The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

[greybeard]

Hammond makes clear he won’t serve with Johnson as he delivers Brexit warning
PA Ready News UK By Shaun Connolly and David Hughes, PA Political Staff,PA Ready News UK Wed, 10 Jul 21:57 BST

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/hammond-ma...205727636.html

Chancellor Philip Hammond has said he does not expect to serve in the Cabinet if Boris Johnson becomes Prime Minister as he signalled he will be a “nightmare” to the front runner in the Tory leadership race over a no-deal Brexit.

Mr Hammond insisted he would use the Commons backbenches to “vigorously” battle any attempt at withdrawing from the EU without a deal.

Asked if he would jump before he was pushed if Mr Johnson takes the Tory crown in two weeks’ time, Mr Hammond told ITV’s Peston: “My expectation is that I will not be serving in the next administration.

“But, I want to say this because I read some stuff in the papers earlier this week about how I would be a nightmare on the backbenches.

“I will continue to argue vigorously against a no-deal Brexit.

“And I will certainly do everything I can to prevent a no-deal Brexit without parliamentary approval.”

The pointed comments came after Mr Johnson was put on notice to expect a legal battle with former prime minister Sir John Major if he tries to suspend Parliament in order to force through a no-deal Brexit.

Former Conservative leader Sir John said it would be “utterly and totally unacceptable” for any British premier to shut down Parliament, and he would seek a judicial review if it happened.

Mr Johnson dismissed Sir John’s “very odd” threat of being dragged through the courts, insisting that Parliament should accept its responsibility to deliver Brexit.

But he has refused to rule out proroguing Parliament to prevent MPs blocking a no-deal exit from the European Union on October 31.

The Tory leadership campaign frontrunner said: “What we are going to do is deliver Brexit on October 31, which is what I think the people of this country want us to get on and do.

“I think everybody is fed up with delay and I think the idea of now consecrating this decision to the judiciary is really very, very odd indeed.

“What we want is for Parliament to take their responsibilities, get it done as they promised that they would.

“They asked the British people whether they wanted to leave in 2016, the British people returned a very clear verdict, so let’s get it done.”
Sir John Major
The former Prime Minister cautioned against putting the Queen at the centre of a constitutional controversy (Yui Mok/PA)

In order to prorogue Parliament, shutting it down until the next state opening, a prime minister would have to ask the Queen to formally allow it.

Although the Queen’s decision could not be challenged, Sir John said the advice of the prime minister could be.

The monarch would be “in the midst of a constitutional controversy that no serious politician should put the Queen in the middle of”, Sir John said.

“I for one would be prepared to go and seek judicial review to prevent Parliament being bypassed,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today.

The potential suspension of Parliament was one of the issues on which Mr Johnson and his rival Jeremy Hunt clashed in a televised showdown on Tuesday night.

Mr Hunt issued a stark warning about the prospect of suspending Parliament.

“When that has happened in the past, when Parliament has been shut down against its will, we actually had a civil war,” Mr Hunt said.

Sir John, who is backing Mr Hunt for the Tory leadership, said: “There is no conceivable justification, wherever we are, in closing down Parliament to bypass its sovereignty.

“I seem to recall that the Brexiteers, led by Mr Johnson, actually campaigned in the referendum for the sovereignty of Parliament… They can’t be concerned for the sovereignty of Parliament except when it is inconvenient to Mr Johnson.”

He was challenged over the timing of his decision to close down Parliament ahead of the 1997 general election, which prevented a report on the cash for questions scandal being considered by MPs.

Sir John said “we carried the election until almost the very last date” and it was an “absurd charge”.

The former premier, who campaigned to remain in the EU, warned the incoming prime minister not to stick rigidly to the “artificial date” for Brexit of October 31.

He warned there could be a “great deal of chaos” if businesses were not ready for a Halloween exit.

Mr Johnson has made a “do or die” commitment to that date, while Mr Hunt has also set it as his goal.

“This date of October 31 has a great deal more to do with the election for leader of the Conservative Party than it has with the interests of the country, and that is the wrong way round,” Sir John said.

“National leaders look first at the interests of the country, not first at the interests of themselves and appealing to a particular part of a small electorate for a particular post, however important that post may be.”

[greybeard]

Just listened to the BBC interview of Borris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt
Andrew Neil the Interviewer gave no room for manoeuvre to either candidate.
Think Hunt came accross as better able to handle the intense questions.
Johnson tried to avoid them with his usual bluster flamboyant.

This question does not seem to be asked by any interviewer
Is it not possible that the British public have changed their mind?

Anyway it is as it is.

Chris

[greybeard]

Boris Johnson’s vow for a ‘no-deal Brexit’ is a complete fallacy – we would need deals galore just to keep afloat
[The Independent]
Ed Davey
The Independent13 July 2019

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/boris-john...102650203.html

No-deal Brexit could be Boris Johnson’s biggest deception yet – worse than the Boris bus or the lies that had him sacked as a Times journalist or as a spokesman by the then Tory leader, Michael Howard.

Johnson is managing to persuade large parts of the Tory party, the right-wing media and even some voters that no-deal Brexit actually means “no deal”. Not a single one. And that we can stick two fingers up to Europe and float off into the Atlantic towards a Trumpian nirvana.

Yet far from an exciting Atlantic voyage, Boris would soon be asking Chris Grayling if he had any ferries available to take him to Belgium for a round of Brexit negotiations in Brussels.

