The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU [Archive] - Page 3 - The Project Avalon Community Forum

greybeard

30th May 2019, 08:30

Six times Boris Johnson has been economical with the truth... at best
Yahoo News UK Will Metcalfe,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/from-killer-buses-to-spending-a-night-in-the-cells-the-lies-of-boris-johnson-revealed-155646406.html

File photo dated 10/01/19 of Boris Johnson who will be summonsed to court to face accusations of misconduct in public office for comments made in the run-up to the EU referendum, District Judge Margot Coleman ruled.
Boris Johnson who will be summonsed to court to face accusations of misconduct in public office for comments made in the run-up to the EU referendum, District Judge Margot Coleman ruled.

He’s the front runner to win the Tory leadership and step into 10 Downing Street next month.

But Boris Johnson doesn’t have the best track record when it comes to being open and honest.

The former journalist has been sacked from a number of roles for both political, and otherwise, for being economical with the truth.

Here are some of his biggest porkies.
File photo dated 12/05/16 of former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, who will be summonsed to court to face accusations of misconduct in public office over claims he was lying when he said the UK gave the EU ??350 million a week.
The bus wasn't Boris' first lie
He claimed the UK sends £350m a week to the European Union

Now subject of a landmark private prosecution, Boris repeatedly claimed Britain sends £350m a week to the EU during the Brexit campaign.

If found guilty of misconduct in a public office he faces more than six months in prison.

The claim was refuted by the UK Statistics Authority - along with a number of independent fact checkers. However, the myth has stuck with some people still believing the government sends hundreds of millions into EU coffers on a weekly basis.
Boris Johnson responds after Prime Minister Theresa May made a statement to MPs in the House of Commons, London on her new Brexit motion.
As a journalist he made up a quote, from his godfather.
He got fired for ‘making up quotes’ as a journalist

Boris began his media career long before his spells as a guest on Have I Got News for You.

However, they were similarly shambolic.

His first frontpage story was a story about the discovery of Edward II’s Rose Palace, who famously had a same-sex lover.

Speaking to the Independent in 2002 he claimed the tale was his “biggest cock-up”.

He said: “The trouble was that somewhere in my copy I managed to attribute to Colin [Lucas - Boris’ godfather] the view that Edward II and Piers Gaveston would have been cavorting together in the Rose Palace.

“Unfortunately, some linkside don at a provincial university spotted that by the time the Rose Palace was built, Piers Gaveston would long have been murdered. It was very nasty.”

He followed up his cock-up with another story: “I made matters worse,” he wrote. “I wrote a further story saying that the mystery had deepened about the date of the castle.”
Boris Johnson is followed by media after leaving the Cabinet office in Westminster.
He's repeatedly lied about Europe
He created EU myths

After his short spell at the Times he moved to Brussels as the Telegraph’s man on the ground from 1989 to 1994.

Here he proceeded to write a series of stories including “Threat to British pink sausages” and “cheese row takes the biscuit”.

Chris Patten later described Boris as "one of the greatest exponents of fake journalism".
Boris Johnson arrives at the Houses of Parliament in Westminster on the day that MPs will be asked to consider a range of alternative Brexit options after Parliament seized control of the Commons agenda to force a series of
He denied a long-running affair
He lied about an affair

In 2004 it was reported Johnson had been having an affair with Spectator columnist Petronella Wyatt which resulted in two terminated pregnancies.

At first he called the claims “piffle” but once proven he was asked to resign by then Tory leader Michael Howard.

Johnson refused and was sacked as vice-chairman of the Tory party and shadow arts minister for his public lies.

He claimed Obama had an "ancestral dislike" of Britain
Obama doesn’t like Britain - apparently

Johnson claimed Barack Obama removed a bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval office because he was “part-Kenyan”.

His actual phrasing was an “ancestral dislike” for the UK.

Churchill’s grandson, and Johnson’s fellow Tory MP, Nicholas Soames said the claims were “appalling”.
File photo dated 10/01/19 of former UK foreign secretary Boris Johnson speaking at the Pendulum Summit at the Dublin Convention Centre last month, a speech for which he was paid more than ??51,000.
Lies, damned lies and...Boris Johnson.
Bending the truth about buses

During Boris’ 2007 London mayoral campaign he vowed to get rid of bendy buses in London.

He claimed: “They wipe out cyclists, there are many cyclists killed every year by them.”

From their introduction in 2001 to their abolition in 2011 not a single cyclist was killed by a bendy bus.

He said he got arrested

Johnson claims he and David Cameron were arrested and spent a night in the cells after the Bullingdon Club threw a flowerpot through a restaurant window.

However, both he and Cameron escaped before police arrived - according to the Financial Times.

However, depending on the outcome of the private prosecution he may experience what it’s like behind bars soon enough.

Clear Light

30th May 2019, 09:09

The claim was refuted by the UK Statistics Authority - along with a number of independent fact checkers. However, the myth has stuck with some people still believing the government sends hundreds of millions into EU coffers on a weekly basis

Ah, thanks Greybeard, and for anyone interested here's the link to the letter from the UK Statistics Authority : Letter-from-Sir-Andrew-Dilnot-to-Norman-Lamb-MP-210416.pdf (https://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Letter-from-Sir-Andrew-Dilnot-to-Norman-Lamb-MP-210416.pdf)

Snippet :

As set out in the attached note, the gross contribution to the EU in 2014 was £19.1 billion. After the rebate, the contribution was £14.7 billion and the net contribution by the UK public sector was £9.9 billion. Taking an estimate of receipts to non-public sector bodies into account produces an estimated average of £7.1 billion for the period 2010-2014

So in other words the actual annual "Net Figure" is much reduced from Boris' claimed amount of £18.2 billion (52 * £350m) to £7.1 billion or approximately £136m per week !!!

Gosh, a Politician being "economical" with the "Facts" ... who'd have thunk it eh ? ;)

scanner

30th May 2019, 09:21

greybeard

30th May 2019, 09:25

The public are conned big time by politicians.
Most dont care to cross check statements.

Chris

scanner

30th May 2019, 09:41

The public are conned big time by politicians.
Most dont care to cross check statements.

ChrisIt goes much deeper than that Chris. Windrush, Grenfill Towers, and selling of Arms to ME countries, to name but a few of their misdeeds. Many people are dead because of them in Parliament. If it was any of us, we'd be in the Tower waiting the hangman, I'm sure of that.

Clear Light

30th May 2019, 09:49

The public are conned big time by politicians.
Most dont care to cross check statements.

Chris

40662

Yet another case of Political "Spin Doctoring" LOL !!! 🙄

greybeard

30th May 2019, 10:13

There is a comedy TV show "Would I lie to you?
One of the reasons I post on this thread is to expose the deceit.
Which politician is innocent of being economic with the truth I wonder!!!!
People hear what they want to hear.
The Europeans are consistent--no further negotiation possible--who hears that?
Parliament will not allow exit without a deal--what are you left with?

Chris

greybeard

30th May 2019, 12:19

After last week's elections, how can the EU be called undemocratic? Now listen to the people one more time
The Independent Vince Cable,The Independent Wed, 29 May

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/last-weeks-elections-eu-called-065025439.html

“Brexit has won the day” was an inevitable narrative after Sunday evening's European election results. There is only one problem with this analysis: it is complete nonsense. A little under a third of the vote going to Nigel Farage is not an "overwhelming victory" any more than the process of leaving the EU has proved “the easiest in human history”.

In fact, the Brexit Party increased only very slightly the vote that Ukip, the leader's former party, achieved five years ago. The Remain parties, however, were indeed the beneficiaries of a substantial boost: my own party scored its best result in a national election for a decade, with 3.4 million votes.

Taken together, the clear Remain vote – for the Liberal Democrats, Green Party, Change UK, the Scottish and Welsh Nationalist parties, Sinn Fein and the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland – totalled 6.8 million, whereas the hard Brexit vote – for Nigel Farage and Ukip – was only 5.8m. Factoring in the likely allegiances of Conservative (80 per cent Leave) and Labour (60 per cent Remain) voters still leaves Remain well ahead.

Despite all this, I am still berated regularly by those who say calling for a People’s Vote is a disgraceful "betrayal of the will of the people".

The Leave campaign having clawed its way to a mendacious victory three years ago demands that the views of the public must be frozen in aspic. The real guardians of the "will of the people" are those of us who are interested in what people think today.

There are two immediate preoccupations for pro-Europeans now, one in the EU and one at home.

The first is the question of what direction Europe as a whole should take. It is popular folklore to say that the EU is hopelessly undemocratic, yet 403 million people were entitled to vote in last week’s election – the biggest pan-continental democratic exercise anywhere in the world (only India beats in sheer size), and the outcome really matters.

Votes in the European Parliament – which will sit first in July – are critical to who becomes the president of the European Commission, and what their programme will be.

Chosen in concert between the Parliament and the Council (which composes 28 elected prime ministers), whoever heads up the Commission will have a clear effect on the Union’s approach to everything from agricultural policy to climate change, to reform of its own institutions. We will be pushing for a Liberal commissioner, Margrethe Vestager, to take the helm.

At home, Remain MPs will need to be fleet of foot in preventing a no-deal Brexit, despite the wild ebb and flow of Conservative politics over the next few months.

There is plainly no majority in Parliament for just slipping out of the EU one wet October evening, without any conclusion on what the terms of departure should be. To do so would promise chaos at ports and catastrophe for the economy.

But the parliamentary mechanisms to stop that happening are, at the very least, more limited than they were at the time of May’s first series of “meaningful votes” on her Brexit deal. Critical to the political pressure necessary will be the courage of remaining sensible Conservative MPs; many of them realise that sitting on their hands would be an unacceptable dereliction of duty.

The Liberal Democrats led the "Stop Brexit" cause in the recent elections and we will continue to lead efforts in the UK and European Parliaments, working across party lines to end the Brexit mess.

The Labour Party now looks like its constructive ambiguity may finally become a touch more constructive and a little less ambiguous. It too must surely recognise that the prospect of a no-deal Brexit as a prime ministerial option of choice makes putting the final outcome back to the public in a Final Say referendum all the more important.

Sir Vince Cable is leader of the Liberal Democrats

greybeard

30th May 2019, 19:26

Chancellor Philip Hammond could try to bring down next government to block no-deal
Sky News Aubrey Allegretti, political reporter,Sky News

Chancellor Philip Hammond has suggested he could try to bring down the government to block a no-deal Brexit.

In an exclusive interview with Sky News, he left open the option of backing a no-confidence vote against the next prime minister to stop them pursuing something "not in Britain's interests".

Mr Hammond admitted it is not a move he would make "lightly or enthusiastically", but warned that "national interest trumps the party interest".

Tory MPs vying to replace Theresa May have been jockeying over whether they would ensure the UK leaves the EU on 31 October regardless of whether or not parliament passes a withdrawal agreement.

Three former cabinet ministers have committed to doing so - Esther McVey, Dominic Raab and Boris Johnson.

Mr Hammond said he was meeting all the candidates this week to decide who to back.

"I would not support a policy of no-deal by choice," he told Sky News.

"That is not in Britain's interests, it would be taking huge risks with the unity of our country, with our security and clearly with our economy.

"I couldn't support a government policy stance that said as a matter of choice we are going to pursue a no-deal exit."

Asked if he would vote for or against the next government in a no-confidence vote if it pursued no-deal, Mr Hammond said: "I've been in parliament for 22 years.

"I have never once voted against the Conservative whip, so it is not something that I would do lightly or enthusiastically.

"But I am very clear that the national interest trumps the party interest.

"And if I am presented with a difficult choice, I will act in what I believe is the best interest of this country."

He previously told the BBC's Andrew Marr Show: "I don't want to have to start now contemplating such a course of action."

It comes after Commons Speaker John Bercow suggested MPs would thwart any plan by the next Tory leader for a no-deal divorce from the EU.

"The idea that parliament is going to be... evacuated from the centre stage of debate on Brexit is unimaginable. It is simply unimaginable," he said.

Britain is on course to leave the EU in five months' time, with the leadership contest for a new prime minister expected to wind up by the end of July.

greybeard

31st May 2019, 11:16

News
Brexit happened out of 'nostalgia' for 'global powerful Britain'
Yahoo News UK Laura Mowat,Yahoo News UK
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/michel-barnier-brexit-nostalgia-113602776.html

EU negotiator Michel Barnier has blamed “nostalgia” for Brexit saying it serves no place in politics and claiming people voted to leave the European Union in the “hope for a return to a powerful global Britain”.

In an interview with The New York Review of Books Mr Barnier said the deal already offered to the UK government by the EU is the only deal available.

This comes after Theresa May has given a resignation speech following her three failed attempts to get an EU withdrawal deal passed by MPs in the House of Commons.

Regarding what will happen from now with the deal, Mr Barnier said: “There are three options: a deal based on the agreement finalised six months ago; withdrawal without a deal; or no Brexit.

“It will have to be the choice of the UK. During the last three years, we have delivered what the UK wants: leaving the EU, leaving the single market, leaving the customs union [after the Irish “backstop” is resolved].

“Even if we regret their decision profoundly, it is their sovereign decision and we have to respect it.”

The EU bigwig said there were some people voting for Brexit in the UK as they did not want to accept the EU’s rules.

He said: “But there were, also, people voting for Brexit who simply don’t want to accept rules.

Read More on Yahoo News:

Jeremy Corbyn moves closer to second referendum as ‘only way out’ of Brexit crisis

Jeremy Hunt is winning the race to be the next prime minister among Tory MPs

“Some based in the City of London voted to leave, as they don’t want to accept the Union’s regulations on their trading; they want to speculate freely and the Union doesn’t allow them to do so.”

Mr Barnier said he wants the UK to remain a partner, friend and ally of the EU and so the relationship between the two parties must be “constructive”.

The chief EU negotiator said the main problem in Ireland today is Brexit due to “contradictions in the demands of the Tories”.

He said: “You cannot leave the single market and customs union without introducing border controls.”
Conservative MP Boris Johnson leaves a house in London on May 30, 2019. - Boris Johnson, considered the frontrunner to become Britain's next prime minister, must appear in court over allegations that he knowingly lied during the Brexit referendum campaign, a judge ruled Wednesday. Johnson, the former foreign secretary, will be summoned to appear over allegations of misconduct in public office, judge Margot Coleman said in a written decision, without specifying the date

Conservative MP Boris Johnson has said he will deliver on Brexit if he wins the leadership contest.

Nigel Farage has now demanded a seat at Brexit negotiations after his new party swept to victory in the United Kingdom’s European Parliament election.

The leadership contest is underway in the Conservative Party with Boris Johnson leading the way in the polls.

MPs, Jeremy Hunt, Dominic Raab and Mr Johnson have all said they would renegotiate the backstop if they were to replace Mrs May.

Mr Raab said he would tear up the backstop and pursue plans to put alternative arrangements in place to avoid a hard border.

Mr Hunt has also said he wants to replace the Northern Irish backstop with “alternative arrangements”.

greybeard

1st June 2019, 05:43

Tory members are overwhelmingly white, male and old – we can't let them decide our future
The Independent Jenna Norman,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/tory-members-overwhelmingly-white-male-111300246.html

With a week to go until Theresa May formally ends her disastrous premiership, all eyes are on her potential successor. And what an embarrassment of riches there are to choose from. By my count, we’re currently at twelve candidates: from the old favourites like Michael Gove and Boris Johnson to the new faces of cliff-diving Conservatism, Esther McVey and Dominic Raab.

Many of the candidates will place democracy front and centre of their campaigns, promising to fulfil the hollow promises made in 2016 as a matter of integrity and duty to the “British people”. And yet, whoever takes over from May will ultimately be decided by the Conservative membership who are 71 per cent male, 97 per cent white and 44 per cent aged over 65.

In fact, research from Queen Mary University in 2018 shows that just 0.75 per cent of the Conservative party membership are young women: 5 per cent of members are aged 18-24 and just 15 per cent of them are young women. A bunch of male, pale and stale card-carrying Conservative voters will be the ones to decide the future of this country. What was that about democratic deficit?

The choice of Tory party leader will be unrepresentative and undemocratic. And yet this prime minister could be the one to lead us back into or out of Europe. They could also preside over a crucial process of healing the country but a glance to their history with tackling inequality doesn’t bode well. Those posturing for leadership don’t exactly have the strongest records on women’s rights. Let’s take a closer look at some of the leading candidates.

First up, Boris Johnson. It’s hardly a hot take to suggest that Boris’s class clown act is a clever guise for what is really a conniving and ruthless long game to secure the keys to Number 10 but has his time finally arrived? Let’s hope not. Just last year Johnson was reported to the Equality and Human Rights Commission for describing women who wear the Niqab as “letter boxes” and “bank robbers”.

His past comments on women also include: women go to university because: “they’ve got to find men to marry” and a personal favourite“voting Tory will cause your wife to have bigger breasts and increase your chances of owning a BMW”.

I’d love to tell you things get better from here but alas, Raab is infamous for his hostility to women’s rights. He famously declared in a PoliticsHome article in 2011 that “feminists are now amongst the most obnoxious bigots”. Then, in what is truly a show of own-goalsmanship, defended this claim live on The Andrew Marr Show this week. Despite the abundance of evidence to the contrary – including the glacial pace of closing the pay gap and ending violence against women – Raab thinks it is in fact men who have got a “raw deal”.

Raab’s attitudes towards food bank users as those with a “cash flow problem” and disabled children having “wish lists” have been widely publicised elsewhere, but it’s worth noting that a 2018 study found that women make up 56 per cent of food bank users and 73 per cent of those receiving carers allowance. Turns out elitism isn’t gender neutral.

Then there’s Michael Gove, the infamous Education Secretary who increased teachers’ workloads and decreased their salaries, while spending per pupil fell 8 per cent between 2010 and 2018. Almost three quarters of school teachers are women meaning that it is women who have been predominantly hit by these cuts.

Dare I even ask about Jeremy Hunt? Best not to be honest. After all this is the man who confirmed to The Times in 2012 that he was in favour of halving the abortion limit. “I voted to reduce the time down to 12 weeks. I still have that view,” he said.

Sticking with health, all major medical bodies passed no confidence motions on our former Health Secretary - and no surprise. On his watch, waiting times for cancer care and A&E increased, thousands of nurses (89 per cent of whom are women) resigned due to poor working conditions and pay, and the social care sector has been ravaged beyond compare. Approximately 1.2 million people aged 65 and over in England (1 in 8) have unmet care needs, an increase of 48 per cent since 2010.

As Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt has described Saudi Arabia – a country where women must obtain permission from a male guardian to travel abroad or obtain a passport and the death penalty still stands – as a “very important military ally”. He also suggested Singapore, a country where there is no anti-discrimination legislation and which ranks 147 out of 159 in Oxfam’s Inequality index, as a model for post-Brexit Britain.

All in all it’s not looking good. We are now in a position where a new prime minister, elected by old white men, will enter office only to carry on with whatever Brexit they care to pursue regardless. With these ideologues lining up to follow May as PM now is hardly the time to be complacent about the status of women. We’ve already seen just how easy it is for populist misogynist to gain national credence elsewhere in the world.

The Brexit we were promised in 2016 looks nothing like this Tory catastrophe. And if the EU election results show us anything it's that the UK is collectively pro-Remain — and certainly that there is no mandate for No Deal. A People’s Vote is therefore now a democratic imperative. We cannot afford to leave it to the boys.

Jenna Norman is a campaigns co-ordinator at Women for a People's Vote

greybeard

2nd June 2019, 10:37

Brexit Party supporters joining Conservatives to vote for anti-EU leadership candidates, analysis reveals
The Independent Benjamin Kentish,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-party-supporters-joining-conservatives-170200544.html

Brexit Party supporters are flocking to join the Conservative Party to help elect the next prime minister, new analysis has revealed.

A study of social media posts found dozens of supporters of Nigel Farage’s party boasting that they had joined the Conservatives to support Eurosceptic leadership candidates.

They include people who had previously been reported to the Conservative Party for alleged Islamophobia, including one who endorsed the idea of “a total ban on Muslim immigration” and another who shared a joke about Muslims being wiped out in America.

The dossier, compiled by the People’s Vote campaign and seen by The Independent, revealed dozens of Facebook posts from Brexit Party supporters who had successfully signed up to join the Conservatives.

A YouGov poll last week found that 59 per cent of current Tory members voted for Mr Farage’s party in last month’s European Parliament elections.

But the revelation that Brexit Party supporters are actively signing up as Conservative members to vote in the leadership contest is likely to fuel fears of “entryism” – an issue that has already been raised by several prominent Tory MPs.

Conservative Party rules state that members must have been in the party for at least three months to be eligible to vote, but many Brexit Party supporters claimed they had signed up for Tory membership months ago in anticipation of a leadership contest.

One wrote on Eurosceptic ringleader Jacob Rees-Mogg’s Facebook page: “I joined so I could vote when the time came.”

Another said they had signed up “just to be able to have a voice in who I want as next leader”. One said: “I joined the Conservative Party to get rid of May and her cronies.”

Phillip Lee, the former justice minister and a supporter of the campaign for a second referendum, told The Independent: “I have long since feared that some are joining [the Conservatives] now at the instigation of rivals now who do not have either our party’s interests or those of our country at heart. This dossier makes disturbing reading for all of us who love the Conservative Party.

“Our party members, most of whom remain some of the most sensible and decent people in Britain, will have the chance to pick not only our next leader but our next prime minister. It is vital that we choose someone who represents our party’s great traditions, who will fight for business and families, not the extreme and entryist agenda of the narrow nationalists behind Nigel Farage.”

On Saturday, Dr Lee was the subject of a no confidence vote by Tory members in his Bracknell constituency. He has previously claimed that more than half of those behind the move had only joined his local party in the last year.

Last year, Leave.EU chairman and former Ukip donor Arron Banks said he wanted to use his group’s 90,000 members to “recruit” 50,000 new members to the Conservatives to “make a real difference ... and help install a true Brexiteer such as Boris Johnson or Jacob Rees-Mogg to the top job”.

Since then, Leave.EU has spent thousands of pounds on online adverts urging its supporters to join the Tories.

Despite widespread anger at the government’s handling of Brexit and the party plummeting in opinion polls, the Conservatives’ membership increased from 124,000 in March 2018 to more than 160,000 today.

The party has claimed this was a result of a recruitment drive introduced by Brandon Lewis, the party chairman, but the new analysis is likely to lead to concerns that it is also a result of entryism.

The Conservatives have been contacted for comment.

greybeard

2nd June 2019, 11:13

Nigel Farage's Brexit Party takes general election poll lead for very first time
The Independent Adam Forrest,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/nigel-farages-brexit-party-takes-220853791.html

The Brexit Party has topped a general election voting intention poll for the very first time, according to a new survey.

Nigel Farage’s insurgent outfit was found to be the most popular party on 26 per cent, ahead of Labour on 22 per cent, in the poll asking voters how they will cast their ballots at the next Westminster election.

The Conservatives are third on just 17 per cent, with the Liberal Democrats on 16 per cent and the Greens on 11 per cent, according to the poll carried out by Opinium for The Observer.

The results suggest pro-Leave voters are not ready to abandon Mr Farage’s party at a general election after granting him victory at last week’s European parliamentary elections.

The Brexit Party has increased its backing by two points since the last Opinium survey two weeks ago, while Labour and the Conservatives have seen support fall by seven and five points respectively.

The latest polling does show a significant boost in support for the pro-Remain parties, however. The Greens are up eight points and the Lib Dems up five since the since the company’s last survey.

There was bad news for Change UK, however, with support for the independent MPs’ group down two points to just 1 per cent.

The results would, hypothetically, give the Brexit Party 306 seats in the House of Commons, according to the Electoral Calculus website. Labour would be on 205 and the Tories would be left with just 26 seats.

Launched only six weeks ago, Mr Farage’s party has rapidly absorbed the support of millions of voters angry over Britain’s failure to leave the EU. After winning 32 per cent of the vote and gaining 29 MEPs at the European elections, the former Ukip leader insisted his new organisation had the capacity to “stun everybody in a general election too”.

On Saturday Mr Farage has said winning the upcoming Peterborough by-election would be “even bigger” than the European results. His party is the bookmakers’ favourite to win the seat on 6 June.

The new poll comes as Donald Trump make his second dramatic intervention in British politics in as many days, calling on the UK to leave the EU without a deal if Brussels refuses to meet its demands, and urging the government to send Mr Farage into the negotiations.

He told the Sunday Times it was a “mistake” not to the involve Brexit Party leader Mr Farage in talks, saying he has a “lot to offer” and is someone he likes “a lot”.

Despite current excitement and fear about the Brexit Party, several leading experts have predicted success at a general election would be a much tougher task for Mr Farage’s group.

“When you’re fighting a general election with 650 constituencies, you need an organisation with grassroots organisational zeal,” Liverpool University’s professor of politics Andrew Russell told The Independent.

“The Brexit Party just don’t have that. It is always going to be difficult for them to win from a standing start. It’s very difficult to see them getting more than one or two seats.”

greybeard

3rd June 2019, 11:07

Donald Trump calls Sadiq Khan a 'stone cold loser' as he lands for three-day UK state visit
Yahoo News UK Ross McGuinness,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-set-to-arrive-in-the-uk-as-guest-of-the-queen-for-threeday-state-visit-065237522.html

Donald Trump called Sadiq Khan a “stone cold loser” just minutes before he landed in the UK for a three-day state visit.

The US president tweeted his latest attack on the mayor of London as Air Force One landed at Stansted Airport just before 9am on Monday.

Mr Trump said Mr Khan has “done a terrible job” as mayor, and said he was “foolishly nasty” to him.

He then called Mr Khan “a stone cold loser” and made disparaging comments about his height.

Mr Khan responded by accusing the US president of “childish insults”.

Mr Trump tweeted: “Kahn reminds me very much of our very dumb and incompetent Mayor of NYC, de Blasio, who has also done a terrible job - only half his height.”

A spokesman for Sadiq Khan said: "This is much more serious than childish insults which should be beneath the President of the United States.

"Sadiq is representing the progressive values of London and our country, warning that Donald Trump is the most egregious example of a growing far-right threat around the globe, which is putting at risk the basic values that have defined our liberal democracies for more than 70 years."

greybeard

3rd June 2019, 15:58

Corbyn’s destructive ambiguity on Brexit has failed
The Guardian William Keegan,The Guardian Sun, 2 Jun

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/corbyn-destructive-ambiguity-brexit-failed-060031203.html

I am told that, shortly before the elections for the European parliament, Jeremy Corbyn was flirting with the idea of being less hostile towards the Remain campaign. Even he could read the opinion polls. However, according to my informant, he was immediately sat upon by his spin doctor, Seumas Milne, and other members of the politburo of what passes for the modern Labour party.

The policy of so-called “constructive ambiguity” remained in place, with all too predictable results at the polls. This approach was tested to destruction, thereby proving what had been obvious for some time: that it was, in truth, a policy of destructive ambiguity.

So what do Milne and his close colleagues do? They terminate the party membership of the previously influential Labour spin doctor Alastair Campbell, for admitting – perhaps even boasting – that, as a staunch Remainer, he had, like many of us, voted Lib Dem.

Things have come to a pretty pass when that prominent supporter of much that Labour wishes to achieve, the journalist and broadcaster Paul Mason, calls for the removal of Corbyn’s inner politburo, who have fomented their leader’s worst Eurosceptical instincts, and achieved such an electoral disaster. Apart from anything else, with the present Conservative government an international laughing stock, it is a remarkable achievement to have become such a self-destructive opposition.

I could hardly agree more with Mason’s call for Labour to “scrap Brexit and rebuild Britain instead”. In which context, people who have been asking me “where is Gordon Brown?” should be pleased to hear that he is now playing a prominent role in the counterattack on that notorious snake-oil salesman, the egregious Nigel Farage.

Brown takes Farage seriously. He speaks of “a new battle for Britain”: “This is a battle against intolerance, prejudice, xenophobia and the manufacture of distrust and disunity.” Incidentally, while cynically continuing to draw an income from the European parliament, Farage, with a characteristic mixture of ignorance and prejudice, proposes to ban university courses in European studies.

I wonder if Lavery is aware that, in his contempt for intellectuals, he is sneering at great Labour figures of the past

Like Corbyn’s disappointed disciple Mason, Brown recognises that, while trying to disabuse the “left behind” of the fantasy that Brexit would mysteriously improve their lot, Labour must address “the fears surrounding immigration, sovereignty, the state of our towns … and Britain’s now rampant poverty and inequality”.

Now, the good news about the British EU election result – the counterpart of the Labour party’s humiliation – was that the combined vote of all the Remain parties easily outshone the Brexit vote. Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy leader, and Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, have been espousing the cause of another referendum for some time, and have now been joined by the shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, and the shadow foreign secretary, Emily Thornberry.

But, according to the Labour party’s chair, Ian Lavery – another member of the politburo – those of us who believe the country should have another look at the prospect of Brexit are “leftwing intellectuals” sneering at “ordinary people”.

Oh dear. I wonder if Lavery is aware that, in his contempt for intellectuals, he is sneering at the memory of, among many others, such great Labour figures of the past as Sir Stafford Cripps, Hugh Dalton, Hugh Gaitskell, Tony Crosland, Michael Foot, Denis Healey – I could go on. Moreover, the Stalinists and Trotskyists who are said to be such influences on Corbyn’s politburo liked to think of themselves as intellectuals.

Meanwhile, we have a Conservative party in power whose candidates for the succession to Theresa May are, with honourable exceptions such as Philip Hammond, making fools of themselves in competing to out-Farage Farage by championing the cause of any kind of Brexit – to the extent, in some cases, of being prepared to leave the EU on 31 October “without a deal”.

Such an outcome – involving the termination of decades of regulatory agreements and contracts, and chaos at the docks and airports – would almost certainly bring the economy close to a halt, and threaten goodness knows what in the streets.

Ministers talk of “delivering Brexit” as if it were as simple as delivering groceries. If they delivered a so-called “hard Brexit”, they would foul up the delivery of many staple requirements. As the French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy recently told a British audience: “Please don’t go. Brexit will be a disaster for the UK. Stay!”

greybeard

4th June 2019, 17:05

Trump says Brexit 'can and should happen' as he dismisses Corbyn and protesters
Yahoo News UK Ross McGuinness,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/president-trump-to-meet-theresa-may-on-day-two-of-state-visit-but-will-he-also-see-boris-064650874.html

( a lot more on the link)

- Donald Trump says Brexit ‘can and should happen’

- President turned down a meeting with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn

- Baby blimp flied for two hours in front of President's motorcade

- Michael Gove and Jeremy Hunt invited for meetings with Trump

- Boris Johnson and Trump speak on phone for 20 minutes

- President says selling off NHS is ‘on the table’ for trade talks

Donald Trump has said Brexit “can and should happen” and claimed he had turned down a meeting with Jeremy Corbyn during his state visit.

The US president emerged from talks at Downing Street with prime minister Theresa May in typically bullish mood.

Speaking at a joint press conference at the Foreign Office, Mr Trump said of Brexit: “It will happen and it should happen.

“This is a great country which wants to have its own borders and its own identity. The prime minister has brought it to a very good point where something will take place in the very near future.”

He paid tribute to Mrs May, saying to her: “That deal is teed up. They have to do something. You deserve a lot of credit, you really do.”

He said it was a “true honour” working with Mrs May, telling her: “You are a tremendous professional and a person who loves her country dearly.”

greybeard

4th June 2019, 17:18

Eye on France: Brexit blues bite in London

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/eye-france-brexit-blues-bite-160004508.html

Over the weekend, the European Banking Authority quietly moved from its Canary Wharf offices in London, to set up shop here in Paris, in the business district known as La Défence. The reason for the move is, in case you have not already guessed, big, bad, Brexit.

The business magazine Forbes has a lovely, if completely incomprehensible, report on the move of the abbreviated EBA and its sister agency the EMA from the UK. This is because, once Theresa May, she’s the PM, announced that the UK would leave the EU and refuse the jurisdiction of the CJEU, there was nothing the DEXEU could do.

I hope that’s clear.

The DEXEU is the United Kingdom’s Department for Exiting the European Union. They tried to convince the European Banking Authority, the EBA, that staying in London after Brexit would pose no problem. The EU negotiators saw it differently. The bank is a Single Market, SM, institution operating under EU law. No way could it remain in a country that was leaving the Single Market and repudiating the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, or CJEU.

Just to complete the explanatory round-up of those abbreviations, the EMA is also leaving London. That’s the European Medicines Agency which regulates the pills and potions which our doctors prescribe to keep us safe, sane and standing upright.

No way were we going to leave such intimate matters in the hands of those pesky Brits. Take a pill, Bill!

But let’s get back to the serious stuff, the money!

All through the Brexit debate, the Rulers of the Universe who operate from the towers and spires of London’s financial district were arrogantly adamant that the City would remain the centre of the known world, whatever happened to Europe. They would have free access to the European marketplace, simply because that European marketplace could not survive without them.

Will London become a distant backwater?

Now, with no deal in place, it looks as if London might become a distant backwater, deserted by both the continental institutions and the big financial groups who like to be within a stone’s throw of the action.

The Forbes’ article continues by pointing out that there is as yet no agreement on anything, and the UK hasn’t left the EU. But the cross-channel stance on Brexit has, we are told, hardened considerably. The European elections saw popular opinion polarised between leaving the EU with no deal and not leaving at all.

Mrs May, the unfortunate prime minister whose attempt to please everyone ended up pleasing no-one, has been hounded out of office. The front runners to succeed her would all rather leave the EU with no deal than agree to the Irish backstop – which is perverse, since a majority of Northern Irelanders themselves seem quite comfortable with that bizarre attempt to ensure that northern loyalists get to keep their cake, eat it, and gobble the share of their nationalist neighbours as well.

But that’s because the Democratic Unionist Party believes that eternal damnation would be preferable to even a few months of fraternal sharing of their island province with southern Catholics.

Let's hear it for Plan B

As the danger of a no-deal departure increases, more London-based financial institutions are setting up subsidiaries in European Union member countries. European banking is leaving London, heading for Paris, Luxembourg, Frankfurt or Dublin.

Financial services have tended to be the forgotten facet of the Brexit debate. London is by far the richest part of the UK; many of those who voted to leave blame the vast GDP per capita gap between London and everywhere else on its close connections with the hated EU.

Some analysts argue that the UK’s dominant financial services sector drains resources from other sectors and prevents the economy from diversifying. And people haven’t forgotten the financial crisis, the bank bailouts and the austerity imposed on them to pay for it all.

There is a widespread view that cutting the bloated City down to size wouldn’t be a bad thing. Protecting banks from Brexit is thus a much harder sell than protecting car manufacturers and farmers. Unsurprisingly, politicians have concentrated on softening the impact of Brexit on goods exports, and largely ignored services.

The news is not all bad

The Reuters news agency, which specialises in sharp financial information, says that property prices in the City of London are on the way up. So someone thinks London is an investment opportunity, Brexit or otherwise.

The Forbes guy thinks the next big thing could be a career for London’s rich and powerful running a kind of off-shore financial centre, right on Europe’s doorstep.

Strange creatures those Brits. Even when they offer to leave, they’re still hard to get rid of.

avid

4th June 2019, 19:49

The City of London, will just do what it has always done, wield power along with their cohorts - the Vatican City and Washington DC, sovereign states of banksters.
Watching Deutsche Bank at the moment, as they may just drag the whole lot down deliberately...

greybeard

5th June 2019, 17:52

News
If we crash out of Europe, Britain will miss out on the next industrial revolution – and millions of jobs
The Independent Vincent McCarthy,The Independent 8 hours ago

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/crash-europe-britain-miss-next-085453009.html

Just before the recent elections that saw Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party ravage both Labour and the Conservatives, EU leaders signed off on an ambitious science funding programme for €100bn – which if there was a no-deal Brexit British scientists would be barred from accessing.

The EU’s Horizon 2020 programme will fund science innovation from brain science, to quantum computing; from 5G, to batteries for renewable storage. The new science programme is vital to spurring a new industrial infrastructure revival – one the UK would be excluded from if a hard Brexit becomes a reality.

Faced with economic stagnation, rising populism and escalating climate disasters, the EU science plan is a no-brainer that leverages an age old reality: the driving motor of economic prosperity is the curiosity that propels scientific innovation. But a hard Brexit could prevent British scientists from accessing this crucial funding.

The continued pursuit of no deal is about to torpedo a core basis for British economic vitality. Perhaps that is why on 17 May, the same day the Conservative government’s Brexit talks with the Labour Party collapsed, the government quietly but officially withdrew a document published under Theresa May’s predecessor David Cameron, extolling the critical role of science innovation in Britain’s economy.

The document makes clear one thing: hundreds of billions of dollars invested into the UK could be at risk if Britain is no longer seen as a safe environment for science innovation. This would not merely knock Britain off its world leadership perch for European scientific innovation. It would leave Britain out of one of the most exciting science funding programmes in recent years, one designed precisely to help plug the gaps of previous EU efforts.

Horizon is the ninth instalment in the EU’s research funding scheme, established in 1984, which cultivates large cross-border collaborations. Science works best in this way because it allows the fruits of curiosity to be harvested. Horizon will also be launching a new European Innovation Council to help finance start-ups and entrepreneurs pioneering commercially innovative ventures.

Two years ago, an interim evaluation projected that Horizon would generate at least €400bn in economic gains by 2030 – a colossal 400 per cent return, that Britain will have no part of under a hard Brexit.

This all isn’t to say the EU’s science policies have not been without flaws. Compared to the US and China, for instance, Europe is still lagging behind in science investment. The commitment to Horizon was what remained when the European Commission decided to cancel €3bn’s worth of flagship science projects in May.

The EU’s investment in the clean energy transition is also still wanting, and has meant that the rate of adoption for renewables has slowed down in over half of EU countries. EU efforts to leave coal behind, while commendable, have been similarly misguided. To meet the goal, the EU is switching increasingly to questionable dependence on “biomass”, which often relies on burning massive volumes of wood – which scientists warn is terrible for climate change. This underlines the need to switch to the sort of innovative clean tech the Horizon programme will focus on.

Another self-defeating policy is the EU’s recent block on palm oil for biofuels from multi-billion dollar trade partners Malaysia and Indonesia. Ostensibly aimed at stopping deforestation, scientists say that a complete ban (as opposed to robust regulation) will increase deforestation in the Amazon, because continued rising demand will be displaced onto intensified rapeseed and soybean production, which uses four to ten times more oil per unit of land. So this potentially worsens climate change while endangering the EU’s trade with Asia – fast becoming a hub of science innovation. These faults are all the more reason for Britain to remain engaged with the bloc.

In fact, these decisions seem to be symptomatic of the same “head-in-the sand” approach that drives the thinking that being separate will lead to a better future. The idea that nations should go it alone, shut down trade and collaboration to “protect” themselves, rely on outmoded technologies like fossil fuels, and pretend there’s no such thing as the Information Age (social media memes notwithstanding).

