in the contest, will also appear at the event in Birmingham, England.

Hunt wrote to Johnson on Friday evening before the altercation became public effectively accusing him of hiding from questions and avoiding media scrutiny. This latest incident will make that more difficult for the former London mayor as reporters are now staked out on his doorstep.

“Scrutiny can be uncomfortable,” Hunt wrote in the letter released to the media. ”But if we can’t handle it with friends, we won’t deserve to lead against our opponents.”

The Tory leadership election is a pivotal moment for Britain, with the two candidates due to spend the next few weeks at more than 15 similar events, known as hustings, as they battle for the votes of 160,000 grassroots members of Tory party.

The winner will have the chance to re-shape the country’s politics, and could dramatically alter its exit from the EU, which is due to take place in four months. For the EU, the prospect of a Johnson victory would be their worst nightmare. Many European officials blame Johnson for Brexit -- he led the 2016 referendum Vote Leave campaign -- and regard him as a dishonest populist intent on wrecking the bloc.

Police were called early Friday morning to the London apartment that Boris Johnson, the favorite to succeed Theresa May as British prime minister, shares with his partner Carrie Symonds, after a neighbor reported an altercation.

“At 00:24hrs on Friday, June 21, police responded to a call from a local resident,” the Metropolitan Police said in a statement. “The caller was concerned for the welfare of a female neighbor. Police attended and spoke to all occupants of the address, who were all safe and well. There were no offences or concerns apparent to the officers and there was no cause for police action.”

Johnson’s spokesman declined to comment. The Guardian reported that a neighbor had heard screaming, shouting and banging, and become worried.

Johnson left his second wife, Marina Wheeler, last year.
Title: 💩 BoJo is Prime Clown
Post by: RE on July 24, 2019, 08:11:35 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/euk7OSzgMlQ
Title: 💩 Boris Johnson takes his revenge and sacks over half the cabinet
Post by: RE on July 25, 2019, 12:18:32 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/24/boris-johnson-takes-his-revenge-and-sacks-over-half-the-cabinet (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/24/boris-johnson-takes-his-revenge-and-sacks-over-half-the-cabinet)

Boris Johnson takes his revenge and sacks over half the cabinet

(https://compote.slate.com/images/cfb76317-266a-42b4-b27c-3ce9a1fb1c4e.jpeg?width=780&height=520&rect=2940x1960&offset=2x0)

New PM shows ruthless streak as he packs team with Brexiters and rightwingers

Heather Stewart and Rowena Mason

Wed 24 Jul 2019 17.33 EDT
Last modified on Wed 24 Jul 2019 19.55 EDT

Shares
1,019
2:56
The day Boris Johnson became prime minister – video highlights

Boris Johnson has signalled his ruthless determination to deliver Brexit and stoked speculation about an early general election by sacking more than half of Theresa May’s cabinet and packing his team with Vote Leave veterans and rightwing free marketers.

Despite the new prime minister’s repeated insistence that he is a one-nation Conservative, he handed the job of home secretary to Priti Patel, who advocated the return of capital punishment as recently as 2011, and the Treasury to Thatcher devotee Sajid Javid.

Dominic Raab, who made headlines during his own leadership campaign when he said he would not call himself a feminist, is the new foreign secretary, and will be Johnson’s stand-in at prime minister’s questions.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, chair of the pro-Brexit European Research Group, which led calls for May to be deposed, is the new leader of the House of Commons.
This is a Vote Leave government now. There will be no one else to blame
Jonathan Freedland
Jonathan Freedland
Read more

Johnson’s rival for the leadership, Jeremy Hunt, and his supporters fell victim to a merciless purge. Hunt himself turned down a demotion from foreign secretary to defence secretary and instead chose to return to the backbenches.

Johnson had already sparked consternation among some colleagues by announcing that Dominic Cummings, the controversial director of the Vote Leave campaign, would be a senior adviser in his Downing Street team.

Cummings is a seasoned campaigner, and his arrival at Johnson’s side increased expectations among MPs that a general election will be triggered within months.

As Johnson prepared to enter No 10 for the first time after returning from Buckingham Palace on Wednesday, where the Queen had confirmed his appointment, he promised to defy “the doubters, the doomsters and the gloomsters”.

He insisted he would strike a “new deal” with the EU27, without the “anti-democratic backstop” and complete Brexit before the Halloween deadline. “The buck stops here,” he said.

“We are going to fulfil the repeated promises of parliament to the people and come out of the EU on 31 October, no ifs or buts,” he said.

“I have every confidence that in 99 days’ time we will have cracked it. But you know what, we aren’t going to wait 99 days, because the British people have had enough of waiting. The time has come to act, to take decisions, to give strong leadership and to change this country for the better.”

Johnson also made a series of one nation-style policy pledges. He promised to recruit another 20,000 police officers, stop people having to wait three weeks to see their GP, begin 20 new hospital upgrades, and boost schools spending per pupil.

But the new prime minister then crossed to his office in the Commons, where he carried out a comprehensive cull of cabinet ministers who had backed Hunt, or criticised his approach or policies.
Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more

Other victims of the clearout included Scottish secretary David Mundell, education secretary Damian Hinds and defence secretary Penny Mordaunt.

In assembling his new top team, Johnson turned to trusted Vote Leave colleagues, including Raab, Patel, Theresa Villiers, who is the new environment secretary, and Andrea Leadsom, who will be business secretary.

Former defence secretary Gavin Williamson will be education secretary, despite having been sacked by May less than three months ago on suspicion of leaking security secrets. Patel was also fired by May, for organising private meetings in Israel without informing officials.

As recently as 2011, Patel said, “I do think that when we have a criminal justice system that continuously fails in the country and where we have seen murderers and rapists … reoffend and do those crimes again and again, I think that’s appalling. On that basis alone I would support the reintroduction of capital punishment to serve as a deterrent.” By 2016 she had changed her mind, however.

Critics swiftly labelled Johnson’s new administration the most rightwing since the 1980s. SNP MP Pete Wishart said, “Boris Johnson’s nightmare Tory government is shaping up to be the worst since Thatcher – packed full of extreme Brexiteers and rabid rightwingers who want to drag us back to a bygone era.”

Former Tory MP Nick Boles, who quit the party over his colleagues’ failure to compromise on Brexit, tweeted: “The hard right has taken over the Conservative Party. Thatcherites, libertarians and No Deal Brexiters control it top to bottom.”

    Nick Boles MP (@NickBoles)

    The hard right has taken over the Conservative Party. Thatcherites, libertarians and No Deal Brexiters control it top to bottom. Liberal One Nation Conservatives have been ruthlessly culled. Only a few neutered captives are being kept on as window dressing. 1/
    July 24, 2019

Dominic Grieve, the former attorney general who has led the battle against a no-deal Brexit, was cutting about Johnson in an interview on Sky News, saying: “I don’t share his optimism about his opinion of himself.”

Asked how he would describe him, the Conservative MP said: “He’s a charlatan. That is the clear evidence of his career and the way he has operated politically.”

He added: “Those of us who have worked alongside him and had a chance of watching him can see for ourselves his modus operandi and his capacity both for deception and self-deception and those are the two ingredients of charlatanism.”

Ian Lavery, the Labour party chair, said: “Boris Johnson’s first act as PM has been to appoint a cabinet of hardline conservatives who will only represent the privileged few.”

Johnson will hold his first cabinet meeting at No 10 on Thursday morning, before making a statement to the Commons, where he is likely to receive a foretaste of the challenges that await him if he is to secure a majority for any new Brexit deal.

Several cabinet veterans, including Greg Clark, David Gauke and Philip Hammond, have made clear they intend to continue making the case against a no-deal Brexit from the backbenches – and using every parliamentary device they can to tie their new leader’s hands.

Asked about the prospect of an autumn poll, Rees-Mogg told ITV’s Robert Peston: “It is clearly not the policy of the government to bring about a general election.” But he added: “It’s impossible to rule out, looking at the parliamentary arithmetic.”

Earlier, Johnson was joined outside Downing Street by his partner, Carrie Symonds, who has stayed away from the limelight in recent weeks following the furore over their late-night row.

Members of his new staff also lined up to hear him, including Andrew Griffith, a Sky executive who lent him a £9.5m townhouse to plan his campaign and will become his business adviser, and Munira Mirza, one of his deputies as London mayor, who will become No 10 policy chief.

Matt Hancock, who threw his weight behind Johnson after abandoning his own tilt at the top job, and has been a key public face of his campaign, will remain as health secretary.
A cabinet purged: ‘I hope Boris has thought this through properly’
Read more

Hancock had said on Wednesday morning that, “uniting the party, and through that then uniting the country, is a really important part of what Boris is talking about”.

But Johnson’s picks for the top table pointed to a decision to assemble an ideologically coherent top team, rather than placating fretful remainers.

Allies said that as the new prime minister had indicated during his leadership campaign, every member of his hand-picked cabinet is fully committed to delivering Brexit, come what may, on 31 October.

Cummings’s old boss, Michael Gove, another Vote Leave veteran, will be chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster – the ceremonial title previously held by May’s cabinet fixer, David Lidington, who resigned on Wednesday rather than serve in a Johnson administration.

Gove has been handed the task of overseeing preparations for a no-deal Brexit, a job that previously fell to the Department for Exiting the EU. Brexiters have long claimed the government was not doing enough to get ready for the possibility of leaving.
Title: 💩 Boris Johnson's new-look cabinet to meet for first time
Post by: RE on July 25, 2019, 12:36:49 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49107417 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49107417)

Boris Johnson's new-look cabinet to meet for first time

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/7D02/production/_108020023_collage.jpg)
Six of the new-look cabinet (clockwise from left): Boris Johnson; Sajid Javid; Priti Patel; Dominic Raab; Gavin Williamson; Ben Wallace

Boris Johnson's new cabinet will meet for the first time on Thursday morning, before the new prime minister addresses the House of Commons.

On Wednesday, Mr Johnson gave key roles to leading Brexiteers.

Dominic Raab and Priti Patel returned to government as foreign secretary and home secretary respectively.

And Sajid Javid became chancellor - as more than half of Theresa May's old cabinet, including leadership rival Jeremy Hunt, quit or were sacked.

Other key appointments included:

    Stephen Barclay: Brexit secretary (retains post)
    Michael Gove: Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and no-deal Brexit planning
    Ben Wallace: Defence secretary
    Liz Truss: International trade secretary
    Matt Hancock: Health secretary (retains post)
    Gavin Williamson: Education secretary
    Nicky Morgan: Culture secretary
    Andrea Leadsom: Business secretary
    Amber Rudd: Work and pensions secretary (retains post)
    Jacob Rees-Mogg: Leader of the Commons
    See the full cabinet here

Media captionJacob Rees-Mogg learns of new role from the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg

Following his appointment, Mr Rees-Mogg, who led the pro-Brexit Tory European Research Group (ERG), denied there had been a "Leave" takeover of the cabinet.

"Boris is bringing the country together, the party together, through his cabinet appointments," he said.

    Live updates as new cabinet prepares to meet
    How much would PM's shopping list cost?
    In Pictures: Boris Johnson becomes UK's new PM

Mr Johnson's new cabinet saw 17 of Mrs May's former senior ministers being axed or stepping down.

Former Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said he had been offered an alternative role but had turned it down, while leading Brexiteers Penny Mordaunt and Liam Fox were also replaced as defence secretary and international trade secretary respectively.

Both supported Mr Hunt in the Tory leadership contest.
Getty
The cabinet in numbers

    31
    ministers entitled to attend - up from 29 under Theresa May

    48average age - down from 51

    26%female - down from 31%

    12Leave supporters (in 2016) - up from six

Source: PA
'A prime minister in a hurry'

These are the decisions of a prime minister in a hurry.

One who is aware that he's up against the clock.

One who has to pull off - within a few months - what his predecessor could not manage over years.

The team surrounding Boris Johnson has been put together with one goal in mind - to help him keep the promise he's made, to see the country leave the European Union in good time.

Number 10 believes it shows strength of purpose - a new administration determined and willing to take decisions after years of drift and disappointment.

Brexit believers have the top roles. But it is not a cabinet made up purely of the most burning Eurosceptics.

Read more from Laura

Mr Johnson used his first speech as prime minister to reiterate his determination to take the UK out of the EU by the 31 October "no ifs, no buts".

The UK was originally supposed to leave the EU on 29 March but the deadline was moved to 31 October, after MPs rejected Mrs May's withdrawal deal three times.

    Who are Boris Johnson's key advisers?

Labour's shadow chancellor John McDonnell said if Mr Johnson campaigned on the platform of a no-deal Brexit in any forthcoming general election, his own party would "almost certainly be Remain".

However, he told ITV that Labour would still look at any new deal Mr Johnson negotiated with the EU.

"But at the moment I can't see him stitching up a deal that's acceptable either to Labour or to quite a bit of his own side as well - so it looks as though we will then be in a straight situation between a no deal and Remain," he added.

Meanwhile, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has written to the new prime minister to say it is "essential" Scotland has an alternative option to his Brexit plan - and to indicate she would continue to press for a referendum on Scottish independence.
Media captionBoris Johnson's first speech as UK PM: "Never mind the backstop, the buck stops here"
Title: Kamikaze Boris Johnson Risks Becoming Britain’s Shortest-Serving PM
Post by: Surly1 on July 25, 2019, 07:40:01 AM
Kamikaze Boris Johnson Risks Becoming Britain’s Shortest-Serving PM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/kamikaze-boris-johnson-risks-becoming-britains-shortest-serving-prime-minister?ref=home (https://www.thedailybeast.com/kamikaze-boris-johnson-risks-becoming-britains-shortest-serving-prime-minister?ref=home)
Johnson doubles down on an unlikely bid to take Britain out of the European Union in just 99 days. A dangerous early election could be the only way out of his aggressive gambit.

Nico Hines
London Editor
Updated 07.25.19 7:51AM ET / Published 07.25.19 3:48AM ET

(https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/c_crop,d_placeholder_euli9k,h_1687,w_3000,x_0,y_0/dpr_1.5/c_limit,w_1044/fl_lossy,q_auto/v1563996046/190724-hines-boris-tease_e1wos6)
Oli Scarff/Getty
LONDON—Boris Johnson’s first act as British prime minister was to launch himself on a spectacular collision course with reality.

Instead of pivoting towards conciliation as he stood on the steps of Downing Street, the new Conservative leader lashed out at the “doomsters” and “gloomsters” who have failed to extricate Britain safely from the European Union over three agonizing years of negotiation at home and abroad.

Even before the Queen formally invited him to become Britain’s next prime minister, a raft of anti-Johnson Conservative lawmakers had quit the government in protest. The new PM chose to respond with a purge of his opponents in the most savage cabinet reshuffle in decades and the appointment of one of the most controversial bomb-throwers in Westminster as his senior adviser.

Johnson, who led the Leave campaign during the Brexit referendum, claims he can solve the Brexit conundrum in just three months. It’s either a pledge of great bravery or colossal hubris. Either way it is very likely that it will lead to Johnson putting the keys to No. 10 on the line in an early general election.

Twice on Wednesday he repeated the campaign pledge made to Conservative Party members, who selected him to replace Theresa May, that he would have Brexit wrapped up by Halloween. He says he wants Britain to leave the European Union with a new deal, which means either convincing Europe to abandon the red lines it's stuck to since 2016 or forcing the House of Commons to change its mind and approve a version of May’s deal that was brutally rejected by lawmakers on three occasions.

The only other option is to take Britain out of the E.U. without a deal, which parliament also has voted against repeatedly. He could try and force a No-Deal Brexit through against the will of Parliament, but that would break with centuries of political precedent.

Johnson finds himself in an almost impossible position. It’s going to take more than optimism to secure Britain’s exit from the E.U., but he made it clear that he would take personal responsibility for doing just that. “The buck stops here,” he said, as crowds of protesters booed and shouted over his first speech as prime minister.

If Parliament won’t let him deliver what he has promised to deliver, he’s going to need a new Parliament—and that means an election.

The big strategic question facing Johnson on the first night in the apartment above his new offices at No. 10 is whether to face up to reality before he crashes headfirst into the obstinacy of EU leaders and parliamentary opponents, or wait until after the damage has been done.

If he spends the three months trying to negotiate a new deal with Europe and convince a skeptical parliament to accept it, he runs the risk of being forced into an election soon after October 31 when he has failed to deliver his trademark pledge. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party is waiting in the wings and ready to crush the Conservatives just as they did in this year’s European elections.

The alternative would be Johnson calling a snap election ahead of the deadline and asking the nation to back his vision by returning a more strongly pro-Brexit set of lawmakers to rubberstamp his approach.

Either of those scenarios could leave him at risk of usurping George Canning, who was Britain’s shortest-serving prime minister—in office from April 1827 for 119 days until his premature death at the age of 57.

Johnson’s best chance of avoiding that ignominy is to convince the current parliament to back whatever deal he can eke out of Brussels. Unfortunately for him, May has handed over a tiny working majority of just two lawmakers in the House of Commons, which means Johnson will be sweating over every vote.

The parliamentary arithmetic makes Johnson’s cabinet reshuffle all the more surprising. By losing at least half of the cabinet of lawmakers he inherited from May, Johnson has created a whole host of new enemies.

He fired Jeremy Hunt, his final opponent for the leadership, as well as Hunt’s backers Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt, even though they were arch-Brexiteers. The Remain-leaning lawmakers have also been booted out of a cabinet that May had tried to balance between the rival factions.

Johnson has disregarded that notion and appears to be rebuilding the Vote Leave organization inside No. 10.

One outgoing minister told The Daily Beast: “It’s the Brexiteers’ wet dream of a Cabinet. The test is whether securing, as they have, every office of state they can now deliver Brexit. Backs to the wall, Dunkirk spirit, underdog rhetoric won’t be enough. The clock is ticking and all hinges upon success—the prime minister, the government, the party, the country.”

Perhaps the clearest sign that Johnson is planning a scorched earth policy rather than looking to build consensus is his choice of Dominic Cummings as senior adviser. Cummings was portrayed as the genius behind the Brexit referendum win—played by Benedict Cumberbatch in a recent HBO movie—but he is also known as one of the most abrasive characters in politics.

He became one of the few people in modern times to be found in contempt of parliament earlier this year for refusing to appear at a committee hearing, and former Prime Minister David Cameron once reportedly described him as a “career psychopath.”

Cummings has been scathing not just about his Brexit opponents but many of those on the same side. He attacked the group of hardline Brexiteers whom May struggled to control, saying they should be “treated like a metastasizing tumor and excised from the U.K. body politic.”

He described the pro-Brexit lawmaker tasked with negotiating the May deal as “thick as mince and lazy as a toad.”

Cummings is also renowned as an electoral strategist, raising the prospect that he has been appointed to help oversee an impending election, or perhaps even a second referendum, if that becomes the only option left on the table.

Johnson has sidelined the party’s big beasts and surrounded himself with a cadre of political outsiders like Cummings and his new Home Secretary (interior minister) Priti Patel, who was forced out of May’s cabinet when it emerged that she had been holding secret meetings with the Israeli government behind the prime minister’s back.

Johnson likes to ham up comparisons between himself and Winston Churchill, but after writing a biography of the leader who prevailed against Hitler in World War II he should know that Churchill’s over-ambitious and under-prepared early forays did not always end in success.

In World War I, Churchill drew up a bold plan to open a second front by attacking the Ottoman Empire, but he was not granted the number of troops he requested. In a fit of blind optimism over reality, Churchill ordered an amphibious attack on what is now Turkey to go ahead anyway. The result was the notorious bloodbath at the Battle of Gallipoli.
Title: Re: Kamikaze Boris Johnson Risks Becoming Britain’s Shortest-Serving PM
Post by: azozeo on July 25, 2019, 11:21:05 AM
Kamikaze Boris Johnson Risks Becoming Britain’s Shortest-Serving PM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/kamikaze-boris-johnson-risks-becoming-britains-shortest-serving-prime-minister?ref=home (https://www.thedailybeast.com/kamikaze-boris-johnson-risks-becoming-britains-shortest-serving-prime-minister?ref=home)
Johnson doubles down on an unlikely bid to take Britain out of the European Union in just 99 days. A dangerous early election could be the only way out of his aggressive gambit.

Nico Hines
London Editor
Updated 07.25.19 7:51AM ET / Published 07.25.19 3:48AM ET

(https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/c_crop,d_placeholder_euli9k,h_1687,w_3000,x_0,y_0/dpr_1.5/c_limit,w_1044/fl_lossy,q_auto/v1563996046/190724-hines-boris-tease_e1wos6)
Oli Scarff/Getty
LONDON—Boris Johnson’s first act as British prime minister was to launch himself on a spectacular collision course with reality.

Instead of pivoting towards conciliation as he stood on the steps of Downing Street, the new Conservative leader lashed out at the “doomsters” and “gloomsters” who have failed to extricate Britain safely from the European Union over three agonizing years of negotiation at home and abroad.

Even before the Queen formally invited him to become Britain’s next prime minister, a raft of anti-Johnson Conservative lawmakers had quit the government in protest. The new PM chose to respond with a purge of his opponents in the most savage cabinet reshuffle in decades and the appointment of one of the most controversial bomb-throwers in Westminster as his senior adviser.

Johnson, who led the Leave campaign during the Brexit referendum, claims he can solve the Brexit conundrum in just three months. It’s either a pledge of great bravery or colossal hubris. Either way it is very likely that it will lead to Johnson putting the keys to No. 10 on the line in an early general election.

Twice on Wednesday he repeated the campaign pledge made to Conservative Party members, who selected him to replace Theresa May, that he would have Brexit wrapped up by Halloween. He says he wants Britain to leave the European Union with a new deal, which means either convincing Europe to abandon the red lines it's stuck to since 2016 or forcing the House of Commons to change its mind and approve a version of May’s deal that was brutally rejected by lawmakers on three occasions.

The only other option is to take Britain out of the E.U. without a deal, which parliament also has voted against repeatedly. He could try and force a No-Deal Brexit through against the will of Parliament, but that would break with centuries of political precedent.

Johnson finds himself in an almost impossible position. It’s going to take more than optimism to secure Britain’s exit from the E.U., but he made it clear that he would take personal responsibility for doing just that. “The buck stops here,” he said, as crowds of protesters booed and shouted over his first speech as prime minister.

If Parliament won’t let him deliver what he has promised to deliver, he’s going to need a new Parliament—and that means an election.

The big strategic question facing Johnson on the first night in the apartment above his new offices at No. 10 is whether to face up to reality before he crashes headfirst into the obstinacy of EU leaders and parliamentary opponents, or wait until after the damage has been done.

If he spends the three months trying to negotiate a new deal with Europe and convince a skeptical parliament to accept it, he runs the risk of being forced into an election soon after October 31 when he has failed to deliver his trademark pledge. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party is waiting in the wings and ready to crush the Conservatives just as they did in this year’s European elections.

The alternative would be Johnson calling a snap election ahead of the deadline and asking the nation to back his vision by returning a more strongly pro-Brexit set of lawmakers to rubberstamp his approach.

Either of those scenarios could leave him at risk of usurping George Canning, who was Britain’s shortest-serving prime minister—in office from April 1827 for 119 days until his premature death at the age of 57.

Johnson’s best chance of avoiding that ignominy is to convince the current parliament to back whatever deal he can eke out of Brussels. Unfortunately for him, May has handed over a tiny working majority of just two lawmakers in the House of Commons, which means Johnson will be sweating over every vote.

The parliamentary arithmetic makes Johnson’s cabinet reshuffle all the more surprising. By losing at least half of the cabinet of lawmakers he inherited from May, Johnson has created a whole host of new enemies.

He fired Jeremy Hunt, his final opponent for the leadership, as well as Hunt’s backers Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt, even though they were arch-Brexiteers. The Remain-leaning lawmakers have also been booted out of a cabinet that May had tried to balance between the rival factions.

Johnson has disregarded that notion and appears to be rebuilding the Vote Leave organization inside No. 10.

One outgoing minister told The Daily Beast: “It’s the Brexiteers’ wet dream of a Cabinet. The test is whether securing, as they have, every office of state they can now deliver Brexit. Backs to the wall, Dunkirk spirit, underdog rhetoric won’t be enough. The clock is ticking and all hinges upon success—the prime minister, the government, the party, the country.”

Perhaps the clearest sign that Johnson is planning a scorched earth policy rather than looking to build consensus is his choice of Dominic Cummings as senior adviser. Cummings was portrayed as the genius behind the Brexit referendum win—played by Benedict Cumberbatch in a recent HBO movie—but he is also known as one of the most abrasive characters in politics.

He became one of the few people in modern times to be found in contempt of parliament earlier this year for refusing to appear at a committee hearing, and former Prime Minister David Cameron once reportedly described him as a “career psychopath.”

Cummings has been scathing not just about his Brexit opponents but many of those on the same side. He attacked the group of hardline Brexiteers whom May struggled to control, saying they should be “treated like a metastasizing tumor and excised from the U.K. body politic.”

He described the pro-Brexit lawmaker tasked with negotiating the May deal as “thick as mince and lazy as a toad.”