In reality, if a no-deal Brexit has any meaning, it means a combination of deals already made – a plethora of contingency arrangements needed to stop a total meltdown, for example, on aircraft and flights – and deals that would have to be made in the weeks, months and years after we had left.

In other words, a no-deal Brexit actually means deals galore – just ones that would be negotiated in an entirely different political situation.

Would our negotiating position in this new situation be stronger or weaker? Would these “no-deal deals”, negotiated after we have left, be better than the deal we’ve already got in the EU, or the various other deals that could be concluded prior to Britain leaving?

To argue that no deal would be better and we’d be in a stronger negotiating position, one has to believe several things.

First, one has to believe our economy would perform better outside the EU, including in the first few years, so we would be negotiating from a position of economic strength, or at the very least not from a position of economic meltdown, as many suspect would be the case.

Second, one would have to believe that our former European partners would be willing to improve their offer to us, after we’ve left the club and after we would have caused costly disruption for many of their citizens and firms.

Third, one would have to believe our new negotiator-in-chief, Boris Johnson, possesses such powers of deal-making and diplomacy that Britain would at last be able to turn the tables on the hapless Europeans.

Perhaps there are sensible people who genuinely believe all of these things.

Perhaps they believe the Johnson line that we will not have to pay the current £39bn divorce fee – as the EU will change its mind about the debts the UK owes the EU for commitments we’ve already made.

If I were an EU negotiator, my starting position would be to increase the divorce fee to £50bn, arguing that the UK must now pay the EU’s cost of handling the no-deal Brexit, after refusing the first deal.

Given the severely negative impact of a no-deal Brexit on everything from our sheep farmers to our NHS, I rather think any UK government would be so desperate to make some deals that £50bn might suddenly seem a bargain.

Now I don’t know what negotiations in Europe Boris Johnson has done to date.

I have led two EU-wide negotiations, which actually went extremely well from a British perspective. The first involved single market and free trade negotiations when I was a business minister, and my second experience was a two-year negotiation of the EU’s climate change deal in October 2014.

But my negotiating success was built on careful preparations. Building alliances. Understanding which countries might be against me, and why. And developing good personal relationships with allies and adversaries alike.

I haven’t seen any evidence of similar tactics by Boris Johnson. Or that he really has a well-thought-through alternative.

Maybe I am misjudging his diplomatic genius.

Or maybe I’m right: Johnson’s greatest deception yet is “no-deal Brexit”.

The problem is, this deception won’t just be another P45 for Boris. It will be a blizzard of P45s, as Britain falls into recession.

Sir Ed Davey is the Lib Dem MP for Kingston and Surbiton

[greybeard]

No-deal Brexit will cost £22bn a year to compensate businesses, landmark analysis reveals
[The Independent]
Rob Merrick
The Independent13 July 2019

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/no-deal-br...181302002.html

The cost of compensating UK businesses for a no-deal Brexit will reach £22bn a year – more than half of England’s schools budget – a landmark analysis of the impact of crashing out of the EU has found.

The study, seen by The Independent, warns that industries including cars, chemicals, textiles and aircraft, as well as much of agriculture, would all need hefty bailouts from punishing new charges.

Its findings were immediately condemned as “shocking and devastating” by one former Conservative cabinet minister, who urged fellow MPs to rise up to stop no deal.

The £22bn figure will fuel criticism of Boris Johnson for his claim that the costs of leaving the EU without an agreement – as he has vowed to do on 31 October, if necessary – would be “vanishingly inexpensive”.

It also dwarfs the £6bn which his rival, Jeremy Hunt, has pledged to set aside for no-deal compensation, an offer covering fishing and farming only.

In contrast, the respected UK Trade Policy Observatory (UKTPO) has measured the enormous impact across all of industry – covering both tariff and non-tariff costs, the latter from leaving the EU single market.

It calculates the annual bill for manufacturing at £18.5bn. The cost for agriculture would be £3.4bn – less than Mr Hunt’s pledge of £6bn, but taking the overall figure to almost £22bn.

Dr Michael Gasiorek, a senior economics lecturer at the University of Sussex, said it exposed the fallacy of senior politicians “trying to play down” the impact of a crash-out Brexit.

“A lot of Brexiteer politicians don’t appear to recognise the costs of a no deal, but it’s important to be honest about what it means,” he told The Independent.

“A no deal will be extremely costly for the sectors most affected and here are the actual numbers to show that.

“For example, if you are in the car industry and you are faced with 10 per cent tariffs on exports to the EU, it’s clear the industry and its supply chains will be badly affected.”

Justine Greening, a former educations secretary, said: “The £22bn estimate cost to Britain of a no-deal departure is a shocking and devastating impact – and behind that number is lost jobs and livelihoods.

“We cannot allow that to happen, above all when parliament has so clearly voted it down.”

Dr Gasiorek said the analysis was the most detailed yet into the consequences of no deal for industry, covering 132 different sectors and following the unveiling of the government’s tariff plans in March.

They would scrap duties on most imports, a “sledgehammer” exposing firms to undercutting by competition from China and other emerging economies, business leaders warned.

The UKTPO analysis finds the industries worst hit by the tariff changes and new costs to trade with the EU would be makers of motor vehicles, chemicals, metals and pharmaceuticals.

However, in percentage terms, fruit growers would suffer the most, followed by manufacturers of fabrics, textiles and fibre optic cables.