Against these glitches, the EU’s decision to fund Horizon is a breath of fresh air inspired by a sense of possibility for a future that promises to kick-start the innovations we need to sustain prosperous societies.

The EU is by no means perfect, but it made the right choice. So, will Britain? Will it continue to play a leading role in helping to fix the glitches and enhance that future? If it does, it would be part of a platform that will provide billions in revenue, millions of jobs, and education for the next generation of innovators and discoverers.

Sounds like a no-brainer to me.

Vincent McCarthy is director of Curiosity Studio and co-founding CEO of The Festival of Curiosity, which is Dublin’s international festival of science, arts, design and technology with over 45,000 attendees each year
image

ThePythonicCow

5th June 2019, 21:09

The EU’s Horizon 2020 programme will fund science innovation from brain science, to quantum computing; from 5G, to batteries for renewable storage. The new science programme is vital to spurring a new industrial infrastructure revival – one the UK would be excluded from if a hard Brexit becomes a reality.
This could be a hidden blessing for the UK.

Industrial Revolutions are seldom funded by large programs investing in well known technologies.

Rather they arise from revolutions in the underlying technology and science, that have names and ramifications seldom anticipated by anyone, prior to their blossoming forth (blossoming slowly at first, until the bastions of the "prior age" die of old age.)

greybeard

6th June 2019, 09:31

Rory Stewart accuses Tory rivals of 'misleading' voters on prospect of new Brexit deal
The Independent Andrew Woodcock,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/rory-stewart-accuses-tory-rivals-101800352.html

Conservative leadership hopeful Rory Stewart has accused rivals, including Boris Johnson, of "misleading" voters about the prospects of negotiating a new Brexit deal.

The international development secretary said that other contenders in the race to replace Theresa May were not being "honest" about their plans, which he said amount to an offer of a no-deal departure from the EU on October 31.

And he warned of the danger of "collapsing the country" and forcing a "disastrous" general election if the Conservative Party chooses a new leader who claims to be able to deliver a new deal by the Halloween deadline.

Mr Stewart is calling for a citizens' assembly process to build consensus behind the deal secured by Ms May with Brussels last November.

Speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live's Emma Barnett, Mr Stewart said: "There is only one thing anybody can do - and this is where people are not being honest. You can't get no-deal through parliament and you can't get another deal from Europe. This is the deal we have got. We got 270 votes for it, in the end this is about getting 45 more MPs to vote for this deal."

He added: If we are to hold the country and the party together, we are going to have to start being very, very careful with being straight and that means not setting expectations we can't meet.

"The only way we are going to avoid tumbling into a disastrous election or collapsing this country is if we avoid politicians pretending they are going to get a better deal from Brussels - which they won't - or pretending they will get a new deal by October - which they won't - or pretending that they can take a no-deal through - which they won't."

Leadership candidates like Mr Johnson who claim to be able to renegotiate the EU withdrawal agreement by October are displaying a "lack of realism" and "misleading themselves and others", he said, adding: "That is going to be catastrophic."

"Let's take a candidate like Boris," said Mr Stewart. "He is saying he is going to go to Europe and negotiate a new deal by October 31 and if he doesn't get a deal before October 31 he is going to go no-deal.

"Anyone who knows anything about Europe can assure you there is not the slightest hope of getting a new deal through Europe by October 31. Not a hope.

"Any leadership candidate pretending they are going to go to Brussels and get another deal simply doesn't understand Brussels, hasn't been following the news, doesn't understand what's happening in Europe and doesn't understand that the European position is very clear.

"Anyone offering that is offering no-deal, is trying to get no-deal through in October, because there is no other deal coming."
image

Tintin

7th June 2019, 11:11

@greybeard: just wanting to say a huge thanks for the work you are doing on this thread, and, capturing the ongoing narrative/drama, and quite simply very odd one at that around this theatre so diligently. :) It's valuable work you are doing here. Kudos :highfive:

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

I'd encourage anybody who would like another voice to whom to refer to visit the excellent John Ward and his blog, here (https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2019/04/20/the-weekend-essay-nothing-is-real-or-is-it/)

Those of us more invested in what is unravelling on this side of the 'Pond' may find John's perspective a refreshing change. Note that he does use some quite 'fruity' language but only to enforce his argument. Please do spend a little time digesting his commentary; it is quite profound in many ways, and I think anyone reading this may also determine that it contains a little healing power.

Do enjoy (TQ)

________________________________________

Uncertainty – the spread of doubt and the fear of doubt – is at the very core of the Human Condition. Serial uncertainty has always been created by ideologically driven lies, but the arrival of exponentially multiplied media alongside a revival in unjustified belief has created a species crisis for Homo sapiens. The Slog asks what this means for individual free speech.

THE WEEKEND ESSAY: Nothing is real. (Or is it?)
Date: April 20, 2019
Author: John Ward

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

Just under two days after Lyra McKee was shot dead in Derry, the question “Why?” is still unanswered. That’s hardly unusual following a shooting; but there are other uncertainties surrounding her death that can be summarised as follows:

The police were attending a riot in Derry where dissident Republicans are alleged to be once again active in encouraging vigilantism and sectarian violence. For the IRA, as ever, bigotry is good for business. But why has there been a flare up now?

McKee – a top-class investigative writer and lesbian activist – was attending the riot while standing among police officers as an accredited journalist. The assumption has spread that dissidents shot her because of her fearless attempts to track down any and all sectarian killers. But the assailants were 18 and 19, using handguns, and firing at the police. They and their weapons are not redolent of IRA ‘executions’. It is, I think, much more likely that she was shot “by accident”.

Manslaughter might therefore seem a more apposite charge. But the two teenagers face a murder rap, the police tell us.

That disturbances like this are still taking place before any border changes occur (if they do) as a result of Brexit might suggest to some that there ought to be more weapons checks at the Eire/Ulster border whatever happens between the UK and Brussels. That’s not meant to be inflammatory: just logical.

One of the things Lyra McKee might have wanted to investigate (had she survived) is exactly who has been stoking up the violence in Derry, where the weapons are coming from, and what the motives of the agitators might be. To speak plainly: a black op designed to show “just how fragile” the Irish Peace is would make sense to people on both sides of the Brexit impasse.

Some, all or none of the above could represent “reality”. I make these points not to start a conspiratorial epidemiology; I make them to point out just how totally our lives and the analysis of important events within them have been muddied (I would argue, almost ruined) by intelligence services, spin, propaganda, black ops, psy ops, false flags, compliant social media and State controlled publicity apertures of every kind.

Because without ideologies and religions (and the industrial scale denialism they all demand of their devotees) none of this pernicious cloak-and-dagger truth-bending would be necessary.

Earlier this week we had the almost obscene rush to ‘accident’ judgement in relation to the Notre Dame fire – despite a long history in France of arson attacks on churches.

Last year we had the farce of Skripal events and narratives that changed almost daily…..to take into account facts pointing out that the previous explanations were hogwash.

The man who played a principal role in that farrago was Boris Johnson….the Foreign Secretary who rubbished naysayers during the Russophobic sitcom, and then (having resigned over Brexit) began accusing Theresa May of conspiracy to sell Britain down the river. I think his second assertion was correct, but would you buy a narrative from this man?

For a commentator trying to make any scintilla of sense about contemporary trends and influences, I can tell you exactly what it feels like: being regularly buggered by a hooded goblin while being held prisoner in a coal cellar. This is I think apt as a “feeling”, because goblins aren’t real, but the fiction I’ve offered sounds unimaginably awful in every way.

Look back if you will over the last (say) twelve years during which this blog has had some sort of measurable niche influence. Look at the causes/investigations and frauds that have been surveyed by the content here: Gordon Brown’s mental health and eyesight, the global derivatives scam, Fleet Street hackgate, Jeremy Hunt’s track record, the truth behind the vassalisation of Greece, The ECB’s ambush of Yanis Varoufakis, the Sky takeover engineered by Newscorp, the paedophile scandals, the demonisation of DJs and tradtional comics by a Met Police in the pay of Murdoch, the acquittal of Rebekah Brooks, the real nature of Antifa and Momentum, the Clinton Foundation racket, the disgraceful embezzlement of female State Pension entitlements by the Establishment, the courageous fight of 2020 and Waspi women to get reparation, the corrupt, creeping attempt to invade the NHS with globalist private health insurance, and now the geopolitical machinations and legislative treachery behind the dilution of Brexit to Brino.

There is, of course, the unmistakable and vomit-inducing stench of self-interest and hypocrisy running through every one.

But the most malign feature is the ideologue’s never-ending attempt to deny, change, disguise and then obliterate reality.

Philosophers and scientists have speculated over millennia – in equally near-infinite measure – on the nature of what reality is in a cosmic, metaphysical sense…or even if the the cosmos and the physical themselve are “real”. “The answer lies within,” the Buddhists conclude.

In recent years, it isn’t just that science has made giant leaps forward at the same time as discovering more and mystery the further they go: it has also been a case of science in several fields discovering that several ancient practices based on inspired insight and instinctive leaps are being borne out. The dilution involved in homoaeopathy has been in part vindicated by the reversal factor in the sub-atomic realm. The prophet Buddha’s insistence that “everything is connected” and “time is an illusion” is now mainstream majority thought in physics.

In the original Hebrew translation of Jesus’s response to the pharisees, when asked who his father is, he replies, “My father’s house is without Time”.

Earlier this week I visited the website Medium.com, and read with great interest a piece by Masters MD Jill Blakeway (https://elemental.medium.com/the-human-body-can-heal-in-astonishing-ways-cc0dc32d862b). In it she makes this profound observation:

‘The body is intelligent in ways that can be prompted and harnessed. I try to honor that intelligence in a way that is grounded in science but doesn’t undervalue the mystery that always seems to be just outside our reach.’

As an expert in both Chinese and Western medicine, Blakeway is that rare thing – an open mind. She clearly isn’t interested in turf wars: she simply believes in an eclectic approach to healing, and she is certain that the body is indeed capable of healing itself. After fifteen years of struggling to master meditation (I’m still a novice) I agree with her completely.

The open mind is the way forward, because the key to perhaps all healing lies in the mind.

Disastrously for our species, the last thirty years have also seen the largely unpredicted revival of belief systems based on wishful thinking, bigotry, just a dash of perverted science, politically correct fancy, greed, and ignorance without reference to IQ level. That is to say, the rise and rise of both thick and intelligent idiots….the Useful Idiots so historically categorised by Vladimir Illyich Ulyanov – or Lenin to you and me.

I know that some readers will balk at this, but I include all the following in the trend defined in my previous paragraph: collectivist socialism, Friedmanite neoliberalism, globalist neoconservatism, Antisemitism, radical feminism, Islamism, modern monetary theory, climate change denial, climate change cause assertion, educational achievement conformity (aka Blairite targets) and remote control geoblocism.

All of them are systemic attempts to herd social numbers, rather than science-based philosophies that begin with the human individual as a flawed social being whose single biggest desire is to be left in peace and harmony with his or her family and community.

Systemics are very good at closing ranks as the means to achieve an ill-defined end. But they are also spectacularly successful at closing minds.

Minds closed by ideology are – in 2019 – the greatest enemy of enlightenment. As such, they are come together today in a perfect storm designed to hide blue-sky thinking that inspires contrarian minds.

The conformist, faux-certainty of ideology belongs in the dark mediaeval ages. And yet here it is again, bossing the game in the 21st century.

—————————————————————
What is the attraction of Unreal Certainty? Probably, I suspect, that it is the opposite of Real Uncertainty….the very uncertainty that foul play and evasive obfuscation produce in the first place.

It appeals to people who need the security blanket of the Status Quo: people who are ruled by fear of the unknown…..whose most powerful weapon is thus that very fear. No matter how bonkers and unfounded the fear might be, it serves to give such ideology followers peace of mind: because they and they alone have the antidote.

Further, their very fear of new experiences is projected (as a mindset) onto the enemy.

Brexit Leavers are thus denoted ‘Little Englanders’. Observation of misogynist and anti-social behaviour by certain elements in UK Islam is dubbed a ‘phobia’. An ability to recognise and record the anthropological need for independence is deemed ‘racist’. And most disturbing of all, anyone who doubts the received truth of what is ‘settled’ or ‘correct’ automatically becomes an extremist.

All the belief systems I fingered in the previous section of this post represent a form of protectionist conservatism: a defence of everything they declare as being (variously) progressive, correct, proven and safe. Those who dare to question the flimsy catechism of their eternal truths are – obviously – anti-social elements whose sole interest lies in the creation of anarchic violence and hate.

“You can’t say that these days,” is an irritating form of hyper-conformity that one hears over and over again: from friends, our children, the media and soi-disant opinion leaders. It is as if a lightning bolt might strike one down should the words “coloured person”, “lesbian nutter” or “eskimo” emerge from the mouth. ‘Gammon’, ‘snowflake’ or ‘scum’, however, are just fine. But on debating with Believers, I never get the slightest feeling of awareness from them that their double standards might just be hypocritical, or their Groupthink in any way dangerous.

—————————————————————

Nor does their enthusiastic adoption of Orwellian syntax strike them as chillingly ironic: off-message, sex-worker, hate-crime, hate-speech, cultural appropriation, inappropriate behaviour, affirmative action, white supremacist, institutional racism and all the dozens of other fascist Newspeak they employ…..all are used with a serious expression and a sense of superiority.

I was truly jolted when an old friend of mine in London – on being asked by me whether he voted Remain in 2016 – answered, “I certainly did” as if he might be responding to, “So did you jump in the river to save that kid?” The air of saintliness was (to me) bewildering and sad.

The fundamental problem with assumptions of correctitude within a broadly-based attitudinal group is so blindingly obvious, the threat it presents to real progress in objective knowledge should not need enumerating or exemplifying. But for the sake of contemporary context, here are just a few:

• It can convince you that democratic decisions are a mistake
• It can persuade you that a narrow majority is invalid
• It can demand that guilt should be ignored “for the common good”
• It can dismiss quantified research as “differently analysed”
• It can generate fear of a foreign State based on little or nothing
• It can make a flawed President a rapist
• It can persuade people that adults are children
• It can make more fuss over 78 injustices than over 3.6 million
• It can declare every voter for self-determination a racist
• It can persuade millions that conspiring against democracy is justified.

In the speech that perhaps ensured his early death at the hands of people who saw themselves as patriots, John F. Kennedy said in November 1963, “There are those in this land who believe the perversion of free speech and democracy is a price worth paying for the defeat of Communism. I am not one of those people”.

JFK’s dad Joe (a profoundly nasty old bastard) was once asked the secret of his success in the stock market. He replied, “I watch what the mass of saps do, and then do the opposite”.

Most of our species knowledge base comes from the experience and eccentric wisdom of contrarians.

At long last – after beating myself up about my own tendencies in that direction for seven decades – I am at ease with my conviction that not all cultures are equal, Big is almost always bad, globalism is tosh and will be reversed, narcissm is divisive, Islam is not a tolerant religion of peace, I’d rather converse with those who know something rather than everything, most tyranny derives from electoral apathy, fascism comes in all the colours, and above all, ideologically awkward truths must be faced.

We live in a three-dimensional Universe governed by e = mc², on one tiny speck of dust in a south-eastern suburb of one nebula among (allegedly) millions of others. As a factory-wired pack species, such success as we have achieved is based on competition within the pack and cooperation with other packs.

The globalist ideological falsehood promotes the idea that forced, impoverished equality in the pack (beneath an obscenely privileged élite) is good, and cooperation with other packs is a mortally dangerous sin.

This kind of thinking created the injustice in Northern Ireland, and caused the death (however indirectly) of Lyra McKee. It was the driving force behind Monnet’s idea of a Federalist EU power bloc in which individual conformity is valued, along with protection against the World outside.

Both are antithetical to the natural order of things. The free movement of workers (the better to be exploited by global combines) is a false God. The most important principle for humanity is the free exhange of ideas – as in, freed from the shackles of ideology.

greybeard

7th June 2019, 11:18

Thanks Tintin for your kind remarks.
Im trying to post all the various points of view as found on Yahoo.
I would advise anyone interested to watch the Andrew Marr shown on Sunday mornings.BBC1.
His questions to the point and obviously the researchers have done their job.
It will be interesting to see how the leadership contest goes.

Labour held Thursdays by election--the Brexit party a close second.

Chris

greybeard

7th June 2019, 11:23

Labour sees off challenge from Brexit Party to win Peterborough by-election
PA Ready News UK By Gavin Cordon and Sam Russell, Press Association,PA Ready News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/labour-fights-off-farage-brexit-031219125.html

Nigel Farage’s new Brexit Party has failed to secure its first MP as Labour took the Peterborough by-election in a closely-fought contest.

The Brexit Party, which launched less than six months ago, was beaten by just 683 votes as the Conservatives fell back into third place.

The constituency, which voted 60.9% for Leave in the 2016 referendum, had been regarded as potentially fertile ground for the new party.

But with a relatively high turnout for a by-election of 48.4%, it appears that they were unable to match Labour’s organisation on the ground.

Mr Farage made a brief appearance at the count – apparently anticipating victory – but left without talking to reporters.

In a tweet, the party said it was a “remarkable result” for such a new organisation.

“If we can come so close in our 201st target seat, no seat is safe,” it said.

The result came as a huge relief for Labour after their dismal showing in last month’s European elections amid complaints they had failed to offer a clear line on Brexit.
Graphic of the Peterborough by-election results

greybeard

7th June 2019, 11:27

'Crowds booing Tories': party leader hopefuls weigh up TV debate risks
The Guardian Jim Waterson Media editor,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/apos-crowds-booing-tories-apos-133929618.html

Tory leadership candidates are considering which television debates to take part in, as campaign teams weigh up the risks of derailing their bids to be the next prime minister with an unpredictable live television appearance.

The BBC has confirmed plans to host a hustings on Tuesday 18 June, according to a memo sent to campaigns seen by the Guardian. The programme, chaired by Emily Maitlis, will be called Our Next Prime Minister and be broadcast live on BBC1 at 8pm. All candidates who are still in the contest at the time of broadcast will be invited to take part.

Multiple leadership campaigns privately said they were particularly concerned about appearing in front of live audiences, especially if they represented a cross-section of the general population rather than the roughly 150,000 Conservative party members who will get to choose the next prime minister.

Michael Gove

The environment secretary is to pitch himself as a “unity candidate” capable of attracting leavers and remainers, as he formally declared his candidacy saying: “I believe that I’m ready to unite the Conservative and Unionist party, ready to deliver Brexit and ready to lead this great country.” But robust Brexiters in particular dislike the fact that he stayed loyal even in the final days of the crumbling May regime.

Sam Gyimah

The former universities minister is calling for a 'final say on the Brexit deal' as the only way to break the parliamentary deadlock. Gyimah is the only candidate offering a second referendum on Brexit, saying 'There is a wide range of candidates out there but there is a very narrow set of views on Brexit being discussed'.

Matt Hancock

The health secretary remains a relative outsider, but the longer the race goes on, the more he gains ground for the seemingly basic virtues of being apparently competent and broadly similar to a normal human being, albeit a particularly energetic one. A concerted effort would probably require an image consultant.

Mark Harper

The former immigration minister and chief whip was behind the controversial 'go-home' vans when working under Theresa May at the Home Office. He resigned as immigration minister in 2014after it emerged he was employing a cleaner who did not have permission to work in the UK. He later served as David Cameron’s chief whip. But he has not served in Theresa May’s government and has, therefore, sought to cast himself as the candidate who offers 'fresh thinking.

Jeremy Hunt

Fears that the foreign secretary would be another overly woolly compromise choice were hardly assuaged when after a set-piece speech he seemed unable to outline why his brand of Conservatism might appeal to voters. Hunt has been backed by Liam Fox.

Sajid Javid

The home secretary still has the same weaknesses: he is an uninspiring speaker and some worry he is too fond of headline-grabbing, illiberal political gestures. But he is almost as ubiquitous as Liz Truss, and clearly believes this is his time.

Boris Johnson

The out-and-out favourite, so popular with the Tory grassroots that it would be hard for MPs to not make Johnson one of the final two. He has been relatively quiet recently, beyond his regular Telegraph column, but this is very deliberate.

Andrea Leadsom

The former House of Commons leader, who left Theresa May as the last candidate standing when she pulled out of the previous leadership race in 2016, has decided to have another tilt at the top job, saying she has the “experience and confidence” to “lead this country into a brighter future”. But even with her staunch Brexiter tendencies, she would be seen as an outsider.

Esther McVey

The former work and pensions secretary, who quit last year over May’s Brexit plans, has launched her own in-party campaign group/leadership vehicle called Blue Collar Conservatism, promising to make the party more amenable to voters in deprived communities – mainly through a promise to deliver a strong Brexit and policies such as diverting much of the foreign aid budget to schools and police.

Dominic Raab

Few things say “would-be leader in waiting” like a kitchen photoshoot with your spouse, and the former Brexit secretary duly obliged with this imageawash with tasteful pastel hues. He formally launched his bid in the Mail on Sunday. Among the more core constituency of Conservative MPs, Raab has been pushing hard, as has his semi-official “Ready for Raab” Twitter feed.

Rory Stewart

The cabinet’s most recent arrival – Mordaunt’s promotion to defence led to Stewart becoming international development secretary – certainly has the necessary ambition and self-belief, plus a privileged if unorthodox backstory covering Eton, Oxford, a senior role in postwar Iraq and a bestselling book about walking across Afghanistan. He remains an outsider, not least because of his remain tendencies and slightly 2010 view of compassionate Conservatism. He's become a social media darling and been endorsed by Ken Clarke, but his reputation as 'Florence of Belgravia' may hinder him.

And those not in the running

Sir Graham Brady, Penny Mordaunt and James Brokenshire are yet to declare their intentions. Liz Truss and Amber Rudd have ruled themselves out.

Among other senior figures not expected to run are Brandon Lewis, Chris Grayling and Philip Hammond. Gavin Williamson’s recent sacking after the Huawei leak inquiry will also surely rule him out as an option this time around.

James Cleverly and Kit Malthouse withdrew from the contest.

One source on a leadership campaign said inviting the general public to take part in a programme would damage all of the contenders, especially if there was an adverse reaction from Labour supporters in the room: “If I was Jeremy Corbyn, I’d then just show this video of crowds booing Tories.”

The proposed BBC hustings will not have a live audience, making it harder for campaigns to turn down the appearance. Instead, the invitation said it would draw on questions from people around the UK: “Between now and the broadcast, we will ask members of the public to submit questions and we will select the best of these. The questioners will join the programme from studios around the UK and put their questions to the candidates.”

Related: New Tory leader could avoid immediate confidence vote

The BBC will also host a special edition of Question Time and two Andrew Neil interview programmes on BBC1 with the final two candidates, once the shortlist has been whittled down by MPs.

British broadcasters endured a torturous few weeks at the end of 2018, trying and failing to agree terms for a televised debate between Corbyn and Theresa May over Brexit. This eventually fell apart, with neither side able to agree on the rules of engagement.

This time around most broadcasters have chosen to announce the programmes after preliminary chats with candidates and to then challenge the campaigns to take part while negotiating on detail.

Channel 4 has attempted to get ahead of the BBC by announcing its own leadership hustings, which is scheduled to last 90 minutes on Sunday 16 June at 6.30pm, after the first round of voting among MPs. It will be hosted by Krishnan Guru-Murthy in front of a live studio audience of potential Tory voters drawn from across the UK.

However, multiple campaigns said they were weighing up whether to take part in the Channel 4 show. This is because of the time involved in preparing a candidate for an appearance on national television at a time when the focus of the contest is on winning over MPs rather than party members. Leading candidates such as Boris Johnson were thought to have more to lose by opening themselves up to attack by the rest of the field.

One leadership campaign cited perceived leftwing political bias by Channel 4 – and the presence of an audience – as risk factors, even though the programme would have to comply with Ofcom broadcasting rules. Every campaign has been reluctant to repeat May’s boycott of the BBC 2017 general election debate, when she was mocked for being the only leader not to turn up.

ITV and Sky News will broadcast programmes during the final round of voting, when Conservative members will choose between two Tory leadership candidates.

ThePythonicCow

7th June 2019, 19:59

Earlier this week I visited the website Medium.com, and read with great interest a piece by Masters MD Jill Blakeway (https://elemental.medium.com/the-human-body-can-heal-in-astonishing-ways-cc0dc32d862b).
That Jill Blakeway link leads to a most delightful article - don't miss it: The Human Body Can Heal in Astonishing Ways -- Even for energy healers, people’s sudden recoveries can be hard to explain (https://elemental.medium.com/the-human-body-can-heal-in-astonishing-ways-cc0dc32d862b)

greybeard

8th June 2019, 15:01

Brexit: No-deal outcome could force shopping bills up by £800 a year, says union

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-no-deal-outcome-could-051100336.html

The cost of a family’s weekly shop could rocket by more than £800 a year if the UK leaves the European Union without a deal, a major union has warned.

Analysis for the GMB found that the bill for a typical supermarket basket of goods would increase by £15.61 a week – 17 per cent – if Britain was forced to fall back on World Trade Organisation rules, which require tariffs on many goods.

Several candidates for the Conservative leadership, including frontrunner Boris Johnson, have said he is ready to leave the EU without a deal on WTO terms on 31 October if it proves impossible to renegotiate Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement by that time.

Dominic Raab has refused to rule out suspending parliamentary sittings beyond the Halloween Brexit deadline to prevent MPs blocking a no-deal outcome.

Among the price hikes resulting from the application of the WTO’s “most favoured nation” rules would by 42p on a 250g pack of butter (up 28 per cent), 62p on a 460g chunk of own-brand Cheddar (up 26.9 per cent), 43p on a pack of eight sausages (up 25.3 per cent), 32p on a 2.5 kilo bag of potatoes (up 14.4 per cent) and £2.56 on a bottle of red wine (up 32 per cent), according to the analysis by Acuity Analysis.

Releasing the figures on the eve of GMB's annual congress in Brighton, the union’s general secretary Tim Roache said: "Tory leadership contenders who casually throw around the idea of no-deal Brexit are completely ignoring what that reality would mean for working people.

“The prices of household essentials will go through the roof if hardliners like Raab and Johnson get their way, but why let people's actual lives get in the way of personal ambition in the Tory Party?

“Either they're negligent in understanding what leaving on WTO terms means or they just don't care.

“If the Tory Party choose a leader prepared to walk us off a Brexit cliff edge, our country will live with the economic consequences of that for a generation. They won't be forgiven easily for that at the ballot box."

Labour MP Clive Lewis, a supporter of the Best for Britain campaign for a Final Say referendum, said: "These Tory leadership candidates who back a no deal Brexit have no idea what it means to be working person in the UK.

"The reason they advocate this disastrous route is because they will never be in the difficult situation of having to make ends meet.

"It's disgraceful that these people think they should lead the country. What we need is a final say on Brexit for the people to decide if this is in their interests or whether a wealthy elite are taking advantage of the 2016 referendum."

greybeard

11th June 2019, 11:57

Johnson Woos Hard Brexiters as Gove Eclipsed by Cocaine Woes
Bloomberg Thomas Penny,Bloomberg Sun, 9 Jun 22:39 BST

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/johnson-woos-hard-brexiters-gove-142212607.html

Johnson Woos Hard Brexiters as Gove Eclipsed by Cocaine Woes

(Bloomberg) -- Boris Johnson, the front-runner to succeed Theresa May as U.K. prime minister, pledged a hard line on Brexit -- including the option of leaving without a deal -- as contenders to lead the Conservative Party sought support before the list of candidates is finalized on Monday.

Johnson, who also said he would scrap the Irish border backstop and withhold 39 billion pounds ($50 billion) owed to the European Union until an agreement is reached, was helped by the discomfort of Environment Secretary Michael Gove, who saw his campaign submerged under revelations that he used cocaine decades ago.

“Yes, it was a crime, it was a mistake, I deeply regret it,” Gove told the BBC as he tried to switch attention away from his past drug use toward his plans to cut sales taxes and renegotiate a deal with the EU. As justice secretary, “one of the things I said was that people should never be defined by the worst decision that they make, but should be given a chance to redeem themselves and to change,” Gove said.

As his opponents fall away, Johnson’s pledge to leave the bloc with or without an agreement on Oct. 31 will be watched closely by markets that have in the past been spooked by the possibility of a no-deal divorce. The Bank of England published a worst-case scenario in November that saw the economy shrinking by 8%, property prices plunging almost a third and the pound losing a quarter of its value under a chaotic no-deal split.

Johnson also unveiled his plan to slash income taxes for about 3 million Britons by raising the threshold at which they are subject to a higher rate. The plan, which he outlined in a story for Monday’s Telegraph newspaper, will cost 10 billion pounds a year, which Johnson said would be covered by money set aside to prepare for leaving the EU without a deal. The tax cut will stimulate the economy after Brexit, he wrote.

‘Hard Man’

Johnson’s Brexit vow, in an interview with the Sunday Times, brought him the endorsement of self-styled “Brexit hard man” Steve Baker, a key member of the anti-EU caucus of Tory MPs. Only Johnson could stop the Conservatives from losing votes to Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party as they did in last month’s European elections, Baker said.

“I am going to put my complete faith in Boris Johnson,” Baker wrote on Twitter. “Unless we deliver a Brexit worth having in the opinion of Brexit Party voters then we will suffer a Jeremy Corbyn government with all the horrors that would mean for our prosperity and our wellbeing.”

Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, another contender, also warned against the dangers of a general election, but said the only way to avoid one is to exit the EU with a deal. Any prime minister who tries to leave without an agreement would find themselves forced to call a national vote, he said as he made a veiled attack on Johnson’s suitability for the top job.

Split Vote

“What a wise prime minister will do is take decisions on the basis of the choices they have in front of them,” Hunt told Sky News. “What an unwise prime minister will do in this situation is something that precipitates a general election. If you say October 31 is a deadline come what may, and then Parliament blocks no deal, the only way you can deliver that promise is to have an election,” Hunt said.

If an election is held before the U.K. leaves the EU, the center-right vote would be split between the Conservatives and the Brexit Party and the opposition Labour Party would “come through the middle” to win, Hunt said. Both Hunt and Gove refused to rule out extending Brexit beyond the end of October to allow an agreement to be reached.

Hunt, who is pitching himself as an experienced negotiator who can find a way through the Brexit impasse, also said German Chancellor Angela Merkel told him when they met last week that the EU is open to new talks “if we take the right approach.”

Take Charge

A common theme among the contenders was that future negotiations should be carried out by politicians rather than officials. Gove, Hunt and Johnson all said they would take charge of talks with the EU, sidelining the officials who led the talks under May.

Johnson said withholding the 39 billion-pound financial settlement will be a “great solvent and a great lubricant” in forcing the EU to offer a good deal to the U.K. But the experience of Greece, when it threatened to default on some 250 billion euros ($284 billion) of loans to the bloc’s crisis-fighting fund in an attempt to extract concessions from its European peers, shows the EU might not be that easily lubricated.

Home Secretary Sajid Javid, who won the support of Scottish Conservative Party leader Ruth Davidson, said if he succeeds, May he will provide funding to Dublin to pay for solutions to the impasse over the border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, which will remain in the EU.

The border issue can be solved but “you need co-operation on both sides of the border to make it happen,” Javid told Sky News. It is “morally right” that the U.K. should pay for the alternative arrangements, he said.

Javid, who also pledged to slow the pace of U.K. debt reduction to allow for more investment in education, refused to comment on Gove’s disclosure. Instead, he criticized drug use among people who, like the environment secretary, talk about their concern for the Earth.

“There are people that you know, they have their organic food, they boast about buying Fair Trade, they talk about climate change and at the same time come Friday or Saturday night, they’re all doing Class A drugs and they should be thinking about the impact,” Javid said. “Anyone who takes drugs should be thinking about how they are not just hurting themselves, but how they are destroying so many countless lives on the way.”

(Updates with Johnson tax proposals in fifth paragraph.)

To contact the reporter on this story: Thomas Penny in London at tpenny@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Tim Ross at tross54@bloomberg.net, Steve Geimann, Tony Czuczka

For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com

©2019 Bloomberg L.P.

greybeard

11th June 2019, 17:43

Brexit: EU will not reopen withdrawal agreement, insists French minister
The Guardian Jon Henley Europe correspondent,The Guardian

France’s state secretary for European affairs has confirmed that the EU27 are not prepared to reopen the Brexit withdrawal agreement, and that without a “new political line” in the UK or a second referendum, Britain must expect to leave the bloc on 31 October.

On the eve of a two-day working visit to London, Amélie de Montchalin also told the Guardian that France regarded the €39bn financial settlement Britain has agreed to pay the EU as part of the exit deal as a matter of international law.

“We are now waiting for clarification from the UK side,” De Montchalin said. “We consider it is up to Britain to decide how it wants to proceed. The exit agreement was not negotiated against the British; negotiators on both sides tried, painstakingly, to find the best solution for all concerned.”

Several Tory leadership candidates have said that if they are selected, their priority will be to go to Brussels and seek to renegotiate the deal agreed last December – and that if they do not succeed, Britain must be ready to leave without a deal. Others have said a further extension could be necessary.

Boris Johnson, the favourite to succeed Theresa May as party leader and prime minister, has pledged to consider withholding Britain’s Brexit “divorce” payment until the EU27 agree to improve the terms on which the UK’s leaves, describing the money as “a great lubricant” in getting a good deal.

But De Montchalin, who replaces France’s former Europe minister Natalie Loiseau, now an MEP, said the bloc was not willing to reopen the 599-page exit agreement. “If Britain does want to leave, and if it wants to leave in an orderly fashion, then this is the way it must do it,” she said.

She said the only condition on which France would be prepared to grant a further extension to the 31 October deadline would be if there were to be a “profound change” to Britain’s current political stance on Brexit.

“As President Macron has said, if there is a totally new political line in Britain, the Europeans would be prepared to reconsider,” she said. “But for now, 31 October is the final deadline.” A no-deal Brexit was “not what France wants”, de Montchalin added, “but we are prepared for it, and so it is now a realistic option.”

Emmanuel Macron said last week he considered 31 October to be the “final, final deadline” for Britain’s much delayed departure, saying he did not want the new European Commission and executive to have to deal with Brexit.

De Montchalin described the €39bn that Johnson has threatened to hold back as “not a settling of scores, or some kind of exit bill – this sum simply represents Britain’s engagements. So this is now a matter of respecting international law … Britain will always be France’s neighbour.”

She said the EU 27 would remain united through the next Brexit stage, dismissing suggestions that some leaders might be ready to break ranks. Jeremy Hunt, the foreign secretary, claimed this weekend that the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, would be willing to renegotiate the UK’s Brexit deal and possibly the Irish backstop.

“Every single member state realises the importance of maintaining that unity and engaging with the UK through the the EU,” she said. “There can be no mini-deals. It’s a question of the credibility of the bloc. And all have understood the importance of the future relationship with Britain.”

She said it would be “unacceptable” for France or any other EU member state to interfere in the present impasse. “I’m certainly not going to say the UK is wasting its time,” she said. “The problem is that there are almost as many kinds of Brexit as there are MPs. But we do need clarity now. We need a decision.”

greybeard

12th June 2019, 18:33

Irish PM concerned Britain set for 'terrible' Brexit miscalculation
Reuters
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/irish-pm-concerned-britain-set-202154760.html

DUBLIN (Reuters) - Ireland's prime minister warned British lawmakers on Tuesday against making "a terrible political miscalculation" of thinking their rejection of the Brexit divorce deal negotiated with the European Union means they will get a better one.

Several candidates vying to replace Prime Minister Theresa May have pledged to renegotiate the withdrawal agreement May's government struck with the EU, only for it to suffer three crushing defeats in parliament.

How to manage the land border between EU-member Ireland and British-run Northern Ireland - including an emergency "backstop" solution to prevent the return of extensive controls - has proven the most contentious element of the divorce deal.

"Like everyone in this House, I am a little concerned about political developments in London at present," Leo Varadkar told Ireland's parliament as a number of candidates launched their Conservative Party leadership campaigns.

"I am a little concerned that some people in London seem to think the failure of the House of Commons to ratify the agreement automatically means they will get a better agreement. That is a terrible political miscalculation."

Ireland has insisted that the backstop remain a central part of the withdrawal deal that Varadkar described as a finely balanced compromise that was the best deal Britain could have reached, given the limited leverage of a departing country.

Outgoing European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker also reiterated on Tuesday that the stalled divorce treaty - including the backstop - will not change with the arrival of a new prime minister in London.

"They made some miscalculations along the way," Varadkar said of the steps Britain had taken since voters decided to leave the bloc in a referendum almost three years ago.

"Some of them thought that when push came to shove, Ireland would be abandoned and EU unity would break. They were wrong about that. I hope they are not making a further political miscalculation."

greybeard

12th June 2019, 18:37

MPs defeat motion seeking to block no-deal Brexit

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/keir-starmer-urges-mps-back-143335583.html

Conservative leadership candidates including Boris Johnson hoping to force through a “deal or no deal” Brexit in October have been handed a boost after MPs defeated a Labour-led attempt to begin legislation to stop the UK leaving the EU without an agreement.

MPs seeking to take steps to prevent a no-deal departure lost a vote in the House of Commons by 309 votes to 298 on Wednesday.

Tory MPs cheered as the motion was defeated, after which the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, was heard to say: “You won’t be cheering in September.”

The cross-party motion would have given MPs parliamentary time to begin to pass legislation that may have significantly constrained a future prime minister, but Labour sources said they feared would-be Tory rebels had preferred to hold their fire until they see which leadership candidate is installed.

The shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer, vowed the move would be the first of many such efforts. “Labour stands ready to use whatever mechanism it can to protect jobs, the economy and communities from the disastrous consequences of a no-deal Brexit,” he said. “Any Tory leadership candidate should know that parliament will continue to fight against no deal.”

One shadow minister said opponents of a no-deal Brexit had missed a crucial opportunity, but plans would be made to find an alternative. “This isn’t the end of it. We’ll just have to be doubly creative,” they said. “The timing in the midst of [the] Tory leadership [contest] is poor, but not our choice.”

However, the former Conservative MP Nick Boles warned opponents of a no-deal departure were fast running out of options – apart from a confidence vote. “No-deal Brexit on 31 October is back to being a racing certainty,” he said.

“It is very hard to see where any further legislative opportunities will come from. So it’s now a question of politics – specifically whether a PM pursuing a no-deal Brexit can command and sustain the confidence of the House of Commons.”

The debate before the vote revealed fraying tempers in all wings of both parties. The Labour MP Gareth Snell, who represents the leave-voting seat of Stoke-on-Trent Central, said he regretted not voting for Theresa May’s Brexit agreement. He said he would abstain because he could not countenance parliamentary manoeuvres that would lead to a further delay.