Cummings is also renowned as an electoral strategist, raising the prospect that he has been appointed to help oversee an impending election, or perhaps even a second referendum, if that becomes the only option left on the table.

Johnson has sidelined the party’s big beasts and surrounded himself with a cadre of political outsiders like Cummings and his new Home Secretary (interior minister) Priti Patel, who was forced out of May’s cabinet when it emerged that she had been holding secret meetings with the Israeli government behind the prime minister’s back.

Johnson likes to ham up comparisons between himself and Winston Churchill, but after writing a biography of the leader who prevailed against Hitler in World War II he should know that Churchill’s over-ambitious and under-prepared early forays did not always end in success.

In World War I, Churchill drew up a bold plan to open a second front by attacking the Ottoman Empire, but he was not granted the number of troops he requested. In a fit of blind optimism over reality, Churchill ordered an amphibious attack on what is now Turkey to go ahead anyway. The result was the notorious bloodbath at the Battle of Gallipoli.

No worries Surly, The cats related to Moses  :icon_sunny:

https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/134041/new-uk-prime-minister-descended-from-rabbi-feels-jewish/?mc_cid=c8a56ad332&mc_eid=cbbf700077 (https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/134041/new-uk-prime-minister-descended-from-rabbi-feels-jewish/?mc_cid=c8a56ad332&mc_eid=cbbf700077)
Title: 💩 Johnson tells EU: ditch the backstop or there will be no-deal Brexit
Post by: RE on July 27, 2019, 06:24:58 AM
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/johnson-tells-eu-ditch-the-backstop-or-there-will-be-no-deal-brexit-idUSKCN1UM0AO (https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/johnson-tells-eu-ditch-the-backstop-or-there-will-be-no-deal-brexit-idUSKCN1UM0AO)

July 27, 2019 / 3:17 AM / Updated 2 hours ago
Johnson tells EU: ditch the backstop or there will be no-deal Brexit
William James

(https://cdn-03.independent.ie/incoming/article38348052.ece/5ce13/AUTOCROP/w620/POLITIC%201013.jpg)

MANCHESTER, England (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Boris Johnson cautioned the European Union on Saturday that the Irish backstop, which he said was undemocratic, needed to be ditched if they were to strike a Brexit divorce deal.
Britain's Prime Minister Boris Johnson reacts as he meets engineering graduates on the site of an under-construction tramline in Stretford, near Manchester, Britain July 27, 2019. Ben Stansall/Pool via REUTERS

Johnson, since taking office on Wednesday, has repeatedly warned that if the EU continues to refuse to renegotiate the Withdrawal Agreement agreed by his predecessor, Theresa May, then he will take Britain out on Oct. 31 without a deal.

His biggest demand is that the most hotly contested element of the Brexit divorce agreement - the Irish border backstop - be struck out of the Withdrawal Agreement, a demand that has angered Ireland and perturbed other EU capitals.
Related Coverage

    Johnson says £3.6 billion fund will help towns develop

“If we get rid of the backstop, whole and entire, then we are making a lot of progress,” Johnson said, when asked if it is was only the Irish border backstop that he wanted changed.

Speaking before a Stephenson’s Rocket, a 19th century steam locomotive, in the northern England city of Manchester, Johnson dedicated most of his speech to improving public services, transport and the internet and driving up economic growth.

European leaders are prepared to talk with Britain’s new leader over Brexit but have so far insisted they will not reopen the Withdrawal Agreement. Many EU diplomats think the United Kingdom will hold a snap election soon.

Advertisement

Johnson said he did not want a no-deal Brexit, which investors fear will send shock waves through global markets and hurt the world’s economy, but that the United Kingdom had to prepare for a no-deal.

Ireland is crucial to any Brexit solution, or any Brexit meltdown.

The backstop is an insurance policy designed to prevent the return of border controls along the 500 km (300 mile) land border between Ireland and Britain’s province of Northern Ireland that were ended by the 1998 Good Friday peace agreement.

Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said the question of the unification of Ireland and Northern Ireland will inevitably arise if Britain leaves the EU without a divorce deal on Oct. 31.

Advertisement

“The approach of the UK government is not going to be disengaged or aloof or waiting for them to come to us: we are going to try to solve this problem and we are going to do it in a spirit of friendship and cooperation,” Johnson said.

“But we can’t do it as long as that anti-democratic backstop, that backstop that seeks to divide our country, divide the UK, remains in place,” he said. “We need to get it out and then we can make progress, I think.”

The Withdrawal Agreement that May struck in November with the EU says the United Kingdom will remain in a customs union “unless and until” alternative arrangements are found to avoid a hard border.

Many British lawmakers oppose the prospect of being bound to EU rules and customs duties that would prevent Britain doing its own trade deals and leave it overseen by EU judges.

Reporting by William James, editing by Guy Faulconbridge
Title: 💩 Jeremy vs Boris in the Battle for all the Brit Marbles?
Post by: RE on July 28, 2019, 08:38:10 AM
Another Circus Clown Show to look forward to!

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/MbkdCQeuF_I
Title: 💩 Brexit and Boris Johnson Send the British Pound on a Slide
Post by: RE on August 01, 2019, 12:30:08 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/31/business/boris-johnson-british-pound.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/31/business/boris-johnson-british-pound.html)

Brexit and Boris Johnson Send the British Pound on a Slide
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/07/31/business/31pound-1/31pound-1-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
Brexit supporters in London last year. Since Boris Johnson, another supporter, became prime minister last week, the British pound has lost nearly 3 percent of its value against the dollar and the euro.  Credit Andrew Testa for The New York Times

By Peter S. Goodman

    July 31, 2019

LONDON — The British pound has long possessed a mystique that transcends its marginal role in the global economy, conjuring memories of its dominance in the imperial age. But lately the currency has devolved into a sign of Britain’s diminishing fortunes in a present dominated by Brexit.

As the country slides toward the European Union’s exits, the latest pressure on its currency comes in the form of the new prime minister, Boris Johnson. Mr. Johnson has insisted he is prepared to accept the expensive chaos of leaving the European Union without a deal governing future relations.

Investors have taken his ascension last week as the impetus to evacuate their money ahead of a potential disaster. They have sold the pound. The currency has lost nearly 3 percent of its value against both the American dollar and the euro since Mr. Johnson took over.

The slide is expected to continue, perhaps right up until Oct. 31, the day that Britain is scheduled to depart the European bloc.

“The markets see turbulence for the economy,” said Kjersti Haugland, chief economist at DNB Markets, an investment bank in Oslo. “They see the potential for the economy to contract abruptly.”

The decline in the pound is at once a reflection of the market’s recognition that Britain has been economically weakened by Brexit, and a cause for distress.

The drop effectively raises prices for a vast range of British imports, from fruit and vegetables shipped in from Spain to chemicals and industrial parts made in Germany. It increases the costs of international travel, just as Britons flock to the beaches of the Mediterranean for summer holidays.
ImageA truck carrying Dutch flowers onto a ferry bound for Britain. The pound’s decline effectively raises prices for British imports.
A truck carrying Dutch flowers onto a ferry bound for Britain. The pound’s decline effectively raises prices for British imports.CreditAndrew Urwin for The New York Times


In theory, the weaker pound should bolster British exports by making them relatively cheaper than those produced by competitors in Europe, North America and Asia.

But given that Britain imports more than it exports, the net effect is negative. Whatever advantages exporters might gain would almost surely be canceled out by barriers to trade across the English Channel if Britain really leaves Europe without a deal.

Most broadly, the decline in the pound signals that investors see less need for British currency in the future, because Brexit is already reducing the appeal of doing business in Britain.

Economists have produced a dizzying array of estimates on the ultimate costs of Brexit, and especially the disruption to trade if confusing new customs checks are established on both sides of the English Channel. A no-deal Brexit would leave the British economy 2 percent smaller than otherwise by the end of 2021, according to a recent report from Oxford Economics, a research institution in London. The hit would be twice as bad by the calculations of the Office for Budget Responsibility, the official British forecaster.

From the auto industry to aerospace, major international companies have over decades set up plants in Britain, exploiting its proximity to the single European marketplace. The more likely a rupture across the English Channel, the less valuable Britain becomes as a base of operations.

None of this is new. Mr. Johnson has merely intensified pressures that have been at play since June 2016, when Britain shocked the globe with its referendum vote in favor of abandoning Europe. The pound plunged more than 10 percent against the dollar the next day. Ever since, the currency’s value has served as a gauge of Britain’s overall economic prospects amid the bewildering wrangling over Brexit.

Inflation resulting from a weaker pound prompted households to limit spending, yielding slower economic growth. Businesses have held back on expansions. Major international companies — Nissan and Honda among them — have shifted production beyond Britain.

Image
A factory in Northern Ireland, whose border with Ireland is a point of contention between Mr. Johnson and the European Union.CreditPaulo Nunes dos Santos for The New York Times

But if this has become a familiar trajectory, Mr. Johnson has injected a substantial element of unpredictability.

His predecessor, the highly scripted Theresa May, abhorred drama even as it consumed her tenure. Mrs. May initially claimed willingness to accept the turmoil of a no-deal Brexit if the alternative was an unsatisfactory arrangement. She then spent most of three years trying to walk back that formulation through negotiation, capitulation and the finessing of previous positions.

Eventually, Mrs. May forged a compromise with Europe that was almost universally panned. Those opposed to Brexit denounced Britain’s departure from the European single market, which allows trade to proceed from Greece to Ireland as if the European bloc were one enormous country. Those favoring Brexit blasted Mrs. May’s deal as a form of vassalage that would prevent Britain from striking its own trade deals with the rest of the world.

In a series of votes, Mrs. May’s deal went down to defeat. Then, she departed, handing the tangled knot that is Brexit to Mr. Johnson, a former journalist whose factually deficient reports from Brussels decades ago helped turn the British public against the European Union.

The new prime minister has a penchant for finding the center of controversy and an eagerness for headline-capturing political fisticuffs. He took office vowing to end what he has portrayed as British deference in the face of vindictive European inflexibility.

He would demand a reopening of negotiations and especially the scrapping of an element of Mrs. May’s deal known as the Irish backstop, a complex bit of maneuvering designed to prevent the reimposition of a border between Northern Ireland — part of the United Kingdom — and the independent Republic of Ireland. The net effect was to keep Britain inside the European customs union indefinitely and retain free-flowing trade until the two sides work out a permanent arrangement that ensures no hard border.

European officials have been resolute that negotiations cannot be reopened, while the backstop must endure. That leaves Mr. Johnson headed toward a collision with Europe, or on the verge of a politically perilous flip-flop.

Image
Mr. Johnson campaigning for Brexit in 2016. The new prime minister was touring Britain again this week.CreditChristopher Furlong/Getty Images

Mr. Johnson has alternately dismissed the risks of a no-deal Brexit and insisted that he was willing to crash out of the bloc at the end of October if need be. During a tour of the United Kingdom this week, he has toggled between pugnacity and reassurance.

On Monday in Scotland, Mr. Johnson was booed. He declared that there was “every chance we can get a deal” with Europe, but he also pronounced the Irish backstop “dead” — an apparent contradiction. The same day, Michael Gove, a member of Mr. Johnson’s cabinet who is overseeing preparations for a no-deal Brexit, said the government was “operating on the assumption” that this would be the outcome.

On Tuesday, sheep farmers in Wales excoriated the new prime minister for imperiling their livelihoods by jeopardizing exports to Europe. A no-deal Brexit threatens steep tariffs on lamb exports, they said, raising the prospect of the mass slaughter of soon-to-be-unsellable animals.

Experts are divided on what is really going on. Mr. Johnson may be bluffing, seeking to force Europe to reopen talks by convincing officials that he is unafraid to crash out of the European bloc. Or perhaps he is merely seeking to position himself and his Conservative Party as the victims of European intransigence ahead of national elections that are likely to follow if Europe does not budge.

Or maybe he is intent on securing his legacy as a hero among hard-core Brexiteers, the man who finally liberates Britain from killjoy European bureaucrats. But if he pursues a no-deal exit to the end, Mr. Johnson risks a mutiny within the Conservative ranks. A few members of Parliament could join the opposition to bring down the government, and an election would follow. If Mr. Johnson pursues an unexpected compromise — perhaps extending the Brexit deadline or agreeing to version of an Irish backstop — he risks a revolt from the other side of his party.

No one knows what will happen, a phrase that has gotten a vigorous workout since the Brexit referendum. Meanwhile, the markets are absorbing the variables and coming away with a less-than-robust appetite for pounds.

The moves in the currency markets are now gradual, reflecting a continued downgrading of sentiment rather than a meaningful change to the economy. But as Oct. 31 draws closer, bringing the cliff edge into sharp relief, the pound could plunge. Britain could well descend into recession.

“The currency markets are making their own judgment that it will be bad for the economy,” said Peter Dixon, a global financial economist at Commerzbank AG in London. “The more the rhetoric gets cranked up, the more likely that sterling comes under pressure.”
Title: 💩 Could a No Deal Brexit be the beginning of the end for the UK?
Post by: RE on August 03, 2019, 12:22:02 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/-p_96YAHZz4
Title: 💩 What’s More Unpopular: No-Deal Brexit or Prime Minister Corbyn?
Post by: RE on August 17, 2019, 06:02:57 AM
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/08/brexit-corbyn-prime-minister-bolton.html

What’s More Unpopular: No-Deal Brexit or Prime Minister Corbyn?

By Joshua Keating
Aug 16, 201911:55 AM

(https://compote.slate.com/images/af2e5901-bb28-42be-a8a2-da0c3e1d0986.gif?width=780&height=520&rect=1560x1040&offset=0x0)
Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn
Animation by Lisa Larson-Walker. Photos by Jon Super/AFP/Getty Images, Chris J Ratcliffe/Getty Images.

There was a lot less talk about the U.K. and the EU reaching a new withdrawal agreement this week. The two sides can’t even agree on conditions for starting new negotiations. The consensus view seems to be that the U.K. is headed for a no-deal Brexit on Oct. 31, unless Parliament can stop it.
More on Brexit

    Blinded by the Light Is a Crowd-Pleaser With Something to Say
    This Week in Brexit: Soon, There Might Not Be Enough Pineapple and Tuna for British Pizzas
    This Week in Brexit: Boris Plays Chicken
    John Oliver Breaks Down Boris Johnson’s “Carefully Calibrated” Buffoonery

This week in Labour: Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn unveiled his plan this week to stop Prime Minister Boris Johnson from pulling Britain out of the EU without an agreement on the future relationship between the two. When Parliament returns from recess in September, Corbyn will call a no-confidence vote in Johnson’s government. There’s reason to think this might succeed: Johnson’s coalition has only a one-seat majority, and a significant number of Conservative MPs oppose a no-deal Brexit. If it does, Corbyn will ask Parliament’s smaller parties and the rebel Conservatives to support him as prime minister, for a “strictly time-limited” government which would ask the EU for a Brexit extension past the current Oct. 31 deadline, and then call a new general election. In that election, Labour would campaign on a pledge to hold a new referendum on Brexit, with an option for remaining in the EU. (This represents a bit of a shift: Labour was previously vague on whether it supports a new referendum.)

The main hitch in the plan is Corbyn himself. Because of his leftist views, allegations of anti-Semitism in the party under his leadership, and his vague stance on Brexit, the Labour leader is a controversial figure whom many moderate Remainers will be reluctant to have as prime minister. The Scottish National Party—the third-largest in Parliament—signaled it was on board with the Corbyn plan. The Greens and the Welsh nationalist Plaid Cymru are somewhat on board but would prefer to have a referendum before a general election. But Jo Swinson, newly elected leader of the Liberal Democrats—the fourth-largest party—opposed the plan, calling Corbyn “divisive” and saying he couldn’t command Parliament’s support. She proposed two other moderate MPs as consensus figures to lead a caretaker government.

This week in America: U.S. national security adviser John Bolton paid a visit to London this week, where he met with Johnson, reiterated the Trump administration’s support for Brexit, and promised that Britain would be “front of the trade queue” for a new deal with the United States once it leaves Europe. There have been worries in Britain that a trade deal with the U.S.
could lead to U.S. firms bidding for contracts within the National Health Service and concessions on food safety. (“Chlorinated” has been a big point of concern.) Bolton promised that agreements could be reached sector by sector rather than all at once, which could ease a few concerns. But back in Washington, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that no U.S.-U.K. trade deal would get through Congress if a no-deal Brexit led to the imposition of a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland—which many fear would endanger the region’s peace process.

This week in the economy: The British economy shrank by 0.2 percent between April and June—the first contraction in a quarter since 2012—amid growing global fears of a new recession. Sajid Javid, chancellor of the exchequer, dismissed fears of a recession saying “the fundamentals of the British economy are strong,” but opposition leaders blamed the uncertainty caused by Brexit and Conservative leadership. The Bank of England expects the British economy to grow 1.3 percent this year, revised down from a previous projection of 1.5 percent.

Days until next deadline: 77 days
Title: 💩 UK faces food, fuel and drugs shortages in no-deal Brexit: Times, citing offi
Post by: RE on August 18, 2019, 01:39:23 AM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu/uk-faces-food-fuel-and-drugs-shortages-in-no-deal-brexit-times-citing-official-documents-idUSKCN1V70M6 (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu/uk-faces-food-fuel-and-drugs-shortages-in-no-deal-brexit-times-citing-official-documents-idUSKCN1V70M6)

August 17, 2019 / 2:59 PM / Updated 9 hours ago
UK faces food, fuel and drugs shortages in no-deal Brexit: Times, citing official documents
Kate Holton

(https://cdn2.img.sputniknews.com/images/106982/37/1069823798.jpg)

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain will face shortages of fuel, food and medicine if it leaves the European Union without a transition deal, jamming ports and requiring a hard border in Ireland, official government documents leaked to the Sunday Times show.
FILE PHOTO: An anti-Brexit protester is seen outside the Cabinet Office in London, Britain July 29, 2019. REUTERS/Toby Melville

The Times said the forecasts compiled by the Cabinet Office set out the most likely aftershocks of a no-deal Brexit rather than the worst case scenarios.

They said up to 85% of trucks using the main channel crossings “may not be ready” for French customs, meaning disruption at ports would potentially last up to three months before the flow of traffic improves.

The government also believes a hard border between the British province of Northern Ireland and the Republic will be likely as current plans to avoid widespread checks will prove unsustainable, the Times said.

“Compiled this month by the Cabinet Office under the codename Operation Yellowhammer, the dossier offers a rare glimpse into the covert planning being carried out by the government to avert a catastrophic collapse in the nation’s infrastructure,” the Times reported.

“The file, marked “official-sensitive” — requiring security clearance on a “need to know” basis — is remarkable because it gives the most comprehensive assessment of the UK’s readiness for a no-deal Brexit.”

The United Kingdom is heading towards a constitutional crisis at home and a showdown with the EU as Prime Minister Boris Johnson has repeatedly vowed to leave the bloc on Oct. 31 without a deal unless it agrees to renegotiate the Brexit divorce.

After more than three years of Brexit dominating EU affairs, the bloc has repeatedly refused to reopen the Withdrawal Agreement which includes an Irish border insurance policy that Johnson’s predecessor, Theresa May, agreed in November.

Johnson will this week tell French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel that the Westminster parliament cannot stop Brexit and a new deal must be agreed if Britain is to avoid leaving the EU without one.

The prime minister is coming under pressure from politicians across the political spectrum to prevent a disorderly departure, with opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn vowing this week to bring down Johnson’s government in early September to delay Brexit.

It is, however, unclear if lawmakers have the unity or power to use the British parliament to prevent a no-deal departure - likely to be the United Kingdom’s most significant move since World War Two.

Opponents of no deal say it would be a disaster for what was once one of the West’s most stable democracies. A disorderly divorce, they say, would hurt global growth, send shockwaves through financial markets and weaken London’s claim to be the world’s preeminent financial center.

Brexit supporters say there may be short-term disruption from a no-deal exit but that the economy will thrive if cut free from what they cast as a doomed experiment in integration that has led to Europe falling behind China and the United States.

Editing by Guy Faulconbridge
Title: 💩 Boris Johnson to find Irish border solution in 30 days
Post by: RE on August 22, 2019, 12:21:04 AM
hahahahahahahahahahaha! 🤣

NOT...GONNA...HAPPEN.

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/evEOEz-wYg0
Title: 'Absolute chaos for months': Shoppers here 'facing empty shelves
Post by: Surly1 on August 31, 2019, 09:16:52 AM
'Absolute chaos for months': Shoppers here 'facing empty shelves within days of no-deal Brexit' (https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/absolute-chaos-for-months-shoppers-here-facing-empty-shelves-within-days-of-nodeal-brexit-38450011.html)

(https://cdn-02.independent.ie/incoming/article38449830.ece/5ef38/AUTOCROP/w620/71DUBLIN1-IRELAND-_.jpg)
Strategic importance: The port of Dublin along with the likes of Rosslare and Cork have become vitally important with a hard Brexit looming. Stock picture

Ireland's supermarket shelves could start to run bare within two days of a hard Brexit, the head of the Freight Transport Association of Ireland warned yesterday.

General manager Aidan Flynn appealed for haulage firms to take immediate steps to improve supply chains as the UK hurtles towards crashing out of the EU with no deal.

“Ireland’s retail shops have no space to stockpile anything,” he told the Irish Independent.

“They must be fed by distribution centres every day – and the UK is the major distribution hub for Ireland.
   
“Stores here have no space to stockpile anything, not even two days of products. They are seriously constrained.

“Everything will take days longer. And in the event of a no deal, there’s going to be absolute chaos for months.”

Mr Flynn said retailers currently order goods from UK warehouses and expect the products to arrive by Irish Sea ferry and truck within 24 hours. But a no-deal Brexit would make such speed legally and logistically impossible.

Mr Flynn said the era of seamless next-day imports under EU rules had allowed stores over the past decade to convert underused storage space to new retail facilities such as bakery counters.

A hard Brexit, he said, would raise the question of how Ireland could bake bread at all.

"We don't mill most of our flour in Ireland. It just shows how reliant we are on the UK for our food," he said. While the answer in part would be stockpiling, Mr Flynn said warehousing was scarce.

"Cold storage and chilled warehousing is in particularly short supply," he said. "There certainly isn't enough available to stockpile levels we would need to cope."

Rental costs for storage had climbed at least 15pc in the past year. "The price of existing warehouse space will rocket up and that ultimately will pass to the consumer.

"The industry now is reliant on too few distribution centres," he said, suggesting supermarket giants with huge hubs remain vulnerable to disjointed planning among their thousands of subcontractors.

Several supermarkets declined to comment. But German retailer Lidl told the Irish Independent it is holding regular Brexit workshops with suppliers, beefing up its local supply contracts to minimise dependence on UK producers and building a 54,000 sq m distribution centre in Newbridge, Co Kildare, due to open in November.

Lidl spokeswoman Claire Moran said Irish-made goods already represented more than half of Lidl's offering. "While some of our produce would currently come through the UK land bridge, we have put alternative logistical arrangements in place to maintain the supply of these goods. We therefore do not anticipate any shortages," she said.

Fourth-fifths of Ireland's truckers - around 150,000 drivers - use the UK as a "land bridge", cutting by half the time it takes by ferry.

Mr Flynn said Ireland needed to work with EU colleagues to forge new direct services linking Dublin, Cork and Rosslare with the French ports of Le Havre and Calais, Zeebrugge in Belgium and Rotterdam in the Netherlands.

Journeys by ferry from Rotterdam or Zeebrugge would take 40 hours. "You cannot send a driver on a ferry of that duration," he said. "It's only an option for unaccompanied containers. You'd be lengthening the supply chain and challenging hauliers' jobs."

FTA Ireland estimates Brexit preparation has helped to drive up haulage firms' costs by 6.5pc in the past year.

"Time is money," Mr Flynn said. "The reality of Brexit, with all these new processes and requirements, is it is going to take massive time to get people up to speed and become efficient again."

Irish Independent
Title: 💩 Brexit Showdown Looms As MPs Prepare To Return To Parliament
Post by: RE on September 03, 2019, 12:12:22 AM
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/02/756763493/brexit-showdown-looms-as-mps-prepare-to-return-to-parliament (https://www.npr.org/2019/09/02/756763493/brexit-showdown-looms-as-mps-prepare-to-return-to-parliament)

Brexit Showdown Looms As MPs Prepare To Return To Parliament

September 2, 20194:48 PM ET
Merrit Kennedy 2018 square

(https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2019/09/02/ap_19245623741499-bc31a77b1b29b366e7bac546f07adeb3535e9c1a-s800-c85.jpg)
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said Monday that he doesn't want an election amid the Brexit crisis and issued a rallying cry to lawmakers to back him in securing a Brexit deal.
Matt Dunham/AP

It's a make-or-break week in the U.K. right now, as the country barrels toward a deadline to withdraw from the European Union without yet securing a deal on the terms of the divorce.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is pleading with lawmakers to support him amid a brewing rebellion in Parliament – even from members of his own party — to try to block the U.K. from leaving the bloc without securing a deal.

A meeting on Monday between Johnson and key government ministers triggered speculation that he was preparing for early elections. But in his remarks, he denied that he wanted to seek a vote: "I don't want an election, you don't want an election – let's get on with the people's agenda."