Dr Gasiorek added: “The £6bn spending pledge for farmers is some indication of how costly a no-deal Brexit would be for Britain, but agriculture is only one part of the story.

“If you take manufacturing as well, the hit would be more than £20bn – and, at the moment, it doesn’t seem there would be that sort of compensation coming through.”

Significantly, the study does not include the impact on services – accounting for more than 70 per cent of the UK economy – which will be studied in a later report.

Despite that balance, when it comes to UK trade with the EU, goods (£165bn) outweigh services (£110bn), official figures show.

Mr Johnson has been widely attacked, including by the Bank of England governor, for a false claim that tariffs could be avoided after a no deal – under a WTO law called Gatt 24, until a permanent agreement was struck

And both candidates were criticised for arguing their spending pledges could be met from a £27bn ‘war chest’ set aside by the chancellor for a crash-out Brexit.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies said they were misleading voters because the cash was for one year only – whereas the potential £22bn bill for industry will be a year-on-year burden.

A Department for International Trade spokesperson declined to comment on the calculation of a £22bn hit to UK business, instead arguing its planned “temporary tariff regime” would “help to protect British jobs” after a no-deal departure.

“Currently, around 80 per cent of total current UK imports are eligible for tariff free access. Under the temporary tariff, 86 per cent of total imports would be eligible for tariff free access,” a statement said.

[AutumnW]

Posted by greybeard (here)

Posted by AutumnW (here)
Greybeard, Would you like Britain to leave the EU under a no deal Brexit?

Im completely neutral AutumW.
One way or another nothing will change to any great degree in my life.
Even if Scotland gets home rule through a side effect of Brexit--its not going affect me.
If I was younger and still working that would be different perhaps.
I dont sweat things I can do nothing about,
The AA serenity prayer covers it.

Regards Chris

Thanks Greybeard,

I understand those who want to leave but think they may be in for a surprise as leaving would draw them rather quickly into the U.S orbit. The UK is already WAY to close to the U.S. and I can't see how this is helping multi-polarity. It seems, for the time being that a much stronger Europe, not forced to align with U.S globalism, might be the wiser choice.

People natter on about globalism being a future threat when it is a current reality and it is unipolar under the U.S. to a great extent.

[Matthew]

A so called much stronger Europe deserves a second look: the surreptitious way politically unified Europe has grown, and the instigators themselves who sit at the top of the European Commission. There's a reason Farage spent years calling for EU reform, then worked to bring accountability to it's Parliament, by insulting them, so people actually look. Then of course, the referendum, and it's result. It wouldn;t have happened without Farage

There's been a revolution in British politics with the Brexit party. It's been missing on this thread. Here's a catch up:

https://youtu.be/O1hpn69GnXI?t=720

Starts 12:00 into the video

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=O1hpn69GnXI

[AutumnW]

Yo Yo,

I understand completely and think the union has tremendous problems, not the least of which is a lack of democracy. My point is it may be the lesser of two evils. I think the U.S. at this juncture requires as much leverage applied against it as possible. At least it seems to me. I don't know.

[Matthew]

It's choosing between an arse and **** place. I'm mostly for disruptive politics, voting people out, if I can help it. The European Commission was a useful disruptive force against British politics etc, but they wanted to grow too fast, too greedy and showed their true colours in the process. The list of where they crossed the line, or lied about their ambition goes on and on. There is very little to stop the E.U. Commission, and they live in denial of Brexit, morphing their version of the word to mean something that's still controlling

Burger King Brexit
https://youtu.be/yGL-XJPuCuo

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=yGL-XJPuCuo

[greybeard]

UK will be 'at the mercy of the French' in event of a no-deal Brexit
Yahoo News UK Yahoo News UK
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-mer...113008323.html


The UK would be at the mercy of the French in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to Chancellor Philip Hammond.

He warned that the next prime minister could be left at the mercy of French president Emmanuel Macron.

Mr Hammond said the French would be able to "dial up" or "dial down" at will the queues for goods going into the port of Calais.

He added that Paris would be able to exploit the Channel crossing to exert pressure in the same way that the Spanish had used the border with Gibraltar.

Despite spending more than £4 billion on preparations for Brexit, Mr Hammond told a BBC Panorama special there would be a limit to the amount of influence the Government could exert in the event of no-deal.

Asked if the UK could control Brexit, the Chancellor said: "We can't because many of the levers are held by others - the EU 27 or private business. We can seek to persuade them but we can't control it.

"For example, we can make sure that goods flow inwards through the port of Dover without any friction but we can't control the outward flow into the port of Calais.

"The French can dial that up or dial it down, just the same as the Spanish for years have dialled up or dialled down the length of the queues at the border going into Gibraltar."


Mr Hammond - who said earlier this month that a disorderly Brexit could cost the Exchequer up to £90 billion - has long warned against the dangers of leaving without a deal with Brussels.

The Chancellor, who has indicated he does not expect to remain in post once there is a new prime minister in No 10, is reported to be at the head of a group of around 30 Tory MPs determined to prevent no-deal.

Britain's Brexit Crisis is scheduled to be screened on BBC One on Thursday.

[greybeard]

Johnson and Hunt join criticism of Trump attacks on Democrats
The Guardian Rowena Mason and Patrick Wintour,The Guardian


https://uk.yahoo.com/news/theresa-ma...123556376.html

Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt have joined Theresa May in condemning Donald Trump’s tweets suggesting four Democratic congresswomen should “go back and help fix” their “broken and crime-infested” countries, but all held back from branding him a racist.