“We will have been responsible for a no-deal Brexit by default because of our inability to make a decision,” Snell said.

The former attorney general Dominic Grieve said he was prepared to resign the Conservative whip and go against the government in a no-confidence vote if it would prevent a no-deal Brexit. “I simply have to say, here and now, I will not hesitate to do that if that is what is attempted,” he said.

The motion proposed giving MPs control of the parliamentary agenda in a fortnight’s time. That day could then have been used to begin legislation to prevent the UK from leaving the EU without a deal, though it is uncertain what form this would take.

Speaking in the debate, Starmer said MPs had been forced to act because of suggestions from leadership candidates including Johnson and Dominic Raab that the UK would leave – come what may – on 31 October. Raab had even suggested he would be prepared to prorogue parliament to stop MPs’ efforts to prevent a no-deal Brexit.

“It will introduce a safety valve in the Brexit process and it will be a reminder to all Conservative leadership candidates that this house will take every step necessary to prevent a no deal,” Starmer said.

The motion, which Labour tabled during an opposition day debate, was signed by the former Conservative minister Oliver Letwin and the leaders of the Scottish National party, Plaid Cymru, the Liberal Democrats and the Green party.

The Brexit secretary, Steve Barclay, said it was a “blind motion” that gave no indication as to what path MPs would try to pursue to block a no-deal departure, and would have “virtually unlimited scope”.

Tory MPs who said they intended to back the plan included Antoinette Sandbach, Dominic Grieve, Sam Gyimah and Jonathan Djanogly, plus Boles, who had flown back to the UK specifically to vote on the motion.

Gyimah said there were “two principles at stake” – the right of the government to control the parliamentary agenda and whether the government could prorogue parliament in pursuit of its policy objectives, including involving the Queen.

“I believe the latter of those two principles is the weightier one, the one we should be bearing in mind as we vote today,” he said.

MPs working across parties believed it was essential to take the opportunity to begin efforts to stop a no-deal Brexit before the next prime minister was installed and prior to the start of the summer recess. There are no further opposition day debates scheduled.

Leadership candidates including Matt Hancock and Rory Stewart, who have opposed no deal, had earlier made it clear they would not back the motion.

Hancock said the motion proved what tactics parliament would use to stop a no-deal departure. “Parliament will do all it can to block no deal. We should stop banging our heads against the brick wall of parliament,” he said.

greybeard

13th June 2019, 12:34

Three candidates eliminated from race to be Prime Minister after first round of Conservative MP votes
Yahoo News UK Yahoo UK Staff,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/becomes-first-candidate-to-drop-out-of-tory-leadership-race-as-competition-hots-up-121209908.html

Andrea Leadsom, Mark Harper and Esther McVey have become the first candidates to be voted out of the Tory leadership race with Boris Johnson storming into the lead.

The three least successful candidates failed to meet the required threshold of 17 votes, achieving 11, 10 and 9 votes respectively.

The remaining seven candidates now go through to the second round of voting by Tory MPs.

The full results were:

Boris Johnson - 114 votes

Jeremy Hunt - 43 votes

Michael Gove - 37 votes

Dominic Raab - 27 votes

Sajid Javid - 23 votes

Matt Hancock - 20 votes

Rory Stewart - 19 votes

Andrea Leadsom - 11 votes (eliminated)

Mark Harper - 10 votes (eliminated)

Esther McVey - 9 votes (eliminated)

Who else is left and what are their policies?

Boris remains the clear favourite to become Prime Minister but he is under pressure from rivals Sajid Javid, Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove.

International Development Secretary Rory Stewart managed to get over the line, despite doubts about whether he would manage to.

**********

Michael Gove: The Brexiteer aiming to heal Tory rifts and land the top job

Jeremy Hunt: Can the ‘true blue Tory’ see off his rivals and land keys to No.10?

Andrea Leadsom: Can former Commons leader become UK’s third female PM?

Boris Johnson profile: He’s the bookies’ favourite... but can he deliver?

**********

Former London Mayor Mr Johnson launched his bid with a warning to MPs that they will "reap the whirlwind" if they try to thwart Brexit - and said it was essential that Britain was out of the EU by the end of October.

But Mr Javid dismissed the former Foreign Secretary as "yesterday's news", saying the party needed to show it had changed.
What happens now?

The candidates will debate on Channel 4 on Sunday, June 16.

After that, a second ballot will take place on June 18. Candidates need at least 33 votes to get through and if all of them achieve that, the person with the lowest number of votes will be eliminated.

On the same day the remaining candidates will debate on BBC1 in the evening.
Tory leadership

greybeard

14th June 2019, 10:26

Along Irish Border, Johnson’s Ascent Adds to Brexit Unease
Bloomberg Dara Doyle and Rodney Edwards,Bloomberg

(Bloomberg) -- Richie McPhillips, living at the epicenter of the Brexit crisis, has a new worry -- Boris Johnson.

The favorite to succeed Theresa May as U.K. prime minister, Johnson said again on Wednesday he’s prepared to lead the nation out of the European Union without a deal if necessary, taking a harder line than most of his rivals. For McPhillips, that could mean a return to checkpoints and unrest along the Irish border that runs close to his home.

“Boris is a danger to the border,” said McPhillips, 61, who lives in Lisnaskea in Northern Ireland and voted against Brexit. “He would not bring any stability to the British political system.”

How the Tory Rivals for PM Reckon They Can Fix Brexit

The question of keeping the Irish border invisible has shaped the entire Brexit negotiation process, with the so-called backstop ultimately costing May her premiership. Johnson, who moved into the second round of the race to succeed her with a clear lead, wants to renegotiate that part of the deal, which was designed to keep the frontier free of customs officers, police or soldiers.

All sides said they wanted to avoid a hard border emerging that could pose a threat to peace on the divided island. But the measure is loathed by Brexit-backers because it risks binding the whole U.K. to EU rules indefinitely.

In the past, the former foreign secretary has described the backstop as “a suicide vest around the British constitution,” and “a constitutional monstrosity” that no other nation would accept.

Johnson later voted for the backstop in Parliament at the third time of asking as he said he feared failing to do so would mean losing Brexit altogether.

Now, he’s holding out the prospect of a no-deal Brexit if Brussels refuses to redraft the divorce agreement. In London, as he launched his campaign to succeed May, Johnson dialed down his earlier rhetoric, saying he isn’t aiming for no-deal exit, but the U.K. must keep the option on the table. He’s vowed to leave the bloc on Oct. 31 no matter what.

Johnson, a key figure in the Brexit campaign of 2016, has suggested the congestion charges he oversaw as London mayor could be a model for solving the border conundrum, an idea Ireland’s Foreign Minister Simon Coveney has dismissed as “extraordinary.” The 310-mile frontier meanders through countryside, dividing rivers, fields and even some houses.

A spokesman for Johnson didn’t respond to a request for comment for this story.

Several rivals also want to renegotiate the deal, but shy away from Johnson’s rhetoric. Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, the current second-favorite, has called a no-deal Brexit “political suicide.”

Others, such as former ministers Dominic Raab, have deployed even stronger no-deal rhetoric than Johnson, but without his profile and status, attract little attention along the border. In the first round of voting to succeed May on Thursday, Johnson won 114 votes with Hunt second, with 43 votes.

Same Constraints

Johnson does have some fans in Northern Ireland.

“I think he would make a good leader, I like his style, I like the way he conducts himself, ” said William Walker, 56, a local councilor for the Democratic Unionist Party, which backs Brexit. “I believe he is an honest man.”

“If Boris becomes prime minister, he should make sure we get out of Europe hopefully with a deal,” said Walker. “But if we leave without a deal, it will not be the end of the world.”~

The prospect of the U.K. crashing out of the European Union in October is now a “very serious” risk, a senior Irish foreign ministry official said.

“Since March, there is an exhaustion with Brexit,” Rory Montgomery, who has helped oversee Ireland’s preparations for the U.K.’s exit from the bloc, said at an event in Nicosia on Wednesday. “The British government need to ask for an extension and it’s going to be difficult for a Conservative leader to do so.”

Ultimately, though, whoever becomes prime minister could find themselves boxed in on all sides, just as May has been. There’s no sign that Brussels is prepared to offer significant concessions. Walker’s DUP holds the balance of power at Westminster, and will keep fighting the backstop without those concessions. And there’s no majority in Parliament for no-deal.

“Personal charm and political skills won’t make much of a difference to the outcome in the short term at least -- it won’t change the arithmetic in Parliament,” said Richard Bullick, a former adviser to DUP party leader Arlene Foster. “There’s no majority for the current deal and no majority for no-deal. So we could be in for another extension.”

Even some Leave supporters in the region question whether Johnson can deliver Brexit, or any solution for the border.

“Boris wouldn’t be my first choice, no,” said Barry Read, 47, who lives near the border in Northern Ireland and voted for Brexit. “He has too much baggage. ”

greybeard

16th June 2019, 08:17

When will the resistance in Britain to populism properly begin?
The Guardian Nick Cohen,The Guardian

The resistance to the Johnson-Farage axis will not come from the parliamentary Conservative party. In private, MPs, who once made sure demagogues did not become prime ministers, admit that Johnson is a phoney, unfit for high office or any office. But the Tory party’s guardians no longer care. The gatekeepers are lifting the lock and urging the bull****ter to charge into the china shop.

They calculate that only an alliance between the right and the far right can ensure their party’s survival. The pact may be unacknowledged. Johnson may neutralise the Brexit party by becoming more Faragist than Farage. The Tories will take his votes and he will fade into the background. I don’t see a man with Farage’s sense of entitlement fading willingly. His friends Matteo Salvini and Donald Trump have power in Italy and America respectively. Why should Britain’s man of destiny allow the Conservatives to pat him on the head and say: “The grownups will take it from here”?

Farage more than any other politician is responsible for Brexit and feels no shame for the pain he has inflicted on the country he professes to love. He can threaten to run candidates against the Tories and let Labour in unless they recognised his greatness by making him, say, deputy prime minister. He surely wants to enter parliament in an early election and his surest route to Westminster is via an electoral alliance with the Conservatives.

One way or another, what we call “populism”, a feeble euphemism for an ideology that tolerates no constraints on the leader or his party, will soon be here. Indeed, it already is. For it is one thing for the Putinesque no-hoper Dominic Raab to say that he would suspend parliament to force through a no-deal Brexit. Quite another for Johnson, “our” next prime minister, to tell the Tory right he won’t take bypassing the Commons off the table either.

The crash that Farage and Johnson contemplate with such insouciance is as much a constitutional as an economic monstrosity. Whatever mistakes they made, no previous administration has deliberately wrecked the economy. But then no administration in the modern era has dared to contemplate inflicting economic misery without a mandate from the Commons or the electorate. You cannot say often enough that a no-deal Brexit was not on the ballot in the 2016 referendum. The 2015 white paper that spelt out the terms of the referendum did not say that no deal would follow a Leave vote, while Johnson and every other senior Leave politician promised that a free-trade deal would follow.

Populism is such a treacherous word because it implies that “the people” are in control. Farage and Johnson are proving that in the populist state the leaders are sovereign and the people get what they are given. You shouldn’t be surprised. What kind of popular democracy do you expect when the decisive voice in choosing the national leader is not the electorate’s but the voices of 160,000 Tory activists?

It was a new type of press conference where Johnson’s claque booed reporters for asking questions

What of my trade of journalism? A poor thing, you might say, and one whose deference to “Boris” has been a disgrace. But as his first press briefing showed, our next PM treats reporters who call him “Johnson” and hold him to account with a hostility he never shows to the flunkies on first name terms. Instead of being a moment where journalists questioned a politician, it was a new type of press conference where politicians who supported Johnson booed reporters for asking questions.

I could go on. An independent civil service is a check, if only a reality check, on deluded politicians. The Institute for Government tells me what I had already guessed: Brexit has produced an unprecedented rise in the number of political attacks on civil servants. One of the first acts of a Johnson regime will be to fire Olly Robbins, the prime minister’s Brexit adviser. He has become a George Soros-style hate figure on the British right: the sinister manipulator its partisans blame for the inevitable failure of their impossible project.

Once the greatest check on runaway power was the opposition. Jeremy Corbyn agrees with Johnson and Farage on the need for Brexit, however, and only queries the detail. His failure to support Remain has fractured the centre left, opening the prospect of a united right coming through the middle in a general election. In any case, look at my description of rightwing authoritarianism. It applies as well to the far left. Corbyn and his network of post-communists don’t want to stop a recession. They are “disaster socialists” who hope, as Lenin hoped, that economic collapse will turn the masses to their cause. They would happily suspend parliament to force through a radical programme and nothing in their ideology suggests they believe in press freedom or civil service independence. They won’t oppose what they yearn for.

Opposition must now be as much without as within parliament. I am heartened to see that the next pro-European march on 20 July will be the start of a full-throated defence of EU membership rather than a process argument about the need for a second referendum. Protests on the streets will not occur in isolation. If any government risks no deal, the financial markets will go wild and employers will warn staff about their jobs. MPs may act independently and reconvene away from a shuttered Westminster. It will be the greatest economic, social and political crisis of our lifetime.

Whenever you talk about the far right or left, or make comparisons with Putinism and fascism, you are told it can’t happen here. Don’t be hysterical, old chap: Johnson is a joke, Farage a pub bore and Corbyn a passive-aggressive crank. They can’t hurt us. The critics don’t realise it has never happened here before because enough “hysterical” citizens have stamped on it early and hard. We are late in the day this time around and the moment to start stamping is now.

• Nick Cohen is an Observer columnist

greybeard

16th June 2019, 09:35

Brexit: Corbyn under pressure to clarify backing for second vote
The Guardian Heather Stewart Political editor,The Guardian Fri, 14 June

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-corbyn-under-pressure-clarify-182251852.html

Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow cabinet is set to debate Brexit on Monday, as the prospect of a Boris Johnson premiership accelerates Labour’s drift towards supporting a second referendum.

Corbyn is coming under renewed pressure to set out his backing for a fresh public vote more clearly, as the shockwaves from Labour’s catastrophic performance in the European elections continue to reverberate.

Shadow ministers will be shown the second part of a presentation on polling which began at last week’s meeting, and according to one person present showed Labour was being “squeezed from both sides”.

Corbyn said in the aftermath ofthe European elections that any Brexit deal would now “have to be put to a public vote” – though that could include a general election, and he subsequently suggested a referendum remained “some way off”.

Related: Corbyn 'listening very carefully' to Labour calls for second referendum

One shadow cabinet member and Corbyn loyalist described Labour’s Brexit policy as “in a state of transition”, saying they expected it to shift towards a clearer stance in favour of a referendum in the next “two or three weeks”, rather than wait for their hand to be forced by restive grassroots members.

Another shadow cabinet source said Johnson’s imminent arrival in Number 10 on a hard Brexit ticket must be “the decisive factor” for Labour’s policy.

Corbyn is content to allow the focus to remain on the warring Tories for the moment. But the Labour leader is facing a pincer movement from both sides of his deeply divided party.

Another Europe is Possible, the anti-Brexit campaign group that works closely with leftwing Labour MPs including Clive Lewis and Lloyd Russell-Moyle, has announced that it plans a “summer of resistance”.

Alena Ivanova, from the group, said: “What we’re witnessing this summer is the growth of a mass and plural movement against Brexit, with mass demonstrations announced for both July and October, and lots of different organisations holding speaker tours and preparing for a referendum.”

She added: “But this movement needs to be radical, both tactically and politically – it has to become a hot summer of resistance, willing to disrupt the status quo.”

Meanwhile Tom Watson, Corbyn’s deputy, has continued to push for a People’s Vote, and will make a major speech on the issue on Monday.

Recriminations from the party’s poll performance have continued. Some shadow ministers, including some on the left, lament what one called the “malign influence” of Corbyn’s advisers, in particular his key confidant, Seumas Milne, and chief of staff, Karie Murphy, complaining that the pair insulate Corbyn from criticism and challenge.

Related: Labour is under pressure to change tack on Brexit – but is it too late already? | Rachel Shabi

Several shadow cabinet members have told the Guardian that Corbyn himself was uncomfortable with the party’s message in the run-up to the European elections, which he felt was insufficiently clear.

“They’re clearly under pressure: I don’t think he’s happy with the way it’s working,” one said. Another claimed: “Even Jeremy, who has always held Seumas in awe, is increasingly dissatisfied with the messaging”.

The shadow cabinet was not consulted about the expulsion of former New Labour spin doctor Alistair Campbell for publicly admitting he had voted Lib Dem at the European elections. “No politician was involved in that decision,” said one senior party source.

John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, was said by allies to have been particularly irked about Campbell’s expulsion, fearing it made the leadership look vindictive.

The decision to drop shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry from prime minister’s questions at short notice last week, after she spoke out about Labour’s Brexit policy, also raised eyebrows.

Corbyn was lambasted by colleagues at Monday’s meeting of the parliamentary Labour party (PLP), with one veteran of the Blair and Brown eras saying it was the worst they had witnessed, with Corbyn reading from a prepared script and failing to take on hecklers.

greybeard

18th June 2019, 08:48

Tory leadership race: Can Twitter darling Rory Stewart beat Boris to Number 10?
Yahoo News UK Ross McGuinness,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/tory-leadership-race-can-twitter-darling-rory-stewart-beat-boris-to-number-10-151614515.html

Race for Number 10: Rory Stewart

In a series of in-depth profiles, we take a look at the Tory leadership candidates to replace Theresa May and become Britain’s new Prime Minister.

Rory Stewart, the international development secretary, started out the race for the Tory leadership and Number 10 as an also-ran, but is now tipped to be the only man who can stop Boris Johnson’s seemingly inexorable march to Downing Street.
In one sentence:

The Tory Twitter king, Rory Stewart has gone from an absolute outsider to second favourite, off the back of his burgeoning public persona, driven by an intriguing social media campaign and a strong showing in the first TV debate.
Betting odds:

12/1 with Betfair, making him second favourite behind Boris Johnson. He was previously priced as high as 100/1 a month ago.
How did he vote on Brexit, and what does he think now?

Mr Stewart backed Remain in the 2016 EU referendum, but said after the result that “the decision is made, and we should be energetic and optimistic about it”.

He was a prominent supporter of Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement, despite its defeats in the House of Commons.

Mr Stewart is strongly opposed to a no-deal Brexit and has criticised Mr Johnson’s assertion that the UK should leave the EU with or without a deal on October 31.

He even went so far to say that he would not take up a post in a Cabinet headed by Mr Johnson.

“I would not serve under a Boris Cabinet,” he said. "I want to change this country and I want to challenge and say there are two completely different visions facing this country: Boris’s vision and mine. His strategy on Europe and mine. His vision on the economics and mine. And the question is, who do you want to represent us?”

Any controversy?

As a teenager, Mr Stewart was a member of the Labour Party, something which hasn’t endeared him to some Conservative Party members.

In 2010, he was forced to apologise to his constituents in Penrith and the Border in Scotland over comments he made about rural poverty.

He had told the Scottish Sun: “Some areas around here are pretty primitive, people holding up their trousers with bits of twine and that sort of thing.”

He said later: "It was an extremely foolish thing for me to say."

Last month, after filming a selfie video for Twitter inviting people to come and talk to him in Kew Gardens, London, Mr Stewart was accused of pretending to film the clip himself by holding his right arm out. He later tweeted: “It’s all fake”.

During the leadership campaign, he admitted smoking opium at a wedding in Iran 15 years ago, calling it a “very stupid mistake”.

greybeard

19th June 2019, 17:18

Boris Johnson surges further into the lead in race to be Prime Minister as Rory Stewart is knocked out of contest
Yahoo News UK Matilda Long,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-surges-further-into-the-lead-in-race-to-be-prime-minister-170832260.html

Boris Johnson has charged further into the lead to be Britain’s next Prime Minister in the third round of voting in the Conservative Party leadership election.

Mr Johnson received 143 votes, an increase of 17 on the second round of voting on Tuesday.

Rory Stewart was eliminated from the competition after receiving the fewest votes from Tory MPs.

Mr Stewart received a lower number votes than he did yesterday after the momentum powering his campaign, which saw him come from rank outsider to genuine contender, appeared to stall.

Mr Johnson picked up additional votes after hard Brexiteer Dominic Raab was booted out of the race yesterday.

Mr Raab came out in favour of Mr Johnson earlier today, saying he was he was the sole contender who would ensure Brexit happened by October 31.

Roughly half of Mr Raab’s votes appear to have jumped to Mr Johnson.

The full results were -

Michael Gove: 51

Jeremy Hunt: 54

Sajid Javid: 38

Boris Johnson: 143

Rory Stewart: 27

After the results were announced Mr Stewart tweeted to thank the MPs who supported him.

greybeard

20th June 2019, 07:53

Chancellor Philip Hammond: No-deal Brexit could break up the UK
Sky News (c) Sky News 2019: Chancellor Philip Hammond: No-deal Brexit could break up the UK,Sky News

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/news/chancellor-philip-hammond-no-deal-045300113.html

The chancellor is to challenge the remaining Tory leadership contenders to lay out their "Plan B" if their Brexit proposals falter when one of them becomes prime minister.

Philip Hammond will also hint a second referendum could be needed to break the current deadlock over the UK's departure from the EU, scheduled for 31 October.

In a speech in the City of London, Mr Hammond, who has not declared who he is backing, will claim a no-deal Brexit could hit the public finances, risk the break-up of the UK and damage the economy.

And he will say £26.6bn of "fiscal headroom" - which could potentially be used to increase spending or cut taxes - would be used up by a no-deal Brexit.

Parliament has already shown it will not allow a no-deal Brexit and has rejected Theresa May's Withdrawal Agreement, Mr Hammond will stress.

He will say: "It may be that I'm wrong, and a new leader will persuade parliament to accept the deal it has already rejected, or that the European Union does a 180-degree U-turn and re-opens the Withdrawal Agreement."

But if not, candidates must set out what they will do.

"If your plan A is undeliverable, not having a plan B is like not having a plan at all," he will add in his Mansion House speech.

Mr Hammond will call for the leadership contenders - who are now down to just four - Boris Johnson, Jeremy Hunt, Michael Gove and Sajid Javid - to be "honest with the public".

And he will say: "I cannot imagine a Conservative and Unionist-led Government, actively pursuing a no-deal Brexit; willing to risk the union and our economic prosperity."

It would also risk a general election "that could put Jeremy Corbyn in Downing Street", he will add.

In a hint at the possibility of a second referendum on Brexit, he will say: "If the new prime minister cannot end the deadlock in parliament, then he will have to explore other democratic mechanisms to break the impasse.

"Because if he fails, his job will be on the line - and so, too, will the jobs and prosperity of millions of our fellow citizens. "

greybeard

20th June 2019, 16:24

Dutch PM slams 'no-deal' Brexit as Boris Johnson march towards Number 10 continues
Yahoo News UK David Harding,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/i-hate-a-harddeal-brexit-says-dutch-pm-and-adds-britain-will-be-diminished-after-leaving-eu-115021340.html

The Dutch Prime Minister has said he hates the idea of a “no-deal” Brexit - an idea not ruled out by the man favourite to become the next British leader, Boris Johnson.

Mark Rutte said Britain leaving the European Union without an agreement would “diminish” the UK.

He was speaking as The Tory Party entered the final stages in Westminster to elect a new leader.

Boris Johnson, the Tory front-runner, has said Britain will leave the EU by October 31 if he is the next Prime Minister, even if that means with a no-deal.

One of his Cabinet supporters, Liz Truss, also told the BBC that is Johnson was elected prime minister “he will leave by 31st October no ifs, no buts”.

His comments to the BBC came on the same day as the Bank of England warned that the prospects of a no-deal had risen, amid the continuing process to elect a new British PM.

Mark Rutte said the next prime minister needs to realise a no-deal Brexit would be bad for the UK, telling the Today programme: “With a hard Brexit, even with a normal Brexit, the UK will be a different country.

“It will be a diminished country. It is unavoidable.”

He added: “I hate Brexit from every angle, I hate no-deal Brexit from every angle.”

Rutte also said Britain outside the EU would not be “big enough” to play a role on the world stage.

Mr Rutte made clear that there could not be a transition period if a withdrawal agreement was not in place, telling the BBC: “As Boris Johnson would say, Brexit is Brexit.

“I would say a hard Brexit is a hard Brexit. I don’t see how you can sweeten it.”

He also added there was no chance of renegotiating the Withdrawal Agreement by Autumn.

And for good measure, the Dutch leader cautioned against implementing a time limit on the Irish backstop - as some Tory leadership candidates have proposed.

"That would mean a hard border, and that would mean an end to the Good Friday Agreement and back to the Troubles," he said.

greybeard

20th June 2019, 17:11

Jeremy Hunt has got through by two votes,
So its down to Boris and Jeremy.
Neither strikes me as being --a person of stature.
I suppose the job of PM will make the man but it may be the shortest held job in Political history.

Chris

greybeard

21st June 2019, 06:58

How the Two Tory Rivals for PM Reckon They Can Fix Brexit

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/tory-rivals-replace-theresa-may-173550782.html

(Bloomberg) -- Boris Johnson will face his successor as foreign secretary, Jeremy Hunt, in the final Conservative Party showdown to determine who takes over from Prime Minister Theresa May.

Their visions for Brexit are similar: Both want to deliver on the referendum result of 2016, both want to ditch or renegotiate the Irish backstop in the existing accord brokered by May, and both are prepared to contemplate a no-deal Brexit if they can’t get the changes they want.

The shortlist was finalized in two votes on Thursday that saw the elimination first of Home Secretary Sajid Javid and then of Environment Secretary Michael Gove. Johnson and Hunt will now tour the country in a month-long contest to persuade the party’s 160,000 grassroots members that they’re the best man to lead. The new prime minister is expected to be announced during the week of July 22.

Boris Johnson

Who? The favorite to succeed May, Johnson, 55, quit as foreign secretary last July over her Brexit deal. He was the highest profile campaigner in the 2016 referendum, and was mayor of London from 2008 to 2016. He was elected to serve the west London constituency of Uxbridge and South Ruislip in 2015; he was MP for Henley for seven years before becoming mayor.

On Brexit: While Johnson has previously said Britain must leave the bloc on Oct. 31 with or without an agreement, he appeared to soften that line in a June 18 debate, saying a departure by then is “feasible,” but refusing to guarantee it.

He’s threatened to withhold the 39 billion-pound ($50 billion) divorce bill if the EU doesn’t improve the terms negotiated with May, and also wants to strip out the controversial Irish backstop. The plan is to discuss solutions for the border as part of the future trade negotiation, after Brexit but during a planned transition period. The EU has previously said no to similar proposals.

Johnson also says he’s not aiming for a no-deal outcome, but that in such a situation, Britain could default to World Trade Organization standstill provisions under Article 24 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. That way it would retain tariff-free trade with the bloc while a new free trade agreement is brokered, he says. That’s something that would require EU agreement, and it’s open to objections from other WTO members.

Johnson has built support both with Tory moderates and ardent Brexiteers, and they’ve drawn different conclusions about the broad thrust of his Brexit policy – suggesting some of them will end up disappointed.

Other policies: Johnson advocates cutting business taxes and red tape. He’s proposed tax cuts for higher earners by raising the threshold at which people start paying 40% income tax to 80,000 pounds from 50,000 pounds. He also wants to boost transport infrastructure and broadband, and raise spending on schools and the police. He’s pledged to put the environment “at the center” of his program for government.

He says nobody “sensible” would want a general election immediately, but some of his supporters have already begun wargaming the possibility in the fall.

Also: Born in New York, Johnson gave up his American citizenship in 2016. He’s published books on the Romans, London and wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

Jeremy Hunt

Who? Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, 52, has been in the Cabinet since 2010. He was the U.K.’s longest-serving health secretary before taking his current job. He voted Remain in 2016 but is now a “born again Brexiteer.”

On Brexit: He wants to renegotiate May’s deal, focusing on getting changes to the Irish backstop. He also says he would seek technological solutions that mean the backstop isn’t needed.

He says it’ll be “very challenging” to get the required changes by Oct. 31 and is open to a delay. That would be better than a no-deal, which would prompt a general election in which the Tories could be “annihilated,” he’s warned.

Pitching himself as an experienced deal-maker, Hunt has also said he’s prepared to walk away without a deal if there isn’t a prospect of one come Oct. 31, because that’s the only way to focus the minds of EU negotiators.

greybeard

21st June 2019, 12:22

Whiter, older and backing the death penalty: Meet the 160,000 Tory members who will pick our next Prime Minister

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/conservative-membership-vote-prime-minister-who-are-they-boris-johnson-112700160.html

There is a lot on this link which I dont have the ability to post--graphs etc.

The Conservative leadership battle has entered the final stages, with either Boris Johnson or Jeremy Hunt set to be Britain’s next prime minister.

In around four weeks’ time the country will have a new leader - and the people who will decide that are the roughly 160,000 or so members of the Tory Party who pay £25 a year for the privilege.

For many, the fact the winner will ultimately be decided by the Conservative membership - which works out at around 0.2% of the population - is undemocratic.

Particularly, as critics point out, when they are not representative of the rest of the country.

Tim Bale, Professor of Politics at Queen Mary University of London, told Yahoo News UK: “I think it’s clear Conservative Party members aren’t representative of Britain as a whole when it comes to ethnicity, age, wealth and income and indeed when it comes to some of their ideological views.

“However, they aren’t that unrepresentative of Conservative voters for the most part, particularly ideologically but also demographically. The mismatch is more with the population as a whole.”
File photo dated 24/08/12 of the then Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport Jeremy Hunt and the then Mayor of London Boris Johnson, who will go head to head in the Conservative party leadership race.
Conservative MPs voted Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt into the final two to become Prime Minister

He said he could see why people are concerned that those choosing the next PM don’t necessarily represent the nation as a whole.

“This is the first time that party members will ever pick the Prime Minister rather than just a party leader and it does obviously seem a little bit odd that 160,000 people are going to decide the future of a nation of 66 million.

“On the other hand, we don’t live in a presidential system - parties are voluntary organisations and therefore can make up their own rules,” he added.

Professor Bale stressed there isn’t anything unconstitutional about the situation, even if people don’t agree with it.

Others are more scathing.

“If you were going to come up with a democratic way of settling the Brexit crisis,” wrote Labour MP David Lammy in the Independent, “it would not look like this.

Below, Yahoo News looks at the make-up of the Conservative membership, according to a January 2018 report ‘Grassroots: Britain’s party members: who they are, what they think, and what they do’, published by the Mile End Institute and Queen Mary University of London.

It includes analysis of ethnicity, ideology, age, wealth, where they live and what they think.

Here are some of the biggest differences: (Graphs on link)

greybeard

21st June 2019, 12:25

It includes analysis of ethnicity, ideology, age, wealth, where they live and what they think.

Here are some of the biggest differences:

The average age of Conservative members is 57 - quite a bit older than the national average of 40.

According to the report, the over-65s make up around 18% of the UK population, yet 44% of the Conservative Party membership is aged over 65.

“Although more than a quarter of the members of all the parties are aged between 65 and 74, significantly more Tory members are 75 and over,” it added.

That age difference might explain why Tory members are at least twice as likely as members of other parties to belong to Saga, the report adds.

While the UK population is split pretty much 50/50 between men and women, the Conservative membership doesn’t reflect that.

According to the report, 71% of Tory members are male, while 29% are female.

When it comes to the Tory membership, 97% are white British - compared to 80% across the nation as a whole.

The report suggests that 86% of Conservative members are ‘ABC1s’ - consumers who fall into one of the three higher social and economic groups, which consist of people who have more education and better-paid jobs than those in other groups.

That compares to 54.2% of British people overall.

Conservative members tend to live in the south, with 12% living in London and 42% living in the south.

When it comes to the Midlands and the North, 18% of members live in the former and 17% in the latter, with 10% living in Scotland.

Yet when you look at the nation as a whole, 31% of people live in the South, while 21% and 23% live in the Midlands and the North respectively, showing yet another gap between Tories and the rest of the country.
Their social views are different, too

According to the report, 57% of Conservative members are in favour of the death penalty.

That’s more than the 48% who support it in Britain overall.

According to the report, just 41% of Tory members support gay marriage - considerably less than the 73% who back it nationally.

It’s also less than other parties - members of Labour, the Lib Dems and SNP are twice as likely to support gay marriage as Conservatives.

Asked for their views on austerity, just 11% of Conservatives think it has gone too far - a stark contrast with other parties and the general population. According to the report, 98% of Labour members think it has, followed by 93% of SNP members and 75% of Lib Dems.

Overall, figures suggest that two thirds of Brits (66%) think austerity has gone too far - much more than the Conservative members choosing the next Prime Minister.
And there are plenty of other things

The report finds Tory members are far more inclined to think young people don’t have enough respect for traditional British values - 77% compared to 20% of Labour members, 23% of SNP members and 18% of Liberal Democrat members.

Conservatives are also more likely to agree with censorship than other parties, with 44% saying it is necessary to uphold moral standards, compared to 19% of Labour members, 21% of the Liberal Democrat membership and 24% of SNP members.

Asked to rate whether immigration is good or bad for the economy (bad being one and good being 10), Conservatives came out at around 4.5, while other parties were more positive at around six.

A similar situation arises when party members were asked whether immigration enriches (10) or undermines (1) Britain’s cultural life, with Conservative members coming out around 3.5 compared to other parties at 6.

greybeard

21st June 2019, 17:15

EU says next UK prime minister can't re-open Brexit withdrawal talks
Tom Belger,Yahoo Finance UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/finance/news/eu-boris-johnson-pm-brexit-withdrawal-agreement-no-deal-talks-tory-conservative-leadership-jeremy-hunt-113121666.html

President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker and the President of the European Council Donald Tusk give a press conference after the first day of the European Summit where the future of the Presidency of the Commission and the Council were discussed in Brussels, on June 21, 2019.

European leaders have warned the next UK prime minister will not be able to re-open talks over Britain’s withdrawal agreement with the EU.

The warning comes soon after Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt were confirmed as the final two candidates in the Tory leadership race, with Conservative party members set to vote between the pair.

Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, told a press conference at a Brussels summit of EU leaders that European leaders “looked forward” to working together with the new UK prime minister.

But he repeated the EU’s long-standing message on Friday: “The withdrawal agreement is not open for renegotiation.

"Maybe the process of Brexit will be even more exciting than before because of some personnel decisions in London, but nothing has changed in our position," he told reporters.

READ MORE: Bank of England governor Mark Carney slams Johnson’s Brexit plans

European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker also said there was “nothing new” to say on Brexit.

“Nothing new, because we repeated unanimously there will be no renegotiation of the withdrawal agreement,” he said.

But Tusk suggested there was more room for discussion of the second part of the agreement May’s government reached with Brussels, which contains a political declaration on their desired future relationship rather than the legal terms of the divorce.

“We are open for talks when it comes to the declaration on the future UK-EU relationship if the position of the United Kingdom were to evolve.

“We want to avoid a disorderly Brexit,” Tusk said, adding that the EU wanted a relationship “as close as possible” with the UK.

Johnson and Hunt have both claimed the EU could re-open withdrawal talks and change their position on the Irish backstop, despite the EU’s clear and united position that they will not do so.

Hunt has said he would be better at negotiating than the UK has been so far, while Johnson has suggested withholding the UK’s divorce bill and highlighted possible EU fears of Nigel Farage’s new party.

“I think what they will see is that politics has changed in the UK and in Europe, they have now 29 Brexit MEPs in Strasbourg,” said Johnson on the ‘Our Next Prime Minister’ debate on BBC earlier this week.

greybeard

21st June 2019, 18:44

I am bewildered.
The Tory party as a whole seem to be deaf and blind.
No means no--as in further negotiating not going to happen.

They talk about the peoples vote and yet are not prepared to have a further referendum to confirm that the decision made way back still holds true--given a wealth of warning about a no deal exit.

When the original referendum was held Borris and other exiteers were economical with the truth.

Borris is still in cloud cuckoo land with claims that we will be given time after exit to arrange deals--- that we wont have to pay the tariffs that non union countries have to. No to that too.

I must say that our Scottish Government seems to be reasonably level headed.

However--its no wonder (to me) that I dont vote--
Just who can you trust to put country ahead of their political party--or desire for a top job in Government.

Chris

greybeard

21st June 2019, 19:13

Police called to loud altercation at Boris Johnson's home
The Guardian Jim Waterson,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/police-called-loud-altercation-boris-181216059.html

Police were called to the home of Boris Johnson and his partner, Carrie Symonds, in the early hours of Friday morning after neighbours heard a loud altercation involving screaming, shouting and banging.

The argument could be heard outside the property where the potential future prime minister is living with Symonds, a former Conservative party head of press.

A neighbour told the Guardian they heard a woman screaming followed by “slamming and banging”. At one point Symonds could be heard telling Johnson to “get off me” and “get out of my flat”.

The neighbour said that after becoming concerned they knocked on the door but received no response. “I [was] hoping that someone would answer the door and say ‘We’re okay’. I knocked three times and no one came to the door.”

The neighbour decided to call 999. Two police cars and a van arrived within minutes, shortly after midnight, but left after receiving reassurances from both the individuals in the flat that they were safe.

When contacted by the Guardian on Friday, police initially said they had no record of a domestic incident at the address. But when given the case number and reference number, as well as identification markings of the vehicles that were called out, police issued a statement saying: “At 00:24hrs on Friday, 21 June, police responded to a call from a local resident in [south London]. The caller was concerned for the welfare of a female neighbour.

“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.”

Carrie Symonds was part of the team involved in the launch of Johnson’s leadership campaign.

Johnson and Symonds have increasingly appeared together at public events in recent weeks. The former mayor of London topped Thursday’s ballot of Conservative MPs in the party leadership contest and is now the favourite against Jeremy Hunt to be the next prime minister.

The neighbour said they recorded the altercation from inside their flat out of concern for Symonds. On the recording, heard by the Guardian, Johnson can be heard refusing to leave the flat and telling Symonds to “get off my ****ing laptop” before there is a loud crashing noise.

Symonds is heard saying Johnson had ruined a sofa with red wine: “You just don’t care for anything because you’re spoilt. You have no care for money or anything.”

The neighbour said: “There was a smashing sound of what sounded like plates. There was a couple of very loud screams that I’m certain were Carrie and she was shouting to ‘get out’ a lot. She was saying ‘get out of my flat’ and he was saying no. And then there was silence after the screaming. My partner, who was in bed half asleep, had heard a loud bang and the house shook.”

Johnson left his wife, Marina Wheeler, last year and began a relationship with Symonds, who has been credited with revitalising his appearance and approach to politics. She was part of his team when he publicly launched his campaign for the Tory leadership earlier this month.