Parliament is set to return to session Tuesday, after Johnson controversially moved to suspend the body for a crucial upcoming several weeks. That move, which limits the amount of time Parliament will be in session prior to the Oct. 31 withdrawal deadline, was slammed by many of Johnson's critics as undemocratic.
Sign Up For The NPR Daily Newsletter

Catch up on the latest headlines and unique NPR stories, sent every weekday.
E-mail address

By subscribing, you agree to NPR's terms of use and privacy policy.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Brexit Watch: Why The Move To Suspend U.K. Parliament Matters
World
Brexit Watch: Why The Move To Suspend U.K. Parliament Matters

On Monday, the shouts of protesters could be heard in the background as Johnson encouraged lawmakers to vote against a bill aimed at stopping him from crashing out of the EU without a deal. A no-deal Brexit is predicted to damage the economies of both the U.K. and the EU.

He slammed the bill, which MPs opposed to a no-deal Brexit will try to bring to the floor tomorrow, as "yet another pointless delay" that undercuts the U.K.'s negotiating position.

"If they do, they will plainly chop the legs out from under the U.K. position and make any further negotiation absolutely impossible," he said. "Let's let our negotiators get on with their work without that sword of Damocles over their necks."

As NPR's Frank Langfitt reports, Johnson's opponents are expected to succeed at taking control of parliament's agenda – typically set by the Prime Minister. If they do that and pass their bill, Langfitt adds, "we actually think that Boris Johnson is going to do what he just said he wouldn't do and doesn't want to do – he'll almost have no choice but to call an election and take this back to the people."

That would be risky for both Johnson and his chief opponent, Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn. Corbyn spoke in favor of an early election on Monday, though he is lagging in the polls. Johnson has a tiny majority in Parliament at the moment and would try to widen it to push through a Brexit deal, as Langfitt reported.
Many Britons React With Anger Over Suspension Of Parliament
Europe
Many Britons React With Anger Over Suspension Of Parliament

Johnson said on Monday that the chances of a deal with the EU are rising — though most analysts are skeptical and the U.K. has not publicly presented any new proposals to break the deadlock with Brussels.

"They can see that we want a deal," Johnson insisted, referring to the EU. "They can see that we have a clear vision for our future relationship with the EU — something that has not always perhaps been the case — and they can see that we are utterly determined to strengthen our position by getting ready to come out, regardless, come what may," he said.

The text of the opposition bill was tweeted out by Labour MP Hilary Benn shortly before Johnson spoke. It stipulates that the U.K. would not leave the EU on Oct. 31 without a deal, unless Parliament agrees.

The bill, which is supported by MPs from across the political spectrum, also would force the Prime Minister to ask the EU in October for a three-month delay if the government hasn't reached a deal with the EU or if Parliament hasn't agreed to a no-deal Brexit.

That's a suggestion Johnson flatly rejects. "I want everybody to know that there are no circumstances in which I will ask Brussels to delay. We are leaving on the 31st of October, no ifs or buts."

Benn said in a tweet that the bill is supported by MPs who "believe that the consequences of No Deal for the economy would be highly damaging. No Deal is not in the national interest."

The EU has thus far not been willing to budge on changing the terms of a deal reached after extensive negotiations with Johnson's predecessor, Theresa May. That deal was struck down three times by parliament.
Title: 💩 Sterling falls below $1.20, hitting its lowest level since October 2016 flash
Post by: RE on September 03, 2019, 09:14:16 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/03/sterling-falls-below-1point20-ahead-of-brexit-showdown-in-uk-parliament.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/03/sterling-falls-below-1point20-ahead-of-brexit-showdown-in-uk-parliament.html)

Sterling falls below $1.20, hitting its lowest level since October 2016 flash crash
Published Tue, Sep 3 2019 2:43 AM EDTUpdated 5 hours ago
Elliot Smith  @ElliotSmithCNBC
   
Key Points

    At around 8:00 a.m. London time on Tuesday, sterling was trading as low as $1.1968, its lowest since a flash crash in October 2016.
    U.K. lawmakers return from summer recess on Tuesday afternoon, with a cross-party group of lawmakers expected to begin the first of a range of measures intended to block the possibility of a no-deal Brexit on October 31.

(https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/106107838-1567445784160gettyimages-1165700439.jpeg?v=1567446122&w=740&h=416)
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson delivers a speech at 10 Downing Street on September 2, 2019 in London, England.
Chris J Ratcliffe | Getty Images

Sterling fell below $1.20 on Tuesday morning, reaching levels not seen since October 2016 as Britain’s constitutional crisis over Brexit threatens to come to a head.

At around 8:00 a.m. on Tuesday, sterling was trading as low as $1.1968, its lowest since a “flash crash” in October 2016. The brief crash saw the pound fall 6% in a matter of minutes during Asian trading hours to $1.1491, confounding market participants.

While no single factor caused the sudden nosedive in late 2016, an official report from the Bank for International Settlements concluded that it was caused by a combination of headline-sensitive algorithmic trading, inexperienced traders and a lack of active market participants given the time of day.
Brexit showdown

U.K. lawmakers return from summer recess on Tuesday afternoon, with a cross-party group of lawmakers expected to apply for an emergency debate and seize control of the agenda of the House of Commons, in a first effort to stop a no-deal Brexit.
VIDEO03:17
No-deal Brexit is becoming more likely, expert says

This would be subject to a vote, which if passed, would tie Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s hands ahead of the suspension of parliament from September 9 until October 14.

Johnson has vowed to leave the European Union on October 31 with or without a deal in place, and reiterated this pledge in a speech Monday evening. He also insisted that the chances of striking a new withdrawal agreement have increased.

However, government officials have said that if parliament votes in favor of the opposition’s amendment to the terms of emergency debate in order to allow it to go ahead, the prime minister will call a snap general election for October 14.

In order for the vote to pass, a number of rebel lawmakers from within Johnson’s ruling Conservative Party must flout his orders and join forces with the opposition, with several indicating already that they plan to do so. The prime minister has this week threatened to expel Conservative lawmakers who vote against him.

A “no-deal” Brexit is widely seen as a “cliff-edge” scenario to be avoided at all costs, resulting in Britain leaving the bloc with no transition period for legal and trading arrangements. Such an event is expected to cause food and medicine shortages along with significant border and travel disruption, according to the government’s own contingency plans.
A ‘lose-lose’ scenario

Stephen Gallo, European head of foreign exchange strategy at BMO Capital Markets, told CNBC via email Tuesday that the British currency is “cornered on the downside.”

“On the one hand you have the global and euro zone growth backdrops, which are both acting as a drag on the currency. On the other hand, it seems highly likely that we will land on some sort of permutation involving a WTO Brexit, early elections or both,” Gallo said.
VIDEO03:41
Rebel lawmakers launch bid to stop a no-deal Brexit

BMO strategists have outlined two possible scenarios for Brexit. In the first, the anti no-deal faction pushes legislation through forcing the government to request an extension of Article 50, the legal mechanism which triggered the U.K.’s departure process.

The government then refuses to request an extension, instead engineering a no-confidence motion in itself or leading the opposition parties to launch one. The government loses the no-confidence vote, announces new elections between mid-October and mid-November, and in the meantime, the U.K. exits the EU on World Trade Organization (WTO) terms without a withdrawal agreement on October 31.

The second scenario follows the same sequence of events but the government wins the confidence of the House of Commons, or the House refuses to vote in favor of early elections but the government still resigns.

“In that case, the opposition would probably seek to form a government and craft a new legislative agenda (i.e. new Queens Speech),” Gallo projected.

“This would need to be voted on by the Commons over the coming weeks, and it would probably fail to pass the House. In that case, it would probably be quite likely for the sovereign to formally dissolve parliament and implement an election date by statute.”

He concluded that this bind means GBP faces a “lose-lose scenario” until after Brexit is resolved, or the result of the election is known.

Correction: This story has been updated to show that sterling was trading as low as $1.1968 at around 8:00 a.m. London time on Tuesday.
Title: 💩 Boris Johnson loses parliamentary majority as Brexit crisis bites
Post by: RE on September 03, 2019, 11:14:38 AM
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/boris-johnson-loses-parliamentary-majority-brexit-crisis-bites-190903145928459.html (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/boris-johnson-loses-parliamentary-majority-brexit-crisis-bites-190903145928459.html)

Boris Johnson loses parliamentary majority as Brexit crisis bites

Phillip Lee has abandoned the Conservative Party, citing 'bullying and lies'.
an hour ago

(https://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdxxlarge/mritems/Images/2019/9/3/c50df605ce714fe5b8d3bd2888bb25ae_18.jpg)
Boris Johnson now has no majority to govern in parliament after a Conservative Party defection [Simon Dawson/Reuters]

more on Brexit

    Brexit: All the latest updates
    today
    Boris Johnson loses parliamentary majority as Brexit crisis bites
    today
    All eyes on parliament as UK faces pivotal day on Brexit
    today
    Who is John Bercow? The speaker in the eye of the Brexit storm
    today

Conservative Party MP Dr Phillip Lee, a former justice minister, has quit the party to join the Liberal Democrats, suddenly leaving Prime Minister Boris Johnson's government without a parliamentary majority.

In a moment of high-drama in the House of Commons, Lee crossed the floor while Johnson was delivering a statement on the recent G7 summit.

Even with an agreement with the Democratic Unionist Party - which cost former prime minister Theresa May as much as one billion pounds ($1.2bn) in extra funding for Northern Ireland - Johnson's parliamentary majority was just one.

Lee's departure means the government has now lost its working majority in the legislature, and Johnson will likely find it impossible to continue governing without an election to shake up the parliamentary arithmetic.
'Manipulation, bullying and lies'

"Over 27 years ago I joined the Conservative and Unionist Party led by Sir John Major," said Lee - a former medical practitioner - in a statement.
Alliance of rebel, opposition MPs seek to prevent 'no-deal' Brexit

"Since 2010 I have had the privilege of representing the Bracknell constituency. The party I joined in 1992 is not the party I am leaving today.

"This Conservative government is aggressively pursuing a damaging Brexit in unprincipled ways. It is putting lives and livelihoods at risk unnecessarily and it is wantonly endangering the integrity of the United Kingdom.

"More widely, it is undermining our country's economy, democracy and role in the world. It is using political manipulation, bullying and lies. And it is doing these things in a deliberate and considered way."

Liberal Democrats leader Jo Swinson welcomed Lee to the party, posting on Twitter: "Welcome @DrPhillipLeeMP - you have joined us at the most crucial time. I look forward to working with you to prevent a disastrous Brexit, and to fight for a fairer, more equal society."

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn took the chance to poke Johnson with a pointed barb after attacking the prime minister for trying to run a "cabal" from Downing Street in order to take Britain out of the European Union without a deal despite the costs.

"This is a government with no mandate, no morals, and, as of today, no majority," Corbyn said in the Commons.
Title: Re: 💩 Boris Johnson loses parliamentary majority as Brexit crisis bites
Post by: Surly1 on September 03, 2019, 06:13:58 PM
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/boris-johnson-loses-parliamentary-majority-brexit-crisis-bites-190903145928459.html (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/boris-johnson-loses-parliamentary-majority-brexit-crisis-bites-190903145928459.html)

Boris Johnson loses parliamentary majority as Brexit crisis bites

Phillip Lee has abandoned the Conservative Party, citing 'bullying and lies'.
//
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn took the chance to poke Johnson with a pointed barb after attacking the prime minister for trying to run a "cabal" from Downing Street in order to take Britain out of the European Union without a deal despite the costs.

"This is a government with no mandate, no morals, and, as of today, no majority," Corbyn said in the Commons.

I have been traveling all day and was reading my phone while in the car.

Just want to points out that the diner Forum had this story 60-90 minutes before it moved as a headline on AP, NPR, and WaPo. I read it here and told my wife before it was pushed out on the others.

Well done, RE.
Title: 💩 Johnson To Call For Snap Election After Conservatives Suffer Key Parliamentar
Post by: RE on September 04, 2019, 02:14:15 AM
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/03/757084924/boris-johnsons-brexit-plans-hit-turbulence-after-conservative-defection (https://www.npr.org/2019/09/03/757084924/boris-johnsons-brexit-plans-hit-turbulence-after-conservative-defection)

Johnson To Call For Snap Election After Conservatives Suffer Key Parliamentary Defeat

September 3, 20194:28 PM ET
Colin Dwyer 2018 square

Colin Dwyer
Frank Langfitt

(https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2019/09/03/gettyimages-1165816955-d9554e675987952d672827c079c3125d58c564d9-s800-c85.jpg)
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, seen hosting health service workers Tuesday at No. 10 Downing St. in London. The same day in the House of Commons, Johnson was dealt a political blow when the defection of a fellow Conservative left him without a working majority in Parliament.
WPA Pool/Getty Images

Updated at 6 p.m. ET

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson says he is ready to call a snap election after lawmakers cleared the way for a vote on Wednesday to prevent the U.K. from leaving the European Union without a withdrawal agreement at the end of October.

The announcement was the culmination of a dramatic day that saw a defection rob Johnson and his ruling Conservative Party of their single-seat majority in Parliament.

"I don't want an election, but if MPs vote tomorrow to stop negotiations and to compel another pointless delay to Brexit potentially for years then that will be the only way to resolve this," Johnson said after the 328 to 301 vote to seize control of parliamentary time on Wednesday.

A general election, which Johnson's aides say he wants for Oct. 14, would be the third in just four years for Britons.

On Tuesday, less than two months from the date he set for the U.K.'s divorce from the European Union — with or without a deal on the terms of the breakup — Johnson suffered another significant blow to his fraying support in Parliament: Phillip Lee, a fellow Tory, defected from Johnson's Conservative Party in a dramatic scene in the House of Commons.
Sign Up For The NPR Daily Newsletter

Catch up on the latest headlines and unique NPR stories, sent every weekday.
E-mail address

By subscribing, you agree to NPR's terms of use and privacy policy.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

As Johnson addressed the chamber, Lee silently crossed the room and took a seat with the opposition Liberal Democrats under a heavy rain of jeers and cheers from his fellow members of Parliament. The seemingly outsize reaction was warranted: The loss of Lee's vote erases the tenuous working majority enjoyed by the prime minister's coalition, just as a possible vote looms on a bill that would bar Johnson from leaving the European bloc without a deal.

"Sadly, the Brexit process has helped to transform this once great Party in to something more akin to a narrow faction, where an individual's 'conservativism' is measured by how recklessly one wishes to leave the European Union," Lee said in a statement released on Twitter. "Perhaps most disappointingly, it has increasingly become infected with the twin diseases of populism and English nationalism."

Lee's defection comes on perhaps the most consequential day so far for Johnson's young premiership. Parliament returned to session for the first time since the prime minister moved to suspend the lawmaking body, beginning around Sept. 9 and leaving it in recess until Oct. 14 — or for more than half the weeks remaining before Johnson's deadline.

That decision elicited fierce resistance, not just from opposition lawmakers but from members within his own party, as well. Commons Speaker John Bercow, for one, said last week that the suspension of Parliament "represents a constitutional outrage," and more than a dozen of Johnson's own Tories have threatened to back the bill blocking a no-deal Brexit.

Meanwhile, protests have erupted outside the Houses of Parliament, as well.

Johnson, for his part, has sought to quell the mutiny within the Conservative Party with threats of deselection and expulsion.
Brexit Watch: Why The Move To Suspend U.K. Parliament Matters
World
Why The Move To Suspend U.K. Parliament Matters
Europe
Another Brexit Showdown Kicks Off In Britain's Parliament

"To these rebels in his own party, he said, effectively, 'I'm going to kick you out if you defy me.' And this would effectively end their careers," NPR's Frank Langfitt explained on Morning Edition Tuesday before the day's tumult in the House of Commons. "Some people find this quite ruthless, but the rebels' view is that 'we're going to choose what we see as the future of the country and the best interests of the country over party.' "

Johnson could also seek a snap general election next month if he does not get his way — which would be the U.K.'s third general vote in three years. On NPR's Here and Now, Langfitt explained that Johnson may choose to run a campaign critical of Parliament and essentially say that lawmakers are "trying to rob the people of the Brexit vote" — and that he just needs an electoral majority to push it through.

"One thing is critical: If we are to succeed in these negotiations [with EU officials], we need to get behind the prime minister," Conservative MP Michael Gove told lawmakers Tuesday in the House of Commons.

"And if it is the case that the motion before the House is passed tonight and the legislation which it gives effect to is passed tomorrow," he continued, "then we will allow the European Union to dictate the length of any extension and to put any conditions they wish to on that extension. That would totally undermine the government's capacity to negotiate in the national interest."

Jo Swinson, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, the party to whom Lee defected, didn't buy arguments such as Gove's

"The prime minister has lost his majority with the honorable member from Bracknell joining the Liberal Democrats," she said on the chamber floor, adding: "When will the prime minister stop playing with people's lives and stop Brexit?"
Title: 💩 British Prime Minister Boris Johnson loses majority after Brexit vote
Post by: RE on September 04, 2019, 04:16:16 AM
Gotta love Brit Politics. lol.  ;D

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/1MoMtWVk8cA
Title: 💩 CLUSTER-CLUCK ‘Chicken’ Jeremy Corbyn blocks Boris Johnson’s snap general ele
Post by: RE on September 05, 2019, 02:07:34 AM
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9858895/jeremy-corbyn-chicken-no-deal-boris-johnson-crunch-vote/ (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9858895/jeremy-corbyn-chicken-no-deal-boris-johnson-crunch-vote/)

CLUSTER-CLUCK ‘Chicken’ Jeremy Corbyn blocks Boris Johnson’s snap general election and No Deal Brexit
Latest

    Natasha Clark  Alex Matthews  Steve Hawkes

    4 Sep 2019, 20:10Updated: 5 Sep 2019, 8:52

(https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/NINTCHDBPICT000518811290-2.jpg?w=620)


JEREMY Corbyn and Tory rebels last night threw out Boris Johnson’s demands for a snap election and rammed through laws to stop a No Deal Brexit.

The PM’s bold rallying cry to go to the polls was rejected by MPs who claimed he was setting them a “trap”.
Boris Johnson lost a bid to call for a snap general election last night
10
Boris Johnson lost a bid to call for a snap general election last nightCredit: PRU
Corbyn said Labour would only back an election after the rebel bill to block a No Deal is rubber stamped by the Queen
10
Corbyn said Labour would only back an election after the rebel bill to block a No Deal is rubber stamped by the QueenCredit: PA:Press Association
Speaking to ITV’s Robert Peston, Boris mocked Corbyn and said he may need to 'get out the chicken suit'
10
Speaking to ITV’s Robert Peston, Boris mocked Corbyn and said he may need to 'get out the chicken suit'Credit: ITV/Peston

Only 298 MPs opted for an election - far short of the two thirds of MPs (434) he needed to get it through.

The vote was lost after Corbyn ordered his MPs to abstain in the knowledge this would prevent Boris getting the two thirds majority he needed.

The decision to abstain rather than vote against BoJo's proposal was a vain move to dodge accusations the Labour leader is being cowardly by turning down the chance to fight the PM in an election.

It's the first time an Opposition party has ever not voted for an election.

Boris demanded to go to the country rather than accept Corbyn’s demands to go cap in hand back to Brussels in just six weeks’ time.

Speaking to ITV’s Robert Peston last night, Boris mocked Corbyn, saying he may need to “get out the chicken suit”.

And he claimed he believed Labour would be so “consumed by cowardice” they would fold and back a poll.
Bank: We overdid the gloom

By Tracey Boles

BANK of England boss Mark Carney has admitted the economic hit of a No Deal would be “less severe” than he previously predicted.

The governor rowed back on last year’s figures as he addressed the Treasury Select Committee yesterday.

He told MPs the bank now forecasts a more manageable 5.5 per cent decline — instead of the 8 per cent bandied about before.

The change is due to No Deal preparations — “the impact of which has been to reduce the worst-case scenario”, he said.

He also forecast 7pc unemployment.
'GET OUT THE CHICKEN SUIT'

“I don’t think I have, I have never known a time in modern history when the Leader of the Opposition has refused to take part in a general election," Boris said.

“I can only invite our viewers, Robert, to speculate why he may be so disinclined - does somebody need to get out the chicken suit?”

Boris even said he believed Corbyn had gone against his "constitutional duty" as Opposition leader to take part in a general election.

But he doubled down on his decision to boot out 21 Tory MPs including Sir Ken Clarke and Sir Nicholas Soames.

“These are friends of mine, I take no joy in any of it.

"But it was sad and surprising that they should choose to undermine our ability to get a deal.”
New law to stop No Deal Brexit

A LAW designed to stop a No Deal Brexit was rammed through last night.

Boris Johnson had warned the legislation to delay Brexit in order to prevent a no-deal departure next month would "scupper negotiations".

But the bill passed all stages in the Commons yesterday.

It appeared as though the bill could have been stalled in the Lords amid accusations of time-wasting.

The Lords sat until 1.30am on Thursday when chief whip Lord Ashton of Hyde said all stages of the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 6) Bill will be completed by 5pm on Friday.

"We have also received a commitment from the chief whip in the House of Commons that Commons consideration of any Lords amendments will take place on Monday and it is the Government's intention that the Bill be ready for Royal Assent," he told peers.

The late night debate capped a day of high drama in Westminster.
MORE EXPULSIONS POSSIBLE

The Prime Minister also warned Hard Brexiteer Tory MPs that they too could face the axe - in the same swift manner as the Remainer rebels.

He told Robert Peston: "What the people of this country want is a Government that's determined to come out of the EU on October 31."

Asked if he'd dispatch Hard Brexit rebels frustrating a new EU deal as well, he said: "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."

But Boris predicted more sackings wouldn't be necessary, adding: "Colleagues are going to find that the deal we get is extremely good.

"People are going to want to vote for it because it gets us out of the EU."

Boris had earlier begged rebels to let the people decide a way out of the Brexit deadlock that has paralysed Westminster for three years - and let them choose who they want to get them out of this mess.

His plan was to call a vote in mid-October and storm a crunch Brussels summit on October 17 to demand a new deal, with a fresh mandate from the British people.

But Boris accused MPs of having "totally wrecked" his chances of getting a new EU deal by backing the legislation to prevent a No Deal Brexit.

He told Peston: "The truth is that we've had our chance to get a deal in Brussels on Brexit really badly damaged if not totally wrecked by the surrender bill."
Bercow on the warpath

JOHN Bercow renewed his war against No 10 yesterday by slapping down Boris Johnson and Sajid Javid in an hour.

But the Commons Speaker was accused of bias and branded a “windbag” for hitting out at ministers.

Remainer Mr Bercow berated the Tory leader for addressing Jeremy Corbyn as “Jeremy” during Prime Minister’s Questions.

Later, he gave the Chancellor a dressing down for talking about Brexit while outlining spending plans.

Mr Bercow butted in to say: “It bothers me greatly that you, in the course of a statement, seem to be veering into matters unrelated to the spending round upon which you are focused.”

One angry Tory MP shouted out, calling Mr Bercow a “windbag”.

Another Tory, Andrew Bridgen, stormed later: “John Bercow knows he will no longer be Speaker after the forthcoming General Election.

"He is on his swansong and determined to go out with a bang playing to his Labour and Remain supporters right to the bitter end. And he is very bitter.”

It comes a day after Mr Bercow told Cabinet minister Michael Gove to “be a good boy” while revealing their kids go to the same school.

He said: “When he turns up at our school as a parent, he’s a very well-behaved fellow.

“He wouldn’t dare behave like that in front of the headmaster.”
'CORBYN DOES NOT BELIEVE HE CAN WIN'

Earlier, the PM taunted the stony-faced Labour boss in the Commons after his defeat, saying: "He’s the first leader in the history of this country to refuse an invitation for an election!

"The obvious conclusion is that he does not think he will win."

He then joked it that it was also a first that the "Opposition has opted to show confidence in Her Majesty's Government!"

The PM is now stuck in a devastating deadlock which could wreck his vow to leave the EU do or die on October 31.

However, defiant Boris is not giving up without a fight and Number 10 is already plotting new ways to force through a general election and give the people the chance to decide Brexit.

Boris hinted he could try again and bring another election forward in the "next few days".

He could escape from the mess as early as next week as Jeremy Corbyn promised to back an election as soon as a No Deal bill from rebels becomes law.

It will force Boris to go back to the EU and seek another Brexit extension.

    He’s the first leader in the history of this country to refuse an invitation for an election
    Boris Johnson

He told the Commons last night: "I don't want an election, but this House has left no other option than letting the public decide who they want as PM.

"Is he now going to say the public cannot be allowed an election to decide which of us sorts out this mess?

"He has demanded an election for two years while blocking Brexit!"

But Corbyn claimed: "The offer of the election is a bit like the offer of an apple to Snow White.

"Not an apple but the poison of a No Deal."

Significantly, Corbyn did say he would support an election after the rebels' bill gained Royal Assent with a rubber stamp from the Queen.
CRUNCH SUMMIT

This could happen by the start of next week, which would leave enough time for an election to still take place in October before the crunch EU summit.

