UK in/out referendum on the EU (Brexit vs Bremain)

{{{ The meeting between Boris and the EU has just broken up.

Now the weekend has been a busy one for government messaging.
With Scary Patel, and a bunch of others farmed out to the Sunday morning news programs to spread the message that the govenrment was working flat out for a deal.

With no details given of course, with Patel in particular simply turning aside the whole idea of giving details during her interview with Marr-

'"The prime minister is fully committed to getting a deal. I hope the country has heard [Mr Johnson's] sheer commitment and determination to ensure that we leave on 31 October, and also that the entire machinery of government now is focused on getting that deal and is planning and preparing to leave with a deal. My instinct is we have to leave, and we have to leave with a deal on 31 October.
We are working through that right now.
I am not going to pre-empt any of the discussions right now in terms of acceptability [of that plan]."

and when pushed for some idea of what this plan was she simply said that it was not -

"a public negotiation".

But Boris himself has been in the papers talking the Hulk (no really)-

"Hulk always escaped, no matter how tightly bound in he seemed to be - and that is the case for this country. We will come out on 31 October and we will get it done."

and on a deal he said he was "cautiously optimistic" about getting one.

And the Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay was out and about in the press too, he said a "landing zone" was in sight for an agreement with the EU, and a "huge amount has been happening behind the scenes".

So what was the fruition of all this busy deal making work behind the scenes they couldn't tell us about? Did the EU today smile with open arms as the UK government finally delivered the details on the plan to replace the backstop?
Well here's their statement on the meeting.

"President Juncker recalled that it is the UK's responsibility to come forward with legally operational solutions that are compatible with the withdrawal agreement.
President Juncker underlined the Commission's continued willingness and openness to examine whether such proposals meet the objectives of the backstop.
Such proposals have not yet been made."

Yeah....


Meanwhile in other Brexit flavoured news the Lib-Dems are having their conference with more MP's than they started it with thanks to several defections from the Tory and Labour benches to them over Brexit. Including Umma, who took th eopportunity at his first Lib Dem convference speech to put the boot into his former boss Corbyn-

'Mr Umunna criticised the Labour leader's foreign policy positions, saying he acted as "an apologist for a hard-right Russian government that thinks it's OK to poison people on British soil".
He also accused him of "lauding authoritarian regimes in Venezuela and Iran" and "failing to support the prescription of Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation".
"These people aren't liberal. You cannot be a champion of liberalism if you are currently subject to a formal investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission for institutional racism against Jewish people. You cannot be a champion of liberalism when your leader's supporters think it is acceptable to abuse, vilify and deselect anyone who dares to question the leader. And you cannot claim to be liberal when the political editor of the BBC needs to take a bodyguard to your conference."

With the big news from the Lib-Dem conference being they voted to ignore the referendum altogether and if they are elected with a majority (even in these times that seems a slim chance) they will revoke Artilce 50.
This is good in terms of a party will be standing with a very clear message- we reject Brexit and won't let it happen.
Bad becuase it rather pisses on all those, a majority after all, of the UK who voted to Leave and because it makes their election - which afterall is to run a lot more stuff than just Brexit, solely tied up in one overriding policy. Effectively turning any election into another referendum by default.

And in Labour land, um, hold on let me check must be something, um, nope. Its been silence pretty much for them all weekend. Quite possibly because the four main pillars of the party- leader, deputy, unions and grass roots are all odds with one another and they don't know what to say because they have still yet to work out which way they are actually facing! }}

There is talk that Johnson will prorogue Parliament AGAIN if he doesn't get his own way.

Which means that if the Supreme Court is too frit to challenge him, we are screwed.

Its D Day, are they going to fudge it?

{{ I have to sadly admit that the governments defence, at its most crude and without Blues insight or knowledge of law to add to it, seems quite good and cunning.

Boris is charged with lying to Parliament, the country and to the Queen about why he wanted to close Parliament- his stated reason being to start a new Parliament and have a Queens Speech. The charge being his real reason was purely political, to prevent Parliament being able to stop him doing what he wanted.

The defence put forward today is to undercut this by saying yes Boris did lie to Parliament, country and Queen, and he did do it for political reasons- but he is allowed to that because here are various other examples from the past where prologueing was used for sometimes openly political reasons.
Or in otherwords Boris lying to everyone up to and including the Queen is not breaking the law, its political manoevering and is for politicans and Parliament to sort out therefore not a legal matter.

The judgement by weeks end is going to be very interesting indeed. }}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{ I have to sadly admit that the governments defence, at its most crude and without Blues insight or knowledge of law to add to it, seems quite good and cunning.