In recent weeks the couple have been sharing a flat in a converted Victorian house. It has been reported that they intend to move into Downing Street together if he is elected leader.

Johnson’s office was contacted earlier on Friday for comment but had not responded by the time of publication.

avid

21st June 2019, 19:20

How ‘convenient’.....

greybeard

21st June 2019, 19:30

Brexit: Bank of England governor shreds Boris Johnson's claim for avoiding economic damage after no-deal
The Independent Rob Merrick,The Independent

The Bank of England governor has rubbished a key Boris Johnson claim for avoiding economic damage after a no-deal Brexit, in a severe blow to the Tory leadership favourite.

Mr Johnson dismissed fears about crashing out of the EU by arguing the UK could still enjoy tariff-free trade under what is known as “Gatt 24”, until a permanent agreement was struck.

But Mark Carney pointed out the trade law could only be invoked if there was an agreement in place – and the central point of a no-deal Brexit was the absence of a deal.

“The Gatt rules are clear. Gatt 24 applies if you have a [withdrawal] agreement, not if you've decided not to have an agreement, or you have been unable to come to an agreement,” he told the BBC.

“We should be clear that not having an agreement with the European Union would mean that there are tariffs, automatically – because the Europeans have to apply the same rules to us as they apply to everyone else.”

Alistair Burt, a former minister and supporter of Jeremy Hunt, Mr Johnson’s rival, said: “You have got to be on top of the detail – no-deal would be very dangerous.”

He pointed out the gaffe came after Mr Johnson had stumbled over his plan for huge tax cuts for high earners when the impact on taxpayers in Scotland was revealed.

To use Article 24 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Gatt) – avoiding tariffs on goods – a trade agreement must be agreed in principle, rather than be an aspiration.

Its use also needs the two sides to agree, meaning the UK could not simply impose it on the EU after a crash-out departure.

During Tuesday night’s TV debate, Mr Johnson was challenged by Rory Stewart on the import taxes – and therefore border controls – that would be required on agricultural goods crossing to and from the Republic.

He replied: “There will be no tariffs, there will be no quotas, because what we want to do is get a standstill in our current arrangements under Gatt 24 – or whatever it happens to be – until such time that we have negotiated an FTA [Free Trade Agreement].”

The answer appeared to betray the former foreign secretary’s lack of detailed knowledge, a persistent criticism of his record in office.