If Boris won an election and got a majority then he could repeal the law.

This move by Corbyn goes against the claim of shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer that Labour would wait until the bill had been enacted on October 19, further showing the splits within the party.

Last night rebels led by Hilary Benn and Sir Keir Starmer rammed the next stage of their new No Deal blocking, 'Surrender' law through the Commons.

MPs opted 327 - 299 to bat the bill over to the Lords for more debates and votes.

But in an extraordinary turn of events Theresa May's deal won a new lease of life in scenes of chaos in the Commons.

A bid from 17 Labour MPs to lay down a version of the ex-PM's old deal again will now have to appear within days.

On another dramatic day in Westminster yesterday:

    Winston Churchill's grandson Nicholas Soames fought back tears during an emotional speech after Boris booted him out of the Tories
    Philip Hammond led a furious backlash from the rebels who were kicked out - and said he'd rather "boil his head" than hand power to Corbyn
    Donald Trump backed Boris again after his defeats, telling reporters: "Boris knows how to win. Don’t worry about him."
    Thousands of protesters gathered outside Westminster as the crunch clash took place inside the Commons

Earlier on Wednesday Boris tore into Corbyn for refusing to support an election and dubbed him “chlorinated chicken”.

Boris raged: "Let the people decide! Let the people decide on what he is doing to this negotiating position by having a general election on October 15."

And he appeared to mouth: “Call an election - you great big girls’ blouse!”

The PM has point blank refused to ask for another extension from Brussels - and last night stressed he wouldn’t quit either.

    Let the people decide on what he is doing to this negotiating position by having a general election on October 15.
    Boris Johnson

SNP boss Nicola Sturgeon was piling on the pressure tonight for Mr Corbyn to back the motion to call an election - but her MPs backed down after it was clear he wouldn't vote for it.

She tweeted: "It's starting to feel like Labour doesn't want an election at all - and leaving this PM in place knowing he'll try every trick in book to get what he wants would be irresponsible.

"Opposition must get bill through and then seek to force election BEFORE Parliament prorogued."

But their leader in Westminster, Ian Blackford said: "Once a no deal has been blocked, MPs across this House and on the opposition benches should come together to bring down this government – not on the Prime Minister’s terms, but on the right terms."

A poll last night put the SNP on track to nick seats off the Tories in Scotland, which is why the SNP are so keen for a snap poll.
The Sun Says

FOR two years Labour has goaded the Tories into calling an election. Now, incredibly, the wretched, snivelling coward Corbyn runs away from one.

Every day he and his arrogant Marxist mob sneered “Bring it on!” Until the moment they were finally offered the chance to stand before the electorate.

Corbyn and his greasy sidekick Keir Starmer have concocted wafer-thin excuses for this monstrous U-turn.  The public won’t buy them.

Boris Johnson has reluctantly accepted that voters must now decide whether to go ahead with Brexit, deal or No Deal, on October 31.

Or whether Labour and treacherous ex-Tories should be able to enforce an aimless further delay, condemning an exhausted public to more bitter division and costly uncertainty.

Labour isn’t as scared of No Deal as it is of a ballot-box reckoning. Mainly for its MPs in Leave marginals, faced now with campaigning for Remain. Labour no longer respects the 17.4million Brexit voters it has betrayed. But they have to face them in the end. Why not now?

If Corbyn truly believed he was a shoo-in for No10 he would bite Boris’s hand off for the chance to snatch the keys. But his ratings are at historic lows.

He feebly tries to claim the PM wants “to avoid scrutiny”. But Boris is literally inviting it from voters. Corbyn is chicken.

Labour knows its Brexit “policy” — “we’ll negotiate a new deal, then campaign against it” — is comically ridiculous. It knows it is grievously wounded by its anti-

Jewish racism, its ruinous economic policies, its fondness for tyrants and terrorists and its idolising of collapsed Latin American dictatorships.

It fears Boris’s Brexit-backing Tories, no matter how weak they now appear.

Corbyn was always an unpleasant dimwit and a liar. Turns out he is a bottler too.

Tories accused Labour of running scared of an election.

Nigel Evans blasted: "I’ve been an MP for 28 years and I have not seen anything like that – it’s Alice in Wonderland meets Westminster.

"You can’t carry on as the Leader of the Opposition saying you want to turf out Boris Johnson without having that early election."

Veteran Tory Ian Duncan Smith raged: "I've never seen a moment when an opposition doesn’t want to take over.
“This is a bizarre affair when they are running away from trying to defeat a Government.
"If the Right Honourable Gentleman who leads the Labour Party right now genuinely believes in democracy - put up or shut up!”

Lucy Allen MP tweeted: "A general election is a people's vote but UK Labour won't let the people have a say."

And Business minister Kwasi Kwarteng said that the leftie leader was frightened of a vote.

He told the BBC: "The leader of the opposition has said repeatedly that he wants an election, and it’s perverse of him to say now that he doesn’t want one. It suggests that he’s rather frightened of a general election."

Former Tory leader Lord Michael Howard said MPs opposing a general election are acting with "arrogance".

"Not only do they think they know better, they are not prepared to let the British people have their say in an election," he raged.

Meanwhile, some Labour MPs were fuming too with the decision to dodge a crunch chance to go to the polls.

    We are not voting for a general election today
    Sir Keir Starmer

Labour backbencher John Mann was outraged, tweeting: "Oh these clever people. Let's spit on the working class and a majority of the electorate. Stop Brexit.

"Then ask them to vote us into power. We are dealing with people who don't respect the views of the people."

Meanwhile, top Tories lashed out with fury after 21 rebels were booted out of the party following Tuesday's historic defeat.

Philip Hammond said it was Boris who was making a Jeremy Corbyn government more likely - and that he would sooner “boil my head” than hand him power.

    A general election is a people’s vote but @UKLabour won’t let the people have a say.
    — Lucy Allan MP (@lucyallan) September 4, 2019

May's deal gets brought back from the dead

THERESA MAY’s Brexit deal won an extraordinary new lease of life last night in scenes of utter chaos in the Commons.

A move by 17 Labour ‘leave’ MPs to force Boris Johnson to publish a draft Brexit agreement based on the ex-PM’s proposal was PASSED last night during the vote on legislation to block a No Deal.

The amendment tabled by Labour’s Stephen Kinnock and Ruth Smeeth went through as no ‘tellers’ were available to count the number of MPs poised to vote it down.

It means MPs will have a chance to debate and vote on a version of the Withdrawal Agreement if and when an extension to the current Brexit deadline of October 31 is implemented.

There is no deadline or specified date for the vote.

Sources claimed the ‘Reman’ Alliance led by Labour were “furious”.

But one Commons clerk last night downplayed the significance of the move. The clerk – Graeme Cowie - said he wasn’t “sure what this amendment does”.

And he added: “It attaches a purpose for the desired extension, but it doesn’t actually compel a Government to actually introduce a bill.”

Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement was voted down three times. Mr Kinnock wanted a new deal based on cross-party talks with Labour - which had paved the way for a closer customs union with the EU - to be at the centre of the new deal.
In Boris' first PMQs session he accused the Labour boss of running scared of a new poll
10
In Boris' first PMQs session he accused the Labour boss of running scared of a new pollCredit: EPA
Theresa May enjoying the fun in the Commons yesterday
10
Theresa May enjoying the fun in the Commons yesterdayCredit: AP:Associated Press
Hillary Ben introducing his rebel bill in the Commons yesterday
10
Hillary Ben introducing his rebel bill in the Commons yesterdayCredit: PRU
Jeremy Corbyn's top team revealed they would block an election bid
10
Jeremy Corbyn's top team revealed they would block an election bidCredit: rogerharrisphotography.co.uk
From top left: Sam Gyimah, David Gauke, Alistair Burt, Philip Hammond, Guto Bebb, Steve Brine, Caroline Nokes; Justine Greening, Sir Nicholas Soames, Anne Milton, Rory Stewart, Ed Vaizey, Margot James, Stephen Hammond; Ken Clarke, Richard Harrington, Sir Oliver Letwin, Richard Benyon, Dominic Grieve, Antoinette Sandbach, Greg Clark
10
From top left: Sam Gyimah, David Gauke, Alistair Burt, Philip Hammond, Guto Bebb, Steve Brine, Caroline Nokes; Justine Greening, Sir Nicholas Soames, Anne Milton, Rory Stewart, Ed Vaizey, Margot James, Stephen Hammond; Ken Clarke, Richard Harrington, Sir Oliver Letwin, Richard Benyon, Dominic Grieve, Antoinette Sandbach, Greg Clark

 
MOST READ IN POLITICS
BERCOW BOOTED Tories set to 'depose biased Bercow' after his furious blast at Michael Gove
REBEL YELL Cabinet ministers demand Boris U-turns on expulsion of 21 Remainer Tory MPs
'COWARDLY CORBYN' Boris to ram through election on Monday after Corbyn runs scared
FARAGE FIGHT Farage names his price for election pact with Boris as No Deal Brexit
CORBYN CLUCKS UP BREXIT Is THIS the most dangerous chicken in Britain?
SPEAKER IN DANGER Tory MPs plot to remove Speaker John Bercow after he sided with Remainers
POLL POSITION UK General Election odds 2019 – what's the latest from the bookies?
Latest
NOW LET BRITAIN DECIDE Boris demands election as rebels take step to block No Deal Brexit
BURKA BLAST Sikh MP angrily confronts Boris Johnson for 'letterboxes' burka comment
CRACKING THE WHIP What does withdrawing the whip mean and has Boris Johnson done it?
Donald Trump said Boris was a 'winner' despite his defeats
10
Donald Trump said Boris was a 'winner' despite his defeatsCredit: Reuters
Pro-Brexit protesters outside Westminster yesterday
10
Pro-Brexit protesters outside Westminster yesterdayCredit: SWNS:South West News Service
Deadlock 'Breaker'

BORIS Johnson last night revealed his plan to break the Brexit deadlock — agreeing an all-Ireland market for livestock and agriculture.

During a bitter Commons debate, the PM said he was ready to propose an alternative to the backstop.

Under the plan, Northern Ireland would match Irish and EU rules in certain sectors after Brexit to avoid the need for a hard border. The idea emerged ahead of talks with Irish PM Leo Varadkar, left, next week.

It mimics a compromise European capitals were brainstorming — where the North  would mirror Brussels on animal and plant health.

It threatens to enrage Ulster Unionists by, in effect, putting a  border down the Irish Sea between the Britain and Northern Ireland. But  senior DUP sources hinted they could back it,  as long as Belfast’s  Stormont Assembly  has a veto on which future EU rules Northern Ireland accepts.

The PM has repeatedly told the EU   there is no chance of a deal unless the backstop —­ which is bitterly opposed by Brexiteers — is killed off.

The backstop is designed to avoid a hard border on Ireland by tying the UK to EU customs rules unless a new trade agreement is signed.
Boris Johnson fails to get MPs backing for an early General Election
Title: 💩 Brexit talks are going nowhere fast
Post by: RE on September 06, 2019, 04:05:27 AM
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/05/europe/brexit-eu-negotiations-boris-johnson-gbr-intl/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/05/europe/brexit-eu-negotiations-boris-johnson-gbr-intl/index.html)

Brexit talks are going nowhere fast

Analysis by Nina dos Santos, CNN

Updated 1:16 PM ET, Thu September 5, 2019

(https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190904125517-01-uk-parliament-0904-exlarge-169.jpg)

Boris Johnson's position weakens in UK Parliament 02:41

Brussels (CNN)Boris Johnson has repeatedly insisted that a no-deal Brexit must remain on the table in order to protect Britain's negotiating position with Europe.
But the reality is, those negotiations are not going anywhere quickly.
At the G7 meeting of world leaders in France lasts month, the British Prime Minister had promised EU Council President Donald Tusk he would deliver a new set of proposals soon.
So it was with some surprise that EU officials, at the first of a series of twice-weekly sessions with UK negotiators this week, diplomats and officials told CNN the UK did not put forward any of the "concrete" ideas they had been promised. It was a waste of hours of preparation, they said.

"We don't really know where the show is going and what the script is or what the finale is," said one EU diplomat. "We are not optimistic and it's getting serious."
After five hours' worth of technical talks on Wednesday, it seems that all the UK and EU agreed upon was to carry on meeting, leading to the sense in Brussels that Johnson is merely running the clock down to use the EU negotiations as a backdrop to an imminent election campaign.
The political crisis has inensified in Westminster.
The political crisis has inensified in Westminster.
Meanwhile in London, the political crisis has intensified. The brutal scenes in the House of Commons, during which the Prime Minister lost his majority and turfed out 21 loyal Conservatives, did not go down well with a bloc which prides itself of having brought harmony to post war Europe. Likewise, Johnson's earlier decision to prorogue -- or suspend- parliament early also raised eyebrows among those defending democracy on the EU's eastern flank.
After briefing representatives of EU member states and the European Parliament, Michel Barnier, the EU's chief Brexit negotiators, said the EU would remain "vigilant, united and calm."
Boris Johnson's brother resigns in new Brexit blow
Boris Johnson's brother resigns in new Brexit blow
Philippe Lamberts, a Member of the European Parliament, was more forthright. "For all the PM's bluster about getting a deal, there are no real negotiations going on in Brussels, despite the EU's door remaining wide open," said Lamberts, who is a member of the European Parliament's Brexit Steering Group, which was briefed by Barnier this week.
As evidence of the trust deficit facing Johnson, particularly with regard to his insistence that both sides ditch the so-called Irish backstop and find another solution to the Irish border conundrum, Barnier cancelled a planned appearance in Belfast next week fearing it "would not be appropriate" and would "undermine the chances of an orderly Brexit."
The EU's chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier briefied the European parliament this week.
The EU's chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier briefied the European parliament this week.
EU officials may have experienced some schadenfreude when they saw parliament seize control of the agenda from the government, passing a bill that would require Johnson to request another extension to the Brexit process.
But none of this will help the UK's cause much at this late stage.
If anything, the scenes in Westminster and Brussels this week have made Britain appear a less stable, reliable partner -- one which unless it has a good enough or "concrete" reasons cannot take for granted the EU will automatically grant it a last minute stay of execution for Brexit after all.

The EU knows it must give the appearance that its doors remain open, lest it be depicted as the bad guy in the Brexit fight. But there is a sense among member states that negotiating with Johnson is becoming increasingly futile, given he no longer has anything close to a majority in the UK parliament, which must approve any Brexit deal.
"What's even the point?" asked one EU diplomat. "They can't deliver."
Title: 💩 Boris Johnson's Brother Resigns From U.K. Parliament Over Brexit
Post by: RE on September 06, 2019, 04:54:39 AM
No more JoJo, now only BoJo.

RE

Boris Johnson's Brother Resigns From U.K. Parliament Over Brexit

September 5, 20191:11 PM ET
Shannon Van Sant

(https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2019/09/05/ap_19163359899605_wide-2af5e64b88881db6a980e68cda4216bd59b68fd0-s800-c85.jpg)
Jo Johnson, brother of Britain's prime minister, Boris Johnson, resigned from Parliament and his brother's Cabinet on Thursday.
Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP

Jo Johnson, the brother of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, has resigned from Parliament, in the latest sign of Brexit turmoil. Jo Johnson says that in recent weeks he has been "torn between family loyalty and the national interest" and that he is stepping down from his roles as both a government minister and a member of Parliament.

"It's an unresolvable tension," Jo Johnson said in a tweet, "and time for others to take on my roles as MP & Minister. #overandout"

Jo Johnson had been a member of Parliament for Orpington, a district on the southeast of London, since 2010.

Jo's resignation follows a string of defeats for Boris, who has repeatedly promised to pull the U.K. out of the European Union by the current deadline of Oct. 31. On Wednesday night, Parliament voted to block Boris' plan to leave the EU without a deal, and members of his own party have spoken out to protest his decision to purge 21 Conservative Party members of Parliament who opposed a no-deal Brexit.

The expelled Conservatives include prominent members such as Nicholas Soames, grandson of Winston Churchill, who has served as a member of Parliament for 37 years, and Ken Clarke, the longest-serving member of Parliament. Some of the lawmakers reportedly learned they had been kicked out of their party via text message.
Article continues after sponsor message

This is the second time Jo Johnson has taken a very public stand over Brexit. Last year, he stepped down from Theresa May's government in protest of the withdrawal agreement she negotiated with the European Union. In 2016, the two brothers were on opposite sides of the referendum, with Boris pushing to leave the EU and Jo in favor of remaining.

Boris is now calling for a snap election, hoping to form a stable majority in Parliament that could support his plan to leave the EU — with or without a deal. Opposition lawmakers also want elections, but Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the opposition Labour Party, says he won't agree to an election until there is a law stopping a no-deal Brexit.

In Wednesday's pivotal vote, former Prime Minister Theresa May sided with Johnson. But she could also be seen laughing in the Parliament chamber, chatting with Clarke as ire was directed at the new prime minister. On Tuesday night, while driving away from the Parliament buildings, May was seen smiling.
Title: Re: 💩 Boris Johnson's Brother Resigns From U.K. Parliament Over Brexit
Post by: Surly1 on September 06, 2019, 07:18:10 AM
No more JoJo, now only BoJo.

RE

Boris Johnson's Brother Resigns From U.K. Parliament Over Brexit

One wag had it that JoJo resigned in order to spend less time with his family.
Title: 💩 Brexit: MPs block Prime Minister’s bid for early election
Post by: RE on September 07, 2019, 04:56:39 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/3r3zHaF3kuo
Title: 💩 This Week in Brexit: The Wheels Come Off the Boris Express
Post by: RE on September 07, 2019, 06:20:58 AM
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/09/this-week-in-brexit-the-week-boris-johnson-lost-control-of-parliament-explained.html

This Week in Brexit: The Wheels Come Off the Boris Express

By Joshua Keating
Sept 06, 20192:15 PM

(https://compote.slate.com/images/c8f4b695-85b5-40f3-8bc0-7e3552e4f6e2.gif)
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson walks across a field as he visits Darnford Farm in Banchory near Aberdeen on September 6, 2019 in Aberdeen, Scotland.
Animation by Lisa Larson-Walker. Photo by Andrew Milligan - WPA Pool/Getty Images

“Let me put it this way: There is a part of my soul that still yearns to believe.”

That’s British Prime Minister Boris Johnson talking about, of all things, the Loch Ness monster during a visit to Scotland on Friday. But he could just as easily have been talking about his yearning to deliver Brexit by the end of October after a bizarre week that saw the Parliament, his own party, and even his own brother turning against him.
More on Brexit

    An Omnishambles Like No Other Omnishambles
    Brexit Is Making Everyone Very Tired
    Anarchy in the U.K.
    Both Sides of Brexit Claim They’re Fighting for Democracy. Who’s Right?

Previously on Brexit: Let’s recall where we were when this week started. Over the summer, Johnson was elected prime minister by the Conservative Party on a pledge to pull the U.K. out of the European Union by Oct. 31, the current deadline, even if they cannot reach a deal. He claims he is attempting to negotiate a new Withdrawal Agreement, without some of the more unpopular aspects of the deal that Theresa May negotiated and Parliament rejected earlier this year. If he can’t get the Europeans to agree—and right now it doesn’t look likely that they will—he’s repeatedly said that he’s willing to pull the U.K. out without a deal on Oct. 31, an action that could have devastating economic and political consequences.

Parliament returned to session this week and opponents of a no-deal Brexit—who include the opposition Labour Party, several smaller parties, and a number of rebel Tories—are dead-set on doing everything possible to stop it, and have spent the last few weeks discussing various strategies for doing so.

Last week, Johnson asked the queen to shut down Parliament—an act known as prorogation—from some time next week until Oct. 14. There are some normal reasons for prorogation but in this case it was fairly obvious that Johnson and his chief strategist, Dominic Cummings, were trying to give Parliament as little time as possible to thwart him. This week, that plan fell apart spectacularly. Here’s how it happened.

Monday in Brexit: The Labour Party introduced a bill that would give Johnson until Oct. 19—just after a crucial European Council summit—to reach a deal. If he can’t, he would be required to ask the EU for an extension of the Brexit deadline until Jan. 31. (This would be the third time it has been delayed.) On Monday, Johnson said there are no circumstances under which he would do that and vowed that if the bill passed, he would call for a new general election in mid-October.
ADVERTISEMENT
inRead invented by Teads

The idea behind a new election is that it would allow the pro-Brexit forces to pick up seats and retake the agenda. You may recall a similar gambit backfired spectacularly on Theresa May back in 2017, but Johnson was running out of options.
Get the Slatest in Your Inbox
Email address:
Send me updates about Slate special offers.
By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms.

Tuesday in Brexit: Things only got more bleak on Tuesday. The Conservatives and their partners, the Democratic Unionist Party, came into the week with just a one-vote majority in Parliament. Then on Tuesday, pro-Remain Conservative MP Phillip Lee dramatically walked across the aisle to join the Liberal Democrats while Johnson was speaking, wiping out his working majority. (This then provoked a backlash within the Lib Dems, with some high-profile members quitting over Lee’s anti-LGBTQ views.)

Twenty-one Conservatives then joined the opposition to vote to open debate on the anti–no-deal law and were summarily kicked out of the party. These included some heavy hitters like former Chancellor Phillip Hammond, former Justice Secretary David Gauke, and Nicholas Soames, the grandson of Johnson’s hero Winston Churchill. The idea here is that when the new election happens, Johnson wants to put only pure Brexiteers before the voters.

Amid the chaos, arch-Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg got comfy on the frontbenches.

Wednesday in Brexit:  Johnson went through the weekly “Prime Minister’s Questions” ritual for the first time, and it was as chippy as you might expect. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn accused Johnson of misleading the public about the status of negotiations with the EU and preparations for a no-deal Brexit. Johnson referred to Corbyn as both a “chlorinated chicken” and a “big girl’s blouse.” (I don’t know exactly what that means, but it sure sounds sexist.) Labour MP Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi also called out Johnson for past comments comparing women wearing burqas to “letterboxes.”

The opposition, boosted by the 21 former Conservatives, easily passed the anti–no-deal bill. They then rejected Johnson’s motion to call an early election next month.

This last bit requires a bit of explanation. Labour does want to have a new election soon—the party wants to run the country, after all—but it wants to make sure no-deal is definitely off the table first. (There’s some disagreement among the party’s leaders over whether they should wait until the bill becomes law, or when it’s actually implemented. Perhaps because he doesn’t like being called a “chlorinated chicken,” Corbyn wanted it sooner, but for now it looks like the party is set on waiting until November to make sure the extension really happens.)
ADVERTISEMENT
inRead invented by Teads

It used to be that the prime minister could just call an election whenever he likes, but under a law called the Fixed-Terms Parliament Act passed back in 2011, he needs two-thirds of Parliament to agree, giving the opposition veto power over his plans. For this mess, as with Brexit itself, the country has former Prime Minister David Cameron to thank.

Also on Wednesday, the EU basically declared a no-deal Brexit a natural disaster in order to free up contingency funds. It’s worth remembering that the assumption of all this maneuvering is that the EU would agree to another extension if the U.K. asks for one. The general assumption is that it would—nobody wants no deal—but not a foregone conclusion and at the very least, they might make the Brits sweat for a few days in late October.

Thursday in Brexit: Speaking at an event with new police recruits in Yorkshire, Johnson said he’d rather be “dead in a ditch” than ask Brussels for another extension, but he was vague about whether this meant he would resign rather than comply with the new law.

That same day, Johnson’s brother Jo, the minister of state for universities and science, resigned from the government and the Conservative Party over his brother’s stance on Brexit. Jo Johnson had been pro-Remain during the referendum but the two had managed to patch things up, until now.

Friday in Brexit: The anti–no-deal bill was passed by the House of Lords, meaning it will become law on Monday. Johnson went off in search of the Loch Ness monster and had a run-in with a bull.

Next week in Brexit:  On Monday, Johnson will again try to call an election for October, and will most likely fail again. He can then either shut down Parliament immediately or try something else. Ironically, his move to shut down Parliament last week give him less time for maneuvering—Parliament has to be shut down by Thursday. This is an important lesson that you shouldn’t ask the queen to put something in writing for you unless you’re sure you really want it.

Deadline aside, Johnson doesn’t have a whole of options left to get his quick election. He could try to amend the Fixed-Terms Parliament Act, which would require only a one vote majority. This might have been a better option before he kicked 21 people out of his party. Even more extreme: He could attempt to trigger an election by calling a vote of no-confidence in himself. This is weird for two reasons. First, it would put Labour in the awkward position of deciding whether to thwart the prime minister by declaring that they do have confidence in him. Second, of the many things that Johnson has been accused of over the years, lacking confidence in himself is not one of them.
Title: 💩 Brexit: Parliament to be suspended after MPs vote on holding election
Post by: RE on September 09, 2019, 02:06:52 PM
"Democracy" in Action!

