Re: The Coward Barnier

[Stephen Cole]

> > I think Boris will deliver.

He?s not even trying to deliver; everything he?s done in the last 48 hours underlines that he?s going for a snap election before Christmas. He?s setting up for the EU and Parliament to reject whatever extreme, far-fetched horseshit he eventually puts forward simply so he can run an election campaign on blaming the EU and Parliament for blocking Brexit.

To be fair to the bloated sack of cum, it?s the only gambit he?s got that could limit the amount of Tory votes Farage might peel off, and it?ll give him semi-effective attack lines to use against Labour, too, so it?s not the worst political position for him to take considering that delivering Brexit on 31st October as he?s promised is 100% impossible.

[Tim Streater]

Why would that be then?

[The Natural Philosopher]

hahaha.

wait and see.

He doesnt have to 'deliver it'

He can sit there playing with his willy for three months andt it will happen anyway

I snipped the rest of your ignorant ill inforned drivel based on false assumptions

[The Natural Philosopher]

Oh dont get involved it's another ignorant remoaner that thinks legislation has to be passed to exit without a deal

[Tim Streater]

I'm happy if he continues to think that. Trouble is that the Member for the 18thC keeps blowing the gaff and telling people that MPs already voted for No Deal to be the legal default (i.e. it's already enshrined in legislation passed by Parliament). But I promise not to pass this on

- oh dear.

[Roger Hayter]

However, it is at least possible that Parliament could block no deal.[1] Boris's best bet in his own interests, and possibly in the interests of the neo-liberals he represents, is to hold a general election in September on a manifesto promise of no deal. That way he should get all the Brexit Party's vots (perhaps at the cost of giving Farage a safe seat and a ministerial post, which would easily induce him to sell out his party) and stealing all Labour's support in the north and midlands. And if he wins then Parliament could not constitutionally (or on the numbers) block no deal.

[1] The simplest way for Parliament to block no deal is to mandate the government to withdraw the Article 50 notice. It might then be a criminal offence for any PM not to. Even if Boris won't he'd have to give way to whichever careerist was willing to grab the opportunity to be PM. Gove springs to mind.

[Swer]

There is no point in doing that given that he's guaranteed to no longer be the PM after that.

Neither can block a no deal brexit except by revoking Article 50.

But he doesn?t have to have a general election so that is irrelevant.

That?s bullshit too. A no deal brexit is completely possible.

[Norman Wells]

Parliament voted as recently as 27 March this year by 293 to 184 *not* to revoke to avoid no deal. I'm not sure Bercow, under his own earlier ruling about Parliament being asked to vote on the same question more than once in any session, can properly authorise the sort of vote you envisage.

In any case, Parliament would need to have a motion before it to debate and vote on. The government certainly won't introduce it, so it would have to be done by the opposition, if indeed there's time for any opposition days, which I'm not sure about, before the end of October.

I don't see why that should be the case at all.

[Brian Gaff]

I think most people have given up caring. Brian

[The Natural Philosopher]

No, I dont think even reversing article 50 is possible with a PM and cabinet opposing it.

Even a private members bill could be jerrymandered away.

And the political fallout would have Nigel as PM in no time flat.

No.

Boris best bet is to deliver a no deal brexit and then have a snap election to deal with the aftermath.

Any pre brexit election will see TBP in in great numbers

[Roger Hayter]

True, but that was hypthetical. The result might be different if they were the only available alternatives. I don't know.

A Parliamentary majority can change almost any rule if they are determined to. It is all to do with Parliament being sovereign.

Only if the law was such that any PM had to revoke Article 50. Boris might resign, or might mislay his principles. I don't know.

[Tim Streater]

They would have to pass legislation to amend the Withdrawal Act. Just having a vote doesn't do it.

[Cursitor Doom]

And indeed preferable!

[Bob Eager]

You have no clue at all.

[Fredxx]

He has a clue, while I don't agree with everything CD says, he is right that a border in the Irish is undesirable and a no deal Brexit will ensure there isn't one.

It will also put a stop EU laws defining us as a nation. A friend recently reminded me of EU meddling in the Implementation of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and a judgment on diesel fuel used in private pleasure craft.

[Marland]

Use diesel to propel a vehicle used for pleasure like a Motorhome the operator pays the derv rate.

Use it to propel a whacking great pleasure boat with powerful engines of several hundred horsepower then the operator wants to pay for his fuel at the red diesel rate .

Hmm , I think the EU is being fairer on this one. It is only because it is an EU ruling that many are against it.

Many of those are narrowboat owners who have far more modest engines, but those are pretty economical anyway and again why should someone using fuel for a pleasure craft on water be charged less than someone using a vehicle for pleasure on the road.

GH

[Roger Hayter]

I would have thought that a no deal Brexit would oblige the Irish government to set up full scale border controls, as by definition there would be no deal on how to avoid this. But maybe I have missed something.

[dennis]

We are a nation as defined by the UN IIRC.

the CJEU is a part of the EU so they can hardly be meddling with it.

If they start meddling with the ECHR or the European standards agency then you may have grounds to complain as neither is a a part of the EU.

Just to be clear the EU does not set the CEN standards or the rules for human rights but it does mandate they be followed by member states. I expect us to still follow them if we leave the EU.

[Pamela]

The EU is a convenient whipping boy for all Britain's ills. I wonder what these people will say when they can no longer blame the EU for everything.

[dennis]

Don't forget that the brexiteers here think that we will set the rules if its no deal. They have been saying that we will set the rules since before the referendum and still claim that we will now despite what has happened so far.

I would like them to be correct but it isn't going to happen.