Boris is charged with lying to Parliament, the country and to the Queen about why he wanted to close Parliament- his stated reason being to start a new Parliament and have a Queens Speech. The charge being his real reason was purely political, to prevent Parliament being able to stop him doing what he wanted.

The defence put forward today is to undercut this by saying yes Boris did lie to Parliament, country and Queen, and he did do it for political reasons- but he is allowed to that because here are various other examples from the past where prologueing was used for sometimes openly political reasons.
Or in otherwords Boris lying to everyone up to and including the Queen is not breaking the law, its political manoevering and is for politicans and Parliament to sort out therefore not a legal matter.

The judgement by weeks end is going to be very interesting indeed. }}

But surely lying to the Queen is unlawful as she is the monarch? plus those examples from the past seemed very compelling but actually they were arguing that in say 1914 Parliament was prorogued by the then PM for political purposes, which is legal and within his power, BUT, the then PM did not lie to Parliament, the PM did NOT lie to the King and say, 'I am proroguing Parliament for the Kings speech, he said 'I am proroguing because there is a war on and shit happens'.
In the past the PM of the day was legally entitled to prorogue, BUT they didn't lie about the motives. This is a fundamental difference. basically Lord Keen said that any PM is entitled to suspend parliament when and for as long as he wants, we know that already, its the motive and lying to the monarch which is different. During the 1st and 2nd WW proroguing went on for political purposes, but they never lied to the King and the motives were up front.

{{ I honestly don't know Figg, we are so far out of precedent and established norms now I havent a clue if lying to the Queen is actually illegal or just very, very bad form! But then I guess the courts will decide that.

Oh and in hilarious Labour news Corbyn has finally come off the fence to make the big public announcment of where he will stand in a second 'peoples vote' on Brexit were Labur to be elected-

So is Corbyn campaigning for remain?

No.

Is he campaigning for leave?

No.

He  says he will be 'neutral'.

Yeah good word for Corbyn, stuck permentantly in neutral.  
Only Corbyn can announce he is getting off the fence by moving to a bigger fence!
I suspect the Labour grassroots, and his own Deputy even will not be too happy about this 'neutrality' being official policy. More fights to come here I would say.}}}

Mrs Figg wrote:But surely lying to the Queen is unlawful as she is the monarch?

I find it fascinating that nobody knows!

And what exactly would count as lying to her? Would saying "Yes, of course your Highness" when you were really thinking "OH MY GOD, NOOOOOO!!!!!" be lying? If so, I'd guess there've been a lot of crimes committed over the years.

Petty wrote:Yeah good word for Corbyn, stuck permentantly in neutral.
Only Corbyn can announce he is getting off the fence by moving to a bigger fence!

They are going to fudge it. After listening to the governments council, he has tamed them and they will f***king fudge it!
The only hope is the nuclear option of John Major speaking in court on Thursday. That is something not to be missed.



As for Corbyn he still wants his unicorns and he will never ever, ever,  change. if you want to remain you have to vote Lib-Dem or SNP. He is useless and Labour will lose without a new leader like Starmer.

Here is the court timetable, John Major
will speak from 12.00 to 12.30 on Thursday

https://www.supremecourt.uk/brexit/timetable-of-proceedings.html

The bass balls to actually try and bullshit like that

Spoiler:

{{ You may recall some time back I outlined what I thought Boris was up to. Here's a very brief recap (I hope)-

1. Boris is not a natural leaver and definently not a No Deal leaver. His choice was political not emotional.
2. He wanted to create fervour, chaos and panic by convincing all he was set on No Deal, when in fact his real plan was to rehash May's withdrawal deal, and when panic was at peak hysteria over No Deal right before Oct 19th and the EU meeting, Boris would triumphantly return with his deal and a House desperate for a way out would pass it.
3. On the back of being the man who got the impossible deal and kept his promise he will call a General Election and sweep the Tories back in on a wave of Brexit support.

Now this hasn't happened because Boris overplayed his hand at stage 1- creating panic. And the House panicked so much it set about stopping Boris keeping up the crucial pretence he was going for No Deal (particularly necessary as he needs the ERG and Brexiteers to believe him till its too late and they get May's deal with a bit of tinkering).
In response Boris accelerated his panic them plan and prolouged Parliament- leading to the current court cases, Lib Dems and Greens declaring they will revoke Article 50, Labour tearing themselves apart, etc

But Boris's plan I believe remains in outline exactly the same, and in fact events as they have unfolded are working supremely to his advantage.

Even if he loses this court case its taken over a week to come to its decision and the time is more than half used up the House could have been sitting. If they do go back its too late to do much with the time save call a vote of no confidence - which won't happen as Corbyn can't get enough support behind him to win it.