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/tUVaiEAytZY
Title: 💩 Brexit: Jeremy Corbyn's Improbable Journey
Post by: RE on September 10, 2019, 05:18:30 AM
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/britain-eu-corbyn/ (https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/britain-eu-corbyn/)

An Improbable Journey
(https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/assets/britain-eu-corbyn/mastheads/RTX36DZR.jpg?v=314609090919)
REINVENTION: Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has appeared to shift his views on Britain's membership of the European Union. REUTERS/Stefan Wermuth
Jeremy Corbyn, Britain’s unlikely EU warrior, makes last stand on Brexit

A REUTERS SPECIAL REPORT

For decades, Jeremy Corbyn was among the EU’s strongest critics. Today, he is the last line of defence against Britain leaving the bloc on Oct. 31 without a withdrawal agreement.

By ELIZABETH PIPER in LONDON

Filed Sept. 9, 2019, 10 a.m. GMT

In 2009, a little-known British politician declared he didn’t want to live in a European empire of the 21st century.

The speaker was Jeremy Corbyn, then a backbench Member of Parliament (MP) on the hard left of the Labour Party. He was addressing a rally against the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty that gave Brussels greater powers.

Today, Corbyn is his party’s leader and he is fighting a very different campaign: Preventing Prime Minister Boris Johnson leading Britain out of the EU, “do or die,” on Oct. 31.

Related content

    Graphic: Parliament’s impasse

    Graphic: Rift in the Conservative party

    In British PM race, a former Russian tycoon quietly wields influence

Corbyn’s journey – from Eurosceptic to last line of defence against leaving the EU without a withdrawal agreement, from Socialist rebel to leader of an opposition united against Johnson – is among the most improbable in modern British history.

In a backbench career spanning more than three decades, Corbyn voted against his own Labour Party over 400 times. He became Labour Party leader in 2015.

Corbyn was at his most rebellious during fellow Labour member Tony Blair’s premiership in 1997-2007, opposing closer economic and political ties with the EU, which is viewed by some on the hard left as a “capitalist club,” and voting against the U.S.-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

He has called members of Hamas and Hezbollah “friends.” He once described the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as a “military Frankenstein.” Corbyn’s Labour is being investigated for anti-Semitism by Britain’s human rights watchdog after a surge in complaints since Corbyn took office. Labour has said it will cooperate fully with the inquiry and Corbyn has promised to tackle the “poison” of anti-Semitism.

Labour MP Neil Coyle, who backed Corbyn to become party leader in 2015, sums up why for many people he is a divisive figure, and why he came to regret lending Corbyn his support: “He has 30 years of baggage on dodgy issues,” Coyle told Reuters.

Corbyn, 70, declined to be interviewed for this article. Reuters spoke to half a dozen people who know Corbyn well, including some of his closest allies, and reviewed past speeches, his parliamentary voting record, and overseas trips to paint a picture of the man who could be Britain’s prime minister after an election expected in weeks.

Colleagues described a principled politician with little personal ambition who became the Left’s candidate for the Labour Party leadership in 2015 simply “because it was his turn,” a political activist more than a parliamentarian, a firm believer in the redistribution of wealth and drawn to any “liberation struggle.”
YOUTH APPEAL: Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn took to the stage at Britain’s 2017 Glastonbury Festival. Above, revellers cheer his speech. REUTERS/Dylan Martinez
CUBA LINKS: At the Labour Party conference in 2018, souvenir cufflinks featured Corbyn in the style of Che Guevara. REUTERS/Phil Noble

Since becoming leader, Corbyn has appeared to change tack on some issues. He has said he opposes leaving the EU on terms that will hurt ordinary Britons and believes any “Brexit” deal must be put to a popular vote. He has supported Britain’s commitment to NATO and said he regrets calling members of Hamas and Hezbollah friends.

Corbyn’s opponents are unconvinced. They believe he still harbours dangerous, hard left views on the economy and foreign policy. Corbyn has a deep-rooted antipathy to Brussels that is unlikely to have changed, these people say. One of Britain’s longest-serving and most respected MPs, Ken Clarke, has known Corbyn for 30 years. “He doesn’t modify his views,” observed Clarke, a former Conservative minister.

The Labour leader’s critics, including some within the party, say he hasn’t done enough to challenge anti-Semitism.

The making of the man

Corbyn grew up in a middle class family in the rural English county of Shropshire. His father, David, was an electrical engineer. His mother, Naomi, taught maths. Corbyn’s parents met in the 1930s at a local meeting in support of the Spanish Republic against Franco’s fascist rule. They shaped Corbyn’s Socialist beliefs.

“Both committed Socialists and peace campaigners, my mum’s inspiration was to encourage girls to believe they could achieve anything in their lives,” Corbyn said in a speech to the Labour Party conference in 2016.

Dennis Skinner worked alongside Corbyn in the Labour Party’s Socialist Campaign Group of left-wing lawmakers. One of nine children, and the son of a miner, Skinner embodies Labour’s working class roots.

Skinner said Corbyn came from a very different Socialist household. “They probably didn’t sit around a table with four or five brothers all arguing the toss about this, that or the other. I can imagine his father would say, ‘Now it’s your turn Jeremy, do you want to make a contribution?’”

When he was 15, Corbyn joined the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, an advocacy group that wants the UK to get rid of its nuclear weapons and opposes NATO. He would later become vice president of the disarmament group, a position he still holds.
CAMPAIGNER: Corbyn is described by some colleagues as an activist more than a parliamentarian. Here he is pictured in 1998 with Isabel Allende, the daughter of former Chilean President Salvador Allende. They were campaigning to have former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet extradited for trial in Spain.

At the age of 19, Corbyn became a teacher in Jamaica, then travelled around Latin America – the start of an enduring fascination with the region. It was the late 1960s, when leftist groups were on the rise. Corbyn was in Santiago, he has said, when “the great” Salvador Allende and his Popular Unity party were readying for power. Last December, Corbyn flew to Mexico for the inauguration of leftist President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who has called Corbyn his “eternal friend.” Corbyn’s third wife is Mexican lawyer and activist Laura Álvarez.

On the back benches

Corbyn was elected to parliament in 1983 as MP for London’s Islington North, a patchwork district of multi-million pound Georgian homes and social housing. He has increased his majority from just over 5,000 in 1983 to more than 33,000 now. Friend and ally Jon Lansman says Corbyn cares deeply about his constituents.

“He did a lot of stuff on housing, on migration, poverty, benefits,” said Lansman, who worked on Corbyn’s Labour leadership campaign in 2015 and co-founded Momentum, a pro-Corbyn movement.

Mike Gapes, a former Labour MP who now represents a small, centrist party, was also on the Left of Britain’s politics in those early days. Like Corbyn, Gapes voted in a 1975 referendum to leave the forerunner of the EU, the European Economic Area. “We wanted to introduce import controls in the siege economy, a form of Socialism in one country,” Gapes said.

Over the years, Gapes went on, “many of us moved on from those delusions” but a few kept the faith. “One of them was Jeremy Corbyn.”

Ronnie Campbell, MP for the northeastern English constituency of Blyth Valley, first met Corbyn in 1987 and remembers how the new MP’s scruffy appearance, in particular his refusal to wear a tie, challenged parliamentary tradition. “The Tories would get up and say, ‘Mr Speaker, there’s somebody in this chamber not properly dressed.’ And it was Jeremy sitting in the back with no tie.”

Campbell described Corbyn as an “inquisitive” man who would talk to pretty much any protest or rebel group because he wanted to “hear it from the horse’s mouth.” Some of his meetings got Corbyn into trouble. He drew all-party criticism for inviting Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams to parliament in 1984 at the height of violence in Northern Ireland. Sinn Fein was the political arm of the Irish Republican Army that fought a decades-long war against British rule.

Campbell said some of Corbyn’s allies were “mortified” when they found out he was talking to Adams. Corbyn responded, “We’ve got to get to know what their cause is and what they want, and that was his argument at the time,” Campbell said. “We’ve got to try and understand these people.”

Corbyn was one of the sponsors of the Stop the War Coalition, a campaign group set up in 2001 when George W. Bush announced the “war on terror.” Stop the War says it opposes the British establishment’s “disastrous addiction to war.”
CRITIC: Corbyn is no fan of former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair. Here Corbyn is pictured in 2018 with Blair and another former Labour PM, Gordon Brown (left). REUTERS/Simon Dawson

    “He has 30 years of baggage on dodgy issues.”
    Neil Coyle, Labour MP, speaking about Jeremy Corbyn

Corbyn has spoken openly about his “difficulties” with Tony Blair, who became Labour Party leader in 1994 and prime minister in 1997. Blair distanced Labour from its Socialist roots and drew the party towards the middle ground. Blair also backed Bush’s invasion of Iraq.

In 2015 at a question-and-answer session, Corbyn was asked by an audience member whether he shared any of Blair’s qualities. “Tony Blair and I were never close,” he said to laughter. “I am sorry, I have a lot of difficulties with Tony Blair.” Corbyn listed his reasons: Blair’s “obsession” with selling off state-owned industry and “with being very close to the U.S. and the neo-Cons, the war in Iraq, and all the problems that have come as a result of that.” Blair has said he believes it was the right decision to join the war in Iraq.

Corbyn’s turn

The Socialist Campaign Group had tried and failed to get one of its members on the Labour leadership ballot for years. At a meeting of the group in 2015, one of Corbyn’s closest allies, John McDonnell, persuaded Corbyn to enter the Labour leadership contest. McDonnell has since become Labour’s finance policy chief. Campbell recalled McDonnell telling Corbyn: “It’s your turn anyway. Get on the paper, at least try to get on the paper. And Jeremy said, ‘OK, I’ll have a bash at it’.”

Lansman said Corbyn was a good choice because he “didn’t have any enemies. Everybody liked him. He was seen as a principled guy, no kind of side to him.”

Corbyn’s expectations of getting the required 35 nominations were so low that he had no qualms about agreeing, people close to him said. To the surprise of many, he passed the threshold.
Corbyn: A bitesize bio

Born: Chippenham, Wiltshire, 1949
Education: Adams’ Grammar School in Newport, Shropshire.
Key past jobs: Trade union organiser, local politician in London’s Haringey district, Labour MP
Campaign slogan: “For the many, not the few”
Hobbies: Growing his own fruit and vegetables, jam-making, Arsenal Football Club. Fluent Spanish speaker.
Favourite book: “Ulysses” by James Joyce
Pet: Cat called El Gato

Elizabeth Piper

In the contest that followed, Corbyn’s criticism of U.S. influence and Conservative austerity policies, introduced after the 2008 global financial crisis, won over many young voters. Labour Party membership surged, and in September 2015 Corbyn won the leadership with almost 60% of the vote.

But Corbyn’s Socialist agenda alienated Labour MPs in parliament. Many of them occupied the centre ground and were loyal to the ideals of Blair, one of Labour’s most successful post-war leaders.

Coyle, one of the MPs who nominated Corbyn, declared less than a year later that he regretted his backing, having concluded Corbyn was a weak leader with a mistaken sense of priorities. There were resignations among Corbyn’s parliamentary team. Health policy chief Heidi Alexander was the first to quit in June 2016.

 “As much as I respect you as a man of principle, I do not believe you have the capacity to shape the answers our country is demanding, and I believe that if we are to form the next government, a change of leadership is essential,” she wrote in her resignation letter.

Corbyn defeated what his supporters called a disgraceful coup attempt by MPs. Labour Party members re-elected him as party leader in September 2016.

Charges of anti-Semitism

During Corbyn’s time as leader, Labour has been beset by accusations of anti-Semitism. In May, Britain’s Equality and Human Rights Commission said it was launching an investigation into whether Labour has discriminated against, harassed or victimised people because they are Jewish.

The commission acted after receiving “a number of complaints and allegations of anti-Semitism in the party.” It said its inquiry would seek to determine whether the party or its employees had committed unlawful acts and whether the party had responded to complaints efficiently and effectively.

Corbyn has said he is determined to “confront this poison” of anti-Semitism. But he has also drawn criticism that his own comments and actions have created a space for anti-Semitism to flourish.

In March 2018, Corbyn apologised for sending a supportive message to the creator of a London mural after local officials ordered it should be destroyed. The mural depicted Jewish bankers playing Monopoly on the backs of the poor. Corbyn conceded the image was “deeply disturbing and anti-Semitic.” In August 2018, he apologised over an event he hosted in 2010 where a speaker compared Israel to Nazism. That same month, a photograph emerged from a trip by Corbyn to Tunisia in 2014. It showed Corbyn at a ceremony where the perpetrators of the 1972 Munich massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes were honoured by a Palestinian delegation. Corbyn said he was there as part of a wider event about Middle East peace and wasn’t involved in the ceremony.

    “We want to change the party and change the country and that is a long-term project.”
    Jon Lansman, who worked on Corbyn’s Labour leadership campaign in 2015

MP Luciana Berger quit Labour earlier this year, saying the party had become “institutionally antisemitic.” She was one of nine Labour MPs who left the party within one week saying it had been “hijacked by the machine politics of the hard left.” The MPs also accused the party leadership of “being complicit in facilitating Brexit.” Corbyn expressed disappointment at their decision.

Corbyn, a lifelong peace campaigner, has changed tack on defence.

Throughout his decades on the parliamentary back benches, he questioned why NATO wasn’t dismantled after the Cold War and accused the alliance of forcing member states to spend heavily on arms that perpetuate war. He consistently argued against  Britain’s nuclear weapons system, Trident.

But in a foreign policy speech in 2017, Corbyn said it was vital that Britain maintained “a close relationship with our European partners alongside our commitment to NATO.” And he now accepts the Labour Party’s long-standing policy to maintain Trident, although says he remains committed to achieving a “nuclear-free world” and would not use such weapons.

Labour’s foreign affairs policy chief, Emily Thornberry, explained that Corbyn has “been on a journey” since becoming party leader. Critics say he is playing hide-and-seek with his policies, appearing to agree with the party line while not bending on his long-held views. “He really hasn’t moved on much,” said Coyle.

reuters investigates

    More Reuters investigations and long-form narratives

    Got a confidential news tip? Reuters Investigates offers several ways to securely contact our reporters

Corbyn is at his most confident when criticising the government over economic austerity. He has vowed to break with the public spending curbs of successive administrations and create a Britain for “the many, not the few.”

In the country’s 2017 general election, he campaigned to bring key sectors of the economy under state control – the railways, the postal service and some public utilities, such as water. He promised greater investment in public services, including healthcare and education. He said he would raise taxation for the top 5% of earners. Students would no longer have to pay for their university education.

More recently, Labour announced plans to redistribute wealth by forcing companies with more than 250 employees to transfer 10% of their shares to workers.

The Labour Party manifesto was credited along with Corbyn’s energetic campaign with winning considerably more votes than Corbyn’s detractors believed was possible, cementing his position as party leader. Lansman says there is no turning back. “We want to change the party and change the country and that is a long-term project.”

NEW EUROPEAN: Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn and his EU policy chief are pictured in Brussels in March. Corbyn says any Brexit deal must be put to a referendum. REUTERS/Yves Herman
Title: 💩 Jeremy Corbyn tells Boris Johnson: 'This government is a disgrace'
Post by: RE on September 11, 2019, 05:27:28 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/BEvTwcso-FQ
Title: 💩 Brexit: Scottish judges rule Parliament suspension is unlawful
Post by: RE on September 12, 2019, 02:08:06 AM
That never stops Trumpovetsky on this side of the Pond, why would it be any different over there? ???  :icon_scratch:

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-49661855 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-49661855)

Brexit: Scottish judges rule Parliament suspension is unlawful

    11 September 2019

(https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2019/09/11/TELEMMGLPICT000209177685_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqNJjoeBT78QIaYdkJdEY4CnGTJFJS74MYhNY6w3GNbO8.jpeg?imwidth=450)

Related Topics

    Parliament suspension 2019

Media captionThe court ruled that the prime minister was attempting to "stymie Parliament" by suspending it for five weeks

Boris Johnson’s suspension of the UK Parliament is unlawful, Scotland’s highest civil court has ruled.

A panel of three judges at the Court of Session found in favour of a cross-party group of politicians who were challenging the prime minister's move.

The judges said the PM was attempting to prevent Parliament holding the government to account ahead of Brexit.

A UK government appeal against the ruling will be heard by the Supreme Court in London next week.

The Court of Session decision overturns an earlier ruling from the court, which said last week that Mr Johnson had not broken the law.

    Why is this court ruling significant?
    MPs demand Parliament be recalled after court case
    Why are MPs being sent home?

The current five week suspension of Parliament, a process known as proroguing, started in the early hours of Tuesday.

MPs are not scheduled to return to Parliament until 14 October, when there will be a Queen's Speech outlining Mr Johnson's legislative plans. The UK is due to leave the EU on 31 October.

Opposition parties have called for Parliament to be immediately recalled in the wake of the court judgement, but Downing Street said this would not happen ahead of the Supreme Court's ruling on the case.

Downing Street also distanced itself from reports that quoted Number 10 sources as suggesting the Scottish judges were politically biased, and insisted that the prime minister has "absolute respect" for the independence of the judiciary.
What did the Scottish judges say?

Mr Johnson had previously insisted that it was normal practice for a new government to prorogue Parliament, and that it was "nonsense" to suggest he was attempting to undermine democracy.

But the Court of Session judges were unanimous in finding that Mr Johnson was motivated by the "improper purpose of stymieing Parliament", and he had effectively misled the Queen in advising her to suspend Parliament.

They added: "The Court will accordingly make an Order declaring that the prime minister's advice to HM the Queen and the prorogation which followed thereon was unlawful and is thus null and of no effect."
Media captionJoanna Cherry: "I would feel confident that the UK Supreme Court will uphold this decision."

The group of more than 70 largely pro-Remain MPs and peers behind the legal challenge were headed by SNP MP Joanna Cherry, who said they felt "utterly vindicated".

The parliamentarians appealed to the Inner House of the Court of Session after their original challenge to the suspension of Parliament was dismissed by judge Lord Doherty last week.

Lord Doherty said Mr Johnson had not broken the law by proroguing Parliament, and that it was for MPs and the electorate to judge the prime minister's actions rather than the courts.

But the three Inner House judges said they disagreed with Lord Doherty's ruling because this particular prorogation had been a "tactic to frustrate Parliament" rather than a legitimate use of the power.
Image caption Mr Johnson has strongly denied suggestions that he was attempting to undermine democracy

One of the three judges, Lord Brodie, said: "This was an egregious case of a clear failure to comply with generally accepted standards of behaviour of public authorities.

"It was to be inferred that the principal reasons for the prorogation were to prevent or impede Parliament holding the executive to account and legislating with regard to Brexit, and to allow the executive to pursue a policy of a no-deal Brexit without further Parliamentary interference."

Lord Drummond Young said that the UK government had failed to show a valid reason for the prorogation, adding: "The circumstances, particularly the length of the prorogation, showed that the purpose was to prevent such scrutiny.

"The only inference that could be drawn was that the UK government and the prime minister wished to restrict Parliament."

The High Court in London says that advice given by the prime minister to the Queen to suspend parliament is basically "political" - something the government has argued from the get go - and so it's not a matter the courts should get involved in because there are really no legal standards against which to judge it.

Scotland's highest court disagreed, strongly.

It ruled that the prime minister's advice could be unlawful if its purpose was to stymie parliamentary scrutiny. That's because parliament's role in scrutinising the government is a central pillar of our constitution, which follows naturally from the principles of democracy and the rule of law.

Two courts, two totally contradictory judgments.

They are now both hurtling towards the highest court in the land, the UK Supreme Court, where that contradiction will be resolved. There will be a definitive ruling on whether the prime minister acted unlawfully, or not - and that will determine whether parliament is to be recalled in the lead up to 31 October.

And that is how our constitution works. Through what's known as judicial review, independent judges can stop the might of government in its tracks if what ministers have done is unlawful. Because as lawyers like to say: "Be you ever so mighty, the law is above you."
What was the reaction to the ruling?

A spokesman for Number 10 said it was "disappointed" by the decision, and would appeal to the Supreme Court.

He added: "The UK government needs to bring forward a strong domestic legislative agenda. Proroguing Parliament is the legal and necessary way of delivering this."
Image caption There were angry protests from many MPsin the Commons ahead of Parliament being suspended in the early hours of Tuesday

Scotland's first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, said the ruling was of "enormous constitutional significance", and that Parliament should be recalled immediately to allow it to do the "real and substantive work of scrutiny".

She added: "The prime minister's behaviour has been outrageous and reckless, and has shown a complete disregard for constitutional rules and norms."

Labour's Shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer said Parliament should be recalled as early as this afternoon.

He told the BBC: "Most people didn't believe Boris Johnson, but for the courts to find he has unlawfully shut down Parliament and that his motive wasn't the one he said it was? That's very powerful.

"I call on him to recall Parliament. Let's get it back open, and sitting this afternoon and tomorrow, so we can debate what happens next and we can debate this judgement."

And Dominic Grieve, the former Conservative MP and attorney general who now sits as an independent, said the prime minister should "resign very swiftly" if he has misled the Queen.

The Liberal Democrats' Brexit spokesman, Tom Brake, said the ruling was "highly embarrassing" for the prime minister, and showed prorogation was "never more than a power grab".

The Court of Session does not criticise the Queen's decision to prorogue Parliament at Boris Johnson's request; it rules on the advice the Prime Minister gave the Queen. But the ruling raises questions for the Palace and the constitutional role of the Queen.

Although the Queen was expected to grant the prorogation - there was precedent for suspending parliament before the Queen's Speech, and she acts on the advice of her ministers - she is not simply a rubber stamp for the government of the day.

How well was the Queen advised? Should the Palace have pushed Downing Street harder as to the reasons for the prorogation? The Queen has been drawn into the Brexit mire, and the questions now go to the heart of her constitutional role.

If she has no discretion at all over prorogation, what is her constitutional purpose? If she has discretion, when would she use it? Traditionally politicians step very carefully around these issues so as not embarrass the Queen and upset the constitutional order. But these are far from traditional times.
What happened at the High Court in London?

High Court judges in London have given their reasons why a similar legal challenge by businesswoman Gina Miller was dismissed last week.

They said they rejected her claim because the suspension of Parliament was a "purely political" move and was therefore "not a matter for the courts".
Image caption Gina Miller is appealing against the decision in the case

Ms Miller's case was deemed "non justiciable" - not capable of being determined by the courts - in a written summary of the reasoning behind the judgment.

Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett, Master of the Rolls Sir Terence Etherton and President of the Queen's Bench Division Dame Victoria Sharp said their conclusion was based on "well-established and conventional grounds".

They said the speed with which Parliament passed a bill to prevent a no-deal Brexit highlighted a flaw in Ms Miller's argument.

"The ability of Parliament to move with speed when it chooses to do so undermines the underlying premise of the case for the claimant that prorogation would deny Parliament the opportunity to do precisely what it has now done," the judges said.

Ms Miller is appealing the decision in the Supreme Court at the hearing which will take place on 17 September.

What questions do you have about the latest Brexit developments?
Title: 💩 Poll predicts hung parliament after election-with SNP, Lib Dems gaining seats
Post by: RE on September 12, 2019, 03:21:34 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/TFA28NoiLPA
Title: 💩 Lies, Purging and Prorogation: Two Pivotal Weeks in Brexit
Post by: RE on September 14, 2019, 12:43:39 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/13/world/europe/brexit-johnson-parliament-bercow-churchill.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/13/world/europe/brexit-johnson-parliament-bercow-churchill.html)

Lies, Purging and Prorogation: Two Pivotal Weeks in Brexit

(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/09/13/world/13brexit1/merlin_160177929_b04bf25a-33b1-4f5d-9128-7e518af81fbd-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
Britain is in a profound political crisis, as Parliament is paralyzed by the task of carrying out the fateful vote of the British public to leave the European Union.Credit  Andrew Testa for The New York Times

By Mark Landler

    Sept. 13, 2019
    Updated 3:25 p.m. ET

LONDON — It started with claims that Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain lied to the people and ended with charges that he lied to the queen. In between, there was a political spectacle so gaudy and unheard-of in this country that it raised a stark question: Is Britain in a constitutional crisis?

The answer, by most accounts, is not yet. But Britain is in a profound political crisis, one that has brought with it a strange argot of upheaval — prorogation, purges, lying — and a Parliament paralyzed by the task of carrying out the fateful vote of the British public to leave the European Union.

After two dizzying weeks, Britain seems poised on a threshold, between the folkways and rituals of its past and a future of radical change, where conventions are turned upside down and old rules no longer apply. Past and future were both on vivid display during these fraught days, sometimes hand in hand.

On Monday evening, when Mr. Johnson’s government prorogued, or suspended, Parliament — an act widely condemned even by some of the prime minister’s fellow Conservatives as a ruthless silencing of debate — the ritual was nevertheless carried out with a ceremony of almost comical formality.
Sign up for The Interpreter

Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

Advertisement

In accordance with tradition, the Lady Usher of the Black Rod, a stone-faced woman clad in a heavy gold chain and wielding a black-and-gold staff, marched into the chamber and petitioned the speaker of the House, John Bercow, to accompany her to the House of Lords to mark the end of the session.

But then, most untraditionally, members of Parliament, shouting “No!” and brandishing signs that said “Silenced,” draped themselves bodily over Mr. Bercow to prevent him from leaving the chamber. The Black Rod waited stoically for the speaker to comply.