The two Conservative leadership hopefuls made clear their criticism of Trump in a Sun and TalkRadio leadership debate, echoing May’s comments that they were “completely unacceptable”.

Asked for his views, Johnson, the runaway favourite to succeed May as prime minister next week, said: “Relations between the UK and US are incredibly important. But if you are the leader of a great multiracial, multicultural country you simply cannot use that kind of language about sending people back to where they came from. It went out decades and decades ago and thank heavens for that. It’s totally unacceptable.”

Pressed on whether he agreed with May, Hunt said: “Yes I do. I have three half-Chinese children and if anyone ever said to them, ‘Go back to China’ I would be utterly appalled. It is totally un-British to do that. So I hope that would never happen in this country.”

They were each asked whether Trump should be called a racist because of his comments but Hunt, the foreign secretary, and Johnson, a former foreign secretary, both declined to use that term.

Earlier, May took the unusual step of commenting on US domestic politics after Trump made reference to the outspoken Democratic congresswomen, only one of whom is foreign-born.

The president’s remarks were attacked as explicitly racist towards Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, who was born in Somalia.

The speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, denounced Trump’s “xenophobic comments meant to divide our nation”, while the four congresswomen accused him of trying to appeal to white nationalists.

On 14 July Trump sent a series of tweets saying:

“So interesting to see ‘Progressive’ Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!”

The US president did not name his targets, but the attack was directed at congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York; Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts; Rashida Tlaib of Michigan; and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota. Only Omar, who is from Somalia, was not born in the US.

Downing Street criticised Trump’s comments but stopped short of branding him a racist. “Her view is that the language which was used to refer to the women was completely unacceptable,” the prime minister’s official spokesman said.

Trump was highly critical of May last week, saying she had made a “mess” of Brexit, following leaked diplomatic cables from the UK ambassador to Washington that described him as inept and insecure.

Johnson, who was condemned for his failure to defend the ambassador, Sir Kim Darroch, is keen to rebuild the relationship with the US after the serious diplomatic row.

Johnson has claimed he said nothing that should have been a factor in the ambassador’s decision to quit, but that is not an assessment shared in Whitehall or by Darroch.

In the cables allegedly leaked to the Mail on Sunday, the UK’s outgoing ambassador to Washington, Sir Kim Darroch told his bosses in London that:

He did not believe the Trump administration would “become substantially more normal; less dysfunctional; less unpredictable; less faction riven; less diplomatically clumsy and inept”.
Trump may have been indebted to “dodgy Russians”.
There were bitter divisions within the Trump White House, saying euphemistically that administration officials would get into “knife fights”.
The Trump presidency could “crash and burn” and that “we could be at the beginning of a downward spiral ... that leads to disgrace and downfall”.
The US president’s approach to global trade could wreck the system on which it depends.
Trump could attack Iran, and that he abandoned the Iran nuclear deal as an act of 'diplomatic vandalism' to spite Barack Obama.
The White House was split over the withdrawal, and lacked a "day-after" plan for what might come next.


Trump had condemned Darroch and sought to ostracise him in an attempt to punish the envoy and apparently to drive him from his job.

Related: No 10 says Trump's 'go back home' tweet to congresswomen 'completely unacceptable' - live news

The latest row about Trump’s remarks is a test case of how far the next prime minister will put what they regard as the national economic interest and the pursuit of the special relationship ahead of defending essential British values and principles.

There is a fear that with Brexit imminent, an increasingly isolated UK will have to turn more towards a Trump-led administration in its search for key allies.

May’s condemnation of Trump is a further sign the prime minister is willing to loosen the shackles in the final days of her premiership and say what she thinks.

The Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson, said earlier that May was right and “both men vying to be her successor should say so”.

Scotland’s first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, said the president’s comments were “not OK and diplomatic politeness should not stop us saying so, loudly and clearly”.

Nadhim Zahawi, the MP for Stratford-on-Avon and a supporter of Johnson, said the UK should not interject into American politics, but described the language used as inappropriate. “It is not language I would use. I am condemning it,” he told the BBC.

“It is domestic US policy. Ultimately, if we do this [interject], we will give Donald Trump the right to intervene in our politics any time he wants. That is not where we want to be. This is our greatest ally. The president of the US has to be someone with whom the prime minister can work, and if we are going to start behaving in this way and attack them all the time then they have every right to do the same back to us.”

[avid]

Twistey twistey, I smell something other than reality.... more reality required...,

[greybeard]

Grieve accuses Johnson of Brexit ‘radicalisation’ over Irish backstop

By Sam Blewett, PA Political Correspondent
PA Ready News UK16 July 2019

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/grieve-acc...095145029.html

Dominic Grieve has accused Boris Johnson of further radicalising on Brexit and leaving the UK with “starker” prospects by trying to appease hardliners in a strengthening of his stance on the Irish backstop.

The former attorney general also accused the Tory leadership front-runner of making a “disgraceful” suggestion which would spell the end of democracy as we know it.

On Tuesday, Mr Grieve warned whoever becomes the next prime minister that their government will collapse if they pursue a no-deal departure from the EU.
Tory leadership race


The day before, Mr Johnson said in a head-to-head debate with leadership rival Jeremy Hunt that the backstop to prevent a hard border in Ireland could not have time limits or “unilateral escape hatches”.