Boris new plan I believe goes like this.

1. Let the other parties rant about No Deal still- Boris knows he isn't trying for it but whilst the other parties believe he is they are making fools of themeselves- if Boris gets his deal where does that leave the Lib Dems who have built their entire rise from the ashes around opposing no deal and Brexit? Will they now refuise to vote for Boris's deal? If they do they set themelves up betraying their own manifesto (Again- remember the no tutition fees fiasco- that sunk them for a decade) and if they do vote for it then going into the general election that will inevitably follow they have no wind in their sails, no cause to champion, and the only thing anyone knows they stand for, stopping Brexit, meaningless.

Labour have torn themselves to bits over Brexit and Corbyns non-stances on a 2nd referendum, a no deal, and all the rest have made the divides in the party from top to bottom more stark and clear. And Corbyn himself is left looking weak and ineffectual, having failed to pick a position on anything throughout.

2. Keep up the No Deal rhetoric regardless of the laws passed to stop it. Make people think he will do it anyway somehow. Come back from the EU meeting with a deal that the House will sign off on just to get out the mess.

When Boris comes back with a deal the others can't really refuse to sign onto if they really want no deal and to appease their own leave voters, then the only one who looks like they have been actually focused on the job and getting on with delivering Brexit this whole time is Boris.

So what's the proof of the pudding?

Well the EU now have in writing some of the UK proposals, and Junker had this to say in an interview with SKY news-

"If the objectives are met - all of them - then we don't need the backstop."
He said his meeting with Mr Johnson in Luxembourg on Monday had been "rather positive", and "we can have a deal" in the next few weeks.
"I don't want to exaggerate the progress that we are making, but we are making progress."

And Boris has said,

"We think we can do that (solve NI border issue)," Mr Johnson said. "We think we can solve that problem and I think we are making some progress."
He added: "Let's see where we get. It is vital whatever happens that we prepare for no-deal, and we will be ready for no-deal on 31 October. We have got to do both things at once."

and we know that the written documents do contain proposals-

'The commission said it had received documents from the UK government and technical talks were taking place...on some aspects of rules relating to customs and manufactured goods, as well as sanitary rules and phytosanitary rules - which relate to the health of plants - she said.'

Meetings have also been stepped up to be daily.
Now you don't get these documents in a day or so, the civil service will have prepared all this stuff, which they can only do at a Ministers request, and it will have taken weeks to do so. Which means Boris has had plans on how to get a genuine deal ongoing for weeks.

He is of course still reiterating his poisiton that we will leave anyway without a deal if we have too - knowing full well the law prohibts him from doing so, but the law is not the point, keeping the panic up is, the belief he will find some sneaky deviouas way round the law to carry out his evil plan of no deal. And he needs that still so they will sign off on what will be essentially May's Withdrawal bill reheated.

So in essence I don't think Boris plan is that different than it was, its been modified by events not derailed by them. And in fact for some of the reasons I outlined, if he does pull this off and get a deal and keep his wword to leave on oct 31st, then I think events will have worked to his advantage with how the other parties are behaving in their panick and the state they will be in come post-Brexit and a general election.
Boris on the otherhand has shorn his party of rebels (who mainly voted for Mays deal so will vote for his too reagrdless of his treatment of them) and will be leading a party united and feeling good about itself on the back of a Brexit victory and all loyal, at least publicly, and united behind Boris, the man who delivered it. }}

Interesting Petty and I agree with you, I also think he is trying to pull a fast one with the EU and the Irish and more importantly the ERG. All this talk of getting a deal or documents is just smoke and mirrors. They are trying to insist on keeping these documents secret from the 27 because Johnson knows its just May's deal rehashed. he knows that as soon as the ERG finds out all hell will break out. he knows that he has to get a deal before the 31st or else so he has put pressure on the weakened DUP, and voila and its May's deal redux. He also wants there to be about 5 minutes for parliament to scrutinize this so called May's deal #2 before we crash out, therefore putting pressure on Corbyn to vote for it. As not voting for it would put the blame on Labour. Meanwhile Junker and co have been playing Johnsons game and have come out with 'optimistic and positive' soundbites so that they are not accused of being negative.

What happens if parliament rejects May's deal #2 is anyones guess.

{{ I think with the ERG he is banking on a few things- first keeping them in the dark as to the actual substance of the deal until as late as possible, second giving them power and respect in the hopes they will protest little to hang onto them and not go back to the party fringes where they were before.
Political ambition, that the Mogg's of this world are eyeing up cabinet ministerial posts and won't want to throw that away for something as trifling as mere principles.