    This is your last free article.

Subscribe to The Times

“I will play my part,” Mr. Bercow said at last, raising his foghorn voice above the din. “This is not, however, a normal prorogation. It is not typical; it is not standard. It’s one of the longest for decades, and it represents, not just in the minds of many colleagues but huge numbers of people outside, an act of executive fiat.”
ImagePrime Minister Boris Johnson suffered a defeat in Scotland when a panel of judges ruled that his suspension of the House of Commons breached the constitution.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson suffered a defeat in Scotland when a panel of judges ruled that his suspension of the House of Commons breached the constitution.CreditDaniel Leal-Olivas/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Performances like that had turned Mr. Bercow into one of the sensations of the Brexit debate. He became a thorn in the government’s side, gleefully defying Mr. Johnson and his predecessor, Theresa May, and manipulating parliamentary rules to give backbenchers control of the debate.

Advertisement

Yet the speaker announced the same day that he would step down from his post at the end of October, a decision that reflected, in part, the polarizing figure he had become. His departure will leave a void in Westminster, raising the question of who could possibly bellow “Order! Order!” with the same brio when a new Parliament reconvenes to debate the next phases of Brexit.

In his final weeks presiding over the House, Mr. Bercow seemed as much ringmaster as disciplinarian. With parts of the Conservative Party in open revolt against Mr. Johnson over the prorogue and his threat of taking Britain out of the European Union without a deal, and the opposition inflamed by his maneuver to cut off debate with the suspension, the House of Commons became a stage for political theater of a particularly British variety.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, a Conservative leader whose upper-crust mannerisms are easy to parody, stretched out on the frontbench during an evening debate, his languorous pose launching a thousand Twitter memes and becoming a metaphor for Britain’s out-of-touch, Eton- and Oxford-educated elite.

Mr. Johnson lampooned the Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, when he balked at the prime minister’s call for an early election, calling him a “chlorinated chicken” (his reference was to chemically-treated poultry from the United States, which many Britons fear would flood the country after Brexit).

One of the Conservative renegades, Phillip Lee, defected ostentatiously while Mr. Johnson was addressing the chamber, crossing the aisle to sit with the Liberal Democrats and depriving Mr. Johnson of his single-vote majority.

His act presaged a broader mutiny in Tory ranks. Twenty-one members voted with the opposition to tie their leader’s hands, passing a law that forbid Mr. Johnson from withdrawing Britain from the European Union on Oct. 31 without a deal.
Editors’ Picks
Giuliani Divorce: It’s Ugly, It’s Operatic. What Did You Expect?
The Perfect Divorce
It’s a New Morning for Jennifer Aniston
Image
The speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, one of the sensations of the Brexit debate.
The speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, one of the sensations of the Brexit debate.CreditJessica Taylor/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Mr. Johnson struck back by purging the 21 rebels from the Conservative Party. Emotional farewell speeches from party elders like Kenneth Clarke, a former chancellor of the Exchequer, and Nicholas Soames, a grandson of Winston Churchill, injected a somber note into the otherwise raucous proceedings, serving as a reminder of Brexit’s human cost on the political system.

Advertisement

There was a personal cost to Mr. Johnson, too. His brother, Jo Johnson, a member of Parliament and government minister, announced he would resign, saying he was “torn between family loyalty and the national interest.” An ashen-faced prime minister wished his brother the best, but insisted he would rather be “dead in a ditch” than ask Brussels for another delay in Britain’s departure.

The broader picture was one of chaos. The opposition rebuffed Mr. Johnson’s call for an election, declining to give him the necessary two-thirds backing of Parliament. They worried that Mr. Johnson would try to schedule a vote before the Oct. 31 deadline to leave Europe, and use a new mandate, if he won at the polls, to leave without a deal.

“Parliament is divided, clueless, and doesn’t know what it wants,” said Anand Menon, a professor of European politics and foreign affairs at King’s College London. “Well, that’s also the British people. The political debate has changed beyond recognition because of Brexit.”

For all the stresses they have absorbed, Britain’s democratic institutions have held so far. But the country’s unwritten constitution has been a source of strength, giving members of Parliament flexibility in resisting the government, but also weakness, as it has forced momentous decisions into the judicial and political spheres, with unpredictable outcomes.

“The line between a political crisis and a constitutional crisis in a country with an unwritten constitution simply isn’t a bright line,” said Timothy Garton Ash, a professor of European studies at Oxford University.

“With an unwritten constitution,” he said, “you leave many of these questions to the political process. We are precisely on the ill-defined frontier between a political and constitutional crisis.”

Advertisement
Image
Since by law the prime minister asks the queen to approve the proroguing of the Parliament, the Scottish ruling also raised the question of whether Mr. Johnson had misled Queen Elizabeth about his reasons.
Since by law the prime minister asks the queen to approve the proroguing of the Parliament, the Scottish ruling also raised the question of whether Mr. Johnson had misled Queen Elizabeth about his reasons.CreditPool photo by Victoria Jones

With Parliament dispersed, the focus last week shifted to the courts. In Scotland, Mr. Johnson suffered a defeat from a panel of judges, who ruled that his suspension of the House of Commons breached the constitution. It was designed, they said, to squelch debate on Brexit, not merely to set the stage for his government’s new legislative agenda.

One of Mr. Johnson’s ministers suggested the court was biased. “Many people,” said the minister, Kwasi Kwarteng, using a vaguely-worded formulation that could be drawn from President Trump’s playbook, “are beginning to question the partiality of the judges.”

Since by law, the prime minister asks the queen to approve the proroguing of the Parliament, the ruling also raised the question of whether Mr. Johnson had misled Queen Elizabeth about his reasons.

“Absolutely not,” Mr. Johnson said in a television interview Thursday. He pointed out that an English court had sided with the government on the decision, and that the legal dispute would ultimately be decided by Britain’s Supreme Court. “We need to get on and do all sorts of things at a national level,” he said.

That seems like a pipe dream.

In the coming days, as Mr. Johnson noted, the high court will decide whether he broke the law in suspending Parliament. Next month, he will attend a European Union meeting that will, in all likelihood, determine whether he can hammer out a deal to leave the union.

Beyond that lies the Oct. 31 deadline, which Mr. Johnson insists he will meet, regardless of what Parliament says about his legal obligations.

Advertisement

Amid all those distractions, there were glimpses of a potential deal that would address the fiendishly complicated issue of Northern Ireland’s border with the south. Speaking in Yorkshire on Friday, Mr. Johnson said he was “cautiously optimistic” about a deal, even if he was determined to leave either way.

British audiences have heard this before, and after years of grinding debate over Brexit, their impatience with the whole topic is palpable. As Mr. Johnson paused to sip water in Yorkshire, a heckler interrupted his remarks to confront him about the mayhem in Parliament.

“Why are you not with them in Parliament,” the man asked, “sorting out the mess that you have created?”
Title: 💩 How Brexit could create a crisis at the Irish border
Post by: RE on September 15, 2019, 12:47:00 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/e0xGHf8o-9k
Title: 💩 Brexit: Boris Johnson pulls out of news conference
Post by: RE on September 17, 2019, 07:11:25 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/yx84i91prx4
Title: 💩 Ruling elite in ‘state of panic’ over Brexit
Post by: RE on September 18, 2019, 09:01:13 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/gHjYSRgZ_GA
Title: 💩 The Real Brexit Plan – The Singapore Scenario
Post by: RE on September 19, 2019, 01:15:40 PM
https://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/the-real-brexit-plan-the-singapore-scenario/

The Real Brexit Plan – The Singapore Scenario
16th September 2019 / United Kingdom

(https://i0.wp.com/truepublica.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Screenshot-2019-09-09-at-10.16.55.png?resize=825%2C546&ssl=1)

Bloomberg News – August 2nd: Boris Johnson Widens Push for Singapore-Style Free Ports in the UK.  Boris Johnson’s government is expanding plans to create 10 free ports in the U.K., which he says will boost the post-Brexit economy.

Daily Telegraph 2nd July – Boris Johnson plans Singapore-style tax-free zones around UK to power post-Brexit economy.  “The benefits of tax-free zones in the country will boost the post-Brexit economy”.

Singapore Online 25th July – “despite the possible negative effects of a no-deal Brexit, there could be opportunities, such as Singapore seeing some “safe-haven flows from any ensuing flight to quality”, or people moving money to safer investments.”

The headlines of a post-no-deal Brexit world to some paint a picture of promised sunny uplands. It will be. For some.

 
SafeSubcribe/Instant Unsubscribe - One Email, Every Sunday Morning - So You Miss Nothing - That's It

Charles Woolfson is Professor emeritus at the Institute for Research on Migration, Ethnicity and Society (REMESO), Linköping University, Sweden. Since arriving in Sweden in 2009 after a decade of residency in the Baltic states, he has written on East-West migration from the newer EU member states, and on the impacts of radical austerity programmes in the Baltics following the crash of 2008.

Woolson wrote an article in the London School of Economics that the plan to turn Britain into some sort of Singapore, itself one of the worst performers in the world for inequality and worker exploitation, is merely a ‘race to the bottom’ to the significant detriment of existing standards.
Boris Johnson’s real agenda: The ‘Singapore scenario’

 

In Johnson’s eyes and those of fellow ardent free-marketeers, a ‘Singapore scenario’ would be achieved by an ultra-business-friendly environment with low or zero corporation tax, low wages, weak trade unions, vestigial welfare provisions and a significant temporary migrant ‘non-citizen’ workforce (around 30 per cent of the total workforce), largely without the protection of national labour laws or access to welfare provisions.

Yet, as the Prime Minister of Singapore pointed out, the transposition of a Singaporean model to the UK is not so simple. Currently, the UK government spending on the public sector accounts for 40 to 45 per cent of the GDP, while for the Singaporean government it accounts for a mere 16 to 17 per cent of the GDP (Bloomberg News, 2018). Furthermore, the Singaporean economy, while ranking second in the World Bank index of 190 countries in terms of ‘ease of doing business’ (pro-business regulation), is also accompanied by powerful regulatory social controls and an extensive system of government patronage (Trading Economics, 2019).

Social inequalities in Singapore are rising. A recent review of 157 countries in terms of commitment to reducing inequalities ranked Singapore overall at 149, among the 10 worst performers, and at 157 in terms of redistributive progressivity of tax policies (Development Finance International and Oxfam Report, 2018). Noting a decline in ranking since the previous year, the report concludes, ‘On labour, it (Singapore) has no equal pay or non-discrimination laws for women; its laws on both rape and sexual harassment are inadequate; and there is no minimum wage, except for cleaners and security guards’. As a prescription for a post-Brexit labour market, a ‘Singapore scenario’ leaves a lot to be desired.

None of this has dampened enthusiasm for turning Britain, free of European regulation, into some kind utopian free-market paradise. Johnson’s trademark rhetoric has consistently excoriated the EU for ‘trussing the nations together in a gigantic and ever-tightening cat’s cradle of red tape’. It was exemplified by Johnson’s theatrical appearance before the cheering Conservative Party faithful on the final leadership election hustings. Brandishing of all things, a kipper, Johnson claimed (incorrectly, as it happens) that ‘Brussels bureaucrats’ required that each kipper sent through the mail be accompanied by a coolant bag, an unnecessary and ludicrous burden on business.

There are echoes in Johnson’s buffoonery with the 1980s satirical BBC TV series, ‘Yes, Minister’. A 1984 Christmas special edition depicted an incompetent and opportunistic James Hacker as Minister heading the Department of Administrative Affairs, reluctant to sign a Xmas card to a Brussels Commissioner (one rather French-sounding ‘Maureece’ by name). In contention was a proposed Brussels directive to standardize the ‘EuroSausage’ and re-designate the ‘Great British Sausage’ as an unappetising ‘emulsified high-fat offal tube’. In the same election hustings speech, Johnson proclaimed, kipper to hand, ‘And when we come out, therefore, we will not only be able to take back control of our regulatory framework and end this damaging regulatory overkill but we will also be able to do things to boost Britain’s economy, which leads the world in so many sectors’ (New Statesman, 2019).

Hostility to EU regulation is merely a surrogate target for hostility to regulation in general, seen as holding back burgeoning British free enterprise. To realise full ‘regulatory divergence’ from EU controls (the glittering prize of a no-deal Brexit), Johnson has now proposed the creation of free economic zones or free ports, offering lower import taxes and customs tariffs, favourable manufacturing locations, and looser regulation to lure investment in up to 10 ports around the country. These free ports will be situated mainly in declining and ‘left-behind’ areas such as Teeside. Such zones are not specifically precluded by EU regulations, although it is true to say that they are regarded by the Commission as potential havens for counterfeiting goods and money laundering. In fact, over 80 exist within the EU, the majority in the newer member states of Eastern Europe. Besides providing free-enterprise zones where capitalism can be let loose to do what it does best, their attractiveness for employers is that they are typically insulated from employment protection and minimum wage legislation, while collective bargaining and trade union representation are generally non-existent. Free ports are ‘the Singapore scenario made real’ in the UK context. They will be the forward positions in a greater national project of wholesale deregulation accompanied by comprehensive labour subordination, UK-apore as one big free port.

 
The post-Brexit foreign trade and investment environment

Ironic, therefore, is the announcement by Brexit-supporting Sir James Dyson, one of Britain’s most celebrated entrepreneurs of the relocation of his corporate headquarters from England to Singapore. This comes only a few months after a previously announced ongoing UK investment programme, much welcomed by Theresa May, and portrayed as a sign of business confidence in Britain’s post-Brexit future. For Dyson, the business logic is presumably compelling. While preserving his UK sites, the company already has manufacturing and new R&D facilities in Singapore, in part following a previous relocation from the UK. The Singapore investment is proximate to profitable East Asian markets for his luxury products, not to mention providing a suitable base for Dyson’s new plan to develop electrical automotives. Not least, however, the move to Singapore potentially offers zero corporation tax. A further incentive is access to labour markets in the East Asia region providing both compliant and relatively cheap human resources when compared to the UK. Dyson Ltd presents a paradigmatic example of ‘foot-loose’ capital investment shopping for regulatory regime advantage in a globalised ‘race to the bottom’. As a pointer to the investment potential of a post-Brexit Britain, Dyson’s decision is ominous.

An additional dimension to the post-Brexit competitive challenges facing the UK economy is the fate of existing foreign direct investment. Japan, for example, is a significant investor in the UK. Nissan, Toyota, and Hitachi between them account for 40 billion pounds (nearly half of Japanese direct investment intended for the EU in 2015 and 144,000 UK manufacturing jobs. Japanese business has sought reassurances that the UK will remain in the European customs union and single market, a demand that is profound anathema to Johnson.

In or out of the single market and customs union, the fact is that the EU is itself remoulding the global trade and investment environment through an extensive series of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), several of which it was hoped would be with potential trading partners for the new ‘Global Britain’. Recent among these is the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) of 2017. This will remove nearly all significant tariff barriers to trade. While the UK has already one of the least regulated labour markets in the EU, such agreements place further competitive pressure on a post-Brexit UK to show even greater ‘flexibility’ on labour and other standards. It is pressure to downgrade that will surely intensify as the UK government embarks on the mammoth task of ‘replicating’ forty years of existing European trade deals or tries its unskilled hand at forging new ones. If preliminary exchanges with the US regarding food safety standards in a future trade deal (specifically, the acceptability of chlorine-washed chicken) are anything to go by, the prospects are not enticing.

 
Labour migration: an unresolved contradiction

Theresa May’s successful wooing of Nissan investment in Sunderland may prove to have been only a temporary demonstration of foreign investor confidence in the future of the UK economy. As the Japan Ministry of Foreign Affairs warned, ‘Japanese businesses rely on inexpensive labour from Eastern Europe in the manufacturing and agricultural industries in the UK’.

Labour migration, the toxic driver of the Brexit debate, will present unique challenges to a free-market Johnson government, not least as its internal logic would suggest a more liberal and open regime. Migration, therefore, presents an unresolved contradiction at the heart of the ‘UK-apore’ project. To appease his core supporters it is more than likely that Johnson’s government will be forced, reluctantly or otherwise, to replicate much of the exclusionary path towards continued free movement of labour that informed the policies of his predecessor.

As Central-Eastern European migrants return home, (or refuse to come to the UK for the wages and conditions on offer) both of which increasingly they appear to be doing, UK nationals will need to be ‘persuaded’ to accept those low-paid ‘3D’ (dirty, dangerous, and demeaning) jobs that they had previously rejected. The ‘Singapore scenario’ applied to the UK would mandate a downgrading of current welfare and labour standards in a massive recalibration of labour expectations of the domestic labour force. Such a recalibration would be achieved by a radical shrinking of what remains of the welfare state, combined with a raft of ‘incentives’ to accept whatever jobs are on offer.

Questions of the downside of globalisation are not new but much accentuated by Britain’s current precarious political and economic conjuncture as it departs from the EU. In short, Boris Johnson’s ‘UK-apore’ can only be realised in a ‘race to the bottom’ to the significant detriment of existing standards. If the business model of labour and welfare devaluation in a ‘Singapore scenario’ is the pathway towards Britain’s economic salvation, then such standards now become integral to the democratic politics of post-Brexit Britain.
Title: 💩 The UK is gearing up for its dirtiest election ever
Post by: RE on September 21, 2019, 08:23:06 AM
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/21/uk/uk-election-analysis-intl-gbr/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/21/uk/uk-election-analysis-intl-gbr/index.html)

The UK is gearing up for its dirtiest election ever
Luke McGee

Analysis by Luke McGee, CNN

(https://www.irishtimes.com/polopoly_fs/1.3945182.1562141677!/image/image.jpg)

Updated 0848 GMT (1648 HKT) September 21, 2019
An exterior view shows a sign by the main entrance of the Supreme Court in London, Monday, Sept. 16, 2019. Britain's Supreme Court this week will rule on whether Britain's Prime Minister Boris Johnson overstepped the law when he shut the legislature for a crucial five-week period. Johnson portrays himself as more convinced than ever that Britain will break with the EU at the end of October. (AP Photo/Matt Dunham)


London (CNN)Boris Johnson has been backed into a corner over Brexit. Partly through his own missteps, partly from the growing opposition to his "do-or-die" Brexit plan, Johnson is a man for whom the losses are piling up, while the UK is a country running out of time.
All of the remaining Brexit options facing Johnson -- and to a larger extent the UK -- lead to one place: An early election. The only real question is whether it happens before or after Brexit.
Whenever it happens, the next election will be vicious, nasty and personal.

"For many Conservatives, (opposition leader) Jeremy Corbyn embodies the very politics that they most loathe, while in Corbyn's Labour Party, Boris embodies the out-of-touch privileged elite," explains Matthew Goodwin, Professor of Politics at the University of Kent. "When there's so much to play for, it's impossible to see how it can't get very personal."
Supreme Court to consider ruling on Boris Johnson's suspension of Parliament
Supreme Court to consider ruling on Boris Johnson's suspension of Parliament
Here's where things currently stand. A couple of weeks ago, Johnson asked the Queen to suspend Parliament, ostensibly to restart the parliamentary session and return with a fresh legislative agenda. It was merely a coincidence, of course, that many lawmakers were also agitating to close down the option of a no-deal Brexit on October 31.
But before the suspension took effect, a majority of lawmakers conspired to seize control of parliamentary business and passed legislation that, in theory, forces his government to request a Brexit extension from the European Union if it fails to negotiate a deal.
So even if Johnson's real intent had been to shut down that effort, it didn't work. And to make things worse, the UK's highest court spent this week hearing evidence alleging that Johnson misled the Queen over his motives for suspending the UK's legislative body.
The outcome of this case comes early next week, but in some respects, it doesn't matter a huge amount. Whether Parliament is forced to return early or not, the political reality of Brexit will collide with Johnson soon enough. And given the lack of a majority for anything, an election would be the only way to fix it.
Why will it be so vicious? The political atmosphere in the UK is more hostile than it's been in decades. Corbyn and Johnson are not only miles apart in terms of their politics, their parties also hold one another in open contempt.
Here's how one Conservative source spells out the likely attack lines the party will run on Corbyn. There's his past association with alleged anti-Semites; his support for a second Brexit referendum but his decision to remain neutral in any campaign; his record on national security and whether he could be trusted to protect the nation; and as the source puts it, unkindly but revealingly, his "generic weirdness."
"He's just an easy target, isn't he? Anything you say about him being hard left or confused on Brexit or dodgy associations has the added benefit of being true," the source says. "Like Trump, there's always a tweet."
Nigel Farage slams 'pipsqueak' Luxembourg PM

Nigel Farage slams 'pipsqueak' Luxembourg PM 01:41
Corbyn's supporters, meanwhile, point to Johnson's privileged background, which they believe makes him blind to the effect of his policies on people who don't come from the same walk of life as him. Early in his bid to lead the country, for example, Johnson boasted that no politician had defended bankers as much as he did. "I defended them day in, day out."
Corbyn's aides point to Johnson's readiness to conclude a quick trade deal with US President Donald Trump. Such a deal, they argue, would require the UK to dilute its standards for food imports, and to open up parts of the National Health Service (NHS) to American commercial interests. While Johnson flatly denies that the NHS would be on the table in trade talks with the US, it's a powerful line of attack. As the UK's former Conservative finance minister, Nigel Lawson, once put it: "The NHS is the closest thing the English people have to a religion."
More urgently, Labour strategists point to Johnson's willingness to leave the EU without a negotiated deal. Corbyn was instrumental in the parliamentary plan to avoid a chaotic exit that the government's own research suggests could lead to food and medicine shortages.
If Labour wanted to run an attack along the lines of Johnson being willing to play politics with the health and well-being of British families, it would be very powerful. And it's a message that Labour aides are privately saying will be a feature of the election campaign.
What's unique about the current political climate is that the two main political behemoths are being squeezed by smaller parties on the fringes of the Brexit debate. First, the Liberal Democrats, who last week vowed to cancel Brexit altogether if they won a majority at a general election. "There is no Brexit that will be good for our country," said leader Jo Swinson at the party's annual conference. She pointed to the economic harm that Brexit will exact on poorer communities and the damage it would do to people in need of urgent healthcare.
Boris Johnson leaves Luxembourg PM alone at joint presser

Boris Johnson leaves Luxembourg PM alone at joint presser 02:21
Given that the Brexit vote was won on a narrow 52%-48% mandate, a party willing to stop Brexit in its tracks is set up to be successful. Successful enough, as it happens, that the Lib Dems finished in second place at the UK's most recent national vote -- the elections to the European Parliament.
And in first place? The Brexit party. Nigel Farage's new political movement is campaigning on a ticket to not just leave the EU, but to leave without a deal. The potency of its message presents a terrifying prospect for both Labour and the Conservatives. Many Labour MPs represent areas of the country that voted strongly in favour of leave. The Brexit party says that Brexit has exposed Labour as a party that has disdain for its voters. "It thinks they are thick, old and it doesn't really want them any more," says a Brexit party spokesman.
On Johnson and the Conservatives, the party's job is even easier. "Boris said he would rather be 'dead in a ditch' than ask for an extension," the spokesman explains. "He's dug that ditch himself, and if we've not left the EU on October 31, we'll gladly push him in it."
So, the election will be horrible, deeply personal and divisive. But where will it all end up?
All the parties' different Brexit options end in trouble
All the parties' different Brexit options end in trouble
"There's no agreement (among pollsters) on how each party is doing, so we don't really know what the starting point of this election campaign is," says Will Jennings, professor of politics at Southampton University. While it's unlikely that the Lib Dems or the Brexit party would ultimately win a general election, Jennings believes that there would be a repeat of the dynamics that played out in the European elections.

Because of the UK's peculiar electoral system, that points to no single party winning a majority. That will lead each faction to claim that it has the democratic mandate to push ahead with the most extreme version of whatever its election manifesto promised.
So, after an inevitable election, a brutal campaign, a country more divided than ever and a government with little-to-no clear mandate, where, after all this, will Brexit end up? A bigger mess than it is today, is the most likely answer.
Title: 💩 Supreme Court: Suspending Parliament was unlawful, judges rule
Post by: RE on September 24, 2019, 05:09:22 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/FFJ7IEPUUAo
Title: 💩 The court was wrong Boris Johnson tells MPs
Post by: RE on September 26, 2019, 12:00:02 AM
The Brits do GREAT Political Kabuki Theater!

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/_r_w8vMF0So
Title: 💩 Boris Johnson could soon be forced to stand down as prime minister to make w
Post by: RE on September 27, 2019, 05:46:54 PM
This is the Brit equivalent of Trumpovetsky being forced to stand down to be replaced Pelosicrat.  ::)

RE

https://www.businessinsider.com/jeremy-corbyn-could-be-made-prime-minister-under-plan-snp-2019-9 (https://www.businessinsider.com/jeremy-corbyn-could-be-made-prime-minister-under-plan-snp-2019-9)

Boris Johnson could soon be forced to stand down as prime minister to make way for Jeremy Corbyn
Adam Bienkov
13 hours ago

(https://image.businessinsider.com/5d8defd22e22af146d152eb5?width=700&format=jpeg&auto=webp)

    Boris Johnson could soon be removed from office under a plan being pushed by opposition parties.
    Johnson's opponents fear that he will find a way of forcing Britain out of the EU without a deal next month.
    The Scottish National Party now believe the only way to prevent this happening is to make Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn a caretaker prime minister.
    Under the plan Corbyn would become prime minister for a few weeks in order to delay Brexit and call a general election.
    Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Boris Johnson could soon be forced out of office, in order to make way for Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn to become prime minister. Here's why.