Mr Grieve said Mr Johnson confirmed that hardliners would “put up another obstacle” if anyone was able to solve the issue because it is being “used as an excuse because of this radicalisation”.

“When challenged and confronted, he radicalised even further and excluded any possibility of trying to negotiate some way out of the backstop at all. It had to go in its totality,” Mr Grieve said.

“The consequence of that is make it the choices starker and starker.

“I’ve always been willing as a politician to listen to people willing to come up with credible compromises but what I’ve found so staggering about the Conservative leadership (contest) is it has been played to a tune of growing extremism.”

Speaking alongside Mr Grieve at a second referendum campaign event, Labour MP Margaret Beckett called the candidates’ backstop pledges “terrifying” and accused them of throwing “the Irish situation under a bus”.

“Nobody can say that that situation is now so peaceful it’s inconceivable that there will be further problems in the future. I think that’s an extraordinary demonstration of lack of responsibility to the country,” she said.
Brexit


Pressed at The Sun and talkRadio debate on Monday, Mr Johnson had said the problem with the backstop was “fundamental”.

He added that the answer was “no to time limits or unilateral escape hatches or these kind of elaborate devices, glosses, codicils and so on which you could apply to the backstop”.

Unlike contest underdog Mr Hunt, Mr Johnson has refused to rule out suspending Parliament in order to force Brexit through against the will of MPs.

[greybeard]

Next Tory leader will have to compromise on Brexit – Rudd
[PA Ready News UK]
By Shaun Connolly and Harriet Line, PA Political Staff
PA Ready News UK16 July 2019

Whoever wins the Tory leadership will have to compromise on Brexit, Cabinet minister Amber Rudd has said.

The Work and Pensions Secretary, who backs Jeremy Hunt in the election, said she was “surprised” by the hardline stance taken by the Foreign Secretary and Boris Johnson on EU withdrawal in Monday’s leadership debate.

Ms Rudd told the Politico website: “I think they will find they have to compromise.

“I was surprised by what they both said and I think their views will collide with the reality when whichever one wins, starts negotiating and starts dealing with a Parliament which may be more difficult than they think to engage with.”

Ms Rudd, who said she had been persuaded by Mr Hunt that a no-deal option should be in the Government’s “armoury” ahead of the October 31 Brexit deadline, said: “There are lots of unknowns to get through before we get to the end of October.”

The comments came as Mr Johnson’s campaign aides have sought to play down reports that they are considering plans to prorogue Parliament in late October – a move which could prevent MPs stopping a no-deal Brexit.

The Tory leadership frontrunner’s team is said to be looking at scheduling a Queen’s speech for early November, according to Sky News.

Parliament would be unlikely to sit for a week or two ahead of the speech, which could hamper MPs’ chances of blocking a no-deal Brexit if a deal had not been passed by that point.

A source close to the campaign told PA the team was “discussing everything as an option”, but Mr Johnson wanted to secure a deal with Brussels and avoid a no-deal exit.

Tory former minister Guto Bebb, a prominent Remain supporter, said he believed Mr Johnson’s campaign was “quite seriously contemplating” suspending Parliament.

He told Sky News: “If you decided to do a Queen’s speech in early November, you’d prorogue Parliament in mid-October so we didn’t sit for the final two weeks in October.

“It would basically mean that a no-deal Brexit, which has no democratic mandate whatsoever, would be imposed upon the people of this country without this House sitting.

“And I think that would be an outrage to our democratic traditions, it would be unacceptable and the worst part is I believe they are quite seriously contemplating doing just that.”

Unlike contest underdog Mr Hunt, Mr Johnson has refused to rule out suspending Parliament to force Brexit through against the will of MPs.

On Monday he said the problem with the controversial Irish backstop was “fundamental”, and suggested he would not accept tweaks such as a time limit or a “unilateral escape hatch”.

Dominic Grieve accused Mr Johnson of further radicalising on Brexit and leaving the UK with “starker” prospects by trying to appease hardliners in a strengthening of his stance on the backstop.

The former attorney general also accused him of making a “disgraceful” suggestion which would “spell the end of democracy as we know it”.

On Tuesday, Mr Grieve warned whoever becomes the next prime minister that their government will collapse if they pursue a no-deal departure from the EU.

Mr Grieve said Mr Johnson confirmed that hardliners would “put up another obstacle” if anyone was able to solve the issue because it is being “used as an excuse because of this radicalisation”.

[greybeard]

Brexit: European holiday costs could soar by £225 per person as a result of no deal, campaigners warn
[The Independent]
Andrew Woodcock
The Independent16 July 2019

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/brexit-eur...164900154.html

The average cost of holidays in popular European destinations could soar by £225 per person as a result of a no-deal Brexit, campaigners have warned.

The warning came as Tory leadership hopefuls Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt came under fire over hard-line promises to scrap the Irish backstop, which sent the pound plummeting amid growing concern about a no-deal outcome.

Brits buying foreign currency ahead of summer holidays got less for their money as sterling plunged to a six-month low against the euro and a 27-month low against the dollar.

Both candidates to replace Theresa May as prime minister declared her backstop deal dead during their final campaign debate on Monday, fuelling expectations of a disorderly departure from the EU.

Fears of a no-deal Brexit were heightened by reports that Mr Johnson is considering calling a Queen’s Speech in early November, triggering a recess of up to two weeks in the second half of October to keep MPs out of Parliament in the vital days around the Brexit deadline at the end of the month.