Meanwhile in today's edition of 'what new ways can Labour find to implode' its their conference which means madness!
In this case Momentum, the far left fringe of the party and who were till Corbyn came along the nutty fringes of the party have tabled a motion to sack the Deputy Tom Watson.

If it was civil war under the surface before it just exploded into daylight.

'A Momentum source told the BBC: "We just can't afford to go into an election with a deputy leader set on wrecking Labour's chances.
"Labour members overwhelmingly want a deputy leadership election, but our outdated rulebook won't let it happen."

Prompting former leader Milliband to say, "Usually when you disagree within parties on issues like taking a remain stance on Brexit, you have a debate. Seems that in Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party they'd rather abolish you than debate with you."

And Labour Mp's from the centre ground (the few left standing) are also not too impressed by this new attack from the party's far left-

"isn't just outrageous, it's self destructive".- Sweeton, MP
"Wish that we could just stop pretending & say what we think... There's a desperate attempt to control & expel anyone who has an independent thought."- Philips, MP.


Now lets be clear about Watson here, he supported Corbyn, he was backed by the Unions, particularly Unite, he himself was considered on the fringes of the far left of the party- but he has found Corbyn's lack of action on antisemitism and lack of action on following up complaints from members, and his lack of a clear position on Brexit to be an issue and has spoken out on them all.
Momentum pretty much exists to promote and support at all costs Corbyn and to keep him in place as leader, and as with all far left politics to purge everyone and anyone else who doesn't agree and toe their line.
So now they've decided Watson has to go- and this is what happens with political purges- they started purging the old Blairties, the centralists and the reformers, and replaced them with their own people, unionists and other further left leaning folk. But Watson is from the left and was Union backed. Now they are turning on their own as not being 'pure' enough for the Corbyn cause.
That's the problem with rooting out enemies of the Party, if its your main job then when there aren't any left you have to invent them anyway to justify your own existence. }}

{{That's the problem with rooting out enemies of the Party, if its your main job then when there aren't any left you have to invent them anyway to justify your own existence. }}

I believe that's exactly what we used to call a "witch-hunt" before the phrase was trademarked and flogged to death

Much as I dislike Watson, he is supposedly a 'moderate' in comparison to Corbyn. it seems as if moderates are being purged by both parties which makes them seem weak and threatened by the moderate voices. This will help the Lib Dems a lot and may cause a victory in the general election. I wouldn't vote Labour while Corbyn is in charge.

Monday is going to be one of the most important days in British political history, and I hope to heaven they haven't fudged it. I have a feeling they may rule that Johnson was not unlawful but they may insist on Parliament being recalled, which would be a good compromise. Personally I would throw him in the Tower of London, but as that wont happen bringing back scrutiny is second best.

I gotta say Petty and Figg, my head would probably have exploded trying to follow all of this if it wasn't for your posts. Tremendously helpful! Thank you!

Mrs Figg wrote:Personally I would throw him in the Tower of London, but as that wont happen bringing back scrutiny is second best.

Personally it seems a great shame to me to have a perfectly good Tower of London sitting around idle.
Why keep it around all these years if you're not going to use it when some of your leaders are all but begging for it?

" Josef Jakobs (30 June 1898 – 15 August 1941) was a German spy and the last person to be executed at the Tower of London. He was captured shortly after parachuting into the United Kingdom during the Second World War. Convicted of espionage under the Treachery Act 1940, Jakobs was shot by a military firing squad."

There have been a few incarcerations & some executions since poor Anne Boleyn's day. its all just for tourists now. I did read about some funny ways of stealing the Crown Jewels. Im not a great lover of Monarchy, things don't seem right to me.

David H wrote:I gotta say Petty and Figg, my head would probably have exploded trying to follow all of this if it wasn't for your posts. Tremendously helpful! Thank you!

Mrs Figg wrote:Personally I would throw him in the Tower of London, but as that wont happen bringing back scrutiny is second best.

Personally it seems a great shame to me to have a perfectly good Tower of London sitting around idle.
Why keep it around all these years if you're not going to use it when some of your leaders are all but begging for it?

Dave I  have a feeling this is just the beginning, its probably going to get even more

azriel wrote:There have been a few incarcerations & some executions since poor Anne Boleyn's day.  its all just for tourists now.

Wait, you execute tourists ???

If only one in a thousand tourists are executed each day, your chances of living are good enough it may be worth it for a spectacle you can't get anywhere else. And nobody will hang around very long to decrease their chances of being nabbed, so there will be a brisk business of seeing the sights and getting out, leaving the pubs free for the locals at night.