The UK prime minister is currently the leader of a minority government, following the defection of one former Conservative MP to the Liberal Democrats and Johnson's own decision to expel 21 members of his own party.

Johnson's advisers originally believed this would only be temporary and that opposition parties would swiftly vote for a general election, which some polls suggest he would win.

However, the opposition has other ideas and are currently blocking a general election until Brexit has been delayed beyond its current deadline of October 31.
Boris Johnson is running out of road
jeremy corbyn boris johnson profile
Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson Getty
This presents a problem for the prime minister, who insists that he will not delay Brexit, despite members of Parliament passing a law instructing him to do so.

This means that Johnson may ultimately have little choice but to resign. However, allies of Johnson are briefing that he will take a different course and find some way of circumventing the Brexit delay law.

Former Conservative prime minister John Major warned on Thursday that this is exactly what Johnson is planning.

As a result, the UK's opposition parties are growing nervous and believe they may have to act first in order to prevent Johnson finding some method of forcing Britain out of the European Union next month.
The caretaker prime minister 'has to be Corbyn'
nicola sturgeon jeremy corbyn
Jeremy Corbyn and Nicola Sturgeon Getty
The Scottish National Party, which is the UK's third-largest party, now believes that the only surefire way to prevent Johnson forcing through a no-deal Brexit is to remove him from office and replace him with Jeremy Corbyn as a caretaker prime minister.

Under the plan, Jeremy Corbyn, who is the leader of the second-largest party in parliament, would briefly enter Downing Street with the sole purpose of delaying Brexit, before triggering a general election.

Responding to a tweet on Friday suggesting that opposition parties should temporarily install Corbyn as prime minister, the Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon replied: "Agree with this," adding that "Nothing is risk free but leaving Johnson in post to force through no deal - or even a bad deal - seems like a terrible idea to me."

One senior SNP source told ITV's Robert Peston that Corbyn would be the only realistic choice for the role.

"It is increasingly clear that we will have to install a new prime minister via a vote of no confidence so that we can request a delay to Brexit and hold an election," the source said.

"The convention is absolutely clear that it is the leader of the opposition - in this case, Jeremy Corbyn - who should become prime minister in those circumstances.

"Trying to find a compromise candidate, a national unity candidate, is too complicated, especially in the time we have. Whether people like it or not, the temporary prime minister has to be Corbyn."
Johnson's opponents see Corbyn as a lesser risk
Jeremy Corbyn
Jeremy Corbyn Getty
Winning a vote in the UK Parliament to make Corbyn prime minister looks tricky, however. Even with the SNP's support, Corbyn would still need the votes of all other opposition parties as well as a significant number of former Labour and Conservative MPs in order to become prime minister.

Given that some of those former Labour MPs left the party specifically because of their opposition to Corbyn, this looks like a very difficult task. The UK's fourth-largest party, the Liberal Democrats, are also reluctant to install Corbyn, even for a short period, with their leader Jo Swinson describing him as "unfit" to be PM.

However, time is running out to prevent a chaotic exit from the EU.

And if push comes to shove, Johnson's opponents may ultimately decide that a few weeks of the Labour leader in charge, is less risky than allowing the current prime minister to remain there any longer.
Title: 💩 Brexit: New UK plan for Northern Ireland to stay in single market
Post by: RE on October 02, 2019, 09:54:53 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49909309 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49909309)

Brexit: New UK plan for Northern Ireland to stay in single market

    38 minutes ago

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/1650E/production/_109060419_9721e45b-c595-4a5c-b986-3916c4875d6b.jpg)
Image copyright AFP/Getty Images

The government has delivered its new Brexit proposals to the EU, including plans to replace the Irish backstop.

The plan, outlined in a seven-page document, would see Northern Ireland stay in the European single market for goods, but leave the customs union - resulting in new customs checks.

The Northern Ireland Assembly would get to approve the arrangements first and vote every four years on keeping them.

The European Commission says it will "examine [the proposals] objectively".

The UK is set to leave the EU on 31 October and the government has insisted it will not negotiate a further delay beyond the Halloween deadline.

Speaking at the Conservative Party conference earlier on Wednesday, Boris Johnson said the only alternative to his Brexit plan was no-deal.

In a letter to European Commission's president, Jean-Claude Juncker, the prime minister said the new proposals "respect the decision taken by the people of the UK to leave the EU, while dealing pragmatically with that decision's consequences in Northern Ireland and in Ireland".

Government sources said they believed they could enter an intense 10-day period of negotiations with the EU almost immediately, with the aim of coming to a final agreement at an EU summit on 17 October.
ADVERTISEMENT
inRead invented by Teads

    LIVE: Brexit border plans revealed
    Reality Check: What is in Boris Johnson's Brexit plan?
    Johnson: No-deal only alternative to Brexit plan
    Would a Brexit delay cost the UK £400m a week?

John Campbell, the BBC's Northern Ireland business editor, said the UK's acknowledgement there would be new customs checks for cross-border trade would make it very hard for the Irish government to accept the package.

The EU will analyse these proposals and probably keep the door open to further talks with UK so there's no risk of being blamed for a no-deal Brexit.

They will likely welcome the massive increase in regulatory alignment proposed for Northern Ireland - which a few days ago was only going to cover food and agriculture and now covers virtually all goods.

The UK will also allow the European Court of Justice to administer EU law in Northern Ireland.

The customs arrangement is based on a lot of trust and a lot of checks, including at "dedicated premises" which sound a bit like the customs infrastructure the EU wants to avoid.

But there will be lots of information about goods travelling into Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK, which the government could share with the EU.

There's also a big problem with the exit mechanism for the Northern Irish Assembly: is this handing the DUP a veto, and what happens if they decide to end the backstop arrangements?

Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party - long-term critics of the backstop and partners of the Conservative Party in Parliament - gave a cautious welcome to the proposals.

In a statement, the DUP said the plan "demonstrates commitment to working with our neighbours" in Ireland and respected "the integrity of Northern Ireland's economic and constitutional position within the United Kingdom".
Media captionPM: Boris Johnson: "It (no deal) is not an outcome we want... but is an outcome for which we are ready"

But Sinn Fein said the plans were a "non-starter" and accused their former power-sharing partners of "working against the interests of the people" of Northern Ireland.

And Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the deal was "not acceptable" and "worse" than Theresa May's agreement, as it "undermined" the Good Friday Agreement that secured peace in Northern Ireland.
What is in the proposals?

The prime minister has set out details of his plan to replace the Irish border "backstop" in the current Brexit agreement.

The backstop is the controversial "insurance policy" that is meant to keep a free-flowing border on the island of Ireland but which critics - including the PM - fear could trap the UK in EU trading rules indefinitely.

Under Mr Johnson's proposals, which he calls a "broad landing zone" for a new deal with the EU:

    Northern Ireland would leave the EU's customs union alongside the rest of the UK, at the start of 2021
    But Northern Ireland would, with the consent of politicians in the Northern Ireland Assembly, continue to apply EU legislation relating to agricultural and other products - what he calls an "all-island regulatory zone"
    This arrangement could, in theory, continue indefinitely, but the consent of Northern Ireland's politicians would have to be sought every four years
    Customs checks on goods traded between the UK and EU would be "decentralised", with paperwork submitted electronically and only a "very small number" of physical checks
    These checks should take place away from the border itself, at business premises or at "other points in the supply chain"

The government is also promising a "New Deal for Northern Ireland", with financial commitments to help manage the changes.
Image caption Mr Johnson has written to the European Commission president about his proposals
What's the reaction been?

Later, Mr Johnson will speak to Mr Juncker on the phone and the two sides' negotiating teams will also meet, while the UK PM will also speak to his Irish counterpart.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the EU would study the proposals carefully and she "trusted" the bloc's Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier to maintain European unity.

But opponents of Brexit in Parliament indicated they would not support the proposals, unless they were accompanied by the promise of another referendum.

The Lib Dems said the proposals would deal a "hammer blow" to the Northern Irish economy while the SNP said it gave the DUP a veto over the proposed alternative to the backstop.

"This is not a way forward," the SNP's Ian Blackford told the BBC. "It is window dressing from the government."
Title: 💩 Boris Johnson’s Brexit Plan Hits a Wall in Brussels
Post by: RE on October 04, 2019, 05:06:16 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/world/europe/boris-johnson-brexit-eu.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/world/europe/boris-johnson-brexit-eu.html)

Boris Johnson’s Brexit Plan Hits a Wall in Brussels

(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/10/03/world/03Brexit1/merlin_162012741_73ca7234-9e25-4ea2-8afd-304539ec55b4-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain at the Conservative Party conference in Manchester, England, on Wednesday.Credit Oli Scarff/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

By Stephen Castle

    Oct. 3, 2019

LONDON — On Thursday, Prime Minister Boris Johnson appeared to have accomplished what his long-suffering predecessor, Theresa May, never could. He rallied support among lawmakers for a plan to extricate Britain from the European Union and won praise from some of the same legislators who had tormented Mrs. May.

One Conservative Party lawmaker even seemed to compare Mr. Johnson to Moses, the biblical figure who descended from the mountain with new commandments.

But diplomats in Brussels greeted his Brexit plan frostily and pointed out a series of gaps and problems. It was an ominous sign that, after more than three fraught and exasperating years of debate in Parliament, Brexit was heading once again for a deadlock — this time in Brussels.

European Union leaders have been polite, at best, about Mr. Johnson’s proposal. On Thursday, Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, said he had told Mr. Johnson he was “open but still unconvinced.”
Sign up for The Interpreter

Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

Advertisement

A less-diplomatic reaction came from an influential committee of the European Parliament, which declared the plan to be not “even remotely” acceptable. The European Parliament would have a veto over any deal.

“On the parliamentary side, it is plausible that Boris Johnson could scrape a majority together,” said Sam Lowe, a senior research fellow at the Center for European Reform, a research organization. “But on the European Union side, it is not a workable deal.”
ImageThe big problem is how to avoid checks on goods at the politically sensitive border between Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, and Ireland, which will stay in the European Union.
The big problem is how to avoid checks on goods at the politically sensitive border between Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, and Ireland, which will stay in the European Union.CreditPaul Faith/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

The real question now, many analysts say, is who would get the blame for any negotiating failure over Mr. Johnson’s plan. That could be critical in swaying sentiment in a British general election, which everyone expects to happen soon.

If Mr. Johnson is ultimately forced to delay Brexit, he will want to blame others, analysts say, and the European Union does not want to be in the cross hairs. “No one wants to be the bad guy,” said Mr. Lowe.

Advertisement

Though Parliament has approved legislation to force Mr. Johnson to request a Brexit extension if he cannot get an agreement, it is also denying him a general election until he does so.

The same Parliament had foiled Mrs. May’s Brexit plan after she managed to reach a deal to get Britain out of the bloc. Three times she brought the plan before lawmakers to ram it through Parliament, and three times it failed.

This time, so far, Mr. Johnson seems headed in the opposite direction, getting support from Parliament but not the European Union.

Mr. Johnson has promised to leave the European Union on Oct. 31 “do or die.” His latest proposal aims to avert the possibility of a potentially disastrous withdrawal without any formal agreement. The big problem is how to avoid checks on goods at the politically sensitive border between Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, and Ireland, which will stay in the European Union.

The prime minister’s plan aims to minimize customs checks, keep them away from the border and leave Northern Ireland obeying many of Europe’s product standards and regulations for goods, providing there is consent from the population.

On Thursday, Mr. Johnson softened his approach and was a symbol of reason itself in a performance in Parliament that was the mirror image of his last combustible appearance, during which he was accused of using highly provocative language.

Advertisement

This time, he moderated his tone and promised to “strain every sinew” to get a Brexit deal, as some of the most vociferous Conservative hard-liners signaled their support for him.

Steve Baker, a prominent member of a group of pro-Brexit Conservative lawmakers nicknamed the “Spartans” because of their die-hard opposition to earlier compromise plans, said there was, at last, “a glimpse of a possibility of a tolerable deal.”

Mark Francois, another Conservative member of Parliament, said that the prime minister’s new proposal was based on “what many of us wanted all along,” including ideas that had been approved in a vote in Parliament.

That was significant because Mr. Francois is not just any Brexit supporter; he is the hard-liner’s hard-liner — someone who once publicly ripped up a letter from a German aerospace executive that warned about potential consequences from Brexit, then added that his father, a World War II veteran, “never submitted to bullying by any German. Neither will his son.”

Significantly, Mr. Johnson had already received support from Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party, whose 10 lawmakers are allied with his Conservatives. Many analysts see the unionists as critical to assembling a majority in Parliament because, on issues related to Northern Ireland, they are influential among a larger number of Tory hard-liners who meet together as the European Research Group.

The opposition Labour Party lawmakers thought to be most likely to rebel and support Mr. Johnson to help him get a Brexit deal through did not speak up. But Frank Field, who recently left Labour to sit as an independent, was supportive.

Advertisement

Mr. Johnson appeared to have a small majority of lawmakers backing his latest proposals for resolving the Brexit crisis. But many see the question of a parliamentary majority as largely academic, including Anna Soubry, a former Conservative lawmaker who opposes Brexit.

She said that Mr. Johnson “thinks he has got the support of Parliament, but he can’t get any support from the E.U.”

Mr. Lowe said that Mr. Johnson was trapped in a Catch-22 that would be familiar to his predecessor, Mrs. May. To get an agreement from European leaders, he would have to make significant concessions, and that would cause his new supporters in Parliament to melt away.

“What we are all waiting for is a general election,” Mr. Lowe said.

As expected, the opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn, said he would oppose Mr. Johnson’s plan, which he said was designed to open the way for an agreement on trade that would be an “America-first deal with President Trump.”

That prompted one Conservative Brexit supporter, Michael Tomlinson, to seemingly compare Mr. Johnson to Moses, saying that even if he had brought tablets down from the mountain, the opposition would have grumbled.
Title: Re: BREXIT! The FUN Begins!
Post by: Surly1 on October 04, 2019, 05:24:09 AM
Teaching Boris Johnson Three Dates of Destiny (https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/10/04/teaching-boris-johnson-three-dates-of-destiny/)
Strategic Culture Foundation by Andrey Areshev / 33min 

(https://www.strategic-culture.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/sieff-600x600.jpg)

1839, 1937 and 1941 – These are three dates for blustering, bullying British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to learn before he sends Britain’s two new aircraft carriers to the South China Sea where the Chinese if they wanted to could sink them within minutes.

Date Number One: In 1839, Britain, then the mightiest sea power and empire the world had ever seen, went to war in the name of international free trade to smash China’s desperate efforts at border security.

The Chinese wanted to stop the flood of opium into their country grown in British India that was destroying their society, the oldest and most populous civilization in the world. Their efforts at border security and their war on drugs never had a chance. The British smashed them.

A tidal wave of economic depression, despair and opioid crises then swept China over the next decade: It led to the rise of the Taiping, a wild militaristic pseudo-Christian sect that was as murderous and merciless as Nazism or Communism.

By the time the Taiping Rebellion was over in 1865, 40 million to 50 million Chinese had died – at least eight times the death toll of the US Civil War at the same time.

Date Number Two for Boris Johnson to learn before he lectures China yet again about freedom of navigation in the South China Sea is 1937: The year that World War II truly began.

In July 1937, the Imperial Japanese Army landed at the mouth of the Yangtze River and drove 180 miles up it in three months to China’s modern capital city Nanjing. Along the way they killed – usually with bayonets and swords to conserve ammunition – as many as three quarters of a million Chinese civilians.

Once the Imperial Army reached Nanjing, things got even worse. The torture, rape, slaughter, beheading and dismembering of Chinese women ranging in age from younger than five to over 90 was so horrifying, so monstrous that even the deputy head of the Nazi Party in the city German engineer John Rabe was appalled.

Acting on his own initiative and with inconceivable bravery he set up an international humanitarian zone. Armed with nothing but bluff, he saved an estimated three hundred thousand lives and is revered by the Chinese people to this day.

Therefore twice in one century, inconceivable, genocidal-scale suffering and horror came upon the Chinese people as a direct result of invasions launched by dominant sea and air powers in the South China Sea. No wonder China’s leaders remain obsessed with the region today.

Boris Johnson may choose to ignore those horrific lessons of history – untaught to this day in schools and universities across both the United States and the United Kingdom.

But there is a third date that should give him pause: 1941.

In the late fall or autumn of that year, Winston Churchill, Britain’s legendary war premier, but also a highly alcoholic, blustering military bungler with a ludicrous 19th century conception of war, sent two capital ships, the battleship Prince of Wales on which he himself had sailed and the battlecruiser Repulse to the other side of the world, believing they would terrify Japan into leaving Britain’s Eastern Empire alone.

Three days after the Japanese air attack on Pearl Harbor, Japanese Navy Air Force bombers and torpedo planes sank both warships in only 30 minutes of operations.

Today, the new British aircraft carriers Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales are as vulnerable as obsolescent and as easy to sink by submarines and missiles as the Prince of Wales and the Repulse were by air attacks nearly 70 years ago.

Boris Johnson reveres Churchill and openly seeks to emulate his alcoholic intake. He seeks to strut the world stage and affects a global role for his tiny offshore island even more impossible to sustain now than it was in Churchill’s time, when it took both the Soviet Union and the United States to rescue the British from Nazi Germany.

The aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth – Britain’s proud new pride and joy – is a joke. The Brits cannot even supply aircraft to fly on it and have to be bailed out with trouble-plagued F-35s from the US. But it is a prime symptom of the childish sleepwalking that is bringing a vulnerable, overcrowded island nation of 65 million people to total destruction.
Title: 💩 Brexit: BoJo CAPITULATES!
Post by: RE on October 04, 2019, 12:53:56 PM
Let's Kick-the-Can AGAIN!  ::)

I can't believe the Brit Lawyers still wear those silly wigs.

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/CXmtjoxuQmU
Title: Johnson faces new constitutional crisis as Brexit talks grind to a halt.
Post by: Surly1 on October 04, 2019, 03:00:01 PM
Johnson faces new constitutional crisis as Brexit talks grind to a halt.
(https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/04/boris-johnson-new-constitutional-crisis-no-brexit-delay)t appears increasingly unlikely PM will hit deadline for deal laid down in Benn act.


(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/e38d9689c69f970a675d2d2a81b69ff4d805b205/487_169_3925_2355/master/3925.jpg?width=620&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=c4689b5a26f75ffaa6ed80a3eaf42a81)

Boris Johnson is careering towards a fresh constitutional crisis, after insisting there will be “no delay” to Brexit just hours after government lawyers promised in a court in Scotland that he would obey the law and request an extension if he failed to clinch a deal within a fortnight.

The prime minister tweeted that there must be “new deal or no deal – but no delay”, echoing the words he used in his party conference speech in Manchester on Wednesday.

The dramatic scenes in court came as Brexit negotiations all but ground to a halt after the EU rebuffed UK requests for them to intensify over the weekend. It now appears increasingly likely Johnson will fail to hit the deadline for a deal laid down in what he calls the “surrender act”.

EU sources said there remained considerable doubt as to whether there was any basis for such discussions, given Johnson’s insistence on there being a customs border on the island of Ireland.

Meanwhile Julian Smith, the Northern Ireland secretary, was told by a series of senior figures in Belfast that the “Stormont lock” envisaged in the proposal is unworkable, setting up a race against time to rework that aspect of the plan in time for the 17 October European council meeting.

The European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act, drawn up by rebel MPs and passed by parliament, states that if Westminster does not agree to a Brexit deal by 19 October, the prime minister has to write to the EU seeking an extension to article 50 until 31 January.

In extracts of legal papers submitted by the government to the court of session in Edinburgh, that emerged on Friday in a case brought by anti-Brexit campaigners, the government appeared to accept for the first time that it would have to make the request.

The papers, which the government declined to publish in full, stated that the prime minister accepts “he is subject to the public law principle that he cannot frustrate its purpose or the purpose of its provisions. Thus he cannot act so as to prevent the letter requesting the specified extension in the act from being sent.”

Campaigners brought the legal action to force Johnson to comply with the requirements of the act, also known as the Benn Act, after a series of suggestions from Downing Street sources that Johnson believes he has found a loophole in the law that will allow him to leave the EU on 31 October regardless.

The UK government refused to release copies of its submissions in this case to the media despite repeated requests by the Guardian, the BBC and other news organisations.

Key excerpts of its pledge were read out instead by Aidan O’Neill QC, the lawyer for the green energy millionaire Dale Vince, the SNP MP Joanna Cherry QC, and the lawyer and anti-Brexit campaigner Jolyon Maugham QC.

O’Neill told Lord Pentland, the judge hearing the case, that Johnson had repeatedly contradicted that position, including in the Commons on Wednesday, by insisting the UK would leave on 31 October “come what may”.

As a result, O’Neill said, the court still needed to issue legally binding orders to force Johnson to comply with the Benn Act in an interdict, or injunction. If the prime minister refused to do so, O’Neill could return to court to ask for Johnson to be fined or jailed, he added. Pentland is due to give his ruling on Monday.

No 10 declined to comment. Yet senior government figures, including some cabinet ministers, continue to insist privately that while they will obey the law as narrowly interpreted, they can still avoid any delay to Brexit.

An attempt to circumvent the law would almost certainly result in another bitter court battle for the government – but Johnson’s allies hope he could thereby present himself as the man trying to “get Brexit done” in the face of obstructionist remainers.

With a Brexit delay forced on him, Johnson could then fight a general election on a platform of a hard Brexit.

Senior government insiders suggest that to confront the challenge from the Brexit party, the Conservatives would have to promise to strike an even tougher bargain than the one the prime minister is currently offering to Brussels.

The backbench rebels who drew up the Benn bill hoped to avert a no-deal Brexit; but Johnson has angrily accused them of undermining the government’s negotiating position.

In Brussels on Friday, a European commission spokeswoman said: “We have completed discussions with the UK for today. We gave our initial reaction to the UK’s proposals and asked many questions on the legal text.

“We will meet again on Monday to give the UK another opportunity to present its proposals in detail.” The spokeswoman added that the proposals did not “provide a basis for concluding an agreement”.

A senior EU diplomat said: “If we held talks at the weekend, it would look like these were proper negotiations. The truth is we’re still a long way from that. We need to work out quickly whether there is the opportunity to close that gap.”

But the Irish deputy prime minister, Simon Coveney, speaking after a meeting in Belfast with the Northern Ireland secretary, struck a more upbeat note, saying a deal was “not mission impossible”.

“I believe it is possible to change that [approach including the old backstop] but we have to make sure that while we change the approach the outcome has got to be the same,” he said, adding that he believed “it’s possible to do that with goodwill and energy on all sides” next week.

But Smith was told by several parties at the meeting that the proposal, backed by the DUP, to give the devolved government the final say on Brexit arrangements in the region after Brexit was a non-starter.

One source with knowledge of the meeting said: “The message has gone back from all quarters in Northern Ireland from Sinn Féin to the Traditional Unionist Voice that this is unworkable and it will destabilise the institutions and the Good Friday agreement and is not plausible – and in light of that, if he is serious about getting a deal, he has to come back with something more realistic.”

Title: Re: Johnson faces new constitutional crisis as Brexit talks grind to a halt.
Post by: RE on October 04, 2019, 03:50:59 PM
It will be interesting if BoJo tries to single-handedly pull off the Brexit without the consent of Parliament.  He'd probably be jailed, which wold make him a Martyr for the Brexiteers.  But does he have that kind of guts?

RE
Title: Re: Johnson faces new constitutional crisis as Brexit talks grind to a halt.
Post by: Surly1 on October 04, 2019, 06:02:04 PM
It will be interesting if BoJo tries to single-handedly pull off the Brexit without the consent of Parliament.  He'd probably be jailed, which wold make him a Martyr for the Brexiteers.  But does he have that kind of guts?

RE

If he takes a page from Trump, he'll just brazen it out, knowing Severn. if he comes to doom he'll be comfortably pensioned off to some Jimmy-Savile-style cild buggery in retirement.
Title: Re: Johnson faces new constitutional crisis as Brexit talks grind to a halt.
Post by: RE on October 04, 2019, 07:33:46 PM
It will be interesting if BoJo tries to single-handedly pull off the Brexit without the consent of Parliament.  He'd probably be jailed, which wold make him a Martyr for the Brexiteers.  But does he have that kind of guts?

RE

If he takes a page from Trump, he'll just brazen it out, knowing Severn. if he comes to doom he'll be comfortably pensioned off to some Jimmy-Savile-style cild buggery in retirement.

I'm not quite so pessimistic about that.  The Globalists really don't want a Brexit, it's contrary to the One World Goobermint.  If/When BoJo fails, I think he gets hung out to dry.  Same with Trumpovetsky.  Time will tell of course.  The clock is ticking down here.