The Johnson camp played down the idea, but Tory MP Guto Bebb, a prominent Remain supporter, said he believed the leadership frontrunner was “quite seriously contemplating” suspending Parliament.

“I think that would be an outrage to our democratic traditions, it would be unacceptable and the worst part is I believe they are quite seriously contemplating doing just that,” he told Sky News.


Conservative party leadership candidates Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt during a debate hosted by The Sun at Talk Radio in The News Building, London 15 July 2019. (Louis Wood/The Sun/PA)
View photos
Conservative party leadership candidates Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt during a debate hosted by The Sun at Talk Radio in The News Building, London 15 July 2019. (Louis Wood/The Sun/PA)

Unlike Mr Hunt, Mr Johnson has not ruled out using a mechanism known as prorogation to suspend Commons sittings in order to stop MPs from blocking a no-deal Brexit.

Analysis released by the People's Vote campaign suggested that the combined increase in the cost of flights, hotels, insurance and mobile roaming fees could add £225 a person onto the cost of holidays to the most popular resorts in Spain and Greece following a disorderly withdrawal from the EU, which could see the pound reach parity with the euro.

Labour MP Wes Streeting, a leading supporter of the campaign for a second referendum, said: “Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt want to impose a hard Brexit, or even a destructive no-deal on us, without giving us the final say.

"That won’t just threaten jobs in the car industry, steel or financial services, it will hit ordinary families hard by trashing the value of the pound and sending the price of everything from petrol at the pumps to two weeks at Disneyland soaring."

A leaked government document warned of the danger that food and medicine shortages after a no-deal Brexit could also trigger riots in prisons.

The memo was withdrawn from the database of government contracts after the Ministry of Justice was alerted to its contents, which were not properly redacted by officials.

Conservative MP Phillip Lee, a former justice minister who quit the government to campaign against Brexit, seized on the warning, saying: “It’s clear that no-deal would be disastrous for our country.

“No one voted for unrest in prisons, shortages of food supplies or any of the other indignities that could result from a disastrous no-deal.“

But a second Labour MP today said she would accept a no-deal Brexit instead of no Brexit at all.

”I want us to leave, the country wants us to leave and for our democracy I think we have to leave... so therefore if it came to it I would take no deal, because we have to leave,” said Rotherham MP Sarah Champion.

[greybeard]

Minister resigns as Tory MPs rebel to prevent no-deal Brexit
Yahoo News UK Andy Wells,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/ministers-...104440504.html



Some ministers are set to resign from Government to stop the new Prime Minister pushing through a no-deal Brexit (AP)

Boris Johnson’s rumoured plan to suspend Parliament to force through a no-deal Brexit has been dealt a severe blow after MPs voted for an amendment designed to block the move.

The Commons voted by 315 votes to 274 for Labour MP Hilary Benn’s amendment. which effectively prevents the next Prime Minister from pushing through a no deal by preventing MPs from having a say.

Digital minister Margot James resigned after voting against the Government.



Tory leadership contender Jeremy Hunt said he thought he was given permission to miss the vote, but was mistaken.

He tweeted: “I missed votes today because I thought I was slipped and it turns out I was not. Apologies to my colleagues & Whip. My position is that parliament should NOT restrict the hands of an incoming govt in this way & I remain opposed to how parl voted.”

His rival Boris Johnson voted against the move to block prorogation.

Theresa May said she was “disappointed” that multiple ministers failed to vote on the amendment - but failed to take action against them.

However, she issued a warning to the MPs over whether their roles will still be available under her successor.

A spokesman said: “The Prime Minister is obviously disappointed that a number of ministers failed to vote in this afternoon’s division.

“No doubt her successor will take this into account when forming their government.”

Opposition and Remain MPs were jubilant, with Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer claiming a ‘huge victory’.

[greybeard]

Ursula von der Leyen: hard Brexit would be massive blow for both sides
[The Guardian]
Philip Oltermann in Berlin
The Guardian18 July 2019

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/ursula-von...160032359.html

The European commission’s new president has said a hard Brexit would have “massively negative consequences” for both Britain and the EU, and said Brussels could provide emergency help for nations such as Ireland that bear the brunt of such an outcome.

In her first interview since narrowly being approved for the post by the European parliament on Tuesday, Ursula von der Leyen said the withdrawal deal concluded between Theresa May and the commission’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michael Barnier, would remain the basis of any future talks.

“We don’t want a hard Brexit, it’s a bad outcome for both sides. We have a good withdrawal agreement,” she said in an exclusive interview with the Guardian and four other European newspapers.

Both of the contenders to succeed May, Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt, have vowed to renegotiate the exit deal with the EU, declaring that the most controversial component, the Northern Ireland backstop, is unacceptable.

When asked about their position, Von der Leyen said the withdrawal agreement was “not dead”. She said: “No, it is a good agreement, which was negotiated properly in accordance with the red lines drawn by the British government.”

She reiterated her view that the EU should consider extending the current Brexit deadline of 31 October if there were “good reasons” to do so. “A Brexit without a deal comes with massively negative consequences for both sides, not to mention what it means for Ireland. That’s why we need to do everything to strive for an orderly Brexit. And that’s why if there are good reasons for an extension coming from our British friends, I am open to listening to them.”

She added: “It would be wrong to see Brexit only as the end of something. The way in which we carry out Brexit will determine our future relationship to our neighbour the United Kingdom. For both sides it is of the highest interest that there is an orderly and good beginning to our future relationships.”