Cara

22nd June 2019, 04:07

This is not specifically about Brexit (except in the more political statements towards the end of the article) but may speak to some of what the wrangling and infighting has been about....

~~~
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/roberto-saviano-britain-corrupt-mafia-hay-festival-a7054851.html

UK is most corrupt country in the world, says mafia expert Roberto Saviano
'It’s not the bureaucracy, it’s not the police, it’s not the politics but what is corrupt is the financial capital'

Peter Yeung Sunday 29 May 2016 12:30

Britain is the most corrupt country in the world, according to journalist Roberto Saviano, who spent more than a decade exposing the criminal dealings of the Italian Mafia (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/Mafia).

Mr Saviano, who wrote the best-selling exposés Gomorrah and ZeroZeroZero (https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/zerozerozero-by-roberto-saviano-book-review-the-terrifying-violence-of-the-cocaine-trade-10360790.html), made the comments at the Hay Literary Festival (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/hay-festival). The 36-year-old has been living under police protection since publishing revelations about members of the Camorra, a powerful Neapolitan branch of the mafia, in 2006.

He told an audience at Hay-on-Wye: “If I asked you what is the most corrupt place on Earth you might tell me well it’s Afghanistan, maybe Greece, Nigeria, the South of Italy and I will tell you it’s the UK.

“It’s not the bureaucracy, it’s not the police, it’s not the politics but what is corrupt is the financial capital. 90 per cent of the owners of capital in London have their headquarters offshore.

“Jersey and the Cayman’s are the access gates to criminal capital in Europe and the UK is the country that allows it. That is why it is important why it is so crucial for me to be here today and to talk to you because I want to tell you , this is about you, this is about your life, this is about your government.”

Prime minister David Cameron (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/DavidCameron) faced growing calls for the UK to reform the offshore tax havens operating on its own Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories, as Britain hosted an Anti-Corruption Summit (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/anti-corruption-summit-2016-nations-agree-to-increase-transparency-and-crackdown-on-money-laundering-a7026976.html) earlier this month.

The UK ranked 10th in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index 2015 (http://www.transparency.org/cpi2015), which measures the perceived levels of public sector corruption worldwide.

Mr Saviano also weighed in on the EU referendum debate, arguing a vote to leave would make the UK even more exposed to the organised crime.

greybeard

22nd June 2019, 11:51

It remains to be seen how tolerant the Conservative Party Members are over the incident reported to have happened at the house BJ shares with his girlfriend.
Also reported that the intention is if he becomes PM to move into no 10 with her.
That will be a first.
Im just smiling at the whole Brexit thing--you would be hard pressed to write a better more spell binding play.
Think the moneys on Jeremy Hunt now for the job.
He voted to remain so it will be interesting to see how he brings about Brexit.
I suspect it wont happen--we will have another referendum most likely.

But then what do I know--been wrong before-- smiling.

Chris

greybeard

22nd June 2019, 13:09

Dominic Grieve warns Boris Johnson over forcing no-deal Brexit
PA Ready News UK By Shaun Connolly, Press Association Political Correspondent,PA Ready News UK

He said an election could be 'catastrophic for the future of the Conservative Party'

Boris Johnson has been warned by Tory former attorney general Dominic Grieve that Conservative MPs could push him out of office in October if he becomes prime minister and tries to exit the UK from the EU with no deal.

In a thinly veiled threat to the front runner in the race for Number 10, Mr Grieve insisted a large number of Tory MPs would mobilise to prevent a no-deal Brexit in the autumn.

He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “If the new prime minister announces taking the country on a magical mystery tour towards an October 31 crash-out, I don’t think that prime minister is going to survive very long.

“Of course, the prime minister could exercise his absolute right of then going to the country and having a general election.

“But that is likely to be catastrophic for the future of the Conservative Party.”

Asked if he could vote against the Government in a no-confidence motion in order to try and prevent a no-deal exit from the EU, Mr Grieve said: “If a prime minister insists that they are going to crash us out of the European Union on October 31 with no deal… then I am pretty sure that there are a large number of Conservative MPs who will object to that happening.

“And, who will do everything possible to prevent it happening. I think the numbers are quite substantial.”

Pressed on whether the Queen would then need to get involved, Mr Grieve said: “It is worth bearing in mind that if an administration falls on a vote of no confidence, there is 14 days to set up a new one.”

He added: “No, it doesn’t have to be Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. It could be another Conservative prime minister.

“It could be anybody who is able to command a majority in the House of Commons.

“There has to be a confidence vote in those circumstances.

“If that were to happen under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, the person who is prime minister, their tenure in office comes to an end and a new administration can be formed in that period.

“And it might concentrate minds wonderfully on the need to have an administration run by somebody who has a tenable policy.”

greybeard

22nd June 2019, 16:28

Boris Johnson dodges questions at hustings about row with partner
[The Guardian]
Simon Murphy and Sarah Marsh
The Guardian22 June 2019

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/boris-johnson-dodges-questions-hustings-154603715.html

Boris Johnson repeatedly dodged questions during a live televised Tory leadership hustings over his late-night row with his partner, Carrie Symonds, which prompted a police call-out.

The former foreign secretary, whose campaign has been rocked by the Guardian’s revelation that police were called to his partner’s flat in the early hours of Friday morning, was questioned about the incident at least half a dozen times but declined to address it.

Questioned by the broadcaster Iain Dale, who accused him of “completely avoiding my question” during the hustings in Birmingham, Johnson said: “I don’t think they want to hear about that kind of thing, unless I am wrong. I think what they want to hear is what my plans are for the country and our party.”

Dale, who has himself stood as a Conservative parliamentary candidate, said: “If the police are called to your home, it makes it everyone’s business. You are running for the office of not just leader of the Conservative party but prime minister. Therefore a lot of people who do admire your politics do call into question your character and I do think it is incumbent on you to answer that question.”

The Tory MP conceded people were entitled to ask about his character, but then went on a tangent and failed to address the incident. Asked whether a person’s private life had any bearing on a person’s ability to be prime minister, Johnson said: “Most people would really rather judge my ambitions and my character and my programme by what I deliver in office.”

When Dale tried to again question Johnson, who is still the frontrunner to be the next prime minister, the crowd began jeering but the Tory MP raised his arms telling the audience “don’t boo the great man”.

Asked again whether a person’s private life had any bearing on their ability to be prime minister, as members of the audience shouted “no”, he said: “I’ve tried to give my answer pretty exhaustively. I think what people want to know is whether I have the determination and the courage to deliver on the commitments that I’m making and it will need a lot of grit right now and I think people are entitled to think about this.”

Asked a final time whether he was going to comment on the incident, Johnson – a former journalist – said: “I think that’s pretty obvious from the foregoing, Iain. But I’ve sat where you sat, I understand the responsibilities that you have.”

Dale said: “Well, I wouldn’t have spent the first five minutes on it had you answered the first question.”

Before being questioned, the politician’s campaign video was played and he made a short speech during which he made no mention of the police call-out, instead referencing the Tory party’s poor showing in polls, telling the audience: “The hour is darkest before the dawn.”

The Guardian’s disclosure of the row between Johnson and Symonds increased scrutiny on the politician’s bid to enter No 10 as the country’s next prime minister.

A neighbour said they had heard a woman screaming followed by slamming and banging. On a recording made by the neighbour, heard by the Guardian, Symonds can be heard telling Johnson to “get off me” and “get out of my flat”.

The couple can be heard rowing about spilt red wine, with Symonds telling him: “You just don’t care for anything because you’re spoilt. You have no care for money or anything.”

At one stage, Johnson can be heard telling Symonds to “get off my ****ing laptop” before there is a loud crashing noise. The neighbour said that after becoming concerned they knocked on the door but received no response, before eventually calling 999.

In response to the Guardian’s revelations about the row, Tory MP Mark Garnier – who is part of Jeremy Hunt’s campaign team – said Johnson had “****ed up” at the outset of the leadership contest.

Garnier, a former minister for international trade, said before the hustings on Saturday: “On the one hand you think, this is bollocks, people have arguments. My wife and I have ding dongs every now and then like all couples – although the line ‘get off my ****ing laptop’ does make you wonder if she was checking his browsing history – I’m just putting that out there.

“The other side of this is that he has ****ed up on the very first evening. My good-natured instinct is that we would not want to capitalise on this, of course not. But you have to say this is the type of attention that Boris attracts. He has the capacity to be front-page news for this kind of thing.

avid

22nd June 2019, 16:36

What an utter waste of democracy, a duplicity that goes beyond national politics, it’s the ever-present manipulation of governments by the CFR, ‘United Nations’, and the bankster collusions promoted by those supposedly ‘secret’ societies.
BJ et al are puppets, Zionists, and looking beyond all that is in turmoil lately, the Saudis and Mossad cabal should blush with their divisive tactics. So OBVIOUS.....
Abraham Lincoln - “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time”

greybeard

22nd June 2019, 19:39

It will be interesting to see how the exercise in "Damage limitation" unfolds tomorrow.
Boris has quite a history with women.
He is charismatic and used to getting his own way.
One word stood out in the taped altercation--"Spoilt"
His supporters seem undaunted.

Chris

greybeard

23rd June 2019, 07:08

I used to be a Leave-voting Tory – this leadership race is yet more proof we need a Final Say
The Independent Leon French,The Independent
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/used-leave-voting-tory-leadership-083720810.html

The last time I wrote about my political views was in 2017 after the General Election, whilst I was still a Tory who believed in leaving the EU. Oh, how times have changed!

And times really have changed, not just for me, but for Brexit itself. The promises that were made in 2016 have turned out to be guff. Now, instead of getting an easy deal as was promised, we’re hurtling towards leaving the EU without a deal at all. In other words, driving the car straight into the wall just for the sake of it.

The remaining candidates in the Tory leadership election, one of whom will become our next prime minister, are all now talking up the possibility of a disastrous no deal Brexit. Boris Johnson, the clear frontrunner, has attracted the support of the most hardcore Brexiter MPs in parliament by apparently promising them he will take us out of the EU on October 31st, deal or no deal. This is an outrageous affront to democracy considering only 160,000 Conservative members, 0.25 per cent of the population, even get a vote on deciding who the next prime minister will be.

There is no democratic mandate for a destructive no deal Brexit. It’s not what I voted for. It would destroy my area of Doncaster. This is why I’m so happy to have been invited to the People’s Vote rally in Leeds on Saturday to share my views as to why I have changed my mind on leaving the EU. It’s pretty simple for me, really: the Brexit we were sold is not what we are going to get.

They talked about “taking back control”, and yet not one of the current Tory leadership contenders can tell us how we gain on the world stage. They also seem to have no interest in passing powers down to the people. Their idea of “taking back control” seems to be keeping it within Westminster and Whitehall. Places like where I live have been ignored. I’d hoped that Brexit would mean we could start a conversation about how people across the country can really take back control, how people can have a real say in how their lives are run, not from the ivory towers of Westminster, but from their own local area.

I can still understand why people from regions like mine believe leaving the EU will be for the best. Westminster seems a long way away from Doncaster. It seems remote and out of touch. Imagine how Brussels seems? But cutting our noses off to spite our faces won’t level the playing field for places like Yorkshire. It won’t heal the North/South divide. Doncaster has received a lot of money from the Regional Development Fund for various projects. The Leavers say “it’s our own money anyway, we can decide what we want to do with it!” I can tell you this now, Westminster will not plug that funding gap. We will be massively worse off.

This rally will show people that there is anger in the North of England as to how Brexit will affect us. Hopefully now the London and the South East media will realise we’re not all angry Leave voters, frothing at the mouth over immigration and bendy bananas. We want the best for our community and it’s clear that the best for Yorkshire is remaining in the EU.

Leon French voted Leave in 2016 but now supports a People’s Vote. He is a supporter of the group Remainer Now

Johan (Keyholder)

23rd June 2019, 08:12

Thanks Chris, for your frequent reports on the Brexit. It's much appreciated!

greybeard

23rd June 2019, 08:15

Thanks Keyholder---sometimes I wonder why I report on insanity though it is interesting.
Chris

greybeard

23rd June 2019, 18:20

A final say referendum is the only thing standing between Corbyn and victory at the next general election
The Independent Vince Cable,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/final-referendum-only-thing-standing-084506593.html

The last few weeks have radically changed the face of British politics. The Liberal Democrats, having languished in single figures for the best part of a decade, now vie on equal terms with the other parties in what appears to be a new kind of four-party politics. Chuka Umunna’s decision to join the Lib Dems last week raises the prospect of others following. The two traditionally major parties are cracking and melting like the Arctic ice sheet.

While the media inevitably focus on the uncertainty around who will lead the Conservative Party, there are three potentially more important imponderables of a structural rather than personal nature.

The first is whether a Brexit deal is deliverable under a new Tory leader. Merely to ask the question is to perpetuate a myth which dogged, and eventually destroyed Theresa May: that the British – through negotiating skill or threats – can change the terms of Brexit. The reality is that the 27 members of the EU are not going to offer the UK a better deal outside the EU than inside it, just because a new PM bangs the table, raises his voice and speaks slowly.

In truth, none of the Conservative leadership candidates offer any new thinking about the main stumbling block in the withdrawal agreement: the Irish backstop. The “max fac” technological solution favoured by Boris Johnson has already been considered and rejected as unworkable.

A possible, but not very plausible, route to delivering a deal is that Johnson pleads for some minor, synthetic changes to the “comfort letter” from the EU which was previously declared to have no legal force. Then, having appointed a plausible minion as attorney general, the new PM would get him or her to endorse it, where a lawyer of integrity like Geoffrey Cox had refused.

However, such cynical manoeuvring would still then require the DUP, wavering Tories and perhaps 20 to 30 Labour Leavers to suspend their critical faculties to “get Brexit over the line”. It could happen, but it is somewhat far-fetched.

A second question is: if a new deal is not negotiable, or is rejected, is “no deal” then inevitable or, at least, likely? Notwithstanding the rejection of Oliver Letwin’s procedural motion last week, I have never sensed that there is any willingness, except on the fanatical fringes, to allow no deal to happen by accident or design.

Parliament is overwhelmingly opposed and has a variety of options still available to stop it. A no-confidence motion leading to an election (which prominent Conservatives have said they will be supporting in extremis); the adoption of a Final Say referendum (which is winning some reluctant support even from the likes of Ken Clarke, if no deal is the alternative); or, as a last resort, revocation of Article 50.

Brexit cannot be achieved without parliament passing a raft of legislation – on migration for example and a trade bill – all of which provide opportunities for the Commons to steer a new course. And the European Union has made it clear that Brexit could be delayed, again, if there were the prospect of an election or referendum.

My third question is whether Jeremy Corbyn could win an election. This question matters because the main factor inhibiting many Conservatives (and some Labour supporters) from precipitating a general election through a no-confidence vote is the fear that Corbyn could win.

His unexpectedly good performance in 2017 helps to keep this nightmare vivid. In practice, it is difficult to see Labour making headway under Corbyn, let alone winning. Scotland has abandoned Labour. Some north of England Leave seats will probably go Conservative or to the Brexit Party, and some heavily Remain, London and university seats held by Labour would probably fall to the Lib Dems.

It is possible that, with the Conservative vote splitting off to the Brexit Party, large numbers of Tory seats could switch to my party too. If that happened, the Lib Dems could then plausibly be a stronger force than either or both of the “big two”.

It is just about possible to see a combination of chance factors helping Labour to edge the Conservatives for the largest number of seats in the Commons, but they would be well shy of a majority. Fear, then, of his enacting a ruinous socialist agenda is misplaced. A Corbyn socialist government is, in the current jargon, a “unicorn”. Corbyn’s real thinking is that a hard Brexit followed by hard economic times might be the only thing which could make the unicorn real.

We may not get clarification on these issues until October and it promises to be a climactic month (but then, we said that about March and May). For those troubled by uncertainty, hold on tight, you are in for a rough ride.

greybeard

23rd June 2019, 18:30

Any bets on the Liberal Democrats winning the next general election?
A major change might be a good thing -- who knows!!!
Chris

greybeard

23rd June 2019, 21:24

Boris Johnson's poll leads vanish as loud altercation with partner deals major blow to Tory leadership bid
The Independent Rob Merrick,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnsons-poll-leads-vanish-072851281.html

Boris Johnson’s poll ratings have suffered a major slump following the loud altercation with his girlfriend, as voters say his private life does matter in the race for No 10.

The favourite’s lead among Conservative voters has more than halved since the incident on Thursday night – and rival Jeremy Hunt has snatched the lead among the wider public.

More than half of voters said Mr Johnson's private life was relevant to his ability to be prime minister and three-quarters said a candidate's character was relevant to the contest.

“It is unusual to see a politician's private life having this level of salience among voters,” said Damian Lyons Lowe, chief executive of pollsters Survation.

Mr Johnson has refused to give an explanation for the banging and screaming heard at the flat he shares with Carrie Symonds, despite it casting a shadow over his bid for No.10.

Instead, Mr Johnson insisted an audience of Conservative members at the first hustings of the Tory leadership race wanted to “what my plans are for my country and for the party”.

“I don’t think they want to hear about that kind of thing,” the former foreign secretary claimed, speaking in Birmingham.

But the survey, for The Mail on Sunday, found that Mr Johnson's lead among Tory voters as the man who would make the best prime minister has more than halved, from a 27-point lead to just 11.

Survation carried out the second poll on Saturday – after the incident was revealed – whereas its first survey was completed on Thursday.

Among all voters, 36 per cent backed Mr Johnson and just 28 per cent supported Mr Hunt before the bust-up, but the second survey put Mr Johnson on 29 per cent and Mr Hunt in the lead on 32 per cent.

Meanwhile, the neighbour who alerted police, and The Guardian, to the incident has defended his actions, saying political leaders must be “held accountable for all of their words, actions and behaviours”.

Tom Penn said he had recorded the altercation from within his own home after collecting a food delivery at his front door.

“After a loud scream and banging, followed by silence, I ran upstairs, and with my wife agreed that we should check on our neighbours,” he said.

“I knocked three times at their front door, but there was no response. I went back upstairs into my flat, and we agreed that we should call the police.

“The police arrived within five minutes. Our call was made anonymously and no names were given to the police. They subsequently called back to thank us for reporting, and to let us know that nobody was harmed.

“To be clear, the recordings were of the noise within my own home. My sole concern up until this point was the welfare and safety of our neighbours. I hope that anybody would have done the same thing.”
image

greybeard

24th June 2019, 06:33

Senior Scottish Conservatives fear Boris Johnson’s election as Tory leader could be a “catastrophe” for the UK, because it is likely to turbo-charge the campaign for Scottish independence.

Senior Tories believe Johnson’s zeal for Brexit will immediately boost support for a fresh referendum – a view echoed by Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, on Sunday. Johnson as prime minister would be “devastating, disastrous” for the party and make the case for independence stronger than ever, she said.

Scottish Tories fear Johnson’s election is a foregone conclusion given his sizeable lead among English Tory activists and members, a lead that could withstand the revelations about his late-night row with this girlfriend Carrie Symonds.

“He would have to be guilty of criminality on a huge scale to be stopped,” said one senior Conservative colleague and critic. “Our job is to move this from being a catastrophe to a challenge.”

Personal style

While campaign-period Johnson has been either invisible or deliberately sober to the point of dullness, his primary draw to Tory members is a self-created sense of optimism and fun. Much is also made of his supposed broad appeal to the electorate, evidenced by two terms as London mayor. In most political contests, Johnson’s character – he has lost more than one job for lying, and has a complex and opaque personal life – would be a big issue, but among the Tory faithful he seemingly receives a free pass.

Brexit

He has promised to push for a new deal while insisting the UK will leave the EU come what may on 31 October, even if it involves no deal. While his hard Brexit supporters are adamant this is a cast-iron guarantee of leaving on that date, elsewhere Johnson has been somewhat less definitive. Asked about the date in a BBC TV debate, Johnson said only that it was 'eminently feasible'.

Taxation

His main pledge has been to raise the threshold for the 40% higher tax rate from £50,000 to £80,000, at a cost of almost £10bn a year, which would help about 3 million higher earners, a demographic with a fairly sizeable crossover into Tory members. Johnson’s camp insist it would be part of a wider – and so far unknown – package of tax changes.

Public spending

He has said relatively little, beyond promising a fairly small increase in schools funding, as well as talking about the need to roll out fast broadband across the country. Johnson has generally hinted he would loosen the purse strings, but given his prior fondness for big-ticket projects – London’s cancelled garden bridge, the mooted 'Boris island' airport – perhaps expect more of a focus on infrastructure projects than services.

Climate and environment

This is unlikely to be a big issue for Conservative party members, and Johnson has not said much on this beyond confirming his general support for the new government target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions to a net zero by 2050.

Foreign policy

Also unlikely to be a big issue among Tory members, beyond vague platitudes on 'global Britain', it could be a weak spot for Johnson given his poor performance as foreign secretary. He was seen as something of a joke by diplomats – both UK and foreign – and is likely to face more questioning over his gaffe about the jailed British-Iranian woman Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe

Peter Walker Political correspondent

On Sunday, Sturgeon said Johnson was seen as one of the principal people responsible for the Brexit “mess” by those living in Scotland, where 62% voted remain in the 2016 EU referendum. She told Sky News’ Sophy Ridge on Sunday she was confident the yes campaign would win a fresh independence vote.

“He is seen in Scotland, I think, as one of the principal politicians who are responsible for the mess that we are in over Brexit, the guy who misled people in the EU referendum campaign and the guy who now says he is prepared to take the UK out of the EU without a deal. For most people in Scotland that is a horrifying prospect.”

A Panelbase poll in the Sunday Times Scotland this weekend found support for independence would jump to 53% if Johnson became prime minister, giving the yes campaign a six-point lead. It found he has a popularity rating among Scottish voters of -37, a worse rating than Nigel Farage.

During last week’s prime minister’s questions, Ian Blackford, the Scottish National party’s Westminster leader, used parliamentary privilege to call Johnson a racist. To cries of shame from Tory backbenchers, Blackford cited a satirical poem published in the Spectator while Johnson was editor, describing the Scots as a “verminous race”, his references to Africans with “watermelon smiles” and Muslim women wearing “letterbox” burqas. Sturgeon also said Johnson had made “overtly racist” comments.

Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leaderwho is widely admired in the UK party, was highly critical of Johnson’s stance on Brexit during the 2016 referendum campaign, effectively calling him a liar on national television.

The Scottish party’s hopes are pinned on Jeremy Hunt, the foreign secretary. Most Scottish members are expected to vote for him, and Hunt flew to north-eastern Scotland on Sunday for an early campaign visit. He remains the rank outsider in the contest but the Panelbase poll suggests his victory could dampen support for independence, if only because it gave him a popularity rating of -24, 13 points better than Johnson’s.

Privately, many senior Scottish Tories are in despair. They have implored Johnson to disavow his previously intemperate language and invest his energies in preventing a surge in support for independence. “The big question mark is will Boris listen? I don’t know what the answer to that is,” said one former cabinet colleague.

Colin Clark, the Tory MP who unseated the former SNP leader Alex Salmond in the 2017 election, is a vocal supporter of Johnson – one of four Scottish Tory MPs who have backed him publicly. He believes his critics underestimate Johnson’s charisma and leadership skills – skills proven, Clark said, by twice winning elections to become mayor of London.

Clark took Johnson on a tour of Aberdeen recently, meeting voters. “They wanted to do a selfie with him; not one person was negative to him. As Etonian as he may be, he communicates with people,” Clark said.

Johnson, he added, was a “one nation Tory”, adding that the language Blackford quoted against him was a caricature, taken out of context. “I honestly believe Boris will bring a team together, including Scottish MPs, which will be better for the whole of the UK.”

Much hinges on whether Johnson reneges on his promises to some Tory backbenchers to force through a no-deal Brexit before 31 October. He faces immense pressure from senior Tories to reverse tack, including from the chancellor, Philip Hammond, and from industry and the City, due to the economic damage it would cause.

A recent YouGov poll of Tory party members underlined a growing gulf between the Scottish and English parties. It showed 63% would rather see Scotland independent than abandon Brexit – a position very few Scottish Tories share.

Johnson’s Scottish colleagues hope his habitual cynicism and opportunism will work in their favour and that once elected he will ignore his promises during the leadership campaign. “The practical thing is he only needs the members once [to get him elected],” said one.

Scottish Tories are already working on a strategy to soften the impact of a Johnson premiership. They want him to pledge his support for the union to lessen the damage of his perceived hostility to Scotland and its interests, as well as to float new concessions for Scotland, including a more flexible immigration system. Along with other parts of the UK dependent on migrant labour, this would allow Scotland to reverse its falling birth rate and protect the public services, universities and farms that need migrants. Theresa May’s £30,000 minimum salary for new entrants would be scrapped.

Scotland might also be offered new financial and tax powers, perhaps before the Scottish and UK governments start reviewing the fiscal framework set up after Holyrood was given near-complete control over income tax rates in Scotland.

Sturgeon recalled last week that after a recent second world war commemoration event, Johnson told her: “So Nicola, full fiscal autonomy. Does that buy you guys off?”

Blackford believes this crisis will come to a head quickly. “Because I don’t believe he can get no deal through, my best guess is he will be seriously tempted to go to the country, to go to the people with a no-deal Brexit,” he said.

If an election did take place, Sturgeon and the SNP would ask Scotland’s voters for a renewed mandate for independence. Faced with a weak and demoralised Labour opposition, recent opinion polls suggest they would get that mandate, comfortably.

greybeard

24th June 2019, 15:07

Boris Johnson branded a 'coward' as leadership bid descends into chaos
Yahoo News UK Yahoo News UK
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/jeremy-hunt-piles-pressure-on-coward-boris-johnson-amid-claims-he-is-all-over-the-place-and-psychologically-unfit-to-lead-083020135.html

Boris Johnson’s bid to become Prime Minister descended further into chaos today as he was branded a ‘coward’ and warned a government under his leadership could collapse immediately.

Leadership rival Jeremy Hunt piled the pressure on Mr Johnson to explain the police visit to his home after it emerged officers had visited the London flat he shares with his partner Carrie Symonds after reports of a domestic disturbance.

He continues to be dogged by accusations of ducking scrutiny after failing to take part in a Sky News debate this week.

Mr Hunt told Sky News: “This is an audition to be prime minister of the UK. If Boris is refusing to answer questions in the media, refusing to do live debates then of course people are thinking: just who are we going to get as PM?”
J
Tory MP Tobias Ellwood warned a Johnson-led Government could be brought down within days.

Mr Ellwood said ‘a dozen or so’ Conservative MPs would consider bringing down a Tory government rather than see the UK leave the EU without a deal.

If a number of rebel Tories supported a no-confidence motion the government would collapse and a General Election would be triggered.

Mr Johnson says he would take the UK out of the EU without a deal on 31 October if he fails to negotiate an improved deal before then.

The Conservative government currently has a majority of just four, meaning only a very small number of MPs need to rebel to tear the government down.

The former foreign secretary’s personal life is being dragged into the race to be the next Prime Minister after the police incident at the weekend.

The Daily Mirror reported that, according to friends, Mr Johnson wants to get back with his estranged wife, barrister Marina Wheeler, despite being in a relationship with Ms Symonds, and that he is finding their divorce “extremely painful”.

Sources close to his family told the newspaper that he was “all over the place” and “psychologically unfit” to be Ms Symonds’s long-term partner.

Meanwhile, The Sun reported that Mr Johnson and Ms Symonds have had four serious rows in the past six weeks and nearly split up at the start of this month.

A friend told the newspaper: “Carrie and Boris have an incredibly volatile relationship — this was by no means the first explosive row they’ve had.”

avid

24th June 2019, 15:33

Despite that, it is despicable that a staunch political opponent ‘remainer’ nosey neighbour should deliberately record a private incident and proliferate it to the press - dirty tricks, disgraceful, would anyone like that happening to them?
Beggars belief, a spilt drink and there goes a career....
There must be a law against this type of invasion of privacy behaviour.

Whoever is one's candidate of preference, the stress at this time must be incredible, so give these folk some anxiety leeway, and stop reading media-biased s**t-stirring rubbish. Phew, it’s all SO OBVIOUS!

greybeard

24th June 2019, 15:55

I suspect that quite a few older member of the Tory Party have not moved on from "Rule Britannia--Britannia rules the waves etc"
Thats probably behind " We have to exit--deal or no deal"
Ireland would get thrown under the bus--good riddance to Scotland--- Brexit at any cost.
Thats taken from a recent poll if I understood it correctly
No matter it is as it is.
Chris

greybeard

24th June 2019, 21:40

I was Boris Johnson’s boss: he is utterly unfit to be prime minister
The Guardian Max Hastings,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-boss-utterly-unfit-152006989.html

Six years ago, the Cambridge historian Christopher Clark published a study of the outbreak of the first world war, titled The Sleepwalkers. Though Clark is a fine scholar, I was unconvinced by his title, which suggested that the great powers stumbled mindlessly to disaster. On the contrary, the maddest aspect of 1914 was that each belligerent government convinced itself that it was acting rationally.

It would be fanciful to liken the ascent of Boris Johnson to the outbreak of global war, but similar forces are in play. There is room for debate about whether he is a scoundrel or mere rogue, but not much about his moral bankruptcy, rooted in a contempt for truth. Nonetheless, even before the Conservative national membership cheers him in as our prime minister – denied the option of Nigel Farage, whom some polls suggest they would prefer – Tory MPs have thronged to do just that.

He would not recognise the truth, whether about his private or political life, if confronted by it in an identity parade

I have known Johnson since the 1980s, when I edited the Daily Telegraph and he was our flamboyant Brussels correspondent. I have argued for a decade that, while he is a brilliant entertainer who made a popular maître d’ for London as its mayor, he is unfit for national office, because it seems he cares for no interest save his own fame and gratification.

Tory MPs have launched this country upon an experiment in celebrity government, matching that taking place in Ukraine and the US, and it is unlikely to be derailed by the latest headlines. The Washington columnist George Will observes that Donald Trump does what his political base wants “by breaking all the china”. We can’t predict what a Johnson government will do, because its prospective leader has not got around to thinking about this. But his premiership will almost certainly reveal a contempt for rules, precedent, order and stability.

A few admirers assert that, in office, Johnson will reveal an accession of wisdom and responsibility that have hitherto eluded him, not least as foreign secretary. This seems unlikely, as the weekend’s stories emphasised. Dignity still matters in public office, and Johnson will never have it. Yet his graver vice is cowardice, reflected in a willingness to tell any audience, whatever he thinks most likely to please, heedless of the inevitability of its contradiction an hour later.

Like many showy personalities, he is of weak character. I recently suggested to a radio audience that he supposes himself to be Winston Churchill, while in reality being closer to Alan Partridge. Churchill, for all his wit, was a profoundly serious human being. Far from perceiving anything glorious about standing alone in 1940, he knew that all difficult issues must be addressed with allies and partners.

Churchill’s self-obsession was tempered by a huge compassion for humanity, or at least white humanity, which Johnson confines to himself. He has long been considered a bully, prone to making cheap threats. My old friend Christopher Bland, when chairman of the BBC, once described to me how he received an angry phone call from Johnson, denouncing the corporation’s “gross intrusion upon my personal life” for its coverage of one of his love affairs.

“We know plenty about your personal life that you would not like to read in the Spectator,” the then editor of the magazine told the BBC’s chairman, while demanding he order the broadcaster to lay off his own dalliances.

Bland told me he replied: “Boris, think about what you have just said. There is a word for it, and it is not a pretty one.”

He said Johnson blustered into retreat, but in my own files I have handwritten notes from our possible next prime minister, threatening dire consequences in print if I continued to criticise him.

Johnson would not recognise truth, whether about his private or political life, if confronted by it in an identity parade. In a commonplace book the other day, I came across an observation made in 1750 by a contemporary savant, Bishop Berkeley: “It is impossible that a man who is false to his friends and neighbours should be true to the public.” Almost the only people who think Johnson a nice guy are those who do not know him.

There is, of course, a symmetry between himself and Jeremy Corbyn. Corbyn is far more honest, but harbours his own extravagant delusions. He may yet prove to be the only possible Labour leader whom Johnson can defeat in a general election. If the opposition was led by anybody else, the Tories would be deservedly doomed, because we would all vote for it. As it is, the Johnson premiership could survive for three or four years, shambling from one embarrassment and debacle to another, of which Brexit may prove the least.

Related: Boris Johnson row: top Tory party donor joins calls for explanation

For many of us, his elevation will signal Britain’s abandonment of any claim to be a serious country. It can be claimed that few people realised what a poor prime minister Theresa May would prove until they saw her in Downing Street. With Boris, however, what you see now is almost assuredly what we shall get from him as ruler of Britain.

We can scarcely strip the emperor’s clothes from a man who has built a career, or at least a lurid love life, out of strutting without them. The weekend stories of his domestic affairs are only an aperitif for his future as Britain’s leader. I have a hunch that Johnson will come to regret securing the prize for which he has struggled so long, because the experience of the premiership will lay bare his absolute unfitness for it.

If the Johnson family had stuck to showbusiness like the Osmonds, Marx Brothers or von Trapp family, the world would be a better place. Yet the Tories, in their terror, have elevated a cavorting charlatan to the steps of Downing Street, and they should expect to pay a full forfeit when voters get the message. If the price of Johnson proves to be Corbyn, blame will rest with the Conservative party, which is about to foist a tasteless joke upon the British people – who will not find it funny for long.

• Max Hastings is a former editor of the Daily Telegraph and the London Evening Standard

avid

24th June 2019, 22:40

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe-iran-hunger-strike-boris-johnson-husband-london-a8960776.html
That poor woman, innocently on holiday with her Iranian family, still in prison due to ‘Boris-gob’ is still in prison years later, he’s a loose canon - a liability, another ‘Bullingdon Club’ compadre just as David Cameron who instigated Brexit
A public liability from a far too privileged background.

greybeard

25th June 2019, 11:27

Where are the statesmen in politics these days?
Who is head and shoulders above the rest?
Oh well the next few month should be very interesting.
Chris
Ps Its catch 22.
Anyone who wants to be PM at the moment is not fit for the job!!!
In spite of all advice to actually believe that the Europeans, who are in total agreement, will negotiate a new deal--is insanity--delusional, living in cloud cuckoo land.
Its clear that parliament will not allow a no deal exit.
So why keep insisting that no deal exit is a valid choice?
Am I missing something!!!!
Chris

greybeard

25th June 2019, 12:22

The Guardian view on Tory leadership: politics may not survive Brexit
The Guardian Editorial,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/guardian-view-tory-leadership-politics-175650930.html

The threat by a Conservative minister to bring down the government of the next party leader if he attempts to leave the European Union without a deal shows how the Brexit virus, having hijacked the Tory machine, could end up shutting it down. It would be wrong to regard such warnings as a bluff. When push comes to shove, such MPs are likely to be in no mood for compromise. This attitude will have been hardened if Boris Johnson becomes party leader despite his obvious flaws – especially since Brexit has radicalised Conservative members so much that they would rather break up the United Kingdom than not leave the EU. Depressingly the no-deal option is openly flirted with by both leadership candidates, shamelessly proffered to Tory members in exchange for their votes.

It is important to remember that even with the DUP’s support, a few Tory rebels can bring down a wayward government by leaving it. What also seems clear is that the new Conservative leader will not have a majority for either his central policy or for his government. That means Theresa May will in all probability have to assess which party leader will command a majority in the Commons. If it is not the Tory leader then it will be Jeremy Corbyn. If neither can put together the votes then Britain will be heading for a general election. Where Tory rebels would go from there is a tantalising question. Some have argued that the shape of the civil war in the party resembles the infighting that was a prelude to Robert Peel’s 1846 repeal of the Corn Laws, which protected British grain against cheaper imports. Peelites such as William Gladstone, who split the Tories by defecting to what ended up as the Liberal party, could justifiably claim to be on the side of the future rather than the past. That is still a seductive argument that could be used by their would-be heirs today.

However, the recent experience of Change UK has shown that while there are many contenders for the inheritor of Gladstone’s mantle, their claims have yet to be realised in substance. Well-established mainstream parties are not given to significant splits in the modern era – not least because no substantial breakaway has given rise to a significant new competitor or one that could ally with an existing rival. Both Labour, which endured a traumatic schism in the 1980s, and the Tories are being stretched by Brexit. For the Conservatives there is a more existential threat because it faces a surgent rightwing nationalist Brexit party of Nigel Farage.

The battle for the soul of the party, between rationalists and ideologues, could quickly become one that splits the Tories so badly that they end up out of power for decades. Even if the party stays together there is another existential threat: the electoral system. Having benefited from first past the post for decades, the Tories could become its victim. The reason is that under current arrangements once a party falls below a certain level of support, which is about 25%, the number of seats it wins collapses. With Mr Farage and Brexit rumbling on, the country could very well have four parties that can muster that share of the vote. Both Labour and the Tories risk voters defecting to the Brexit party and the Liberal Democrats. The result of any election could be chaos. It should be noted that British democracy has never been specifically associated with just one way of voting. First past the post in single-member constituencies was not the original system, nor one that many reformers had sought. It was a postwar creation that ought to be reconsidered in the light of the debacle of Brexit.

greybeard

26th June 2019, 07:01

Boris Johnson clashes with Bank of England chief over whether Britain can strike a deal to continue free trade with EU after Brexit
Evening Standard JOE MURPHY, NIcholas Cecil,Evening Standard

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-clashes-bank-england-093000383.html

Boris Johnson clashed with the Bank of England Governor today over whether Britain can strike a deal to continue free trade with the EU after Brexit.

The Tory leadership contender called on people to be “a little more positive” about the options for Britain if it leaves the European Union on October 31.

In a stormy LBC interview, Mr Johnson was repeatedly challenged by interviewer Nick Ferrari to say if he was accusing Mark Carney of being wrong.

Mr Johnson insisted Britain would be allowed to use world trade laws to enjoy a period without any changes to tariffs that would endanger exports, something the Bank Governor and many others have stressed would be impossible to demand without agreement in Brussels.

The former London mayor said Mr Carney was “wrong in thinking it is not an option”. He said Britain could continue to trade “in the same way as we normally trade”.

Asked if Mr Carney was wrong, Mr Johnson said: “He’s right in the sense that GATT, Article 24, paragraph 5b, makes it perfectly clear that two countries that are in the process of beginning a free trade agreement may protract their existing arrangements until such time ... as they have completed a new trade agreement. That is the way forward.”
Quizzed: Mr Johnson faced questions from LBC listeners and host Nick Ferrari (Jeremy Selwyn)

When told Mr Carney disagreed, Mr Johnson went on: “Where Mark is right is saying that that implies mutuality, there has to be an agreement on both sides.” Challenged again, he said: “Well, he’s wrong in thinking it is not an option, it is certainly an option. I don’t know if he has said it is not an option, but people are wrong if they say it is not an option. I don’t think Mark Carney has said that.”

Mr Johnson has been under repeated pressure over his plan to use GATT [general agreement on tariffs and trade] rules to extend the current trade terms after Brexit.

His European Research Group allies argue that the GATT rules allow for an extension to allow trade negotiations. However, the Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox, has ruled that GATT only applies to smooth the way to a deal that has been largely agreed in advance. Liam Fox has also questioned Mr Johnson’s plans. Asked about Mr Cox’s concerns, Mr Johnson said: “No, I think there is some confusion about this. What you can’t do is unilaterally use a GATT 24 solution.”

Mr Johnson continued: “But what you could do is agree with our EU friends and partners to go forward on that basis. When you think about it, we haven’t had an interruption to trade between the UK and the Continent for years and years. It would be bizarre if the EU were to decide on their own to impose tariffs on goods coming from the UK. It wouldn’t be in the interests of their businesses or their consumers. Let’s be a little more positive about this.”

Mr Carney stressed last week that the return of tariffs would be “automatic” if Britain left the EU with no deal.

“The GATT rules are clear,” the governor said. “We should be clear that not having an agreement with the EU would mean that there are tariffs automatically.”
Mr Johnson was repeatedly challenged by interviewer Nick Ferrari (Jeremy Selwyn)

Mr Johnson repeatedly refused to deny that a photo of him and his partner Carrie Symonds was six weeks old.

The picture taken in the Sussex countryside appeared in the media yesterday, just days after the couple had a row at her London flat and the police were called by a neighbour.

Pressed on when it was taken and whether it was old, he said: “I’m not going to comment on the antiquity or the provenance of some photo that newspapers decide to put on their front pages.”

He accused Mr Ferrari of turning the interview into a “farce” with the repeated questions about the photo.

But the presenter stuck to his line of questioning, even at one point joking that it was pop star Ed Sheeran not Mr Johnson in the picture.

Asked if he knew the photo was being put out, Mr Johnson responded: “I’m aware of all sorts of pictures of me out on the internet. It’s entirely up to the newspapers to decide what they want to print.” He sought to bring the conversation back to his policies and insisted it was “not fair” on his family and loved ones to answer questions about his private life.

Mr Johnson waded into the row over LGBT teaching at a Birmingham school, where some parents have withdrawn their children in protest.

He backed LGBT equality and the need for children to attend lessons and learn about “the world as it is”.

“I believe very strongly that people should be able to love whoever they choose,” he said. “That’s the way we live our lives in the UK.” He added: “I don’t think kids should be unreasonably taken out of school.” Rival Jeremy Hunt has also backed the school against the parents.
Under the spotlight: Boris Johnson answers questions in a live radio phone-in on LBC today (Jeremy Selwyn)

On Brexit, Mr Johnson warned that the Tories were “staring down the barrel of defeat” if the UK does not quit the European Union. Seeking to explain how he could get a Brexit deal agreed by both Brussels and Parliament, he claimed that “politics has totally changed” since March 29, the original departure date from the European bloc. He told LBC: “People are looking at this thing and thinking ‘Parliament is just not going to do this’. But, actually, I think they are.”

Mr Johnson confirmed he is willing to quit the EU without a deal, but his rhetoric has changed in recent days to stress that he wants a stripped-down agreement with the EU, including that free trade would keep going for an “implementation period” to allow more negotiation.

He backed the ambition of recruiting 20,000 more police officers, as proposed by Home Secretary Sajid Javid, although he refused to put a timescale on it. The former foreign secretary also warned that seeking to blame him for the continued imprisonment in Iran of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe on spying charges, which she and Britain strongly deny, was shifting responsibility away from the hardliners in Tehran.

greybeard

26th June 2019, 20:49

EU says it will never renegotiate Brexit deal despite Boris Johnson claims: 'Full stop'
The Independent Jon Stone,The Independent

European Commission has again reiterated that the Brexit withdrawal agreement will not be negotiated, "full stop" – despite claims by Boris Johnson that he would somehow be able to re-open talks.When asked whether the agreement could be reopened under any circumstances – including to stop a no-deal or prevent a hard border in Ireland, – a spokesperson for the Commission was emphatic:"I can confirm, as has been repeated several times, we will not be renegotiating the withdrawal agreement, full stop," she told reporters in Brussels.Asked to comment on what the view was of Mr Johnson was within the EU institutions, the spokesperson said: "I would refrain from using any kind of adjectives to define any future prime minister of the United Kingdom and will repeat what we have said before, which is that the Commission will work with any prime minister in the spirit of good cooperation."More follows…

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/eu-says-never-renegotiate-brexit-131800677.html

greybeard

27th June 2019, 12:35

Brexit: MPs reveal plan to block no-deal by cutting off government funding
The Independent Ashley Cowburn,The Independent 6 hours ago

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-mps-reveal-plan-block-061100849.html

MPs are expected to launch a fresh attempt to block a future prime minister pushing a no-deal Brexit policy by threatening to cut off vital funds for government departments.

The cross-party plan, led by Conservative MP Dominic Grieve and senior Labour MP Dame Margaret Beckett, aims to force the future Tory leader to gain parliament's consent for leaving the EU without a deal.

Their amendment to route finance legislation in the Commons – known as "estimates" – would cut off funding for government ministries if the PM failed to do so.

Boris Johnson, the frontrunner in the race to replace Theresa May as Conservative leader, said this week the UK will leave the EU on 31 October "do or die" - heightening the risk of a no-deal scenario.

At the latest Conservative hustings, the ex-foreign secretary again refused to rule out suspending parliament to leave the EU without the consent of the Commons, but claimed the odds of a no-deal Brexit were a "million-to-one against".

But Mr Grieve, the former attorney general, told The Sun: "The suggestion that we could or should be taken out of the EU without the consent of the House of commons is fundamentally wrong, and frankly unconstitutional.

"The fact that it is being suggested as a viable option is unacceptable. The Commons should put down such markers as it can that such a course of action is unacceptable."
image

greybeard

27th June 2019, 15:59

No matter who gets into No 10, their Brexit plans are fantasy
The Guardian Gina Miller,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/no-matter-gets-no-10-050012198.html

As commentators line up to debate the character and personality traits of the two men running for the Tory leadership – and by default our prime minister – there is only one question on my mind: how credible are the details of how and when they can deliver or resolve Brexit?

This does not appear to be a question 84% of Conservative party members are remotely bothered with, as they would prefer the fantasy of an immediate “clean Brexit”. They welcome their witching hour of 11pm on 31 October becoming Independence Day, as if it’s some sort of Hollywood blockbuster, with no deal.

If only will was reality. There is a raft of legislation required even in a no-deal scenario – for example bills on agriculture, fisheries, financial services, trade and immigration. So, too, the vexed question of the Irish border. Boris Johnson, like an overexcited puppy when interviewed by the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg this week, grabbed this bone and enthused about “abundant, abundant technical fixes that can be introduced to make sure that you don’t have to have checks at the border”. Johnson is not one to worry about details, given the fact that in January Sabine Weyand, the EU’s deputy negotiator, said: “We’ve looked at every border on this Earth, every border the EU has with a third country – there’s simply no way you can do away with checks and controls.”

Then there is the clause in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. Section 10, on the subject of the Irish border, states that nothing in this act “authorises regulations which … diminish any form of North-South cooperation provided for by the Belfast agreement”. This is likely to mean that the Northern Ireland backstop will stay in place until MPs reach an agreement that honours the UK’s obligations under the Good Friday agreement.

Related: Liam Fox 'tilting at windmills' over tariffs, say Tory Eurosceptics

I can hear the naysayers now – we are Great Britain, we can leave with a clean Brexit and a smooth transition to World Trade Organization (WTO) terms under which the rest of the world trades. Yes, Britain is a signatory to the WTO in its own right – but there are no WTO terms that apply specifically to the UK, as we have been operating under the EU’s umbrella for decades.

To deal directly under WTO terms will require us to have something called a schedule of tariffs, which applies tariffs to all imports into a country as well as quotas for a certain amount of tariff-free goods. Brexiteers such as Bernard Jenkin MP say we can simply rely on “default terms” or the EU’s schedule of tariffs. But that suggestion has already, understandably, been blocked by many of the 164 WTO members. Why would they allow the UK to take advantage of the negotiating position of a large global trading bloc such as the EU, when they themselves can’t? Unless Britain can set up emergency cover by using the EU schedule or our own schedule without formal approval, we will enter uncharted territory on the morning of 1 November, as no deal means no transition period. Again, Johnson thinks this is “tosh”. He can magic this, too – an implementation period not attached to a withdrawal agreement, but agreed by the EU anyway – even though he has not spoken to a single person on the EU side about this.

Gatt XXIV, or article 24 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade is a piece of international trade law from 1947 which pre-dates the existence of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