RE
Title: 💩 Boris Johnson Tells Merkel Brexit Deal Essentially Impossible
Post by: RE on October 08, 2019, 01:21:20 PM
http://www.youtube.com/v/UHwCajz3qEE
Title: 💩 Farage: 'You patronising stuck up snob!'
Post by: RE on October 13, 2019, 01:11:05 AM
Nigel is BACK! (again  ::) )

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/WSOUsfl_CVA
Title: Re: 💩 Farage: 'You patronising stuck up snob!'
Post by: Surly1 on October 13, 2019, 04:52:46 AM
Nigel is BACK! (again  ::) )

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/WSOUsfl_CVA

Just fuck this clown with a claw hammer.
Title: 💩 Stick Save for BoJo?
Post by: RE on October 17, 2019, 05:43:35 AM
No idea what the details of this agreement are, but it takes the onus off BoJo for now and throws it into Parliament.  Will they ratify the agreement?

RE

UK and EU strike new Brexit deal in last-ditch talks
Published 3 hours agoUpdated 35 min ago
Holly Ellyatt   @HollyEllyatt
   
(https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/http%3A%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-us.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fa7b59ccc-f0c6-11e9-ad1e-4367d8281195?fit=scale-down&source=next&width=700)
   
Key Points

    Sterling rises on news after the U.K. made concessions over the Irish border, an issue that had proven to be the biggest obstacle to a deal up to that point.
    The pound is 0.8% higher against the dollar, at $1.2929, reaching a five-month high.

watch now
VIDEO03:58
European Commission and the United Kingdom reach a draft Brexit deal

Negotiators from the U.K. and EU reached a draft Brexit deal in 11th-hour talks Thursday, although there are serious doubts that the agreement will be approved by U.K. lawmakers back in Westminster.

Sterling rose on news after the U.K. made concessions over the Irish border, an issue that had proven to be the biggest obstacle to a deal. The pound was 0.8% higher against the dollar, at $1.2929, reaching a five-month high.

“We have a great new Brexit deal,” U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson tweeted. He called on British lawmakers to back the deal when it’s put before Parliament on Saturday.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker called the deal “fair and balanced.”

The “Withdrawal Agreement” will now be put before EU leaders at their summit on Thursday and Friday, and then U.K. lawmakers at the weekend. Negotiations had continued late into the night Tuesday and into Wednesday. The EU Parliament will also have to ratify the deal at an as yet unspecified date.

Speaking after the deal was announced, Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, said the deal was the result of intense work from both negotiating teams. “We have delivered together,” he said.

Giving further details on the deal, Barnier said that Northern Ireland will remain part of the U.K.’s customs territory and would be the entry point into the EU’s single market. He said there would be no regulatory or customs checks at the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland (a part of the U.K.). That removed what had been a key issue for both sides. He added that Northern Ireland would remain aligned to some EU rules, notably related to goods.

The deal also covers the protection of citizens’ rights and a transition period that will last until the end of 2020. Barnier also said the EU and U.K. would work toward an “ambitious free trade deal with zero tariffs and quotas.”

Johnson faced a Saturday deadline by law to request an extension to the current Brexit departure date of Oct. 31 had no deal been reached.

Whether the deal will be approved in Westminster is in doubt, however, with opposition parties already criticizing it.

While details of the new deal remain scant, the U.K. opposition Labour party said in a statement that “from what we know, it seems the Prime Minister has negotiated an even worse deal than Theresa May’s, which was overwhelmingly rejected.” The pro-Remain Liberal Democrats also said they were determined to stop Brexit altogether and still advocated a second referendum. The leader of the Brexit Party, Nigel Farage, said the deal should not be supported. The Scottish National Party (SNP) has also said it will not vote for the deal.

A key ally of the government, the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), has already responded by saying that it cannot support the deal.

The U.K. government, which does not have a majority in the British Parliament, needs the DUP’s votes to approve the deal.
European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker (R) poses with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson prior to a meeting at a restaurant on September 16, 2019 in Luxembourg.
Pool | Getty Images News | Getty Images

The DUP said in a statement earlier Thursday that it was unhappy with the proposed customs and consent arrangements, which were designed to give Northern Ireland a say over its relationship with the EU post-Brexit. The DUP has repeatedly opposed any plans that would see it treated differently from the U.K. after Brexit.

British MPs had rejected a Brexit deal reached by Johnson’s predecessor, Theresa May, three times because of objections to the Irish “backstop” issue. This was designed to prevent a hard border on the island of Ireland if the U.K. and EU couldn’t agree on a trade deal in a post-Brexit transition.
Title: 💩 Here’s how Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal differs from Theresa May’s
Post by: RE on October 18, 2019, 02:28:35 AM
Should be fodder for some GREAT Kabuki in the House of Commons tomorrow!  ;D

RE

Here’s how Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal differs from Theresa May’s
Published 2 hours agoUpdated 23 min ago
Silvia Amaro  @Silvia_Amaro
   
(https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/105484682-1538545810809gettyimages-695196190.jpeg?v=1538545998&w=740&h=416)
Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May (L) sits with Britain’s Former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson.
LEON NEAL | AFP | Getty Images
   
   
Key Points

    Under the revised deal, Northern Ireland will be part of the U.K. customs territory.
    Not the European customs region.
    Some U.K. lawmakers had rejected the previous deal because Northern Ireland would have been in a separate customs area from the rest of the United Kingdom.


BRUSSELS — The European Union and the United Kingdom announced a new deal that will allow the latter to leave the political and trading union, provided that the U.K. Parliament approves it.

This is the second Withdrawal Agreement that both sides have put together, after the first was rejected three times by U.K. lawmakers.

CNBC takes a look at what has changed in the deal.

    Under the revised deal, Northern Ireland will be part of the U.K. customs territory – not the European customs region. Some U.K. lawmakers had rejected the previous deal because Northern Ireland would have been in a separate customs area from the rest of the United Kingdom.
    Nonetheless, under the new deal, Northern Ireland will still have to apply certain EU rules, including on agricultural products.
    Northern Ireland will have to provide “democratic consent” in order for this agreement to continue to apply in the future. Specifically, the Northern Ireland assembly (the devolved legislature in the country) will be able to vote on whether to continue with this arrangement four years after the transition period ends in December 2020. According to Michel Barnier, the EU’s Brexit negotiator, this democratic vote is “a cornerstone” of the newly agreed approach. Often, throughout the Brexit process, lawmakers from Northern Ireland, had insisted they should have a say on its post-Brexit future.

watch now
VIDEO05:13
Brexit deal agreed based on four key elements, EU’s Barnier says

Other points included in the new agreement include:

    Products from Northern Ireland can be branded “from the United Kingdom.”
    The U.K. will collect VAT (valued-added tax) from Northern Ireland, meaning revenues that result from transactions that are taxable in Northern Ireland shall not be remitted to the EU.
    There will be a new working group to oversee application of this protocol, meeting once a month and co-chaired by the EU and the U.K.

At a press conference, earlier on Thursday, Barnier explained that this was a brand-new deal that avoided the need for a previous insurance policy developed in case trade talks failed in the future, the controversial so-called called “Irish backstop”. However, there are still doubts as to whether this revised agreement will get approved by U.K. lawmakers, when they gather Saturday.
Title: 💩 LIVE FROM PARLIAMENT! Brexit Super Saturday
Post by: RE on October 19, 2019, 03:23:56 AM
The Great Kabuki across the Pond is ON!  ;D

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/0rkixKUMiTI
Title: 💩 'People’s vote' march: up close with anti-Brexit protesters at the 'biggest e
Post by: RE on October 19, 2019, 07:24:29 AM
Peaceful Protests, no matter how big just don't cut the mustard.

I see Yellow Vests and Black Pajamas in the future for Jolly Old England.

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/81eLXg21VSA
Title: 💩 As MPs finally hear what Brexit really means, Boris Johnson's deal is unravel
Post by: RE on October 19, 2019, 12:13:55 PM
BoJo still claims he won't write a letter to the Eurocrats requesting an extension (aka kick-the-can).  So what will happen on All Hallows Eve?

RE

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-deal-vote-latest-boris-johnson-letwin-amendment-mps-a9162686.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-deal-vote-latest-boris-johnson-letwin-amendment-mps-a9162686.html)

As MPs finally hear what Brexit really means, Boris Johnson's deal is unravelling fast

(https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/http%3A%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-us.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fc4416efc-f25b-11e9-bbe1-4db3476c5ff0?fit=scale-down&source=next&width=700)

The Johnson deal, it is increasingly clear, means everything and nothing. It is promising too many things to many people that cannot be simultaneously true

    Sean O'Grady
    @_seanogrady
    1 hour ago
    26 comments

Boris Johnson must always have known that his best tactic to get his Brexit deal through Parliament was to bounce the Commons into accepting it. It is a bad deal and does not survive close scrutiny. The Commons is proving it so, as the prime minister tries and fails to convince his critics this morning.

The Johnson deal, it is increasingly clear, means everything and nothing – especially the parts about worker, consumer and environmental protection, now in the woolly Political Declaration, which is about as legally binding as the sincere personal pledge by Johnson never to put an economic border down the Irish Sea.

Johnson, the “greased piglet”, the most shameless snake oil salesman in political history, a man this title has described as boasting the “morals of an alley cat“, should not be taken at his word by any Labour or Liberal Democrat (or, for that, matter Tory) MP.
Top articles
4/5
READ MORE
Mo Mowlam: Fury after Stephen Barclay uses
late Labour MP to urge Commons to 'come together' and support Brexit deal

Hence the PM’s attempt to pull off the “Boris bounce” and hoodwink the Commons with a rushed vote. Hence too the dramatic urgency of a Saturday sitting. Hence dishing out a thick 500-plus page legal text on the very morning of the “meaningful vote”, and when there ought to be complex arguments about its terms. Hence the whipping. Hence the bogus promises given to all sides.
Boris Johnson and Brexit merchandise for sale at the Tory conference
Show all 10

As Tony Blair says, if Johnson has been promising to liberalise labour markets to his Thatcherite European Research Group mates as well as pledging to protect workers rights to Labour backbenchers, both cannot be right. Johnson will most likely follow his own Thatcherite instincts and not those of the Labour old left. Hence, too, the refusal to publish the accompanying legal advice and a fresh economic assessment of the damage his deal will do, though the country deserves to know how many jobs will be lost under the Johnson plan, cooked up a bunch of ideologues who want to relive the 1980s.
Top articles
4/6
READ MORE
Investigation into Hillary Clinton emails finds no
deliberate mishandling of classified information

The Johnson deal can morph (indeed, is designed to evolve) quite easily into no deal when the transition period ends in 2020, or 2021. That needs to be outlawed via a new Benn Act. The arrangements for Northern Ireland need to be tested legally against the Belfast Good Friday Agreement. The deal needs to be put to the people for a Final Say. The Johnson deal will soon unravel.
Watch more

    If Brexit was a drug trial, scientists like me would have stopped it

The holes and contradictions and obfuscations in the Johnson deal represent the seeds of its own destruction. It is promising too many things to many people that cannot be simultaneously true. The Letwin amendment gives parliament and people the time and space to look through the Johnson deal and discover its true and often horrifying nature. It puts into slow motion the conjuror Johnson’s sleight of hand. It will make ministers account for their policy before granting the deal parliamentary approval.

Above all it will give the voters the ability to fully understand – for the first time in fact – what Brexit really means, to make their own judgement and to choose their destiny in the final say referendum which remains the only way out of the Brexit crisis.
Title: 💩 Brexit vote postponed: Here’s what could happen now
Post by: RE on October 20, 2019, 03:34:25 AM
Here's what WILL happen:

(https://media.giphy.com/media/GhLT76qCCBmE/giphy.gif)

RE

Brexit vote postponed: Here’s what could happen now
Published 2 hours agoUpdated an hour ago
Matt Clinch @mattclinch81
   
http://www.youtube.com/v/64ODDs386QA
   
Key Points

    U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson was thwarted by a cross-party group of politicians.
    They voted to postpone the “meaningful vote” on his new divorce deal.
    They also forced him to ask Brussels for an extension to the current Oct. 31 Brexit deadline.

watch now
VIDEO02:30
Boris Johnson speaks after UK lawmakers delay Brexit vote

Despite being billed as “Super Saturday,” a special parliamentary session in the House of Commons offered little detail on when, or even if, Britain will finally exit the European Union.

U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson was thwarted by a cross-party group of politicians who voted to postpone the “meaningful vote” on his new divorce deal and force him to ask Brussels for an extension to the current Oct. 31 Brexit deadline.

The developments in Parliament set up a complicated week with just 11 days left until the U.K. is still due to leave the world’s largest trading bloc.
Will there be a deadline delay?

Johnson grudgingly asked for an extension to the deadline late on Saturday night, but EU leaders don’t necessarily have to accept it. Some have ruled out giving Britain more time, piling pressure on U.K. lawmakers to accept the current deal. But it’s unlikely they would want a no-deal scenario and the potential economic hit it could mean for both sides of the English Channel.

Brussels could offer a technical extension of a few weeks in the hope of passing the agreement they recently thrashed out with Johnson. Or they could accept what Johnson was obliged to ask for on Saturday night and push the date back to January 31, opening the door to a U.K. general election — which itself could lead to a renegotiation or a second referendum.

They could also push it out until June 2020 when the next cycle of EU budgets begins, but this is seen as unlikely with the Brexit fatigue that has set in across the whole of Europe.

EU leaders are expected to take their time with a response, but it could come as early as Monday.
watch now
VIDEO05:14
Where did Brexit come from?
When will the vote now happen?

The U.K. government is keen to have its “meaningful vote” on Monday, but this could be rejected by the house speaker as it’s not parliamentary convention to repeatedly ask the same questions to politicians.

Instead, the government could present the full Withdrawal Agreement Bill early this week and slowly to try to pass it through both chambers — the House of Commons and the House of Lords. This will involve days of debate, many attempts to amend the bill and a selection of different votes as the week progresses. A crunch, decisive question to lawmakers would then come later in the week or be pushed back even further.
Could we still have no deal?

Yes. The cross-party amendment that was backed on Saturday tried to reduce the odds of a no deal, but it could still happen. The EU could say no to an extension. The passage of the bill could also be held up and not make it through Parliament in the time available.
Could there still be a second referendum?

Yes. Some MPs (Members of Parliament) will likely try to amend the bill this week to make sure there is a “confirmatory” referendum. If a lengthy extension is granted by the EU then nothing is ruled out. Several opposition parties would campaign to offer a so-called People’s Vote in the event of a general election, or could promise to abandon Brexit altogether.
Premium: Brexit EU 170804 EU
JUSTIN TALLIS | AFP | Getty Images
What are the experts saying?

Capital Economics called Saturday’s vote “a decent result for the economy and the pound as it makes a no deal Brexit on 31st October even less likely.” But it added that “it does extend the uncertainty that has been hampering growth for a least a bit longer.”

Analysts at Deutsche Bank said “the outlook for a Brexit resolution remains constructive,” explaining that the makeup of the voting on Saturday actually meant that Johnson could receive enough backing for his deal at a later date.

The bank also said it would “retain our constructive outlook on the U.K., and long sterling and short U.K. real yield recommendations.”

If Brexit already seems complicated, it might be about to get a whole lot more so.
Title: 💩 British lawmakers vote to delay Boris Johnson's Brexit deal
Post by: RE on October 21, 2019, 12:58:36 AM
https://nypost.com/2019/10/20/brexit-will-happen-on-oct-31-despite-pms-unsigned-delay-request-uk-says/

British lawmakers vote to delay Boris Johnson's Brexit deal

(https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/boris-johnson-1.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=1236&h=820&crop=1)

Parliament debates Brexit deal as protesters demand new referendum
Anti-Brexit campaigners plow giant message into field
Brexit costing UK scientists nearly half a billion in funding

LONDON – The British government insisted on Sunday the country will leave the European Union on Oct. 31 despite a letter that Prime Minister Boris Johnson was forced by parliament to send to the bloc requesting a Brexit delay.

The Brexit maelstrom has spun wildly in the past week between the possibility of an orderly exit on Oct. 31 with a deal that Johnson struck on Thursday and a delay after he was forced to ask for an extension late on Saturday.

Johnson’s defeat in the British parliament over the sequencing of the ratification of his deal exposed the prime minister to a law passed by those opposed to a no deal departure, demanding he request a delay until Jan. 31.

Johnson sent the request note as required, but unsigned, and added another signed letter arguing against what he cast as a deeply corrosive delay. One of his most senior ministers said Britain would still leave the bloc on Oct. 31.

“We are going to leave by October 31. We have the means and the ability to do so,” Michael Gove, the minister in charge of no-deal Brexit preparations, told Sky News.

“That letter was sent because parliament required it to be sent … but parliament can’t change the prime minister’s mind, parliament can’t change the government’s policy or determination.”t

In yet another twist to the running Brexit drama, Johnson sent three letters to Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council.

First, a brief cover note from Britain’s EU envoy explaining that the government was simply complying with the law; second, an unsigned copy of the text that the law, known as the Benn Act, forced him to write; and a third letter in which Johnson said he did not want an extension.

“I have made clear since becoming Prime Minister and made clear to parliament again today, my view, and the Government’s position, that a further extension would damage the interests of the UK and our EU partners, and the relationship between us,” Johnson said in the third letter, signed “Boris Johnson.”
see also
British lawmakers vote to delay Boris Johnson's Brexit deal

The EU, which has grappled with the tortuous Brexit crisis since Britons voted 52%-48% to leave in a 2016 referendum, was clearly bewildered by the contradictory signals from London.

Tusk said he had received the request from Johnson and would start consulting EU leaders on how to react.

French President Emmanuel Macron told Johnson that Paris needed swift clarification on the situation after Saturday’s vote, an official at the French presidency told Reuters.

“He (Macron) signaled a delay would be in no one’s interest,” the official said.

It was unlikely that the EU’s 27 remaining member states would refuse Britain’s request, given the impact on all parties of a no-deal Brexit. Diplomats said on Sunday the bloc would play for time rather than rush to decide, waiting to see how things developed in London.

Gove said the risk of no deal had increased and the government would step up preparations for it, including triggering its “Operation Yellowhammer” contingency plans.

“We cannot guarantee that the European Council will grant an extension,” he said, adding that he would chair a meeting on Sunday “to ensure that the next stage of our exit preparations, our preparedness for a no deal, is accelerated”.
Title: 💩 Speaker refuses vote on Boris Johnson's Brexit deal
Post by: RE on October 22, 2019, 12:08:07 AM
This would be a good week for BoJo to start snorting Meth.

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/XsmBbZG1l2M
Title: 💩 Brexit Bill paused after Commons rejects timetable
Post by: RE on October 23, 2019, 12:02:36 AM
As Nostradamus RE PREDICTED, CAN KICK!  LOL

:hi: to the Hotel California UK.

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/9aTaYAXpuiY
Title: 💩 Boris Johnson is taking a huge election gamble which could trigger the end fo
Post by: RE on October 30, 2019, 01:31:56 AM
...and the beat goes on...

http://www.youtube.com/v/bS3O5zg290k

RE

https://www.businessinsider.com/uk-christmas-election-why-boris-johnson-taking-a-huge-gamble-2019-10 (https://www.businessinsider.com/uk-christmas-election-why-boris-johnson-taking-a-huge-gamble-2019-10)

Boris Johnson is taking a huge election gamble which could trigger the end for Brexit
Thomas Colson

(https://image.businessinsider.com/5db8a663dee0195f941b6c99?width=1300&format=jpeg&auto=webp)

LONDON — Boris Johnson's call for a Christmas election has finally been granted, with opposition parties agreeing to his demand for a new vote on December 12.

 On paper, it might look like the Conservatives will comfortably win the next election, putting them into power for another five years, and giving Johnson the numbers he needs to force Brexit through parliament.

A recent Opinium survey, for example, put the Conservatives on 40%, 16 points ahead of Labour on 24%, with the Liberal Democrats on 15% and the Brexit Party on 10%. That indicates enough support, in theory, for the Conservatives to win a comfortable majority.

However, in reality, Boris Johnson has taken a huge gamble by calling an election which could end either in triumph or disaster for both his government and the entire Brexit project.

That's because the Conservatives are almost certain to lose multiple seats as Remain voters who backed them at the last election abandon them and move to support anti-Brexit parties instead. To compensate for those losses, the Conservatives are confident they Labour-held seats where the Conservatives have never won before.

If he fails then Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn will become prime minister and the UK will head for a second referendum which most polls suggest Remain will win.

So can Johnson's strategy work or will it all go badly wrong? Here's everything you need to know about the key battlegrounds and how they will decide the next election.
Where are the key battlegrounds?
boris johnson general election
Getty

Scotland

There are 13 Tory MPs in Scotland, but the Conservatives could lose all of those seats.

A YouGov survey in September, which was conducted across the 13 constituencies, indicated a 14% drop in the party's vote share in those seats, from 44% to 30%.

The Scottish National Party's vote share, meanwhile, was predicted to rise from 34% to 42%.

That's because the majority of Scottish voters voted to Remain in the EU and are increasingly disillusioned with the Conservative Party's push for a hard Brexit.

The Conservative vote share will also be damaged by the departure of Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson, a popular figure who softened the party's image and was credited with the party's unexpected success north of the border in 2017.

The South-West of England & ultra-Remain seats

The Conservatives are likely to lose seats to the ultra-Remain Liberal Democrats and Labour, who have called for a second EU referendum.

The Lib Dems plan to campaign relentlessly on Brexit and have even pledged to revoke Article 50 altogether if they win a majority. They don't expect to win a majority but hope the message will help them pick up Remain-voting Conservative seats, as well as traditional strongholds in the southwest which they lost to David Cameron in 2015.

The party also hopes to win ultra Remain-voting seats in urban areas, particularly in London. That is why they have picked high-profile MPs who defected to the party from Labour and the Conservatives this year to run in Conservative-held London seats which voted to Remain. That includes Labour defectors Chuka Umunna running for the City of Westminster seat and Luciana Berger running for Golders Green & Finchley.

Johnson also faces a squeeze on the other side of the political spectrum. Nigel Farage's Brexit Party, which advocates a no-deal Brexit, is currently polling on as much as 10%.

While Britain's first-past-the-post system means Farage's Brexiteers are unlikely to pick up many seats, they could steal enough Conservative votes to deprive the Tories of a majority in seats where they otherwise might have won.
What is Boris Johnson's strategy?
Dominic Cummings
Boris Johnson's chief strategist Dominic Cummings Getty
Johnson wants to run a "people vs. parliament" campaign arguing that the current crop of MPs has done everything it can to block Brexit.

He will insist he has negotiated a good Brexit deal while Jeremy Corbyn has delayed and pushed for a second referendum. He is relying on polling that Labour voters who backed Leave could be tempted to back a Conservative leader.

The Conservatives hope that strategy will pay off and have identified between 30 and 40 marginal seats which they believe are key to winning a snap election, the Telegraph reported.

Most of those seats are Leave-voting areas in northeast England and the Midlands. They include Bishop Auckland in County Durham, where Labour has a majority of 502, and Stockton South, where Labour's majority is 888, as well as Barrow & Furness, Dewsbury, and Wakefield.

Conservative strategists believe that potential gains made in those areas could offset their losses in Scotland and the south.

A split Remain vote between Labour and the Lib Dems could also help them win ultra-marginal seats.

James Johnson, who was a pollster for Johnson's predecessor Theresa May, told the Sunday Telegraph: "These are seats that look hopeless on paper for the Conservatives but that they could win with a split Remain vote - even if the Tories lost votes."
What is Labour's strategy?
Jeremy Corbyn
Getty
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn needs to hold onto a fragile coalition of Leave and Remain voters to repeat the party's performance at the last general election, when it gained 30 seats and secured 40% of the vote share but won fewer seats than the Conservatives.

The party will accordingly try to shift the debate beyond Brexit, to areas where Labour is more comfortable, pledging to reverse austerity and restore funding to public services. This strategy will be especially important in Leave-voting Labour heartlands, where Labour knows it will lose the debate if it is focused on Brexit.

The strategy could work. A poll conducted in August found that traditional low-income Leave voters who Johnson is targeting care more about the cost of living, crime, and housing than Brexit. That is why Johnson has spent so much time visiting hospitals and pledging to boost police numbers in recent weeks.

But voters motivated by such issues may be reluctant to back the Conservatives, who have made big spending cuts since they took office in 2010. Historically, Labour have been more trusted on areas like the NHS and the cost of living.
Why could Johnson's strategy backfire?

Boris Johnson
Getty
Boris Johnson could be Theresa May 2.0

There are a number of reasons why Johnson's election bid may backfire, as Business Insider recently reported.

First and foremost, the Conservatives will be worried about a repeat of the 2017 general election in which a disastrous campaign saw the party lose their majority.

When Theresa May called the election, she had very high approval ratings and big opinion poll leads. But the prime minister's awkward media performances — which saw her s and a disastrous manifesto meant the party's poll ratings plummeted during the campaign. Labour, which ran a tightly messaged campaign, ended up neck and neck with the Conservatives in the p