In a wide-ranging interview conducted inside the defence ministry in Berlin that she presided over for six years, Von der Leyen told the Europa group of newspapers that the EU would show solidarity with member states hardest hit by a disorderly British exit.


In 2012, six major European newspapers came together to launch joint editorial projects to dig deeper into pan-European issues, understand the EU better and investigative the good and bad things emerging from the continent.

Since then, we have jointly investigated the environment, youth unemployment, Brexit, immigration, euroscepticism, the eurozone the Brussels bureaucracy - and even the legacies of the first world war.

We have interviewed prime ministers and presidents, as well as a host of EU leaders, and will continue our efforts long after Britain has left the EU.

The six papers are The Guardian, Le Monde, Süddeutsche Zeitung, La Vanguardia, La Stampa and Gazeta Wyborcza


She said a European unemployment benefit reinsurance scheme, modelled on measures put in place in Germany to cushion the blow of the world financial downturn a decade ago, could be rolled out across the bloc of 27 nations.

In 2008 the German government prevented massive job cuts through a state-subsidised programme to finance reduced working hours. “We can apply this idea to the whole of Europe,” said Von der Leyen. “Should an external shock such as a disorderly Brexit hit two or three countries particularly hard, for example, the unemployment reinsurance scheme could come into force.”

One recent report said a no-deal Brexit could do massive harm, especially to the economy in Ireland where it could cost £6bn and lead to an estimated increase in unemployment of 50,000 to 55,000.

Asked whether Ireland could be one of the countries to benefit from such emergency help in the case of a no-deal Brexit, Von der Leyen said: “I can’t predict that. But it is right for Europe to help the member states who are hit hardest.”

A mother of seven who has held ministerial posts under the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, since 2005, Von der Leyen became the commission’s first female president-elect on Tuesday, winning a vote in the European parliament with the support of 383 MEPs, only nine votes more than required to secure an absolute majority. Critics say the vote has left her at the mercy of nationalists and populists in Poland and Italy who supported her candidacy.

“The work is only about to begin,” she said. “In my debates with the political groups and national delegations I came across a lot of openness for constructive collaboration, also from the Green parties. Climate change, digitalisation, the economy, Brexit, security, trade, migration – we have work to do.”

In an effort to win votes from Green MEPs, Von der Leyen pledged to make fighting the climate crisis a priority under her presidency. Some have speculated that her ambitious promises on emissions targets may have led some members of the conservative EPP bloc to reject her in Tuesday’s secret ballot. She proposed reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 55% on 1990 levels by 2030. The current target is 40%.

Von der Leyen, a Christian Democrat, said she believed action on climate to be of the utmost urgency. “The worst-case scenario will come about if we don’t act with determination, namely rapidly intensifying climate change with all its consequences. The clock is ticking, and we have to act.”

She added: “Polluting the environment has to come at a price, which will bring about a change in our behaviour and a lowering of CO2 emissions. If you compare it to the rest of the world, then our industry is already doing well at climate-friendly technology, but we have to get better.

“But if industry modernises, we also have to protect it from cheap imports produced in environmentally harmful ways outside Europe’s borders. In coal-heavy regions, especially in central and eastern Europe, we have to support the transition to new clean branches of the economy and protect jobs.”


Ursula von der Leyen, born in 1958, is the daughter of Heidi and Ernst Albrecht, the latter having been a senior politician in the centre-right Christian Democratic Union who rose to be governor of the state of Lower Saxony.

She spent the first 12 years of her life in Brussels, where her father was serving as a commission official. She studied economics at the universities of Göttingen and Münster before attending the London School of Economics where she used the pseudonym Rose Ladson because she was seen as a potential target for West German leftwing extremists.

Von der Leyen then read for a medical degree, becoming a gynaecologist, and only entered politics at 42. A mother of seven, she has held government positions as labour and family affairs minister, driving forward key policies on gender quotas for company boards and improved maternity and paternity pay and rights – policies that initially won her considerable popularity.

In 2011, Von der Leyen spoke of her desire for a “United States of Europe along the lines of federal states like Switzerland, Germany or the US”. She has since claimed that Brexit, and the loss of the “pragmatism” of the British in the EU, should propel the bloc towards further integration, and has voiced support for a European army.

She is a key ally of Angela Merkel, with whom she has worked since 2005. Like Merkel, she has championed the idea of a close relationship between the EU and UK after Brexit.

Von der Leyen, though, has been withering about those who campaigned for Brexit, Describing events since the referendum as a “burst bubble of hollow promises … inflated by populists”. She has cautioned that a no-deal Brexit would be the “worst possible start” to the close long-term EU-UK relationship that Berlin holds desirable.

The nicknames she has acquired over the course of her 29-year career in German politics tell their own story. During her time in charge of the family ministry, she was first called Krippen-Ursel (“crèche Ursel”), a conservative closet feminist set on expanding nursery places, and then Zensursula, a control freak who wanted to shield German youth from the dark sides of the internet.

When she became Germany’s first female defence minister in 2013, her (mostly male) detractors referred to her as Flinten-Uschi (“shotgun Uschi”), a caricature of the bossy career woman.

As commission president, Von der Leyen will represent the EU on the world stage, and a key task will be building a working relationship with Donald Trump’s White House. She has previously criticised a lack of strategy in Trump’s approach to Vladimir Putin’s Russia and has suggested the US president’s frosty relationship with Merkel is based on his outdated view of women.