If the UK leaves the EU without a deal, then by default it means the end of tariff-free trade between the two parties. Some supporters of a no-deal Brexit have claimed that the UK can use Gatt XXIV to implement a period of up to 10 years where trade between the UK and EU continues under existing arrangements while a comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA) is negotiated.

Under the WTO’s most-favoured nation rule (MFN), if the UK offered tariff-free access to the UK market to the EU, it would also have to do so to any other trading partner with which there was not an already established FTA. With Gatt XXIV, Brexiters say, the UK can maintain its existing tariffs and quotas as part of a ‘standstill’ arrangement.

However to invoke Gatt XXIV, both the UK and the EU have to agree an ‘interim arrangement’ leading towards a FTA within the 10-year time limit - and that agreement has to meet the conditions and approval of the WTO. The UK cannot invoke article 24 unilaterally, and even if it could, it only applies to goods, and not to services. In 2017, services made up 79% of the UK’s economic output.

In previous cases where the article has been used, the two sides had a deal in place, and it was used as part of a process of implementing new trade arrangements. It has never been used to replicate something of the scale and complexity of the EU and the UK’s trading relationship - and if the UK truly leaves the EU with no deal, then there is no interim arrangement to apply Gatt XXIV to.

Martin Belam

Johnson will say we can be like Australia or New Zealand or Norway, conveniently forgetting that Australia has trade agreements in place with more than 17 countries, including the US, China, Japan, Singapore and Malaysia, and deals with another 20 countries signed and in the pipeline.

I do not doubt that there are many countries that will wish to trade with the UK post-Brexit, but understandably they will wait to see what the UK’s ultimate relationship with Europe will be. WTO members will be watching Britain’s diplomatic behaviour closely. How the new prime minister and his government conduct themselves, especially if they refuse to pay the £39bn bill, will have a serious impact – and possibly make us devoid of international goodwill.

Trade would not stop, but there will be legal uncertainty, tariffs and barriers, and protectionism from other countries. In some sectors, such as meat and dairy, tariffs as high as 97% would result in British farmers who export lamb and beef seeing their prices double to uncompetitive levels. Imports of animal feed and fertilisers could also face tariffs, so farmers’ costs will increase, squeezing margins in the face of falling sales and no subsidies. This would affect chemicals and machinery parts too, which operate on a “just in time” basis, and also labour. A similar story would unfold across other sectors, with everyday imports we depend on – life-saving drugs, radioactive isotopes for MRI scans, medical equipment, epilepsy drugs, contact lenses, electricity, petrol, even milk – being hit.

Most politicians stay quiet on the fact that we are an 80% service economy. The WTO/Gatt regime into which this would fall would mean other countries being able to impose barriers, such as requiring doctors, accountants or architects to requalify. The financial services sector, which has been world-leading, and the UK aviation services sector, the third largest in the world, would be hugely affected: the EU has a competitive single market for air transport.

Meanwhile, though the prime minister will change, the arithmetic in parliament won’t. And there will be just 20 sitting days to the end of October to resolve the hornets’ nest of issues – and no one on the EU side of the table to renegotiate with until mid-November at the earliest.

But let’s not be bothered with mere details. Who needs policies and practical solutions – sheer force of personality will win the day. Why worry that we would be poorer and less safe than we are today?

• Gina Miller is a businesswoman and transparency activist

greybeard

28th June 2019, 08:43

Boris Johnson called the French 'turds' over Brexit but it was cut from BBC documentary
Yahoo News UK Ellen Manning,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-french-turds-bbc-documentary-075013497.html

The BBC reportedly cut a crude comment by Boris Johnson about the French from a documentary following concerns at the Foreign Office over how it could impact diplomatic relations

Boris Johnson reportedly accused the French of being ‘turds’ over Brexit in a comment that was cut from a BBC documentary before it aired.

The Daily Mail reported that the comment was due to appear in a fly-on-the-wall documentary but the Foreign Office asked for it to be removed amid concerns it could affect diplomatic relations.

According to the newspaper, a Whitehall memo said the comment would make Anglo-French relations ‘awkward’.

Senior diplomats also privately voiced concerns that it could make it harder for the UK to get a good Brexit deal, it reported.

The comment was reportedly made during filming for the three-part documentary Inside the Foreign Office.

The documentary was broadcast on BBC Two in November last year, after Mr Johnson had resigned as foreign secretary.

A BBC spokeswoman said: "The programme set out to reflect the realities of life inside the Foreign Office, the production team made judgments about what was in the programme and they are satisfied that the programme achieves its ambitions and has the content they wanted."

The Foreign Office declined to comment.

But Foreign Office Minster Sir Alan Duncan said there had been a significant level of concern within the Foreign Office about the documentary.

He told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: "I do remember that the filming of the documentary was a pretty high octane venture.

“There were some pretty bumpy moments when we thought 'Ooh, we don't want that to appear'.

"I imagine that there were discussions between the Foreign Office and the Beeb saying 'Please don't put that it in ... or that, or that, or that, or that'. This was perhaps one of them."

greybeard

28th June 2019, 14:08

Johnson Refuses to Rule Out Suspending Parliament: Brexit Update

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/johnson-zigzags-again-says-no-075616502.html

(Bloomberg) -- Boris Johnson’s Brexit strategy faces growing opposition from Tory members of Parliament determined to prevent a no-deal Brexit, despite the leadership front-runner saying there was only a “million-to-one” chance of it happening. Even Theresa May hinted she might be willing to vote against Johnson -- or his rival Jeremy Hunt -- if they pursued it.

Key Developments:
Tory leadership rivals Johnson and Jeremy Hunt to hold another hustings at 7 p.m.Prime Minister Theresa May is in Japan for G-20 meetingIFS says Hunt’s tax and spending plans would cost 28 billion pounds ($36 billion) a yearTory MP Dominic Grieve proposed amendment to public spending limits, to try to make a no-deal Brexit practically impossibleJapanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono says his government is “very concerned” about a no-deal Brexit

Hunt Says He’d Be Out If He Fails on Brexit

Jeremy Hunt said the reality of British politics is that no leader could survive if they don’t quickly deliver the U.K.’s split from the EU.

“No prime minister is going to last any time at all if they don”t deliver Brexit and deliver it very quickly. That is the reality of British politics. that’s not about Jeremy Hunt, it’s about anyone who does that job,” Hunt said at a Hustings event for Tory members.

He also reiterated his commitment to a no-deal divorce if talks fail. “If we get to October and there is no prospect of a deal that we can get through Parliament and no deal is on the table, as I sincerely hope it would be, then I’m absolutely clear I will leave,” he said.

Johnson Refuses to Rule Out Proroguing

Boris Johnson refused to rule out suspending Parliament in order to force through a no-deal Brexit on Oct 31, even though he said he thought it was unlikely and he isn’t attracted to the idea.

Proroguing, or suspending, Parliament is one method a prime minister could use in order to ensure the U.K. Leaves the EU on Oct. 31, however it could cause a constitutional crisis.

“I’m not attracted to the idea of a no deal exit from the EU but I think it would be absolute folly to rule it out,” Johnson said when asked if he would rule out suspending Parliament at a Hustings event for Tory Party members. "I don’t particularly envisage the circumstances in which it would be necessary to prorogue Parliament, nor am I attracted to that expedient," he said.

No Food Shortages if No Deal, Johnson Says

Boris Johnson, speaking at a hustings event for Tory members in Bournemouth, southern England, dismissed warnings about the economic risks of a no-deal Brexit, saying it was “nonsense”.

“The planes will fly, there will be drinking water whatever happens on Nov. 1 in this country and there will be milk solids and glucose and whey for our Mars Bars,” he said, without giving any details of how he would ensure supplies. “Where there’s a will there’s a way.”

Food industry experts last year warned the government that makers of the chocolate bar could be forced to halt production in a hard Brexit scenario and the price of confectionery could rise drastically.

PSA Building Astra in U.K. Depends on Brexit Terms (4 p.m.)

French carmaker PSA said its final decision on whether to build the next-generation Astra model at its Ellesmere Port plant in the U.K. will depend on the terms of any Brexit deal, as well as the ratification of an agreement negotiated with the workers’ trade union.

The Astra is currently built at Ellesmere Port, in northwest England, and Gliwicein Poland.

Clarke Will Back No-Deal Brexit Spending Threat

Former Chancellor of the Exchequer Ken Clarke said he’ll be supporting a measure that would shut down parts of government spending in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

Clarke told journalists he’d vote for an amendment, put down by former Attorney General Dominic Grieve, which would cut off funding to some departments if the government takes the U.K. out of the EU with no deal unless it first gets Parliament’s approval.

Theresa May’s office has called the amendment, which could be voted on next week, “grossly irresponsible” and said it would potentially cut off funding for schools, housing and welfare. Some MPs may feel queasy backing something that could do that, but Clarke’s comments suggest the move has at least some support.

Clarke also said he wouldn’t back an immediate no confidence vote in the new prime minister, but would wait to see how they approach Brexit. “Come September,” he said, “the new prime minister will have to explain to the House of Commons what he is actually planning to do.”

May Hints She May Oppose No-Deal in Parliament

Theresa May signaled she might be willing to oppose her successor as prime minister if he tries to force the U.K. out of the European Union without a deal.

Speaking to reporters on her way to the Group of 20 summit in Japan, May declined to promise she will follow the orders of Boris Johnson or Jeremy Hunt in votes on Brexit policy. She has already voted against leaving the EU without an agreement, arguing it would disrupt trade and damage the economy.

Asked if she could guarantee she will support her successor’s plan, even if it meant no-deal, May was equivocal. “What you are saying to me is, ‘will you now say that whatever happens in the future you’re going to agree with it?’’ she said. “I think it’s important for us to deliver Brexit in a way that is good for British people.”

May also indicated she’s opposed to the idea of suspending Parliament to get a no-deal Brexit done -- something Boris Johnson has not yet fully ruled out.

“What I hope and expect is that my successor will be able to put before Parliament proposals that will enable us to deliver on the vote of the British people in a way that will be good for the United Kingdom,” she said.

Brecon By-Election set for Aug. 1

A by-election in Brecon and Radnorshire will be held on Aug. 1. Chief Whip Julian Smith moved the writ for the replacement of Tory MP Chris Davies, who was convicted of fiddling his expenses and removed by a recall position.

The constituency was held by the Liberal Democrats for 18 years before Davies won in 2015, and it will offer them and Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party an opportunity to turn their momentum -- after successes in last month’s European elections -- into representation in the House of Commons.

Johnson Silent on Parliament Saying ‘No’

Boris Johnson has again refused to say what he’ll do if Parliament tells him not to pursue a no-deal Brexit. Asked five times in his ConservativeHome interview what he’d do, Johnson first said it would be wrong for Parliament to do this, then, twice, that Parliament wouldn’t do it, then that he was determined to leave the EU on Oct. 31. He then said he didn’t want, or plan, to have a general election if Parliament tried to block him.

Asked if he would ignore Parliament, he replied: “I’m not quite saying that. What I’m saying is that the parliamentary mood has changed and continues to change.”

Despite his confidence, there’s nothing to suggest that every Tory MP is willing to vote for a no-deal Brexit, or that Labour MPs are moving in his direction. Indeed his plan to exclude from his government every Tory who won’t sign up to leaving the EU without a deal (see 9:15 a.m.) implies there will be a large number of former ministers freed to vote their conscience -- and who will owe the new prime minister nothing.

Johnson Says Cabinet Must Commit to Oct. 31

Boris Johnson said that if he becomes prime minister, he will require every member of his cabinet to sign up to leaving the European Union on October 31 -- even if it means leaving without a deal.

“I want obviously to have a broad range of talent in my government, the government that I will lead, but clearly people must be reconciled to the very, very, very small possibility, and I stress it will be a very, very small possibility, that we would have to leave on those terms,’’ Johnson said in an interview with the ConHome website. “I don’t think it will happen but they would have to be reconciled to it.”

The move could rule out senior Tories, including Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd, Business Secretary Greg Clark and Justice Secretary David Gauke, who oppose a no-deal divorce, from being part of a Johnson administration.

Japan ‘Very Concerned’ About No-Deal: Kono

Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono said his government is “very concerned” at the prospect of a no-deal Brexit and the effect it would have on Japanese companies working in the U.K.

There are more than 1,000 Japanese companies in Britain and a no-deal split “would have a very negative impact on their operations,” Kono said in an interview with BBC radio. “Many companies are worried about the implications, they don’t know what’s going to happen, they don’t know what’s going to happen legally or physically.”

He said automakers in the U.K. would be particularly affected by any change to customs arrangements with the EU if it disrupts their just-in-time movement of components. “If there’s a no-deal Brexit and they have to go through actual customs inspections physically, those operations may not be able to continue.’’

“Some companies have already started moving their operations to other places in Europe,’’ he said. “We don’t want to disrupt the economic relationship with the U.K., we’ve been asking the U.K. government ‘let the Japanese companies know what they can expect’ and things should happen smoothly without any disruption.’’

Earlier:

Boris Johnson Predicts ‘Million-to-One’ Chance of No-Deal BrexitBrexit Bulletin: Factually ChallengedQuadrillion-Dollar London Market Finds Way Through Brexit BluesBrexit Takes Toll on Pound’s Share of Global Transactions: Chart

--With assistance from Thomas Penny and Tim Ross.

To contact the reporters on this story: Jessica Shankleman in London at jshankleman@bloomberg.net;Robert Hutton in London at rhutton1@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Tim Ross at tross54@bloomberg.net, Thomas Penny

For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com

©2019 Bloomberg L.P.

greybeard

28th June 2019, 19:33

Tory leadership race: Hunt overtakes Johnson as the public's preferred Prime Minister
Yahoo News UK Joe Gamp,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/hunt-overtakes-johnson-as-the-publics-preferred-prime-minister-155635339.html

(PA)
Jeremy Hunt has edged in front of Boris Johnson in a public YouGov poll (PA)

Tory leadership candidate Jeremy Hunt has overtaken favourite Boris Johnson as the public’s preferred choice to become Prime Minister.

The race to replace Theresa May has come down to the final contenders, with Hunt and Johnson taking part in nationwide hustings before the party votes.

In a YouGov poll of public opinion, Hunt now leads Boris as the public's preferred successor by 41 percent to 29 percent.

However, the vote will be decided by Tory party members alone.

Among Conservatives, Johnson is ahead by 48 percent to 39 percent.

The survey showed a quarter - 25 percent - of people think Boris Johnson would be a good Prime Minister

But 58 percent said the opposite of Mr Johnson leadership (a net figure of -33, compared to -18 a fortnight ago).

Meanwhile, 28 percent believe Hunt would make a good Prime Minister.

Britain's leadership contest is taking the two contenders on a month-long nationwide tour (GETTY)

And it seems the public are more confident of Mr Johnson’s vision of Brexit, with 22 percent of people thinking Mr Johnson would lead Britain out of the EU, compared to Hunt with 12 percent.

Another 43 percent think be bad (a net figure of -14, compared to -24 a fortnight ago).
Meanwhile, the foreign secretary told a hustings in Exeter he would love Mr Johnson on board as he was an "enormous talent".

But Johnson denied making the same offer to Hunt if he became the next Prime Minister.

Around 160,000 Conservative members will begin voting next week with the new leader named on July 22.

greybeard

29th June 2019, 12:56

UK must decide next step on Brexit, says France’s Europe minister
The Guardian Angelique Chrisafis in Paris,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/uk-must-decide-next-step-183318662.html

France’s minister for European affairs, Amélie de Montchalin, has said it is up to the UK to decide the next step on Brexit and no single European Union country was pressuring London, least of all France.

Asked to respond to a report that Boris Johnson, the Conservative leadership favourite, had called the French “turds” over Brexit, De Montchalin declined to comment, saying she was unfamiliar with the word.

The minister said Brexit was “a British issue for the British to decide”.

She told the Anglo-American Press Association in Paris: “If the UK wants to leave the EU, and in an orderly way, the withdrawal agreement is the deal on the table, which has been negotiated for over two years. We’ve also said that the political declaration on the future relationship is open to discussion if the prime minister had a majority.”

De Montchalin said the key question was to move on as quickly as possible to think about the future relationship. “What is important is how we work together on the future on issues that are economic, academic, cultural, social, defence and security – what we’ll do together, and we’ll do a lot together, that’s certain.”

She said the EU 27 countries were united on Brexit.

Asked if France would back giving another extension to Britain’s leaving date beyond 31 October, De Montchalin said there would have to be a political element “which showed that, if more time is given, something will be happening”. She said for the last extension, which was given in the spring, this was after cross-party talks between Conservatives and Labour. For any future request, there would have to be a process in place. “If it’s just the question ‘we’d like more time’, the EU council is very clear on that: there’s no reason for it without a new political scheme being put forward.”

She said the advantage of the withdrawal agreement was that it included a transition period “which allows us to discuss the future in a stabilised situation. If there was not an exit agreement, we’d be discussing the future in a situation that wasn’t stabilised.”

She said many EU countries had made contingency preparations for a no-deal exit “not because they want that” but because there might be a possibility it could happen by accident.

“The cost of uncertainty is high – in the economy in general, in industry, in the financial sector, among fishermen on both sides of channel who don’t know what’s happening tomorrow,” she said. “I think there are a certain number of governments, who see the cost of that.”

greybeard

30th June 2019, 19:26

Boris Johnson ‘might never enter No 10’ if MPs withdraw support
The Guardian Michael Savage,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-might-never-enter-230503104.html

Boris Johnson could be stopped from becoming prime minister even if he is elected as the new Conservative leader, two of Britain’s leading constitutional experts have said.

With Tory MPs threatening to withdraw support for the party under his stewardship, Johnson is warned that he could be prevented from ever entering Downing Street should it become clear he cannot command a majority in the House of Commons.

It is the latest sign of the parliamentary crisis that could face Johnson upon his election. It risks involving the Queen in politics and could pull Theresa May back into the Brexit impasse; as the incumbent prime minister, she will be key in recommending to the palace who should be called to form the next government.

Johnson’s legitimacy would be challenged if just a handful of Tory MPs declare that they could not support his administration, according to professors Robert Hazell and Meg Russell from the constitution unit at UCL, University of London.
With May already struggling with a tiny working majority, two Tories – Dominic Grieve and Ken Clarke – have already indicated that they would not be able to support an administration that would leave the EU with no deal, which Johnson is willing to do.

The professors conclude Johnson would “not necessarily” become prime minister should he beat Jeremy Hunt and become Tory leader at the end of July. The cabinet manual, which covers changes in government, does not deal with the unusual circumstances that have been created in parliament by the Brexit dilemma.

“The key test is whether the Conservatives’ new leader is able to command the confidence of the House of Commons,” they write. “Whether the new Conservative party leader can command parliamentary confidence is clearly in some doubt given comments from Conservative MPs that they may not be able to support the new government. The government only has a majority of three, including the DUP, so only a very few rebels is enough for it to lose its majority.

“One possible scenario is that a group of Conservative MPs is so concerned about the winning candidate that they declare their withdrawal of support immediately the result of the leadership contest is known – ie, before the new PM is appointed. This would pose a serious dilemma for the Queen and those advising her, because it would not be clear that the new Conservative leader could command confidence.”

This would pose a serious dilemma for the Queen and those advising her Professors Robert Hazell and Meg Russell

One senior Tory said it was simply a statement of reality that Johnson would struggle to form an administration. However, he predicted that Johnson would be allowed to do so at the end of July, but would be likely to face a no-confidence vote when MPs returned from summer recess. “It’s very probable that he will be able to set up an administration and the crunch in terms of his legitimacy won’t come until September,” he said.

In their analysis, Hazell and Russell conclude that the Queen could make the new Tory leader a “provisional appointment” as prime minister, conditional on him demonstrating he has the confidence of enough MPs. “Alternatively, Theresa May could remain in place and facilitate a process in parliament to demonstrate that the winning candidate – or indeed an alternative candidate – can win a confidence vote, before recommending that person to the Queen.”

It is currently unclear who an alternative candidate could be. Labour would not have the numbers to form a government, so some kind of unity-government figurehead could be an option. Many MPs on all sides now believe that the crisis will end in an autumn general election, either called by Johnson or forced upon him MPs unwilling to leave the EU with no deal..

greybeard

1st July 2019, 07:35

Jeremy Hunt Plans £6bn No-Deal Brexit 'War Chest' To Avoid Leaving On 'A Wing And A Prayer'
HuffPost UK Graeme Demianyk,HuffPost UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/jeremy-hunt-plans-6bn-no-210030775.html

Jeremy Hunt has pledged a £6bn no-deal Brexit ‘war chest’ to help protect the farming and fishing industries as he warned against leaving the European Union on “a wing and a prayer”.

The Tory leadership hopeful will on Monday lay out his plans if the UK leaves the bloc on October 31 without an agreement with Brussels. It will include a ‘stimulus package’ likened to the bail-out offered to the financial sector after 2008′s crash.

In contrast to rival Boris Johnson’s “do or die” approach, Hunt says he would prefer to leave with a deal - but says a leader must have the “courage” to “walk away”.

If elected Prime Minister, Hunt will also lead an emergency Cobra-style committee to “turbocharge” Whitehall preparations, as well as holding a no deal budget and creating a national logistics committee to keep Britain open for business.

In a speech, the MP will spell out how the food and agricultural industry will be supported if the UK has to move on to World Trade Organisation tariffs.

He will say: “If you’re a sheep farmer in Shropshire or a fishermen in Peterhead I have a simple message for you. I know you face uncertainty if we have to leave the EU without a deal.

“I will mitigate the impact of no deal Brexit on you and step in to help smooth those short term difficulties. If we could do it for the bankers in the financial crisis, we can do it for our fisherman, farmers and small businesses now.”

Similar support packages have been offered by US president Donald Trump, who provided a $16bn package for farmers impacted by Chinese tariffs.

His proposed National Logistics Committee, led by the Department for Transport, will produce a plan to keep goods flowing in and out of the UK in the event of no deal, and could include emergency powers to ensure ports and airports are running.

A no-deal Brexit budget will include cutting corporation tax cut to 12.5 per cent, increasing the annual allowance to £5 million and taking 90 per cent of high street businesses out of rates.

Hunt will say: “Britain deserves a leader who works tirelessly to get a deal. But who is prepared to put the hard yards in preparing for no deal.

“I have made it clear that my preference is for us to leave with a new deal. One that removes the backstop and ensures we have a fully independent trade policy. And if the Commission engages in good faith I believe this is possible.

“But Britain deserves a leader with the courage to not just tell the European Commission he will walk away. But to show them he is willing and able to do so.

“Because in the end, without those abilities, without that determination, and without that plan, it is just a wing and a prayer.”

Meanwhile, outgoing Prime Minister Theresa May has suggested Johnson’s attitude to the October 31 Brexit deadline is not the right approach,

Johnson has also refused to rule out ignoring MPs and proroguing parliament to ram through a no deal should he fail to win support.

When asked if this was the best approach to Brexit as she arrived for her final European Council summit, May said the next prime minister should focus on getting a deal through parliament.

She said: “I’ve always been very clear that I think the best approach for the UK is to first of all ensure we’re delivering on the vote that took place in 2016, leaving the EU, but that we do that with a good deal so we can do it in an orderly way.

“I still think we negotiated a good deal, I wasn’t able to get a majority in parliament for that deal.

“It will be up to my successor to get that majority, deliver on the vote and take us forward.”

greybeard

1st July 2019, 20:34

Hammond warns Johnson and Hunt over spending promises

Chancellor says no-deal Brexit would drain £26bn that rivals claim could be a ‘war chest’

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/01/philip-hammond-boris-johnson-jeremy-hunt-brexit

Brexit latest – live updates

Heather Stewart and Richard Partington

Mon 1 Jul 2019 12.33 BST
First published on Mon 1 Jul 2019

Philip Hammond has delivered a stinging public rebuke to both Conservative leadership candidates, warning them to “stop and think” before engaging in a “bidding war” of tax cuts and spending pledges.

The chancellor is among those senior Tory figures who fear that the contest – which has seen both Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt promise tax reductions and spending increases, while openly contemplating a no-deal Brexit – risks undermining his party’s reputation for economic competence.

Just a few minutes before Hunt was due to set out plans for bailing out farmers and fishing fleets in the event of a no-deal Brexit on Monday, Hammond tweeted a warning that the “fiscal firepower” he set aside in the spring statement would be wiped out if the UK left the EU without a deal.

Later, the chancellor, who has not endorsed either candidate, told the BBC: “There is always a temptation to sort of get into a bidding war about spending more and cutting taxes.

“But you can’t do both and, if we’re not careful, all we end up doing is borrowing more, spending more on interest instead of on our schools and our hospitals and our police, and delivering a bigger burden of debt to our children and our grandchildren.

“I don’t think either of the candidates would want to do that, that is not what the Tory party is about, but we just need to sometimes stop and think about what we’re doing.”

Johnson and Hunt have been vying to set out the toughest Brexit stance, with both insisting they would be prepared to go ahead with a no-deal Brexit if necessary. But the pair have also each made a string of lavish spending pledges.

Hunt promised on Monday to earmark £6bn of additional government spending on emergency funds for the fishing and farming industries and help for small businesses in the event of a no-deal Brexit. He has also pledged to cut corporation tax and increase defence spending by 25% over the next five years.

Johnson, still the frontrunner to become prime minister despite Hunt gaining ground, said at the weekend he would spend about £25bn of “fiscal headroom” built up by the chancellor in the public finances to fund his plans, which include increasing the higher-rate tax threshold from £50,000 to £80,000.

But Hammond warned: “That money would be available if we have a smooth Brexit with a transition period in an orderly way. But that isn’t a pot of money sitting in the Treasury, it’s actually more borrowing without breaching the government’s borrowing limits.”

Hunt was challenged over Hammond’s warning, after delivering a speech in Westminster about his plans for emergency no-deal spending, which he acknowledged would represent “one of the largest fiscal and regulatory stimuli the country has seen in decades”.

“I am the cabinet minister who is in a government who has had to make the most painful cuts in public spending, across public services, where all of us felt the pain of what was happening very personally,” he said. “We took those painful decisions. We put the economy back on its feet. And so we will never throw that fiscal responsibility away, because it’s essential for our prosperity.

“But as a result of that, we have built up headroom, which makes it possible to make the commitments I am making today whilst sticking to our plans to reduce the deficit and reduce our national debt as a proportion of GDP.”

That stood in flat contradiction to Hammond’s insistence that the headroom would be wiped out by a no-deal Brexit, which the Treasury expects to hit economic growth and thus tax revenues.

Hunt added: “When you face an economic shock, it is just basic economics that you find support for the industries that are affected. It is temporary support, but it allows them to change their business models – to adapt.”

The necessity of tackling the deficit formed the centrepiece of the Conservatives’ economic pitch in the 2010 and 2015 general elections, and was one of their key attack lines against Labour.

Paul Johnson, the director of tax thinktank the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), said: “This whole debate seems to be taking place in a complete vacuum. It is plausible, of course it’s plausible, to say, ‘Look, we want a big fiscal expansion,’ but it would be nice to know how long for, what level of debt and deficit are considered acceptable, and how it will eventually be unwound.”

Even before Monday’s latest spending pledges, the IFS had warned that Hunt’s spending plans would “amplify the long-run challenges facing the UK public finances”.

Anna Soubry, the former Conservative business minister who left to join Change UK – which she now leads – said: “The Conservatives were once proud to be the party of business, for business, and both candidates are not just trashing that reputation but have done so whilst in government.”

UK government borrowing is currently 1.2% of GDP. The £26.6bn represents a rise to about 2% of GDP – a level targeted by Hammond. While the chancellor has previously said the funds could be used under an orderly Brexit to end austerity, the Tories committed in their manifesto to remove the deficit entirely by the mid-2020s – two targets viewed as incompatible by many economists.

Hunt was setting out more details of his “10-point plan” for a no-deal Brexit at the Policy Exchange thinktank in Westminster. He said he would seek to begin exploratory discussions with EU leaders, and make a decision by 30 September on whether a better deal was possible.

If not, he promised to “focus the whole country’s attention on no-deal preparations”.
Sign up to the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

Kirsty Blackman, the SNP’s economic spokeswoman, said that by openly contemplating a no-deal Brexit, Hunt and Johnson had become “the Thelma and Louise of Brexit”. “It beggars belief that both are prepared to drive the UK economy off a Brexit cliff-edge, regardless of the catastrophic consequences for the economy and people’s jobs.”

Star Tsar

2nd July 2019, 02:11

RichPlanet.net

Fake, Five Star Fugitive

Published 1st July 2019

Mr Hall explores the possible hidden motivations behind Brexit...

ccAthbjSKgA

greybeard

2nd July 2019, 10:52

Brexit: Jeremy Hunt says he will abandon talks with EU a month early and let UK crash out if he has failed to persuade Brussels to renegotiate
The Independent Rob Merrick,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-jeremy-hunt-says-abandon-104300049.html

Jeremy Hunt has vowed to “cease all discussions” with Brussels at the end of September if it has failed to budge on Brexit and let the UK crash out of the EU a month later.

In a dramatic ramping up of his Brexit threats, the foreign secretary pledged a comprehensive no-deal plan by the end of August, with all civil service leave cancelled.

And he said, of the new 30 September deadline: “If my judgement is that there is no deal to be done, I will immediately cease all discussions with the European Union and focus the whole country’s attention on no deal preparations.”

The move is a clear attempt to outflank Boris Johnson, who remains the clear favourite to win the Tory leadership race after his vow to leave the EU on Halloween “deal or no deal”.

Mr Hunt said he would allow only three weeks for fresh talks with the European Commission after his no-deal Brexit plan was published at the end of August.

And he said: “If there is no engagement on this deal, if it is apparent that the Commission is simply not interested in negotiating, if there is no willingness to tackle the shortcomings of backstop then there will be no kicking the can down the road and we will intensify and finalise our preparations to leave without a deal.

“So from the start of my premiership, I will work on the basis we are leaving on 31 October without a deal unless the Commission changes its position.”

Chris says
As far as I can "guess"
This is all about winning this contest.
The only ones deciding the outcome of this race are the Conservative Party Members.
The whole thing is tailor made to get the right wing vote.
Then when a new leader of the party is elected their might be a change of tune with the next General Election in mind.
As far as I can see being elected leader does not necessarily mean that being the PM will follow on from that result.
All crazy interesting stuff.
Think the current Chancellor would make a good PM but he was sensible enough to stay out of this contest.
Chris

greybeard

2nd July 2019, 18:51

Boris Johnson Too ‘Unstable’ To Be Prime Minister, Labour’s John McDonnell Warns
HuffPost UK Paul Waugh,HuffPost UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-too-unstable-prime-155544138.html

Boris Johnson is not fit to be prime minister because of his “unstable” political views and private life, Labour’s John McDonnell has suggested.

The shadow chancellor said that the unpredictable nature of Johnson’s character meant that even Tory MPs were worried about what he would do in office.

The broadside at the Tory leadership contender came as Labour stepped up its attack on anonymous briefings about Jeremy Corbyn’s own fitness for No.10.

Johnson has steadfastly refused to comment about a heated row he had with girlfriend Carrie Symonds last month.

But McDonnell suggested that the former foreign secretary had proved himself too unpredictable to take over as PM.

“I actually think the instability of Boris Johnson himself in terms of - well, in all aspects of his life – the unstable nature of Boris Johnson and his political decision making, anything could happen,” he told reporters.

“I think that’s one of the deepest worries that all of us must have for the future of the country and the economy – and that includes I think many Conservative MPs.”

Johnson has been accused by some Tory MPs of changing his mind on Brexit ahead of the 2016 EU referendum, and has in recent days shifted his position on issues like tax policy, Heathrow and public sector pay.
Labour's John McDonnell

Asked if Brexit could no longer happen, McDonnell replied: “I think anything can happen now. I think it’s just almost impossible to tell what will happen in September, October.”

In a separate move, Corbyn wrote to cabinet secretary Sir Mark Sedwill to demand an independent investigation into a Times report that senior civil servants had gossiped about his physical health and capacity to be PM.

Downing Street revealed that a Cabinet Office investigation had been launched into whether senior civil servants had claimed that Corbyn was “too frail” to be prime minister.

Theresa May’s official spokesman said: “The Cabinet Office is investigating this potential breach of the civil service code fully and fairly just as it would any other. If we are able to identify an individual responsible we will take disciplinary action.”

Shadow cabinet office minister Laura Pidcock told BBC Radio 4′s Today programme that the claims about Corbyn’s health were “ridiculous”

“He’s much fitter than me – and I’m 31. It’s ridiculous. The reason many of us in the Labour Party find this so absurd is because everybody knows from seeing him around Westminster, from his schedule, from his personal life he is just really really fit and well,” she said.

“We have to look at the underlying motivations behind those comments. We are talking about some of the most senior civil servants here...If they are against [Labour’s radical] agenda perhaps it is all part and parcel of sowing doubts in the kinds of people out there that Jeremy is up to it.”

One Tory source pointed out that both Johnson and Hunt had condemned the civil service gossip about Corbyn’s health, adding a full investigation was needed.

A source close to Johnson hit back at McDonnell’s remarks. “Jeremy Corbyn and his Marxist-loving acolytes are turning to personal attacks because they know a Conservative party led by Boris Johnson would condemn them to the dustbin of history,” they told HuffPost UK.

“This is only because Boris is committed to delivering Brexit on October 31, with or without a deal.”

Meanwhile, McDonnell revealed that he had asked Jeremy Corbyn to raise with cabinet secretary Mark Sedwill the idea of opening up talks with the civil service to discuss Labour’s detailed plans for government in the event of a snap election – including plans for a second Brexit referendum.

“Jeremy has made it clear that it should go back to the people in a referendum. And we’d expect just as you’d expect the civil service to prepare for an incoming government, for them to prepare for all options so yes that would have to be an option.

“The big mistake that David Cameron made was to prevent the civil service do any preparations for the outcome of the referendum that he didn’t want. Lessons have been learned from that.”

greybeard

5th July 2019, 11:47

UK breaking up would be 'regrettable' but price worth paying for Brexit, says Nigel Farage
The Independent Benjamin Kentish,The Independent Thu, 4 Jul 10:40 BST

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/uk-breaking-regrettable-price-worth-094000552.html

The break-up of the United Kingdom would be "regrettable" but a price worth paying to deliver Brexit, Nigel Farage has said.

The Brexit Party leader said he did not believe that Scotland would leave the union but that his priority was for the UK to be an "independent self-governing nation" outside the EU.

Several senior Tories, including Jeremy Hunt, have warned that leaving the EU without a deal would pose a major threat to the union, with Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland's first minister, ploughing ahead with plans for a second referendum on independence.

On Thursday, Ms May warned Mr Hunt and his rival to be prime minister, Boris Johnson, that one of their "first and greatest" duties must be strengthening the union.

But Mr Farage insisted that Brexit should be the "number one" priority - even if it means the UK breaking up.

He told ITV's Peston: "Being an independent self-governing nation is the number one. If there were parts of the United Kingdom that didn't wish to stay part of it that would be deeply regrettable but I just don't believe that to be the case - I really genuinely don't believe it."

He added: "They said if we voted Brexit that the United Kingdom will break up. We're three years on, we're not seeing that in any way at all. Frankly we've had enough of all these threats. I don't see any possibility of Scotland leaving the United Kingdom to join this United States of Europe that is being built, and having to sign a commitment to join the Euro. In the case of Scotland I just do not see that happening."

Mr Farage poured cold water on speculation that he could make a pact with the Conservatives at the next election, especially if Mr Johnson is elected as leader of the party, saying he would only be willing to hold discussions if the next prime minister showed the were willing to deliver a no-deal Brexit.

He said: "We're back to trust, aren't we? Who on earth would I trust?

"If we had a new Conservative leader who said, ‘right, I’m going to face down the House of Commons and, if necessary, I will call a general election this autumn on us leaving on 31 October,' – if a Conservative leader had the guts to do that then, of course, if they wanted to come and talk to us, we would be prepared to listen.

"We would meet them, I guess, in the demilitarised zone because, at the moment, whenever my name or the Brexit Party name comes up, all we get is abuse and insults, so I don't think we're very close to a deal."

He also defended Brexit Party MEPs' decision to turn their backs when the European anthem way played in the European Parliament chamber earlier this week, saying he had "no regrets whatsoever".

He said: "We were there, they were about to play the European anthem, the president of the European Parliament said 'it is respectful to stand up for the anthems of other countries' so basically saying the European Union is now a country. Did they ever ask anybody whether they wanted to become to be a country?"

He added: "We didn't shout, we didn't make any noise, we just quietly followed the instructions we'd been given to stand up but decided to turn our backs on things.

"All through history there are traditions of people turning their backs on things - one thinks of the Canadian parliament where those campaigning for women rights turned their backs a few hears ago on Trudeau. These things happen."

Speaking in Scotland, Ms May will warn her successor of their "duty" to strengthen the union.

She will say: "The job of prime minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland brings with it privileges and responsibilities which you only really feel once the black door closes behind you.

“One of the first and greatest is the duty you owe to strengthen the union. To govern on behalf of the whole United Kingdom. To respect the identities of every citizen of the UK – English and Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish.

"And to ensure that we can go on facing the future together, overcoming obstacles together, and achieving more together than we ever could apart – a union of nations and people."
image

greybeard

5th July 2019, 14:08

A ‘unity’ government is our last hope of stopping Brexit – and Caroline Lucas is the only MP fit to lead it
The Independent Nate Higgins,The Independent Thu, 4 Jul 10:41 BST

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/unity-government-last-hope-stopping-094104948.html

Ed Davey, a Liberal Democrat leadership contender, has written in The Guardian calling for a government of national unity to “halt Brexit”. It’s a sensible argument, in theory.

A government of national unity could be what finally breaks through the Brexit gridlock. But Davey is wrong about who should lead this government, and on the limits of their policy platform, which he believes should be restricted solely to delivering a referendum.

For a unity government to work, it would need to be led by someone well-liked and trusted within Westminster and with the public. They would need experience working with MPs across party lines. Labour MPs are unlikely to back either a Conservative Remainer or a Liberal Democrat after the coalition’s austerity agenda contributed to the Brexit vote.

Of course, Conservative Remainers are unlikely to vote down their own government, triggering an early general election while Brexit remains unresolved. Many MPs are also concerned about doing anything to put Jeremy Corbyn into Number 10. But if they felt they could pull the plug on the government safe knowing it would not lead to either of those events, they might just do it.

MPs would achieve this by passing a motion of no confidence in the government. Parliament would then have two weeks to find another executive. In this time, MPs could install a cross-party government with the sole aim of holding a second Brexit referendum. If they are unable to form another government, a general election would take it out of their hands.

The leader, whoever that may be, would also need to win the votes of most of the shadow cabinet, so they will need to have avoided publicly clashing with Corbyn. This rules out both of Davey’s preferred options – Hilary Benn or Yvette Cooper. It would have to be someone who has not alienated those within the Remain coalition. And that person is Caroline Lucas.

The Green MP has long been the favoured face of the People’s Vote campaign. She is credited with forging the campaign in the days after the referendum result and has represented its aims in both post-referendum Brexit TV debates. But she has not ignored those who voted to leave in 2016, launching her “Dear Leavers” project to engage with those concerned about our membership of the European Union. She has credibility on both sides of this divide that many others do not.

Lucas also negotiated the successful Liberal Democrats/Green Party alliance in the 2016 Richmond Park by-election. This kick-started the Progressive Alliance movement in 2017. She has experience working with other parties that few could rival.

This would not be without precedent. Iceland’s dominant centre-right Independence Party recently joined a coalition led by the chair of the Left-Green Movement, Katrín Jakobsdóttir. In the election, the Left-Green Movement came second to the Independence Party, but Jakobsdóttir’s own popularity far outstripped that of her party, and the rest of the coalition. Sound familiar?

Davey is also too pessimistic about what this unity government could achieve. It will need to sustain itself for long enough to properly address Brexit, which could take up to 12 months if another referendum were to produce a Remain result. Meanwhile, the government would need to address some of the other major crises facing this country.

Climate change has never been closer to the top of the political agenda. Parliaments and councils across the United Kingdom have been quick to respond and declare a “climate emergency”. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal has made waves across the western world, empowered by Extinction Rebellion and other climate activists. Lucas is the perfect person to spearhead the first government with fighting climate change as a core priority.

Brexit has also highlighted the widening democratic deficit in this country, and therefore democratic reform must also be on the agenda so that the next parliament can regain the trust of the public.

Votes at 16, proportional representation, House of Lords reform, restoration of the Northern Ireland Assembly and further devolution will all need to be on the agenda. There could also be common ground on rolling back the devastating impact of austerity around the country.

Lucas has the integrity, experience, and trust of the public and other MPs necessary to make a government of national unity happen. Could she soon become prime minister? Stranger things have happened.

ulli

5th July 2019, 15:10

Found this the other day, from a friend on FB:

“I was asked the following question in response to a comment I made about the EU:
“Oh dear! As a convinced Leaver, please explain why leaving the EU is a good idea. And please don't say 'to take back control' or 'to regain our sovereignty', since we hadn't lost them. Please come up with a rational reason.”

Here is my answer:

“You seem to have shut down the key issues before they started. I’m not surprised - Remainers only want to debate on issues they think they can win.
Ok - I’ll play anyway.
1. Because it’s the will of the people. The majority of those who cared enough to vote.
Do I need to say anymore?
I will anyway.
2. The History and the lies behind it tell a significant story.
- Edward Heath (paedophile and therefore a blackmailed puppet of those who wield the hidden power) sold us out with lies many decades back
1942 - the Nazis first came up with the term EEC
1943 - Redhouse Report in Strasbourg.
In 1943 German industrialists and Nazis realising the certainty of military defeat devised an economic plan to implement the dominance of the 4th Reich
Who is the greatest benefactor of the EU?
I am in favour of as little government as possible.
The vast corruption (not unique to EU but characteristic of all government as it gets larger and larger)
The vast waste of money on expenses, gravy trains, first class or business class travel. These are just a few examples of the consequences.
Attempting to create litigation and regulation that somehow applies equally to 28 countries - one size fits all is a proven disaster in any field in which it is applied.
Rich countries subsidising poor countries - socialism has never ever worked.
Unelected decision makers. Do I need to say more?
The influence of Soros within the EU. Again nothing more needs to be said.
The evident weakness of the single currency which has stayed alive precipitously thanks to Central Bank shenanigans. It is in a perilous position.
Britain wisely rejected this option.
Laws not being enacted fairly. Compare Italy and France when related to debt as a percentage of GDP and how much is allowed. France receiving favourable treatment. There are numerous examples of this from small regulations to the big diktats.
The imposition of social engineering - the Eu seeks a monolithic culture where immigration in vast numbers is a requirement. This is having appalling consequences across the EU - Germany, Sweden to name but two. We are not bringing in the kind of people who integrate and contribute. Unlike say the Caribbean and Sub continent communities who contribute and integrate. Enriching our culture. Cultural uniformity is where it’s headed.
Nationalism - i am proud to be a white nationalist and yet the term has been vilified by the media.
So what is nationalism?
“identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations”
I love my country. I put it first. Many who have entered the U.K. in recent years patently do not love the U.K. I do not personally choose to exclude other countries or damage them, only simply to prioritise England. Above all I am a galactic citizen. But I am British. Uniquely English. I am fighting peacefully, patiently and relentlessly for my country, it’s values and it’s culture.
I could continue for hours and hours - there really are that many more obvious reasons to reject this abomination.
There’s a really good test. Whatever the media push and advocate is to the advantage of the Elites and the owners of the media and those who seek their influence. It should be inherently mistrusted and questioned - their track record is entirely dubious.
Unregulated globalism is the EU scaled world-wide. One world government is the goal. Regulations world wide. Global taxation and control on energy usage and carbon Emissions. It’s happening on so many levels.
I’m truly amazed anyone can’t see it. Most people I would venture oppose Brexit for various reasons but high on every one’s list is their personal economic circumstances and the promise that it will be a disaster if we leave. This is a fear and that fear has been fanned by the media and those who are already well off and comfortable while the working class and many of the increasingly pinched middle class derive no benefit from the EU while the fat cats lap up the expenses and look after their own. This is the perception and in many cases the reality for vast swathes of Europeans whose voice is minimalised while the chattering classes pump out and devour BBC propaganda and debate the stupidity of the masses in Islington or wherever.
So tell me why is it you are prepared to tolerate all this?
Afraid of the future?
Afraid of receiving less money?
Afraid of the EU bullies who sound remarkably like those who call us Brexiteers stupid in their arrogance.
Relax. You lost. It’s going to happen. The EU experiment is over.
Trump, Putin, Xi and a widening alliance are bringing down the whole globalist house of cards. The Central Banks are the big target but first we clean house and bring to account, incarcerate and execute those who’ve committed crimes beyond your comprehension. Crimes that make policemen weep. Crimes of staggering corruption and arrogance.
Politicians are blackmailed after they are entrapped by the globalist machine. The bankers, the pharmaceutical industry, the secret services etc. Once Ted Heath commits paedophilia and is recorded doing so (by elements within MI5 or whomever) then those who wield the power from behind the curtain can influence political decision making across the board.
I hope this at least partially answers your question.
You say we’ve not lost our sovereignty or control. And you’d rather I didn’t bring that up. We are not even being allowed to enact the mandate of the people by the arrogance of Tusk and Juncker et al. Are we in control?
Juncker - drunker than a pirate on payday. It’s quite extraordinary that you’d allow such a man in the building let alone initiate and instigate policy that effects 28 nations. Who elected him? That would be no one - he was selected.”

avid

5th July 2019, 16:33

Ulli, that was amazing - I couldn’t agree more, the vile beings pretending to be human, twisting and turning humanity for the last few centuries, we are now awake to their duplicities, false flags, even this last week trying to exacerbate another war with Iran, another war under the sea, thank goodness for sensible folk, we won’t be fooled any more. Fake shootings, fake insurrections, fake ‘dreadful’ toxic reverberations, yet what happens when reality kicks in? We are aware enough of natural disruptions which have been forecast and are imminent in specific areas. CERN is the vile atrocity in the mad mix. Shut it down forever....

greybeard

5th July 2019, 17:38

Good post ulli
As said I dont vote so just observing the drama.
Cant see that remain or leave is not controlled by the same PTB.
Staying at the moment seems less hassle in the short term.
Leaving one would think should be easier than made out.

The Liberal Democrats may get back in power--is that a good idea?

Absolute power corrupts absolutely

Chris

greybeard

6th July 2019, 11:11

Hammond-led plot to sink no-deal could kill off Johnson’s Brexit plans before he takes office
The Independent Andrew Woodcock,The Independent

A plot to stop no-deal Brexit by a group of Tory MPs headed by Chancellor Philip Hammond could kill off the chances of Boris Johnson’s “do or die” EU withdrawal strategy before he has even taken office.

Mr Hammond has put himself at the head of the informal group of around 30 MPs discussing parliamentary manoeuvres to ensure the Commons has an opportunity to block a no-deal outcome in October.

It is understood that one option is to force a vote before the summer recess, which would set aside a day in the autumn - before the Halloween deadline for Brexit - when MPs would control Commons proceedings in order to apply a last-minute brake if the new prime minister is taking Britain towards no-deal.

One MP said that some ministers believe the process will lead to a Final Say referendum.

It is unclear how a vote could be engineered ahead of the 25 July start of the Commons' summer break. If it proved possible, the autumn date for MPs to take control could be in place before the new PM takes office on 24 July.

News of the rebel group emerged as 70 members of the separate One Nation group of Tory MPs issued a warning to Mr Johnson and his leadership rival Jeremy Hunt not to use suspension of parliamentary sittings - known as prorogation - as a means to secure a no-deal outcome.

And former prime minister Sir John Major revealed he will vote for foreign secretary Mr Hunt as Theresa May’s successor, on the grounds that he could not support someone who “misled the country” in the 2016 referendum.

Mr Hammond has made no secret of his concern that a no-deal withdrawal will be seriously damaging to the UK economy, and it is understood that he wants to ensure that MPs are not denied an opportunity to prevent it by parliamentary procedures or the suspension of the Commons.