Daniel Boffey in Brussels and Philip Oltermann in Berlin


She indicated a more nuanced approach towards states such as Poland and Hungary, which have been brazenly challenging the EU consensus on issues such as migration, the rule of law and press freedom.

“I think we have to properly listen to the arguments. For example, the Poles make the justified point that they have taken in 1.5 million people from the Ukraine – a country that has for years been the site of a hybrid war in which people are still dying. We must not ignore that.

“Also, the member states who want to go ahead [with a refugee distribution scheme] are already in the process of finding solutions. But it remains the case that in different areas every member state needs the solidarity of the others. We need a fair sharing of the burden – maybe in different areas for different countries.”

Among Brexiters, Von der Leyen has been characterised as a cartoon Eurocrat intent on building “a centralised, undemocratic, updated form of communism”, as the Brexit party leader, Nigel Farage, said in the parliament. She once told an interviewer that her dream was “a united states of Europe – run along the lines of the federal states of Switzerland, Germany or the USA”.

Asked whether her dream had changed since then, she said: “It has become more mature and more realistic. In the European Union we have unity in diversity. That is something different to federalism. I think that is the right path.”

[greybeard]

Boris Johnson could be the last ever UK prime minister, warns Gordon Brown
Yahoo News UK David Harding,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-john...165140236.html



Boris Johnson will be the last prime minister of the UK unless there are moves to protect the union which is “hanging by a thread”, Gordon Brown has warned.

The former prime minister predicted the combination of “Boris and Brexit” will be at the heart of the SNP’s independence campaign, which he said could see the 300-year-old union “bite the dust”.

Mr Brown called for a “positive, patriotic and progressive” case for Scotland’s role in the UK, contrasting it with “Boris Johnson’s history of casual hostility and the shrill and economically suicidal separatist obsessions of the SNP”.

Arguing Scottish independence would be an “even worse financial catastrophe” for Scotland’s economy, communities and citizens than a no-deal Brexit, Mr Brown claimed £50 billion of Scottish trade and up to a million jobs would be at risk from leaving the UK.


The former Labour leader said the SNP’s plans for independence and a new currency would leave “no real alternative to a hard border” between England and an independent Scotland.

Writing in the Scottish Daily Mail, the former Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath MP also attacked the “anti-European Conservative extremism” of the Tory leadership contest and said it is seen as anti-Scottish.

He said: “People in Scotland deserve better than more decades riven by seemingly endless divisions and conflict.

“There is a better way forward than having to limit our choice to these two extremes.

“Not only do we need to ensure that the destructive policies of the Scottish Government and the official Scottish opposition are fully exposed, we need to set out anew the positive, patriotic and progressive case for our Scottish Parliament and our role in the UK.”

Mr Brown also announced the creation of a new think tank, Our Scottish Futures, saying: “It will show how Scotland can stand tall in the world without standing apart from our nearest neighbours and it will demonstrate why Scotland is at its best leading in the UK, not leaving it.”

A spokeswoman for the SNP said: “The prospect of a Boris Johnson-led Brexit Britain illustrates exactly why Scotland needs independence.”

[greybeard]

If there is another "peoples vote" = Referendum--I cant see UK leaving.
The Media is full of the cost of Brexit--very little positive for leaving.
Chris

[greybeard]

I watched the BBC1 Andrew Marr show.
The current Chancellor was on and spoke a lot of clear common sense and answered all the questions.
That makes a change for a Politician.
A man of stature--he would make a good Conservative leader I think.
The spokes man for Southern Ireland was also worth listening to.
Well we will know this week who is the new PM.

Chris

[Matthew]

Posted by greybeard (here)

UK will be 'at the mercy of the French' in event of a no-deal Brexit
Yahoo News UK Yahoo News UK
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-mer...113008323.html


The UK would be at the mercy of the French in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to Chancellor Philip Hammond.

He warned that the next prime minister could be left at the mercy of French president Emmanuel Macron.

Mr Hammond said the French would be able to "dial up" or "dial down" at will the queues for goods going into the port of Calais.

He added that Paris would be able to exploit the Channel crossing to exert pressure in the same way that the Spanish had used the border with Gibraltar.

Despite spending more than £4 billion on preparations for Brexit, Mr Hammond told a BBC Panorama special there would be a limit to the amount of influence the Government could exert in the event of no-deal.

Asked if the UK could control Brexit, the Chancellor said: "We can't because many of the levers are held by others - the EU 27 or private business. We can seek to persuade them but we can't control it.

"For example, we can make sure that goods flow inwards through the port of Dover without any friction but we can't control the outward flow into the port of Calais.

"The French can dial that up or dial it down, just the same as the Spanish for years have dialled up or dialled down the length of the queues at the border going into Gibraltar."


Mr Hammond - who said earlier this month that a disorderly Brexit could cost the Exchequer up to £90 billion - has long warned against the dangers of leaving without a deal with Brussels.

The Chancellor, who has indicated he does not expect to remain in post once there is a new prime minister in No 10, is reported to be at the head of a group of around 30 Tory MPs determined to prevent no-deal.

Britain's Brexit Crisis is scheduled to be screened on BBC One on Thursday.

In negotiations there is a concept called 'Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement (BATNA)'

BATNA is a key term and useful tool in negotiations. It is explained in 4 minutes here.

TL;DR
Your BATNA is your greatest source of strength in any negotiation

https://youtu.be/oVGjuUjr2YI

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=oVGjuUjr2YI