He is understood to have held at least three meetings of the rebel Tories in his Commons office, with others thought to be sympathetic including Cabinet ministers David Lidington and David Gauke, both of whom are thought likely to lose their government jobs along with the chancellor if Mr Johnson takes charge on 24 July.

One Tory MP told Sky News that successfully blocking no-deal in October would boost the chances of a second referendum.

"At this point there are only three options - pushing through a version of the Withdrawal Agreement with the help of the ERG (European Research Group of Tory eurosceptics), which seems unlikely, a general election which would be catastrophic for the Tories or a second referendum which suddenly looks more appealing,” the MP said. “Some ministers explicitly see this ending in a second referendum.”

Former minister Phillip Lee, who quit the government to oppose Brexit, told The Independent that he was not part of the Hammond group but was not surprised to hear of fellow Tories preparing to fight to block no-deal in the autumn.

“Of course there are colleagues working together to try to stop no-deal without consent,” he said. “Anyone working on this is clearly working in the best interests of the country from our point of view.”

A cross-party bill to block a no-deal outcome was passed by a single vote in April, forcing Ms May to seek an extension to the Article 50 negotiation process.

(REUTERS)

Tory MP Guto Bebb, who rebelled on that occasion, said that the margin of victory could be expected to be wider in any future division, as Remain-leaning ministers in Ms May’s administration were likely to be out of government and freed from the constraints of collective responsibility.

“There are a number of people in office now who will not be there for much longer and will be able to follow their principles on this,” Mr Bebb told The Independent.

“The idea that there are insufficient numbers of Conservative MPs opposed to no-deal to stop it is somewhat unrealistic.”

Mr Johnson has put the promise to take Britain out of the EU with or without a deal by 31 October at the heart of his campaign for the Tory leadership, and has not ruled out the option of prorogation.

Mr Hammond told the BBC’s Political Thinking podcast it would be “shocking” if Ms May’s successor sought to “sideline” the House of Commons by avoiding a vote on no-deal.

"The Commons has been clear already that it does not support a no-deal exit. That is my position, and as a backbencher I will continue to argue against a no-deal exit," said Mr Hammond.

And justice secretary David Gauke insisted that “a way will be found” to block a no-deal Brexit, saying: “I do think that parliament will find mechanisms to try to stop this from happening.”

Mr Lidington, who is Ms May’s effective deputy prime minister, has said he would not serve in any government that would intentionally leave without a deal in October, warning that it would be “very bad for the Union both economically and politically”.

greybeard

6th July 2019, 20:04

Boris Johnson is heading for a landslide victory – and then disaster
The Independent John Rentoul,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-heading-landslide-victory-122921894.html

There is only one question in British politics at the moment. Can a no-deal Brexit be stopped? Yes it can, and so Boris Johnson is set to become prime minister on a false prospectus.

According to YouGov, 74 per cent of Conservative Party members intend to elect him as leader – on a pledge to leave the EU, deal or no deal, on 31 October. That is a promise he cannot guarantee to deliver.

This has been pointed out repeatedly, and the Tory leadership campaign has continued serenely on – untroubled by reality, buoyed by the power of simple assertion. Johnson says he’ll do it, “do or die”, and the party members clap and cheer, as if to drown out the voices of doubt in their heads.

Jeremy Hunt, instead of telling the truth, has appeased the delusion by toughening up his own language, saying that, if a Brexit deal is not in prospect at the end of September, he would take us out without a deal too. His reward for such cowardice will be a drubbing without honour.

Johnson’s blithe assertion that the world is as he wants it to be has confused people. Surely it would be hard to stop a determined prime minister from taking Britain out of the EU without a deal? So it is worth setting out, again, how parliament can prevent such an outcome.

Philip Hammond, the chancellor, discussed plans this week with fellow opponents of a no-deal Brexit in his office in the House of Commons. I have no inside intelligence of what was said, but it was something like the following.

The first line of defence is that parliament can pass laws against the wishes of a prime minister. This happened in April when, even though Theresa May had said she would ask for an extension to the Brexit timetable, the Cooper-Letwin act was passed to make absolutely sure that she did so.

The question is how to get such legislation started if the government provides no legislation or motion of its own that could be amended, and if it refuses to allow an opposition day before the end of October.

The answer to that is an application for an emergency debate, under standing order 24. It would be unprecedented for the speaker to allow such a debate to be used to propose, and vote on, a motion to take control of the parliamentary timetable, but anyone who thinks John Bercow wouldn’t do it hasn’t been paying attention.

There will be howls of outrage from advocates of a no-deal Brexit, who will denounce Bercow as biased, but how could an impartial speaker justify blocking a majority in the Commons on such an important question?

There is no question that the opponents of a no-deal Brexit have the numbers. True, the Cooper-Letwin act was passed by just one vote (it would have been two except that Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, had a family emergency). But there are at least 12 current ministers who strongly oppose a no-deal Brexit and who, like Hammond, expect to be out of government when Johnson takes over.

Having taken control of parliamentary business for a day, the opponents of a no-deal Brexit need to pass two laws: one to prevent prime minister Johnson suspending parliament, and another to require him to seek a Brexit extension in the event of no deal being approved by 31 October. (The first objective might be achieved by Dominic Grieve, Tory former attorney general, with an amendment to a Northern Ireland bill on Monday.)

So I think Johnson will find his path to a no-deal exit obstructed by the time he goes to the EU summit on 17 October.

However, a law requiring a prime minister to “seek” an extension is not watertight. It cannot mandate him to accept whatever terms the EU might offer. Johnson might shrug and say he was unable to agree. That is why the Hammond Plan has to have a fallback – one that could be activated in the 13 days before the deadline of the end of October.

This is the nuclear option of bringing the government down. It will be harder to muster a majority for a vote of no confidence in Johnson’s government, but I think there are enough Tory MPs who see no future for themselves in politics and who think a no-deal Brexit would be so damaging that they have to stop it – “do or die”, you might say.

It doesn’t have to lead to a general election straight away – which might be a deterrent for some MPs. If the opposition parties and Tory rebels can agree on a person to take over as a temporary prime minister, then Kenneth Clarke, for example, could do so for the sole purpose of agreeing an extension.

That would be peculiar, and I don’t think it would come to that. The threat would be sufficient to persuade Johnson to agree an extension himself.

It is possible, of course, that Johnson will agree some minor changes to Theresa May’s deal within nine weeks of becoming prime minister and secure the approval of the Commons for them, but it is hard to see where those extra votes would come from.

That’s why I think Johnson will win the leadership by a landslide, and then, as prime minister, collide with reality with – for him – disastrous results.

AutumnW

6th July 2019, 21:46

Greybeard, Would you like Britain to leave the EU under a no deal Brexit?

greybeard

6th July 2019, 21:53

greybeard

8th July 2019, 21:14

Boris Johnson warns Brussels he is not bluffing over no-deal Brexit
PA Ready News UK By David Hughes, PA Political Editor,PA Ready News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-warns-brussels-not-221412313.html

Boris Johnson has insisted he is not bluffing over his commitment to take the UK out of the European Union on October 31 – with or without a deal.

The Tory leadership frontrunner said the EU had to “look deep into our eyes” and realise that the UK was prepared to walk away.

His campaign received the support of Home Secretary Sajid Javid, who said Mr Johnson was “better placed” than Jeremy Hunt to “deliver what we need to do at this critical time”.

In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Johnson accused Theresa May of presiding over a “diet of miserablism” and a “computer says no” approach in government.

Asked if his commitment to the October 31 deadline was a bluff, Mr Johnson said: “No … honestly. Come on. We’ve got to show a but more gumption about this.”

He added: “We were pretty much ready on March 29. And we will be ready by October 31.

“And it’s vital that our partners see that. They have to look deep into our eyes and think ‘my god, these Brits actually are going to leave. And they’re going to leave on those terms’.

“Everybody who says ‘I can’t stand the idea of a no-deal Brexit’, what they really mean is actually they don’t want to leave at all.”

In a hustings in Cardiff on Saturday night, Mr Johnson said: “If we had to come out on WTO (World Trade Organisation) terms, I really think this country has the versatility and the creativity to get through it and prosper and thrive.”
Tory leadership race
Jeremy Hunt has pledged to rewrite treason laws if he becomes PM (David Mirzoeff/PA)

Mr Hunt also insisted he was not bluffing about being willing to walk away without a deal, although he told the Sunday Telegraph it was “not the most secure way of guaranteeing Brexit” because MPs would try to block it.

He also promised an overhaul of treason laws to “make the punishment fit the crime”, with life sentences for Britons who join jihadist groups fighting against UK forces.

“We must be able to properly punish those who betray our country,” he said.

“Betraying Britain by supporting terrorism is one of the most serious crimes a person can commit.”

The move is intended to address concerns that fighters returning to Britain from war zones overseas could escape prosecution.

The Sunday Times said Mr Javid’s support for Mr Johnson comes ahead of a speech on Tuesday in which he will call for an emergency budget to prepare for a no-deal Brexit.

Mr Javid, who is widely believed to have his sights set on becoming chancellor under the new prime minister, will say: “Trust in our democracy will be at stake if we don’t make October 31 a ‘deal or no deal’ deadline.

“To prepare that, we are agreed on the need for ramped-up no-deal preparations, including a budget.”

greybeard

9th July 2019, 08:20

Boris Johnson's Brexit plan for businesses dismissed by head of WTO
The Independent Andrew Woodcock,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnsons-brexit-plan-businesses-161900837.html

The head of the World Trade Organisation has blown a hole in Boris Johnson’s Brexit plans as Conservative party members vote on whether he should become party leader and prime minister.

Mr Johnson has argued that if the UK crashes out of the EU without a deal on 31 October, businesses will still be able to continue tariff-free trade with Europe under an obscure trading law known as Gatt 24. Without this protection, thousands of goods traded between the UK and the EU would be subject to standard WTO tariffs, adding considerably to costs to consumers.

But WTO director general Roberto Azevedo has now baldly stated that the mechanism - which his organisation oversees - cannot be invoked unless the parties involved have reached agreement on a future trade deal.

He told Prospect magazine that Gatt 24 only applies in the period between a deal being struck and its full implementation.

“If there is no agreement, then Article 24 would not apply, and the standard WTO terms would,” said Mr Azevedo.

Standard WTO terms involve tariffs of anything up to 10 per cent on cars and 35 per cent on dairy products. If the UK were to waive tariffs unilaterally for EU exporters under these terms, it would have to do the same for all 164 WTO members around the world or face charges of breaching fair access rules.

If the UK left the EU without first agreeing on a future trade arrangement, Mr Azevedo said “in simple factual terms in this scenario, you could expect to see the application of tariffs between the UK and EU where currently there are none”.

Mr Azevedo’s predecessor as director-general, Pascal Lamy, said that the introduction of the levies would “certainly hurt” the UK after decades in which it has benefited from the tariff-free conditions of the EU single market.

He compared the effect on the quality of trade arrangements to dropping two leagues in a sporting competition.

Mr Lamy, who led the WTO from 2005-13, told Prospect: “Jumping brutally from trade league one (the internal market without borders) to trade league three (a WTO, multilaterally committed trade regime for goods and services) would certainly hurt.”

And Stuart Harbinson, former director of the WTO’s general council division, told the magazine: “The effect of increased costs would be to make UK businesses less competitive, with the risk that EU importers of goods and services might look elsewhere.”

The WTO director general is the most senior figure yet to contradict Leavers’ claims that the use of Gatt 24 could spare the UK a shock to trade conditions in the case of a no-deal Brexit.

Speaking during a TV leadership debate last month, Mr Johnson said that in the case of no-deal, “there will be no tariffs, there will be no quotas because what we want to do is to get a standstill in our current arrangements under Gatt 24, or whatever it happens to be, until such a time as we have negotiated (the free trade agreement)”.

(REUTERS)

Within days of his comments, his argument was rejected by international trade secretary Liam Fox.

Dr Fox, who is backing Jeremy Hunt for the Tory leadership, said then that in order to benefit from the terms of Article 24, “there must be an agreement between two WTO members as to the elimination of duties and other restrictive regulations on substantially all trade”.

And he added: “A no-deal scenario, by definition, suggests that there would be no mutual agreement between the UK and the EU on any temporary or permanent arrangement. In those circumstances Article 24 cannot be used.”

Mr Lamy said: “Affirmations such as ‘WTO terms would be painless, after all many countries do that’ are one of the many Brexit unicorns flying around.

“If that were the case, why would all developed countries - and many emerging countries - have negotiated free trade agreements, which provide a higher bilateral level of openness than the multilateral WTO regime?”

The was no immediate response from Mr Johnson’s team to a request for comment on Mr Azevedo’s remarks.

Details of the WTO chief’s comments can be found at https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/economics-and-finance/jumping-from-league-one-to-league-three-wto-insiders-scathing-assessments-of-a-wto-brexit

greybeard

9th July 2019, 11:02

Jeremy Corbyn makes Brexit referendum U-turn as he says Labour will back Remain in second vote
Yahoo News UK Ross McGuinness,Yahoo News UK 14 minutes ago

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/jeremy-corbyn-makes-brexit-referendum-uturn-as-he-says-labour-will-back-remain-104417876.html

HARTLEPOOL, ENGLAND - JUNE 27: Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn meets military personnel at the Heugh Battery Museum on Hartlepool Headland as he announces a package of measures that the Labour Party would introduce to support armed forces personnel and veterans on June 27, 2019 in Hartlepool, England.

The visit came ahead of Armed Forces Day and Mr Corbyn announced Labour’s five pledges that aim to support armed forces and their families.

The five pledges are; Fair Pay. Decent housing for forces and their families. A voice for servicemen and women. Bring an end to privatisation. Support for forces children.
Jeremy Corbyn has made a U-turn on Brexit and said he will back a second EU referendum.

He said the Labour Party will challenge whoever is the next Tory leader to put their Brexit deal to the people in another public vote.

Following a meeting of the shadow cabinet, Mr Corbyn said Labour would campaign for Remain in such a vote.

In a letter to party members, he said: "Whoever becomes the new prime minister should have the confidence to put their deal, or no-deal, back to the people in a public vote.

"In those circumstances, I want to make it clear that Labour would campaign for Remain against either no-deal or a Tory deal that does not protect the economy and jobs."

Mr Corbyn has been under pressure within his own party for a number of weeks to shift to an anti-Brexit position.

In a statement emailed to party members, he said: “I have spent the past few weeks consulting with the shadow cabinet, MPs, affiliated unions and the NEC. I have also had feedback from members via the National Policy Forum consultation on Brexit.

“Labour has a crucial, historic duty to safeguard jobs, rights and living standards. But no Brexit outcome alone can do that.”

Former Labour MP Chuka Umunna, who left the party to join Change UK, before swiftly moving on to become a Liberal Democrat, criticised Mr Corbyn for coming up with “another fudge”.

Mr Umunna tweeted: “Yet another fudge, where the Labour leadership keep open the door to standing on a pro-Brexit platform in a General Election or supporting it in government.

“The @LibDems are the only party that can get into govt which is 100% committed to stopping Brexit.”

greybeard

9th July 2019, 18:50

poll findsTory members back death penalty, believe Islam is a threat and think Trump would make a good PM,
The Independent Adam Forrest,The Independent Mon, 8 Jul 05:04 BST

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/tory-members-back-death-penalty-040400614.html

Conservative Party members want to bring back the death penalty, believe Islam is a threat to the British way of life and think Donald Trump would make a good prime minister, a new poll has revealed.

The YouGov survey suggested 58 per cent of Tory members believe the death penalty should be allowed for certain crimes, against 37 per cent who do not back the return of capital punishment.

Some 56 per cent of members surveyed said Islam was “generally a threat” to the British way of life, while just 22 per cent thought it was “generally compatible”. It comes as the party struggles to shake off accusations it has failed to deal with Islamophobia.

On the question of Mr Trump’s leadership, 54 per cent said they believed he would make a good prime minister of the UK, with 43 per cent saying he would be bad.

The survey, commissioned for Channel 4’s Dispatches, also found that 42 per cent thought having people from a wide variety of racial and cultural backgrounds has damaged British society.

The programme, which will be broadcast at 8pm on Monday, highlights Islamophobic posts on Facebook from self-identifying members of the Tory party.

One member of the Boris Johnson Supporters Group said: “I would ban all Muslim (sic) from entering the whole of Great Britain.”

A member of the Jacob Rees Mogg Appreciation Society said: “Two mega mosques agreed planning permission in Maidstone and Worcester, how we feel about this?” Another person posted: “WRONG.”

The YouGov poll also reveals scepticism about the threat posed by climate change, with 46 per cent of Tory members saying concerns about climate change had been exaggerated, while 45 per cent said the danger is every bit as real as scientists have said.

Some 49 per cent of members said schools should not be required to educate children about LGBT relationships, and 51 per cent thought most people on benefits could get a job if they tried hard enough.
Hunt arrives at the Tory leadership hustings in Cardiff (PA)

YouGov questioned 892 of the Tory members – currently choosing between Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt as party leader and the next prime minister – between 11 June and 14 June.

A later study by the same firm, carried out after Mr Johnson and Mr Hunt had made it through to the final stage of the process, found the majority of members thought the former London mayor would make the “most trustworthy” prime minister.

The poll of 1,119 members carried out between 1 July and 5 July found 52 per cent backed Mr Johnson to make the most trustworthy premier, with 32 per cent favouring Mr Hunt.

A Conservative spokesman responded to the social media posts highlighted by Dispatches.

“Those people making these posts that we have found to be members of the party have been suspended pending investigation,” he said. “Discrimination or abuse of any kind is wrong and will not be tolerated.”

Mr Rees-Mogg said the Jacob Rees Mogg Appreciation Society Facebook group is not an official supporters’ group, adding: “I absolutely condemn such behaviour. Anyone who behaves in such a way is not one of my supporters and should be reported.”

In June ex-Tory chairwoman Sayeeda Warsi welcomed Conservative leadership contenders pledging to hold an internal inquiry into Islamophobia in the party, but said it was shame they had to be dragged “kicking and screaming”.

Miqdaad Versi, a spokesperson for the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), last month revealed he had documented “hundreds of cases” showing Islamophobia in Tory ranks.

The MCB has submitted more than 20 pages of evidence to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, urging independent investigators to launch an official probe into accusations within the party.

greybeard

12th July 2019, 09:49

Sir John Major warns Boris Johnson of legal challenge if he suspends Parliament
PA Ready News UK By David Hughes, PA Political Editor,PA Ready News UK
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/sir-john-major-warns-boris-081125416.html

The former PM said it would be unacceptable to prorogue Parliament in order to force through a no-deal Brexit.

Boris Johnson has been warned by Sir John Major he could be dragged through the courts if he suspends Parliament in an effort to force a no-deal Brexit through.

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

Sir John told BBC Radio 4’s Today: “You cannot and should not bypass Parliament in this fashion.

“I cannot imagine how anyone could conceivably think that is right.”

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 added.

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.

But Mr Johnson said: “I’m not going to take anything off the table, any more than I’m going to take no-deal off the table.

“I think it’s absolutely bizarre at this stage in the negotiations for the UK – yet again – to be weakening its own position.”

Sir John, who is backing Mr Hunt for the 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.”

The former premier 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.”

Health Secretary Matt Hancock, who supports Mr Johnson, said he did not believe Parliament would be suspended because the leadership frontrunner had the “force of personality” to bring people together and reach a deal.

Mr Hancock, who opposed prorogation during his own leadership campaign, told Today: “I do not think that it’s going to happen, I understand why Boris hasn’t ruled it out.

“But ultimately when you have to choose between who is going to be the next prime minister, who you want to be the next prime minister, you have to take everything into account.

“I have chosen to back Boris because he is the best person to deliver Brexit with a deal.”

greybeard

12th July 2019, 19:37

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-makes-clear-won-t-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

12th July 2019, 20:32

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

13th July 2019, 16:19

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-johnsons-vow-no-deal-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

13th July 2019, 19:28

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-brexit-cost-22bn-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

13th July 2019, 20:35

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

14th July 2019, 00:14

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

O1hpn69GnXI

AutumnW

14th July 2019, 01:40

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

14th July 2019, 02:02

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

yGL-XJPuCuo

greybeard

14th July 2019, 18:25

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-mercy-france-hammond-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

15th July 2019, 20:07

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-may-condemns-trump-apos-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

15th July 2019, 21:07

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

greybeard

16th July 2019, 17:57

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-accuses-johnson-brexit-radicalisation-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

16th July 2019, 21:00

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

16th July 2019, 21:05

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-european-holiday-costs-could-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

18th July 2019, 15:41

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-set-to-resign-today-to-stop-new-pm-from-forcing-through-nodeal-brexit-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

18th July 2019, 19:04

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-der-leyen-hard-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

18th July 2019, 19:27

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-johnson-could-be-the-last-ever-uk-prime-minister-warns-gordon-brown-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

19th July 2019, 07:53

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

21st July 2019, 10:07

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

21st July 2019, 10:23

greybeard

21st July 2019, 15:55

Irish deputy PM issues stark warning over no-deal Brexit
PA Ready News UK By Michelle Devane and Ben Cooper, PA,PA Ready News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/irish-deputy-pm-issues-stark-111111223.html

Mr Coveney maintained the backstop can be avoided by negotiation, but that it needs to be part of the Withdrawal Agreement.

Everyone in the EU is in trouble if the new British prime minister wants to tear up the Withdrawal Agreement, Ireland’s deputy premier has warned.

Simon Coveney said that if a no-deal outcome would be a British choice, not an Irish or an EU choice, then the future relationship with the EU could be changed.

He also reiterated that Ireland would have to carry out checks in the event of a no-deal Brexit, but those checks would not be at the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic.

“If the approach of the new British prime minister is that they’re going to tear up the Withdrawal Agreement, then I think we’re in trouble, we’re all in trouble, quite frankly, because it’s a little bit like saying: ‘Either give me what I want or I’m going to burn the house down for everybody’,” Mr Coveney told the BBC’s Andrew Marr on Sunday.

He added: “The EU has made it very clear that we want to engage with a new British prime minister, we want to avoid a no-deal Brexit.”

Mr Coveney maintained the backstop can be avoided by negotiation, but that it needs to be part of the Withdrawal Agreement.

“The idea that we can consider moving away from something that took two-and-a-half years to negotiate given all of that complexity and compromise on both sides to try and accommodate British redlines, don’t forget, not EU redlines, we’re simply not going to move away from the Withdrawal Agreement,” he said.

The Cork politician refuted that a no-deal was where the situation was headed.

He said it would only happen if the House of Commons facilitated it, adding: “If the House of Commons chooses to facilitate a no-deal Brexit and if a new prime minister chooses to take Britain in that direction then it will happen but this is a British choice, not an Irish choice, not an EU choice, this is a British choice.

“We all want to avoid a no-deal Brexit….we want to try to resolve these issues but we won’t do it on the basis of being told what will happen.”

Mr Coveney reiterated that checks would have to be carried out on the island of Ireland in the event of a no-deal Brexit, but he said those checks would not be at the border.

“We have to protect relationships and peace on the island of Ireland, and we are not going to create a security risk by putting a border in place on the border, but we also have to make sure that there are verification mechanisms to ensure what the EU knows what is coming into its single market,” he said.

He added: “There will need to be checks somewhere. We are working out with the European Commission how that will work.”

But he said such a scenario would “fundamentally disrupt” the all-island economy.

Writing in the London edition of The Sunday Times, Mr Coveney warned that a no-deal Brexit would “devastate” Northern Ireland’s economy.

“If Britain decides to leave without a deal it would cause huge damage to us all,” Mr Coveney wrote.

Northern Ireland would be the hardest hit in such a scenario, he added.

“A no-deal Brexit will devastate the Northern Irish economy with tariffs and rules that will fundamentally disrupt the all-island economy upon which so much progress has been built.”

Matthew

21st July 2019, 22:40

Remainers didnt know what they were voting for (Brexit News)

Majid Majid gives his account of seeing how the EU politics of Brussels works, or rather not seeing it work. Harsh words of disillusionment
https://youtu.be/EQrWkMLOadU

EQrWkMLOadU

scanner

22nd July 2019, 12:22

greybeard

22nd July 2019, 16:42

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's anti-Brexit Liberal Democrat party named lawmaker Jo Swinson as its new leader

https://news.yahoo.com/britains-anti-brexit-liberal-democrats-161639321.html

on Monday,

as the party looks to translate a surge in voter support for its pro-European Union agenda into influence in a deadlocked parliament.

Swinson, 39, won just under 48,000 votes, beating her rival Ed Davey who was backed by 28,000 in a ballot of party members, taking the reins of the centrist party which has 12 seats in the 650-seat parliament at a critical juncture in British politics.

Britain's governing Conservatives are expected to name Boris Johnson as leader and prime minister on Tuesday - a man who has pledged to take the country out of the EU on Oct. 31 "do or die".

But, the future of Brexit hangs in the balance, without a clear majority in parliament behind Johnson and deep division over how, when, and even if, Britain should follow through on its 2016 referendum decision to leave the EU.

Swinson, the party's first female leader, has built her campaign around cementing the Liberal Democrats as the rallying point for those from across the traditional political spectrum who are opposed to Brexit.

"We believe the UK's best future is as members of the European Union, and that's why, as your leader, I will do whatever it takes to stop Brexit," she said after the result.

Polls show support for the Liberal Democrats has rebounded in recent months as Britain's political crisis over leaving the EU enters its fourth year.

In May, the party came second in elections to the European Parliament and earlier in the same month gained hundreds of elected local government posts, largely at the Conservatives' expense.

(Reporting by William James and Kylie MacLellan, editing by Elizabeth Piper)

Matthew

22nd July 2019, 19:29

So, under BATNA, have we reached our walk away point? My concern, which no MSM has asked Farrage et al. About his background, Farrage liked to point our political leaders backgrounds in detail. Let's spotlight Farrages background. Multi millionaire, worked in the City of London, is an ex Con-seritive and pulled a rabbit out of his hat with his new Brexit party at some ones huge expense. One has to question, his and all his cronies motives.

I'll be upfront, I voted to leave, not because of anything our Political leaders said, including Farrage et al. But, from my own research. Coming to the conclusion, it was just a dictatorship, and we'd just be a vassal state. Already having many acts and statutes forced upon, the British people, by unelected dictators from the EU parliament. Well, I call it a parliament, just a huge office really, business as usual.

The can, will be kicked down the road, yet again. Under the guise, can it wait until after the general election. I fear Corbin et al. Will receive the reins of power, keeping us in the EU, no matter what. So much for voting and doing the PEOPLES bidding. You can see the strain it is having on the Worlds politicos. Braking down under the pressure, Merkel, Macron and May all visible to see.

Thanks for your thoughts!

When MP's got rid of a no deal option they showed how inept they are at negotiations, or alternatively that they wanted to let the European Commission have the upper hand.

Without keeping no deal as an option, a fair negotiation can't happen. But that was meant to be the point I think, either maliciously or through laziness or both

The things I hear from The Brexit Party have made sense to me. But I don't believe in heroes, or voting in the right person because I don't believe that exists. I can't wait to vote people out of power, and that's all I care about.

If I can vote down a growing, crass, aspiring empire, like the European Commission, I will revel in it, and laugh all the way.

Likewise if I can vote in proportional representation, which The Brexit Party have on their manifesto, I will be putting my humble vote to that. And then I will look forward to voting them out of power, if they get in
;)

Majid Majid, from my post above, seems like a sincere, well meaning guy. He's a strong remainer, which is very different to my own opinion. I like his refreshing honesty about what he sees in the EU parliament. Whether remain or not, if we had more like Majid Majid, I think that would be a good thing. I'm not going to hold my breath though, but I wish the guy the best of success and respect him for saying difficult truths

greybeard

23rd July 2019, 11:07

Borris has won by almost twice the number of votes that Jeremy got.
Chris

greybeard

23rd July 2019, 11:15

Boris Johnson is going to be our next prime minister
Ross McGuinness
Yahoo News UK23 July 2019

Boris Johnson has been named Britain’s new prime minister.

As expected, he finished ahead of his rival, foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt, in the Conservative Party leadership contest.

Mr Johnson was announced as the winner at the Queen Elizabeth II conference centre in Westminster. About 160,000 Conservative Party members voted.

Mr Johnson will officially become prime minister on Wednesday.

The result was announced by Dame Cheryl Gillan, from the backbench Conservative 1922 Committee.

Mr Johnson won 92,153 votes compared to Mr Hunt’s 46,656. The turnout was 87.4%.

Theresa May congratulated her successor on Twitter.

The outcome follows weeks of campaigning in which the country has been given a glimpse

greybeard

23rd July 2019, 16:09

The three major Brexit problems Boris Johnson is going to face
Yahoo News UK Ellen Manning,Yahoo News UK 4 hours ago

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/three-major-brexit-problems-for-boris-johnson-115650623.html

He has promised to take the UK out of the EU on 31 October ‘do or die’, but new Prime Minister Boris Johnson will face many of the same issues as his predecessor Theresa May.

Revolts loom from different sides of a warring Tory party, the EU is doubling down in its refusal to reopen negotiations and resurgent Lib Dems threaten to hoover up Remainer votes.

Mr Johnson promises a ‘can-do spirit’ to tackle the Brexit deadlock, but will that be enough?

Here are the areas he’ll have to deal with:-
The European Union
European Commission in Brussels
The EU could prove a bit of a problem for Boris

Mr Johnson has vowed to try and secure a new Brexit deal by the deadline of October 31 and, if that fails, take the UK out of the European Union with no deal.

But EU negotiators have repeatedly said that the Withdrawal Agreement is not up for renegotiation, including the backstop.

Michel Barnier, the EU's chief Brexit negotiator, has said Mrs May’s agreement is the “only way to leave the EU in an orderly manner”.

Even if the EU is prepared to renegotiate some points, Boris’s stance has hardened.

He has declared the backstop ‘dead’ and said it should be removed from any deal.

That means even if some concessions are offered to help grease the wheels on a possible deal, they might not meet the new PM’s demands.

Another issue is the fact that Boris Johnson has already rubbed a few people in the EU up the wrong way.

In a recent Panorama programme, the EU Commission's First Vice-President, Frans Timmermans criticised Johnson’s approach to Brexit negotiations from when they began.

He said: "Perhaps I am being a bit harsh, but it is about time we became a bit harsh. I am not sure he was being genuine.

"I have always had the impression he is playing games."
His own party

The irony of David Cameron calling a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU to heal the divide in the Conservative Party has not escaped anyone.

Arguably, the past three years have seen the Tory party at its worst, and there remain clear and deep divisions over Brexit.

Mr Johnson has made his feelings clear on the issue - we’ll leave no matter what by October 31 - but there are plenty in his party who disagree.

Like Theresa May before him, there is no way Johnson will be able to please everyone. Hard Brexiteers are unlikely to vote for a version of Mrs May’s deal, while vocal critics of a no-deal Brexit like Philip Hammond are expected to try to block it from happening.

It’s believed that Mr Hammond and his fellow no-deal opponents including David Lidington, David Gauke and Rory Stewart will be frozen out of the top jobs and find themselves on the backbenches.

Some speculate Mr Johnson has made conflicting promises to different camps in a bid to win their support, telling ERG supporters like Mark Francois that he would leave without a deal, whilst also winning support from the likes of Matt Hancock, who is against a no-deal Brexit.

In June Tory grandee Ken Clarke said he would vote to bring down the next Prime Minister rather than allow a no-deal Brexit to go ahead, saying it would be "totally incompatible with everything the Conservative party has stood for" over decades.

His comments, which came alongside suggestions that he would be prepared to see Jeremy Corbyn take the helm if it meant avoiding a no-deal Brexit, were echoed by Tobias Ellwood who said other Conservative colleagues would be willing to back a vote of no confidence in any leader who tried to take Britain out of the EU without a deal.

In an interview with the BBC’s Newsnight last week, Margot James - who resigned as culture minister so she could vote against the government for the anti-prorogation amendment - said “quite a number” of ministers would leave the government if Boris Johnson became PM and join the campaign to block a no-deal Brexit.

It comes as no surprise that Labour is planning a vote of no confidence in the government in a bid to bring down Boris Johnson.

The party has reportedly been in talks with Tory rebels about the best time to call the vote.

Conservatives could try to bring down Boris by joining the Liberal Democrats, wiping out his majority and potentially triggering a snap election.

As the party that aligned itself with a Remain agenda, the Lib Dems will undoubtedly try to block any kind of Brexit pursued by Johnson, as will other parties in favour of staying in the EU.

greybeard

24th July 2019, 13:35

Four cabinet ministers resign ahead of Boris Johnson becoming Prime Minister

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/three-cabinet-ministers-resign-ahead-of-boris-johnson-becoming-prime-minister-123841464.html

Four cabinet ministers have resigned ahead of Boris Johnson becoming Prime Minister.

Chancellor Philip Hammond, International Development Secretary Rory Stewart, Justice Secretary David Gauke and de facto deputy Prime Minister David Lidington all handed in their notice after Theresa May’s final Prime Minister’s Questions.

Hammond, Stewart and Gauke had already said publicly they could not serve under a Prime Minister who supports a no-deal Brexit.

The resignations are largely symbolic. Mr Johnson, who will announce his new cabinet later today, would have sacked the three ministers and replaced them with his own supporters anyway.

Mr Hammond led the exodus, and said it had been a ‘privilege’ to serve as Chancellor under Theresa May.

The Chancellor has been a constant critic of leaving the EU without a deal.

Speaking at the weekend he told the BBC’s Andrew Marr: “Assuming that Boris Johnson becomes the next prime minister, I understand that his conditions for serving in his government would include accepting a no-deal exit on the 31st October and it’s not something that I could ever sign up to.

“It’s very important that the prime minister is able to have a chancellor who is closely aligned with him in terms of policy and I therefore intend to resign to Theresa May before she goes to the palace to tender her own resignation on Wednesday.”

Confirming his resignation on Twitter, former leadership candidate Rory Stewart posted an image of Sky News reporting his departure with an upside down smiley emoji.

Mr Gauke thanked Theresa May and reiterated his opposition to no deal.

He said: “Given Boris’s stated policy of leaving the EU by 31 October at all costs, I am not willing to serve in his Government.

“I believe I can most effectively make the case against a no deal Brexit from the backbenches.”

greybeard

24th July 2019, 14:54

Boris Johnson just became Britain’s Prime Minister
Andy Wells
Freelance Writer
Yahoo News UK24 July 2019

Queen Elizabeth II welcomes newly elected leader of the Conservative party Boris Johnson during an audience in Buckingham Palace, London, where she invited him to become Prime Minister and form a new government.

Boris Johnson has officially been appointed Prime Minister after meeting Queen Elizabeth II at Buckingham Palace.

Mr Johnson accepted the Queen’s invitation to form a new Government.

Earlier, Theresa May gave her final PMQs where she told Labour leader Jeremy Corby that he should quit his post as his “time was up”.

She later gave a short farewell speech outside Number 10, saying she wanted a Brexit "that works for the whole United Kingdom".
Theresa May congratulated Mr Johnson during her farewell speech outside Number 10 (PA)

A lot is happening in the first 100 days of Mr Johnson's premiership (PA)

Mrs May also gave a supportive message to Mr Johnson, adding: "I repeat my warm congratulations to Boris on winning the Conservative leadership election.

"I wish him and the government he will lead every good fortune in the months and years ahead.

"Their successes will be our country's successes and I hope that they will be many."

Mr Johnson is now starting work on appointing his Cabinet that ‘reflects modern Britain’ to help him deliver Brexit by October 31.

Chancellor Philip Hammond, Justice Secretary David Gauke and International Development Secretary Rory Stewart all resigned from their posts just hours before Mr Johnson became PM, while Deputy PM David Lidington also handed in his notice.

They will now fight a no-deal Brexit from the backbenches, giving Mr Johnson an early headache in his reign.

Eurosceptic Priti Patel is expected to be named Home Secretary in Mr Johnson’s Cabinet, while Vote Leave campaign mastermind Dominic Cummings is set to be named senior adviser.

MPs applaud as Prime Minister Theresa May leaves following her final Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons, London.

Theresa May was given a standing ovation as she left Parliament following her final PMQs (PA)

Mr Cummings clashed with officials and politicians while he was an adviser to Michael Gove in the coalition government, but Mr Johnson clearly believes his forthright style will help steer Brexit through.

His appointment will be controversial given that earlier this year he was found to be in contempt of Parliament for refusing to give evidence to a committee of MPs investigating "fake news”.'

He is also less than impressed with the calibre of Brexiteer MPs, describing a "narcissist-delusional subset" of the European Research Group (ERG) as a "metastasising tumour" that needed to be “excised".

Carmody

24th July 2019, 15:27

the first mistake was leaving Germany in charge of the basket of currencies that made up the EU.

Which means the hidden power factions of Germany and such, is what really runs the EU.

But that was the intent from the beginnings of the EU.

The history of the EU goes back to the plans written up by the Nazis for the financial and commercial empire they were trying to build or create.

The EU follows that original Nazi plan to almost a perfect letter. Yes, the Nazi's made up the EU on paper, in approx 1940. Really. Seriously. It's on the record books. Look around.

Just think about that for a few minutes. What the heck is really going on here?

the plan for a second racial destabilization and a new EU from the ashes of a racial war? 3.5ths time is the charm! (to wipe out the middle east finally, as a side order of desirability).

What a mess.

Does the power faction of the UK desire to not be brought along for the ride, anymore, (they HAD to know, it would be impossible to not know)...as the Euro-GErmanic faction has too much power and is making it uglier than it has to be, so they can finally...neuter the UK at the same time?

War among the killers and oligarchs, I guess.

Can't even agree on and order a sandwich -while sitting at the same desk.

greybeard

24th July 2019, 16:49

Ministers ousted from Government as Boris Johnson begins brutal Cabinet cull
Yahoo News UK Matilda Long,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/three-cabinet-ministers-resign-ahead-of-boris-johnson-becoming-prime-minister-123841464.html

Boris Johnson has kicked off a brutal cull of Government ministers, ousting a number of top Tories from their posts shortly after officially becoming Prime Minister.

The major overhaul saw allies of Theresa May and prominent backers or leadership rival Jeremy Hunt pushed out of the door.

The changes so far include:

SACKED: Penny Mordaunt, Defence Secretary

SACKED: Liam Fox, International Trade Secretary

SACKED: Greg Clark, Business Secretary

RESIGNED: Chris Grayling, Transport Secretary

SACKED: Damian Hinds, Education Secretary

SACKED: James Brokenshire, Housing Secretary

SACKED: Karen Bradley, Northern Ireland Secretary

Ms Mourdant, who was a prominent backer of Jeremy Hunt in the Tory leadership race, tweeted: “I’m heading to the backbenches from where the PM will have my full support, as will my successors at @DefenceHQ & @WomenEqualities.”

Mr Fox made it clear he was pushed out of the door against his will, saying: “Sadly, I will be leaving the Government. It has been a privilege to have served as Secretary of State for International Trade these past 3 years.”

Mr Clark, who was also fired, said: “I warmly congratulate Boris Johnson on becoming Prime Minister. He is right to appoint a new team for a new premiership and I wish him and them well for the vital work ahead.”

It came after four cabinet ministers resigned from the Government today ahead of Boris Johnson’s reshuffle.
Three cabinet ministers resigned ahead of Boris Johnson's coronation as PM (PA Images)
Philip Hammond, David Gauke and Rory Stewart all resigned ahead of Boris Johnson's coronation as PM (PA Images)

Chancellor Philip Hammond, International Development Secretary Rory Stewart, Justice Secretary David Gauke and de facto Deputy Prime Minister David Lidington all handed in their notice after Theresa May’s final Prime Minister’s Questions.

Hammond, Stewart and Gauke had already said publicly they could not serve under a Prime Minister who supports a no-deal Brexit.

The resignations were largely symbolic. Mr Johnson, who will announce his new cabinet later today, would have sacked the three ministers and replaced them with his own supporters.

All will continue to work as MPs and are likely to cause trouble for the new Prime Minister from the backbenches.

Tintin

25th July 2019, 12:59

Aside from the certainly inferred (very likely) Zionist content of his selected cabinet, more transparent to those of us who have perhaps dug a little deeper, what we are seeing unravel gradually is the long-planned US/UK/Israel axis being gradually further developed.

It's now becoming a lot more transparent.

Register of Members' Financial Interests - elected parliamentarians are required to record any financial interests they may have, which could come from a variety of individuals, or organisations, which could comprise, for example, any one of a number or combination of, say, tax-exempt foundations, publishers, the pharmaceutical industry, aerospace and defence and weapons contractors, healthcare industry, to cite but a few.

It certainly gives one an idea of who they may be lobbying for. - who is effectively bribing them. Whitehall is replete with lobbyists leveraging their interests through the theatre (charade) of a democratic institution (parliament). And then there are propagandists in the Admiralty. Quite a well oiled machine.

If you scroll through this document (https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmregmem/190701/Updates%20-%2018%20June%20-%201%20July%202019.pdf) and find Boris Johnson, do please have a read through his recent donors. It's more than interesting. Before the Conservtive members voted him in as leader/proxy PM he had acquired something to the tune of £235,000 in donations, and interestingly from one of the wealthiest families in Britain. Do see here:

- The Reuben Foundation: https://www.reubenfoundation.com/global-initiatives/
- Companies House (beta): https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04481304/officers

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Craig Murray has some typically very sensible observations to make on the personnel now on-board Boris Johnson's new Cabinet. It really helps in putting things into a rather stark perspective.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Johnson’s Westminster Cabinet is Far to the Right of Thatcher

Source: https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/07/johnsons-westminster-cabinet-is-far-to-the-right-of-thatcher/

25 Jul, 2019 in Uncategorized by craig
________________________________________

I can only imagine that the media people who are saying this is the most right wing cabinet since the 1980’s were not sentient in the 80’s. Thatcher never had a Home Secretary remotely as illiberal as Pritti Patel, never had a Foreign Secretary remotely as xenophobic as Dominic Raab, never even had a Chancellor as anti-State intervention as Savid Javid (though came closer there) and never had a Defence Secretary as bellicose as Ben Wallace.

Even Thatcher’s final and most right wing Cabinet contained figures like Ken Clarke, Chris Patten, John Major, Virginia Bottomley, Douglas Hurd and William Waldegarve. All Tories with whom I have fundamental disagreements, but every single one of them is far, far to the left of virtually all of Johnson’s appalling cronies.

Thatcher deliberately and cruelly wrecked the social democratic society in which I grew up, with the aim of destroying any ability for working people to be protected against the whims of the wealthy. But Thatcher never introduced privatisation into the NHS or state schools – that was her acolyte Blair.

She maintained free university education in England and Wales. That was destroyed by Blair too. We should be more rigorous than to accept Thatcher as the definitive most right wing government possible. It is not only lazy, it obscures the fact we now have the most right wing British government since 1832.

Pritti Patel is a Home Secretary who admires the approach to law and order of Benjamin Netanyahu and voted against a measure to prevent pregnant asylum seekers being slammed into immigration detention pending hearing. Savid Javid is a Chancellor who materially caused the problems of British Steel by, as Business Secretary, vetoing in Brussels tariffs against dumped Chinese steel. Dominic Raab is a foreign secretary who negotiated a deal with the EU then resigned because it was so bad.

This is the biggest political shock to hit the UK in my lifetime and it is potentially worse than Thatcher. Here in Scotland, we need to move immediately for Independence. The time for talking really is behind us.

araucaria

25th July 2019, 13:05

It is a good while since I made a forum post. I shan’t go into why, beyond what can be inferred from this one exception (two posts). The conjunction here of three great Avalon minds, Greybeard, Ulli, and now Carmody, incites me to express a... diverging viewpoint. The fact that we can have this friendly disagreement at all is a sign that we westerners have come a long way after a long time. The British-German clash is the hardest one to get over: after winning the war, joining the EC was seen as a moral defeat or climbdown. The French-German relationship has had more time to mature and envisage a fresh approach whereby we should be done with war. For example, 150 years ago, leading French artists were fighting or fleeing the Prussians. Frédéric Bazille might have become the best of them all. He could easily have dodged the draft, but no, he decided he couldn’t. In his very first action, to evacuate civilians from a battlefield, he got killed, and that is why you might not even know who I am talking about. In the first half of the 20th century, things got so much worse, and I am exceedingly grateful to have been able to get through my lifetime trying to develop my talents along with millions of others, instead of becoming more cannon fodder. All these talents must not be wasted; they are the one tool that we have now that we badly needed then and that was destroyed.

Found this the other day, from a friend on FB:

“I was asked the following question in response to a comment I made about the EU:
“Oh dear! As a convinced Leaver, please explain why leaving the EU is a good idea. And please don't say 'to take back control' or 'to regain our sovereignty', since we hadn't lost them. Please come up with a rational reason.”

Here is my answer:

“You seem to have shut down the key issues before they started. I’m not surprised - Remainers only want to debate on issues they think they can win.
Ok - I’ll play anyway.
1. Because it’s the will of the people. The majority of those who cared enough to vote.
Do I need to say anymore?
I will anyway.
2. The History and the lies behind it tell a significant story.
- Edward Heath (paedophile and therefore a blackmailed puppet of those who wield the hidden power) sold us out with lies many decades back
1942 - the Nazis first came up with the term EEC
1943 - Redhouse Report in Strasbourg.
In 1943 German industrialists and Nazis realising the certainty of military defeat devised an economic plan to implement the dominance of the 4th Reich
Who is the greatest benefactor of the EU?
I am in favour of as little government as possible.
The vast corruption (not unique to EU but characteristic of all government as it gets larger and larger)
The vast waste of money on expenses, gravy trains, first class or business class travel. These are just a few examples of the consequences.
Attempting to create litigation and regulation that somehow applies equally to 28 countries - one size fits all is a proven disaster in any field in which it is applied.
Rich countries subsidising poor countries - socialism has never ever worked.
Unelected decision makers. Do I need to say more?
The influence of Soros within the EU. Again nothing more needs to be said.
The evident weakness of the single currency which has stayed alive precipitously thanks to Central Bank shenanigans. It is in a perilous position.
Britain wisely rejected this option.
Laws not being enacted fairly. Compare Italy and France when related to debt as a percentage of GDP and how much is allowed. France receiving favourable treatment. There are numerous examples of this from small regulations to the big diktats.
The imposition of social engineering - the Eu seeks a monolithic culture where immigration in vast numbers is a requirement. This is having appalling consequences across the EU - Germany, Sweden to name but two. We are not bringing in the kind of people who integrate and contribute. Unlike say the Caribbean and Sub continent communities who contribute and integrate. Enriching our culture. Cultural uniformity is where it’s headed.
Nationalism - i am proud to be a white nationalist and yet the term has been vilified by the media.
So what is nationalism?
“identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations”
I love my country. I put it first. Many who have entered the U.K. in recent years patently do not love the U.K. I do not personally choose to exclude other countries or damage them, only simply to prioritise England. Above all I am a galactic citizen. But I am British. Uniquely English. I am fighting peacefully, patiently and relentlessly for my country, it’s values and it’s culture.
I could continue for hours and hours - there really are that many more obvious reasons to reject this abomination.
There’s a really good test. Whatever the media push and advocate is to the advantage of the Elites and the owners of the media and those who seek their influence. It should be inherently mistrusted and questioned - their track record is entirely dubious.
Unregulated globalism is the EU scaled world-wide. One world government is the goal. Regulations world wide. Global taxation and control on energy usage and carbon Emissions. It’s happening on so many levels.
I’m truly amazed anyone can’t see it. Most people I would venture oppose Brexit for various reasons but high on every one’s list is their personal economic circumstances and the promise that it will be a disaster if we leave. This is a fear and that fear has been fanned by the media and those who are already well off and comfortable while the working class and many of the increasingly pinched middle class derive no benefit from the EU while the fat cats lap up the expenses and look after their own. This is the perception and in many cases the reality for vast swathes of Europeans whose voice is minimalised while the chattering classes pump out and devour BBC propaganda and debate the stupidity of the masses in Islington or wherever.
So tell me why is it you are prepared to tolerate all this?
Afraid of the future?
Afraid of receiving less money?
Afraid of the EU bullies who sound remarkably like those who call us Brexiteers stupid in their arrogance.
Relax. You lost. It’s going to happen. The EU experiment is over.
Trump, Putin, Xi and a widening alliance are bringing down the whole globalist house of cards. The Central Banks are the big target but first we clean house and bring to account, incarcerate and execute those who’ve committed crimes beyond your comprehension. Crimes that make policemen weep. Crimes of staggering corruption and arrogance.
Politicians are blackmailed after they are entrapped by the globalist machine. The bankers, the pharmaceutical industry, the secret services etc. Once Ted Heath commits paedophilia and is recorded doing so (by elements within MI5 or whomever) then those who wield the power from behind the curtain can influence political decision making across the board.
I hope this at least partially answers your question.
You say we’ve not lost our sovereignty or control. And you’d rather I didn’t bring that up. We are not even being allowed to enact the mandate of the people by the arrogance of Tusk and Juncker et al. Are we in control?
Juncker - drunker than a pirate on payday. It’s quite extraordinary that you’d allow such a man in the building let alone initiate and instigate policy that effects 28 nations. Who elected him? That would be no one - he was selected.”

Obviously discussion alone is not enough, because the facts are always more numerous and complex than any one person’s knowledge of them; things that are not untrue can take on a different light. I do see what Ulli’s friend sees, but there really are two sides to this whole question. The EU is far from ideal, that goes without saying. But it is like the Dalai Lama was saying in New York (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30405-Here-and-Now...What-s-Happening&p=1298364&viewfull=1#post1298364) you go for paedophile priests, but you don’t want to destroy the Catholic Church in the process. It doesn’t have to be deliberate either. There are also money-grabbing false positives which make the numbers look even more dreadful. There was a case in the UK a while back in which I know for a fact at least one character witness was never heard, and the jury was not to be told that the plaintiff was a convicted fraudster. The Catholic Church is not all bad and the judicial system is not all good. Europe is not all good either, but when the end aim is some kind of world government, which is a prerequisite for greater things ahead but which we all rightly fear because our politicians fall so woefully short of what is required, a European federation is one small step towards that goal that we don’t want to destroy or walk away from. To see it as an abomination is to go way beyond Brexit, and, let’s face it, desire its destruction. This is Manichean thinking and just another form of warfare. War is binary action, a one-thing-at-a-time approach to a complex reality. The “Allies” defeated the Axis in WWII, and then turned on each other; which is not how simultaneous realities work. And now there is a civil war of words going on in and over the UK.

The Brexiters won the referendum, says Ulli’s friend. Take the voting system that voted for Brexit. I remember commenting on the appalling chaos at some UK polling station in a video I saw. In France, you have separate tables with four people checking exactly 100 envelopes at a time, with the general public breathing down their necks. The counted envelopes are immediately placed in larger envelopes and put back in the urn. It is clear for all to see that such an organization at least has a decent chance of working fairly. The chaos is already a sign that vote-rigging would be that much easier. But I have no hard info, so I will just state that the UK polling system seems less rigorous than elsewhere, and a close-run campaign is more vulnerable to tampering, and leave it at that.

Referenda with binary Yes or No answers may or may not be democratic but they are a problematic form of public consultation because it is so easy to answer the wrong question. As I wrote at the time, I think many people heard the question, “Who’s in charge?” and answered “We the people”. Which is technically the correct answer to an exam question (the wrong situation), and in practice, the wrong answer with regard to the current state of affairs – both before and after the poll, the people were not and are not in charge. There is an extra dimension to the argument that has been overlooked. Like in the above criminal case, the jury needs to be told the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Both Yes and No are emotional responses to an issue that calls for clear-headedness. Clear-headedness has never been a British quality: the Brits are on the whole incredibly muddle-headed and Boris Johnson, whatever else he is, is muddle-headedness in spades, so of course people will vote for that. My whole education was about getting over this hurdle. I worked for 25 years translating tons of legal briefs, from crystal clear French into a language that is simply not made that way. This is often the actual cause of international misunderstandings in the first place and has certainly characterized the last wasted three years, not to mention the campaign for PM: you just cannot muddle through and think everything will work out all right. The fine print does matter. And historical fact is the fine print of current affairs. Facts do still exist.
(I now learn from Ulli in a PM that Sir Harold Evans, former editor of the Sunday Times and the Times, talks about "fog" (https://www.strandbooks.com/event/sir-harry-evans?fbclid=IwAR03cYGf_1QrZpWqZ2WLpRU-j7t48drwyPIcVc3IJWwN849i__FT810H8dE) ).

Regarding the people mentioned: you need to take this further. Trump is his own man? Maybe so, he was saying the same things forty years ago, so he definitely has a spine. Johnson on the other hand is an empty spineless buffoon: ask a serious question, there is no one at home. Johnson working with Trump? I don’t think so, although Trump doesn’t seem to have noticed yet.

Next, Juncker is a drunk? Well, not long ago, Wade Frazier was talking about he and Brian O’Leary having a drink problem, saying it came with the territory. We don’t want to dismiss Brian, or Wade, though, do we? And what about Johnson’s idol, Churchill, a notorious alcoholic? When a woman told him he was drunk, he replied, “Yes, and you’re ugly; but I’ll be sober in the morning”. But of course he wasn’t, or not for long. So maybe Juncker’s problem comes with his territory, which would be understandable, would it not?

Now Heath: he was a paedophile and did what his handlers told him? Sure, but Heath was just the first PM to come after the demise of General De Gaulle, who had been rejecting British membership for years. Heath and his sexual proclivities had nothing to do with that process. And lastly, if you are criticizing the man who brought about EC entry, you cannot not take into account the mastermind of the exit. Johnson is definitely not his own man; his handlers are by definition not on the same wavelength as Avalonian-type idealists. Their Brexit is not your Brexit.

Now the Nazi connection. Europe may have been mooted in Nazi Germany, a useful way to discredit the idea, but the concept dates back at least to Aristide Briand in the 1920s, based on the thinking of some Austrian. The idea was to organize the European wing of the League of Nations as a peacekeeping force, already 27 nations back then. The war obviously interrupted this process. And the UK was just one of several cogs: when they joined, Ireland and Norway also joined, and the Six became the Nine. Back in the fifties, Macmillan wanted France and Germany to give up the whole idea, because he thought it would lead to war. Which perversely inspired De Gaulle to like the idea, because he disagreed with the Brits, i.e. thought it would lead to peace.

Macmillan was wrong: we have had over seventy years of peace. So with the benefit of hindsight, he was right to change his mind. At that stage it was Groucho Marx in reverse: Britain wanted to join a club that wouldn’t have it as a member. When you make war, both sides lose out; when you make peace – active peace, not just an uneasy truce – all sides can win out. That means cooperative trade, not competitive trade trying to make a rip-off. One of the obstacles to British entry was the Commonwealth, formerly the Empire. (The other objection to British entry was the USA; I’ll come to that.) Empire too can have its advantages, but its main characteristic, as opposed to commonwealth, is unbalanced, competitive trade. The EU idea or ideal was of a geographical commonwealth among equals. To be sure, this ideal is still very much a work in progress, but still very much worth pursuing.

Why that would be is fairly obvious: the eastern countries are prospering? perhaps no bad thing, as they suffered badly and are no longer bolstering the Cold War Soviet pseudo-threat; Germany is prospering? perhaps because Germany is a country with many qualities; France is also prospering, and for instance any removal from the common agricultural policy would be disastrous. And half of the UK must be prospering, to the extent that they see what damage a no-deal would do to them. Ideally, everyone should be prospering, but clearly that is not the case – not yet. This is true notably for Italy, Greece, and... the other half of the UK. It would seem that areas like northern Britain are suffering more at the hands of London than Brussels and are unable to separate the two; not because they are stupid, but because they are politically disenfranchised and economically underprivileged. In other words, what is wrong with the UK is a microcosm of what is wrong with Europe. The government is blind to that fact and to the fact that by putting its own house in order, it can contribute to making Europe a better place as well. That is the inconvenient truth that Brexit is trying to brush under the carpet.

France is ambiguous: they want Britain to remain, but also understand with plenty of hindsight where De Gaulle was coming from, and will say good riddance. It could well be (but I am not sufficiently informed) that Brussels is fed up with the City of London and needs to cut it off, in which case it is Brussels following Trump, not the Brits. One sign of this is the idea being floated right now of setting up several Singapore-style tax-free zones, “structures that have the potential to facilitate money laundering”, someone was saying, and someone else they “facilitate large-scale criminality”. All the signs I am seeing point to Brexit being the elite’s backlash to Trump, although that was probably not the original intention. David Cameron timed his referendum to coincide with a Clinton regime, coming after Obama, who was to tell him to get in the “queue” (an interesting Englishism for him to be using). Note how Johnson had to do a U-turn on Trump. I hardly think Trump came into the picture at all early in 2016, unless Cameron was being advised by a Simpsons fan... If you abhor the Clinton administration that never happened, this has to be part of that nightmare.

The idea of revolution is “to come a full circle”, back to where you started. Hence revolution is essentially reactionary. And the UK position is revolutionary in that reactionary sense: a return to Commonwealth and America. But America has changed (and so has the Commonwealth); it is literally in a different place, because the Earth comes a full circle round the Sun, but as the Sun is moving round the galaxy, we never come back to the same spot, we move on all the time. That means the EU is here to evolve; it is a problem we have to solve: it is not going to dissolve away. A chemical solution is no solution: dissolve salt in water, the salt only appears to disappear.

There is a qualitative difference between Yes and No. No is blanket negativity and only an adequate reaction in the face of some kind of abuse when all else fails. Is the UK, a major world power, in an irretrievably abusive relationship? Really? Yes on the other hand is not blanket positivity but a nuanced response to a richly complex proposition. When one marries, Yes does not mean signing up for abuse. The joke Aisle, Altar, Hymn – I’ll alter him! – means taking the rough with the smooth but also accepting there is a basis for smoothing out the rough. This lack of nuance I am seeing is clear in the analogies we use, the bad apple being a favourite negative one. “One or two bad apples” is equatable with “all rotten”. What is bad is the analogy itself, based on incompetent husbandry. The correct way to store fruit is to prevent any contact. Apples growing on a tree mostly do this naturally; a healthy tree will survive a few worm-eaten apples. Other apples rot when they hit the ground; this is the normal process whereby the fruit is designed to bury the seed and enrich the soil at the point where the seed can grow. All other apples are surplus to immediate requirements and can be traded with other life forms (humans, birds, mammals, and yes worms). This is called symbiosis: a tree is not an island. What it gets in return is richer soil in which to thrive. Even the rotten apples have a part to play in that.

The apple-tree itself will not suffer from a few worms producing bad apples, but from its own specific diseases. One such is mistletoe, which does not live symbiotically but parasitically, draining the nutrients from the branch. Mistletoe grows in a tree the way a tree grows on the soil. The cure has nothing to do with worms: no use picking off grain by grain. Surgical removal, traditionally with a golden sickle, was followed by hanging the mistletoe in the house at Christmas and kissing under it as a symbol of immortality and bringer of good luck! Effective husbandry, and a little bit more besides.

So the apple analogy is a lot more complex than it looks, and the EU is likewise a lot more complex than it looks. Brexit is the wrong remedy for the wrong disease. For one thing, after decades among all these bad apples, the British apple itself is going to be pretty rotten; it is too late to be isolating it. And in any case, the problem is structural, not superficial. Brexit is like taking aspirin for appendicitis: it removes the feverish symptoms for a time but does nothing to save a generally valuable institution. The structural issue is that the European Community is being parasitized by a foreign organism, namely imperialism. The problem is not with individual Eurocrats but the branches to which they have become attached. It can only be solved by talking to Brussels with an authoritative voice, i.e. from within the EC to change the EC.

araucaria

25th July 2019, 13:09

araucaria

25th July 2019, 13:15

There is a qualitative difference between Yes and No. No is blanket negativity and only an adequate reaction in the face of some kind of abuse when all else fails. Is the UK, a major world power, in an irretrievably abusive relationship? Really? Yes on the other hand is not blanket positivity but a nuanced response to a richly complex proposition. When one marries, Yes does not mean signing up for abuse. The joke Aisle, Altar, Hymn – I’ll alter him! – means taking the rough with the smooth but also accepting there is a basis for smoothing out the rough. This lack of nuance I am seeing is clear in the analogies we use, the bad apple being a favourite negative one. “One or two bad apples” is equatable with “all rotten”. What is bad is the analogy itself, based on incompetent husbandry. The correct way to store fruit is to prevent any contact. Apples growing on a tree mostly do this naturally; a healthy tree will survive a few worm-eaten apples. Other apples rot when they hit the ground; this is the normal process whereby the fruit is designed to bury the seed and enrich the soil at the point where the seed can grow. All other apples are surplus to immediate requirements and can be traded with other life forms (humans, birds, mammals, and yes worms). This is called symbiosis: a tree is not an island. What it gets in return is richer soil in which to thrive. Even the rotten apples have a part to play in that.

The apple-tree itself will not suffer from a few worms producing bad apples, but from its own specific diseases. One such is mistletoe, which does not live symbiotically but parasitically, draining the nutrients from the branch. Mistletoe grows in a tree the way a tree grows on the soil. The cure has nothing to do with worms: no use picking off grain by grain. Surgical removal, traditionally with a golden sickle, was followed by hanging the mistletoe in the house at Christmas and kissing under it as a symbol of immortality and bringer of good luck! Effective husbandry, and a little bit more besides.

So the apple analogy is a lot more complex than it looks, and the EU is likewise a lot more complex than it looks. Brexit is the wrong remedy for the wrong disease. For one thing, after decades among all these bad apples, the British apple itself is going to be pretty rotten; it is too late to be isolating it. And in any case, the problem is structural, not superficial. Brexit is like taking aspirin for appendicitis: it removes the feverish symptoms for a time but does nothing to save a generally valuable institution. The structural issue is that the European Community is being parasitized by a foreign organism, namely imperialism. The problem is not with individual Eurocrats but the branches to which they have become attached. It can only be solved by talking to Brussels with an authoritative voice, i.e. from within the EC to change the EC.

What follows is a response to what I see as a confusion that also affects our friend Carmody’s post, http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?91509-The-UK-Brexit-vote-to-leave-the-EU&p=1306403&viewfull=1#post1306403 namely between an ideological abstraction (Nazism) and a concrete geographical term (Germany). As we know the worst Nazis fled to the Americas, so if Nazism has a geographical, and more importantly political, basis, it is not primarily located in mainland Germany. It has moved on. This will become clearer if we link this to the above-noted issue of the parasite of imperialism.

There is a current Avalon thread on the end of production of the Volkswagen, the “people carrier” that put people first and the car itself literally took a back seat with the revolutionary rear-mounted motor. It proved so popular because of its practicality. German efficiency, 50 miles per gallon, etc. (actually 26.2 in 1954, now less, but you get my point, relatively cheap to run back then). To dismiss it as Nazi technology would be to destroy something merely useful, but entirely useful, by smearing it with ideology: this backfires like the proverbial excrement hitting the proverbial fan. You might as well argue that the French preference for the “traction avant”, the front-wheel drive, was an ideological difference. No; such pragmatic considerations need to be treated with pragmatism. Speaking pragmatically, this small family car might be less than ideal for anything larger than a small family; a growing third child would soon find it a bit of a squeeze in the middle of the back seat.

German efficiency in the arts. Beethoven wrote some sublime sonatas, quartets, symphonies, without so much as a tune. 50 miles per gallon artistry. Ah, but then came Wagner, with his huge operas, his mythological gods, his Bayreuth festspiele extravanganzas. 50 gallons per mile. We don’t hear too much about German inefficiency, but here’s another example: the Tiger tank was a superb piece of military machinery, except that it... kept breaking down.

So Germany was/is not one elementary thing: it is a full spectrum with opposite extremes. As so often, we easily get the wrong end of the stick. Likewise “Nazi Germany” conflates two separate things, Nazism and Germany. Again, National Socialism is two things. Socialism in the 1930s was not a cause for conflict. In addition to socialist Russia, you had the Front Populaire in France in 1936, and the Labour movement in the UK. What could lead to conflict was the “National” bit: “Socialism in one country” as opposed to “International Socialism”. We are talking about politics of, by and for the people, way to the left of American-style “leftist” liberalism. So what went wrong? The movement of the people was hijacked, in Russia by Stalinism, in France by kowtowing to Germany, and in Germany? In Germany, it gets interesting, because you see the same explosive mixture of two ingredients that we are seeing now in Johnsonian England: populism harnessed by aristocratic entitlement. It is a matter of extreme concern to me that Johnson’s hero should be the wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

Modern warfare is precisely what results when populism is harnessed by aristocratic entitlement. It dates back at least to the Battle of Agincourt in 1415, when Henry V told his peasant archers to actually shoot to kill the French nobility. It was not supposed to happen that way: normally the peasants killed each other and the aristocracy were captured and ransomed. Just a game for some, but very real for others; sounds familiar? Henry V is a still well-loved medieval Boris Johnson who was annoyed when the French king suggested he should stick to playing tennis.

German expansionism came from the lack of an empire. Spain once had South America, Britain had the British Empire, and France extended her influence in Africa and elsewhere. Aristocratic entitlement was frustrated and only really got going by introducing the populist version of Lebensraum (living space). The lack of living space in a world of just 2.5 billion people when European populations were much lower is an idea we need to look at closely. How much space you need depends on who you are. Some aristocrats and plutocrats think they need several large mansions, when lesser mortals are confined to tiny spaces. This was the major area of convergence become two unlikely allies. While everyone wanted more space, the major reason for fighting was not over working-class housing but because the large mansions were no longer enough. Geography is a major component in this equation: like the fifth passenger in a Volkswagen, Germany is “hemmed in”, say between Russia and France. Imperial powers have always relied on their navy. The proposed solution was by extermination to reduce to zero space the Slavic and Jewish populations, themselves hemmed in between Russia and Germany, and also break out to the French Atlantic coast. The fact that the surviving Jews were later transplanted to the Middle East, hemmed in again, did little to improve their plight. Basically there is no longer anywhere for anyone to go.

Since migration is no longer a solution, the European Union has been an exercise in living together without jostling for position. There are more people in the world than back then, so all things considered, we are doing all right. It was never going to be easy. One of the positives of being geographically closer together is that as we become physically closer we may become psychologically and emotionally more intimate. So how much space do we really need? Well, we can get by for a while in a rush-hour commute, provided we have a home to go to. That home is the new space we are trying to build out of the old. And succeeding: I remember forty or fifty years ago, many smaller towns that are now exciting hives of activity were completely dead.

Of course, if a country wants to go off and do its own thing, that would be perfectly acceptable. But, seen in the above light, going back to the American dream is a fool’s paradise. The American dream was all about Lebensraum, until that country filled up too, notably with Germans fleeing Nazis, then with Nazis fleeing Germans: individual solutions to a collective problem. A rush to the west coast; the tide turned, a rush eastwards to fill in the gaps. Now they want a wall. The American dream is well and truly dead.

The specifically Nazi solution to overpopulation was and is totally ineffective. The weakness lay in having to entrust the extremely aristocratic Wehrmacht to Corporal Hitler and his Nazi rabble: two groups of total incompetents relying upon each other and at each other’s throats. These groups are the ones at war, while anyone with any sense (competence) is at peace. WWII produced the baby-boomers – some depopulation! And before WWII was over, plans were being made for a bigger, better, nuclear WWIII. Since this has not only failed to materialize in 75 years, but the danger has been receding since 1962, it is a prime example of German inefficiency. And incidentally it shows that the planners were not in Germany, which was right in the firing line.

There is a biblical story of overpopulation caused by counting the people and finding there are too many. The census at Bethlehem meant that the whole town was fully booked: “no room at the inn”. The birth of Christ was a counterintuitive solution to the problem of overpopulation: one more head to count and mouth to feed, but quality is more important than quantity.

One final thought. Sometimes seemingly unrelated things need to be connected. If Brexit is the wrong end of the stick, what would be the right end? The other day I was reading Marie Louise von Franz retelling of Jung’s story of the rainmaker who stayed in a village suffering from a drought until it rained, and even snowed.

”You see it was like this – throughout the drought the whole of nature and all the men and women here were deeply disturbed. They were no longer in Tao. When I arrived here I became also disturbed. It was so bad that it took me three days to bring myself into order.” And then he added, with a smile, “Then naturally it rained.” (Psyche and Matter, p. 161)Perhaps there is a connection between Johnsonian politics and the current major heatwave, which is the meteorological equivalent of illegal immigration from the south. Given the scale of the phenomenon, it will take a few Taoists to chill out on behalf of the rest of the population.

Matthew

25th July 2019, 13:16

The EU ruling laws were a great disruptive force to the UK in the early days, but the European Commission itself needs the disruptive force now; it's so ambitious in such a hurry, and surreptitious in it's methods. Remainers can have strange logic, like have a second referendum until they get the desired result. It's happened in other countries previously, as the EU was growing

greybeard

25th July 2019, 13:33

Thanks for the compliment and the post araucaria
Cant help but think that Boris trying to sound like Winston Churchill.
Time will tell--very rapidly--where this is going.

I could make a good case for leaving and I could make a good case for staying.
Fortunately Im 73 and settled in retirement-- just enough of a State pension to get by.
Basically looked after by the state in a council house.
So no complaints.
However I have concern for younger people.
The picture painted by many regarding leaving without a deal is far from rosy.
If Boris pulls of a deal he will be very popular if not--I would not like to be in his shoes.

Cant, in honesty, see how he can get anything he has promised through Parliament.

Chris

Hervé

25th July 2019, 19:11

Johnson’s Westminster Cabinet is Far to the Right of Thatcher (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/07/johnsons-westminster-cabinet-is-far-to-the-right-of-thatcher/) 90 (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/07/johnsons-westminster-cabinet-is-far-to-the-right-of-thatcher/#tc-comment-title)

by craig (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/author/craigm/) in Uncategorized (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/category/uncategorized/)
25 Jul, 2019 (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/07/25/)
(https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/category/uncategorized/)
I can only imagine that the media people who are saying this is the most right wing cabinet since the 1980’s were not sentient in the 80’s. Thatcher never had a Home Secretary remotely as illiberal as Pritti Patel, never had a Foreign Secretary remotely as xenophobic as Dominic Raab, never even had a Chancellor as anti-State intervention as Sajid Javid (though came closer there) and never had a Defence Secretary as bellicose as Ben Wallace.

Even Thatcher’s final and most right wing Cabinet contained figures like Ken Clarke, Chris Patten, John Major, Virginia Bottomley, Douglas Hurd and William Waldegrave. All Tories with whom I have fundamental disagreements, but every single one of them is far, far to the left of virtually all of Johnson’s appalling cronies.

Thatcher deliberately and cruelly wrecked the social democratic society in which I grew up, with the aim of destroying any ability for working people to be protected against the whims of the wealthy. But Thatcher never introduced privatisation into the NHS or state schools – that was her acolyte Blair. She maintained free university education in England and Wales. That was destroyed by Blair too. We should be more rigorous than to accept Thatcher as the definitive most right wing government possible. It is not only lazy, it obscures the fact we now have the most right wing British government since 1832.

Pritti Patel is a Home Secretary who admires the approach to law and order of Benjamin Netanyahu and voted against a measure to prevent pregnant asylum seekers being slammed into immigration detention pending hearing. Savid Javid is a Chancellor who materially caused the problems of British Steel by, as Business Secretary, vetoing in Brussels tariffs against dumped Chinese steel. Dominic Raab is a foreign secretary who negotiated a deal with the EU then resigned because it was so bad.

This is the biggest political shock to hit the UK in my lifetime and it is potentially worse than Thatcher. Here in Scotland, we need to move immediately for Independence. The time for talking really is behind us.

Matthew

25th July 2019, 20:22

The British people had a say, in an epic and historical referendum. The referendum was about leave or stay. The way the European Commission has negotiated it's as if the British people voted for a new deal. We didn't, we voted to leave. No-deal Brexit was meant to kick in if the European Commission couldn't understand what 'leave' meant. (It's only remainers who complain Brexit wasn't clearly represented by the way, not Brexiteers.)

...

I just want to echo what I said here, those months ago.

When Scotland finally leave the UK (more correctly to say if, but what I hear in conversations with Scottish friends makes me think it's simply a matter of time and patience, but is inevitable), Scotland would expect to leave. I would hope their vote to leave would be respected in the spirit they voted for.

The way Boris is talking, it sounds like Tories know they have Farage hot on their heals. I'm looking forward to seeing how the next few months go

Tintin

25th July 2019, 21:37

Hervé

25th July 2019, 21:54

[...]
Thanks Hervé: already posted here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?91509-The-UK-Brexit-vote-to-leave-the-EU&p=1306575&viewfull=1#post1306575)
Inadvertent "Bump" :)

greybeard

26th July 2019, 15:21

Nicola Sturgeon calls for new Scottish independence vote
The Guardian Libby Brooks Scotland correspondent,The Guardian Thu, 25 Jul 07:23 BST

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/nicola-sturgeon-calls-scottish-independence-062345770.htm

Scotland’s first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has written to Boris Johnson to tell him that she is “looking forward” to discussing with him her proposals for a second independence referendum.

Using her first letter to the new prime minister to remind him of Scottish government analysis which found that a no-deal Brexit could cost 100,000 jobs across Scotland, she writes: “Given your public comments about leaving the EU on October 31 with or without a deal, “come what may” and “do or die”, it is now – more than ever – essential that in Scotland we have an alternative option.”

Stating that her government would continue the parliamentary progress of legislation to enable a second referendum on independence, which Sturgeon has indicated she would like to hold before 2021, she tells Johnson: “The right of the people of Scotland to determine their own future is a basic democratic principle that must be respected.”

The referendums (Scotland) bill does not specify the date, question or referendum period, which would all be set by secondary legislation. The Scottish National party leader has previously committed to securing the necessary transfer of powers from Westminster.

Johnson refused to rule out blocking a second referendum on Scottish independence, even if the SNP won a mandate for one at the next Holyrood elections, when he visited Scotland during the Conservative leadership campaign, maintaining that “we should stick to that promise” that the 2014 vote was decisive for a generation.

Giving Johnson a timetable for future discussions, Sturgeon writes: “Similarly any decision of the Scottish parliament on whether to give people that choice must be respected. The parliament will consider the necessary framework legislation for a referendum after the summer recess, and I look forward to taking this matter forward with you once MSPs have had the opportunity to debate the issue further.”

The letter comes after the SNP shadow leader of the house, Pete Wishart, described Johnson’s new cabinet as the “worst since Thatcher” on Wednesday night, while his fellow SNP MP Tommy Sheppard dismissed the Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson, as a “busted flush”, after Johnson apparently ignored her advice to keep the former Scottish secretary David Mundell in post.

Sheppard said: “Ruth Davidson is a busted flush – Boris Johnson has humiliated her and left her authority non-existent following the sacking of David Mundell as Scottish Secretary.”

Davidson, who has made no secret of her reservations about Johnson and said on Tuesday that she would judge him by his actions once in Downing Street, issued a warmly worded statement after Mundell’s sacking, while many other senior Scottish Tories indicated on social media that they felt his departure was a significant loss to the party.

While critics have warned that a Johnson premiership could boost support for the SNP and independence, Scottish Conservative supporters of the new prime minister have insisted in recent days that he is willing to take guidance from colleagues based north of the border.

avid

26th July 2019, 16:31

That Sturgeon woman - why do I feel that I dislike her attitude? She has always been a ‘rude’ person, condescending, and purporting to represent all Scottish folk, but this is not the case for many downtrodden, under-represented folk, I don’t trust her 1 iota.... Big mistake leaving the UK, however, if the oil/gas revenue was territorial, hmmm, but big corporates would never allow that!

Carmody

26th July 2019, 16:51

If Scotland was to decide to separate, the separation must happen before the damage occurs. Not after.

I hold this point to be obvious.

It's kinda like when Quebec wanted to separate from Canada, and there was a national vote on it..

It had to be introduced to the Quebec people..that the 3/4 of the land that is Quebec, as a province, does not belong to Quebec.

the upper 1/2 to 3/4.... is native lands. and that part would, via voting on it, stay with canada. Quebec would be isolated to a small patch along the border with the USA.

https://geology.com/canada/quebec-map.gif

the upper 3/4 of that which you see in the map.... is native lands.

I don't imagine that 'Merrie olde' will look much different after a separation.

From my viewpoint of a considerable lack of knowledge about the true depth of the EU and UK involvement, I think The UK is right to want out. The same for most of the countries in the EU, who want out. I don't see equal representation anywhere in that mix. I think they are better together and I think that some of them are better apart.

When the huge influx of immigrants and basically open borders began, that, to me... was the death knell for an experiment that was probably working prior.

So the real question, is, who let it be that way, and why? Nothing that complex happens without direct intervention..intervention and a push/force --- to have it be that messy.

the stuff happening at the USA border and then inland, and at the EU borders and then all over the EU, is a clear cut and obvious case of asymmetrical warfare.

The question is ....what faction is responsible for the driving of it?

Eg, the place I am at has changed dramatically in the past 5 years, alone.

Billy

26th July 2019, 18:58

Joseph Farrel talks about new Prime minister Boris Johnson and Brexit. Worth a listen.
Interestingly enough, Joseph is an old acquaintance of Boris from university days.

zdrBz-pfdpU

PS. I am for Scottish independence but I definitely don't take to Nicola Sturgeon's globalists agenda either. :facepalm:

Matthew

26th July 2019, 19:19

Carl Benjamin aka Sargon of Akkad gives his live reaction to Boris' opening speach.

I've heard it all before from May, but Boris delivers it well. Time will tell if we get an actual 'leave'

:cocktail:

https://youtu.be/ZGRRRL7uQiY

ZGRRRL7uQiY

greybeard

27th July 2019, 15:41

UK on course for no-deal Brexit as Johnson rejects EU agreement
The Guardian Peter Walker Political correspondent,The Guardian 17 hours ago

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-deadlock-no-10-insists-120244225.html

Boris Johnson has set the UK on an apparent course towards a no-deal Brexit by playing down the likelihood of any talks with the EU unless Brussels agrees to scrap the existing withdrawal agreement and Irish backstop, both of which it has ruled out.

The seemingly intransigent tone prompted Leo Varadkar, the Irish prime minister, to warn that a no-deal departure could lead more people in Northern Ireland to seek a united Ireland.

Johnson’s spokesman said there were no talks with the EU scheduled, and that if they happened it must be “clear what the basis for those discussions needs to be” – a message the new PM then delivered personally to Angela Merkel.

According to No 10, Johnson told the German chancellor in a phone call on Friday that while he would seek a deal, the “only solution” involved entirely scrapping the backstop, and that in the interim the UK must prepare for the prospect of there being no deal.

Asked earlier if Johnson’s team had sought any talks with Brussels, a Downing Street spokesman said: “What we’ve done is set out our position and say that we are very ready and will be energetic in beginning talking, but we’re also clear-eyed about what needs to happen if we are going to be able to secure a deal which parliament can support.

“As I say, we are ready to begin talking, but we are clear what the basis for those discussions needs to be.”

The approach from Johnson, who spent Friday visiting a police centre in Birmingham to tout his domestic promise of 20,000 new officers, will boost speculation about a deliberate attempt by a No 10 now packed with former Vote Leave alumni to scupper any negotiated settlement.

With a seeming majority in the Commons set on blocking a no-deal departure on 31 October, this could create an impasse in which Johnson could declare an autumn election, for which he will be styled as the champion of Brexit.

The strategy does, however, carry risks, not least to the integrity of the UK, even as No 10 confirmed that Johnson would carry the extra, self-appointed title of “minister for the union”.

On the visit to Birmingham, Johnson tried to scotch speculation that he was preparing for a general election, saying he would “absolutely not” call for another vote. The prime minister said: “The British people … don’t want another electoral event, they don’t want a referendum, they don’t want a general election. They want us to deliver.”

While Johnson has no plans for talks with Brussels, he has spoken to Donald Trump, who called him on Friday evening to congratulate him on his new role and discuss the “unparalleled” trade opportunities offered by Brexit. The US president, who has publicly praised Johnson on numerous occasions, also discussed the Iran crisis.

Downing Street said: “The leaders both expressed their commitment to delivering an ambitious free trade agreement and to starting negotiations as soon as possible after the UK leaves the EU.”

However, at an event on Friday in Co Donegal, Varadkar warned that a no-deal Brexit could make some in Northern Ireland “question the union”. “People who you might describe as moderate nationalists or moderate Catholics, who were more or less happy with the status quo, will look more towards a united Ireland,” he said.

“And we will increasingly see liberal Protestants and liberal unionists starting to ask the question as to where they feel more at home: is it in a nationalist Britain that is talking about potentially reintroducing the death penalty, or something like that, or is it part of a European home and part of Ireland?”

Johnson is likely to face some turbulent encounters with other EU leaders, including at next month’s G7 summit in France. Following Johnson’s call with Merkel, a German spokeswoman, Ulrike Demmer, said he had also accepted an invitation to visit Berlin.

He is expected to combine it with a visit to the French president, Emmanuel Macron, to whom he also also spoken. Political insiders in Berlin say the visit could take place as early as next week, but no date has been announced.

Michael Roth, Germany’s minister of state for Europe, said Johnson was mistaken “to believe that the European Union will let itself be blackmailed”. He told the TV channel ZDF: “My message to the new British prime minister is very clear. Boris, the election campaign is over. Just calm down.”

Following Johnson’s talk with Macron, France’s minister for European affairs, Amélie de Montchalin, said both sides should avoid “games, gestures and provocations” with just three months to go before the UK is due to leave the EU.

On the domestic front, Johnson is due to make the latest in a series of ambitious, if so far vague and uncosted, new policies, this time for a new trans-Pennine rail route between Manchester and Leeds.

At a speech in Manchester on Saturday, Johnson was expected to say: “It will be up to local people and us to come to an agreement on the exact proposal they want – but I have tasked officials to accelerate their work on these plans so that we are ready to do a deal in the autumn.”

The coming weeks, however, look set to be dominated by what could descend into a Brexit standoff, with a united EU27 adamant that there is no time to rewrite the withdrawal agreement, and that the backstop is the only proven way to avoid the risk of a hard Irish border.

Pressed on whether Johnson’s stance meant, in effect, that the process was deadlocked, his spokesman said the UK’s priority remained to leave with a deal. “But it is very clear that if we are going to be able to secure a deal that allows us to leave on 31 October, which the prime minister has said we are absolutely going to do, that is going to mean reopening the withdrawal agreement,” he said.

Johnson must also factor in concerns about his strategy from worried Conservatives, given that he has a working Commons majority of just three, which seems set to fall further after the Brecon and Radnorshire byelection next week.

Tobias Ellwood, the junior defence minister, who strongly opposes a no-deal departure, was sacked from his post on Friday. He later told the Press Association that while “pure Brexiteers” on the Conservative benches wanted no deal, “the damage to our economy will send our party into opposition for a decade”.

greybeard

28th July 2019, 09:15

Hammond plots with Labour to kill Johnson’s no-deal Brexit plan
The Guardian Toby Helm,The Guardian 1 hour 56 minutes ago

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/hammond-plots-labour-kill-johnson-203628411.html

The former Tory chancellor Philip Hammond held private talks with Labour’s Brexit spokesman Keir Starmer shortly before Boris Johnson entered Downing Street last Wednesday, to plot cross-party moves aimed at preventing the new prime minister agreeing to a no-deal Brexit.

Related: Opponents of no deal ‘have just weeks’ to plot blocking strategy

The meeting in the House of Commons – which took place shortly after Hammond had resigned from the government – is evidence of the fierce backlash Johnson faces from MPs of all parties if he tries to defy parliament and take the UK out of the EU without an agreement on 31 October.

It is understood that the former political opponents Hammond and Starmer agreed to work together through the summer recess with other leading parliamentarians who oppose no deal, including former Tory ministers Oliver Letwin and Dominic Grieve, to thrash out how best to use parliamentary votes to torpedo no deal.

On Saturday night Starmer confirmed that Johnson’s arrival in No 10 had spurred more cross-party discussions at high levels involving senior Tories sacked by Johnson, or who chose to resign, as opponents of no deal prepared a cross-party counter-offensive against his new hard-Brexit cabinet and government.

“The political direction of travel under Boris Johnson is clear,” said Starmer, “and so it is more important than ever that we build a strong cross-party alliance to stop a no-deal Brexit.

“That work will intensify over the summer, before parliament resumes in September.”

The plans being hatched include amending Brexit-related legislation that has to pass through parliament before the UK can leave the EU in a way that would force the Johnson to ask for a further extension to the UK’s membership if no Brexit agreement has been reached by early October.

A “last resort” option is for Hammond and other Tory Remainers to vote for a no-confidence motion in their own government if no deal still appears on the cards.

A new Opinium/Observer poll on Sunday will heighten fears among Remainers that Johnson could resort to calling a snap Brexit election to seek a mandate for a no-deal Brexit if he fails to persuade EU leaders to reopen talks on the Irish backstop and Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement.

The poll, conducted after Johnson was elected Tory leader, shows a marked “Boris bounce”, putting the Tories up seven points compared with a fortnight ago, on 30%.

The Conservatives have leapfrogged Labour (which is 3 points up on 28%) to retake the lead. The surge in support appears to come at the expense of the Brexit party which has dropped 7 points to 15%.

The Liberal Democrats, whose new leader Jo Swinson took office last week, are up 1 point on 16%.

Johnson also has a 21-point lead over Jeremy Corbyn when voters are asked who would make the best prime minister. It is the biggest lead since May forged ahead of Corbyn before the 2017 election. Half of the public think, however, that Johnson will divide the nation.

Professor Robert Ford of Manchester University said that Johnson’s pursuit of Labour voters who backed Brexit could win the Tories some seats but could also cause losses for the party in Remain areas, where voters would reject his talk of no-deal Brexit.

“ A dramatic gamble may be needed to break the Brexit deadlock, but such gambles can easily backfire, as we saw in 2017,” Ford writes.

On Saturday Johnson further fuelled speculation that he was preparing for an election on a visit to Manchester. In a speech that bore all the hallmarks of an election pitch to disillusioned Leavers in Labour areas, he pledged a £3.6bn fund for deprived towns, a new Manchester-to-Leeds rail line and major investment in buses, broadband and police.
Boris Johnson
Johnson pledged a £3.6bn fund for deprived towns and a new Manchester-to-Leeds rail line while in Manchester on Saturday. Photograph: Getty Images

“The centre of Manchester, like the centre of London, is a wonder of the world. A few miles away from here, the story is very different,” he said.

“The story has been for young people growing up there of hopelessness, or the hope that one day they will get out and never come back.

“It certainly isn’t really the fault of the places, and certainly isn’t the fault of the people growing up there.

They haven’t failed. It’s we, us, the politicians, our politics has failed them.” Officially Johnson has ruled out a general election before Brexit has been delivered, but many MPs believe he will be prepared to switch to backing one if he cannot secure a deal on Brexit that he can sell to his own party and get through parliament.

Meanwhile Corbyn, who is having to step up election preparations, on Sunday will accuse the Tories of causing a £40bn of lost investment in 2019 as a result of the Brexit impasse.

Labour claims that it has reached the figure by comparing forecasts by the Office for Budget Responsibility before and after Brexit. It said businesses are expected to invest around £187bn this year, compared to the £227bn forecast in 2016.

“Boris Johnson won the support of fewer than 100,000 Tory party members by threatening a reckless no-deal Brexit, leaving businesses and workers facing serious risks and huge uncertainty,” Corbyn said. “He is staking all our futures on a sweetheart trade deal with Donald Trump that would risk the takeover of our NHS by US corporations, while handing out tax cuts to the richest.

“With Johnson and his divisive hard-right cabinet gambling with people’s jobs and living standards, it is now clear that the only way Brexit can be resolved is by taking it back to the people.”

Tintin

28th July 2019, 15:52

Not entirely off-topic, and relevant to the overall possible outcomes from separating from the EU I do wonder what things may look like should that happen.

Only fairly recently after revisiting the "London Calling" film (and see below) was I reminded of this probably very little known independent state within Moldova, but autonomous all the same.

Gagauzia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gagauzia) described on Wikipedia, unusually accurately by them as well ( :) ) as:

"...an autonomous region of Moldova. Its autonomy is ethnically motivated by the predominance of the Gagauz people, who are primarily Orthodox Turkic-speaking people. Gagauz Yeri literally means "place of the Gagauz"."

And they have their own independent media channel :)

Craig Murray did though make a point in "London Calling" that there may not be any really useful purpose served anymore in any autonomous region (England, Scotland etc..) having a centralised TV channel as new media in many ways has superseded the need for an institution like the BBC.

I'd also strongly recommend that this film is watched as it related to the 2014 Scottish Referendum vote. (Related post on the 'censorship' thread here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?80790-Internet-Censorship-So-it-began...&p=1306822&viewfull=1#post1306822))

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

London Calling
Released 2016 - dir. Alan Knight

Source: https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/london-calling/

Overview
The divide between hard news and propaganda has become murkier than ever in recent years. Audiences from both sides of the aisle have observed an insidious media bias at play whether they consume their news online, in the morning papers or on the nightly networks. The presentation of alternative facts has inspired a palpable sense of disillusionment and mistrust among viewership. The documentary London Calling, based on the popular book of the same name by author GA Ponsonby, recounts one of the egregious examples of bias as it targets the BBC and their role in defeating the 2014 referendum for Scotland's independence.

The 'Yes' campaign for independence was rightfully viewed as an underdog, but public support was growing. In the lead up to the vote, however, much of the media seemed chilly to their movement. This was definitely the case with the BBC, a large and long-respected organization that many credit with propelling the downfall of the movement. Key figures within the campaign, media insiders and ordinary voters give voice to the frustrations of the 'Yes' campaigners who experienced defeat both in the voting booth and in the promise of an impartial media.

Do they have a point? The evidence points to much more than just sour grapes. The film is littered with instances of bias committed by the BBC. Opponents cite a series of deceitful headlines, cheap tactics that provoked fear in the outcome of a yes vote, and coverage that failed to find a balance between both sides of the issue. The organization willfully evaded the lingering questions, scandals and controversies that marked the campaign to vote against the independence measure. Meanwhile, leaders in the 'Yes' campaign were tormented by manufactured character assassinations and a barrage of exaggerated negative reporting. Pro-union interests who stood against the quest for independence were given a dominant role in programming while many Scots with a different point of view were given short shrift.

For their part, the BBC claims they adhered to the strictest ethical standards of impartiality in their reporting. But the damage seems to have already been done as more viewers consume their media with increasingly discerning eyes. London Calling exposes the importance of an impartial press that is truly representative of the people, and the democratic catastrophes which can occur in its absence. It's a scary potential that we all must struggle against.

greybeard

28th July 2019, 19:32

Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson goes to war with Boris Johnson: 'I won't support no-deal Brexit'
The Independent Ashley Cowburn,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/scottish-tory-leader-ruth-davidson-124600437.html

Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson has publicly challenged Boris Johnson over his Brexit plans, saying she will not support a no-deal exit from the EU.

Her frank warning came as Michael Gove, who is now in charge of no-deal preparations at the Cabinet Office, said the government is "operating on the assumption" of the UK leaving the bloc without a deal.

While the aim for the new prime minister is still to leave with an agreement, his hardline approach and vow to "abolish" the backstop has been stonewalled by Brussels, who have refused to change their position.

"With a new prime minister, a new government, a new clarity of mission, we will exit from the EU on October 31. No ifs. No buts. No more delay. Brexit is happening," Mr Gove wrote in the Sunday Times.

Sajid Javid, the new chancellor, will also ramp up preparations for a no-deal scenario this week by announcing a £1bn spending package to be made available to government departments.

But in a sign of frustration at the approach of the new government, Ms Davidson, who is often referred to as a rising star in the Conservative Party, used a newspaper column to outline her opposition.

In the Scottish Mail on Sunday, Ms Davidson said: "I hope beyond measure the new prime minister is successful in getting an agreement with the EU so he can go back to the House of Commons and get the majority backing he needs. He has my full support in those efforts.

“Where I differ with the UK Government is on the question of a no-deal Brexit.

"When I was debating against the pro-Brexit side in 2016, I don't remember anybody saying we should crash out of the EU with no arrangements in place to help maintain the vital trade that flows uninterrupted between Britain and the EU."

"I don't think the government should pursue a no-deal Brexit and, if it comes it, I won't support it," she added. "I wrote to tell the former prime minister Theresa May that last year and I confirmed my position to her successor when I spoke to him last week."

Ms Davison, who has previously been highly critical of Mr Johnson, added: "As leader of the party in Scotland, my position exists independently of government. I don't have to sign a no-deal pledge to continue to serve."

Her remarks follow claims that Philip Hammond, who resigned as chancellor before Mr Johnson took office, had held meetings with Labour's shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer in an effort to prevent the new prime minister seeing through a no-deal exit from the EU.

Sir Keir told The Observer the "political direction of travel under Boris Johnson is clear" and that it was "more important than ever that we build a strong cross-party alliance to stop a no-deal Brexit".

He added: "That work will intensify over the summer, before parliament resumes in September."

It was also claimed that Mr Johnson had set up a "war cabinet" in order to deliver Brexit "by any means necessary". It will meet for the first time on Monday, and consist of Mr Gove, Mr Javid, the foreign secretary Dominic Raab, the Brexit secretary Stephen Barclay, and the attorney general Geoffrey Cox.

In response to Mr Gove's comments, the mayor of London Sadiq Khan said: "It beggars belief that the Government is now operating on the assumption that a no deal Brexit will happen.

"With the devastating consequences that crashing out of the EU would have on jobs, growth, public safety, food supply and living standards in London and across the UK there is only one sensible course of action for the Government to take.

"The new prime minister should immediately withdraw Article 50, allowing time for a public vote to be held so the country can decide what course it wants to take - with remain as an option on the ballot paper."

greybeard

29th July 2019, 11:43

Boris Johnson faces Tory backlash after new government says no plan for law to guarantee EU citizens’ rights after Brexit

The Independent Benjamin Kentish,The Independent Sat, 27 July

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-faces-tory-backlash-212857481.html

Boris Johnson is facing a backlash from his own MPs after his government dismissed demands for new laws to protect the rights of EU citizens in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

Conservative MPs warned that failure to guarantee the rights in law would be an “abrogation of responsibility”, because the EU is unlikely to guarantee the rights of the 1.3 million Brits living in its member states unless the UK acts first.

But former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith, a senior ally of Mr Johnson, told The Independent that ministers would be reluctant to bring forward a news law on citizens’ rights because of fears that it would be “hijacked” by MPs trying to block a no-deal Brexit.

The claim came as Tory MPs warned Mr Johnson not to prioritise a no-deal exit ahead of guaranteeing the rights of 3 million EU citizens living in the UK, and Brits living in the EU.

MPs said that some Tories would be willing to support Mr Johnson’s threat to opt for a no-deal Brexit if citizens’ rights were protected, but would not contemplate doing so otherwise – potentially stopping the new prime minister from getting a no-deal plan through parliament.

Speaking in the House of Commons on Thursday, Mr Johnson said he wanted to “repeat unequivocally our guarantee to the 3.2 million EU nationals now living and working among us”.

He added: “I thank them for their contribution to our society and for their patience. I can assure them that under this government they will have the absolute certainty of the right to live and remain.”

However, he faced an angry backlash minutes later when his spokesman admitted that Mr Johnson was not talking about new legislation to protect EU nationals’ rights.

Instead, the government believes that the existing Home Office scheme offering EU citizens “settled status” is enough to guarantee their rights.

But critics said the settled status scheme could be scrapped or changed “on a whim” and provided no security for EU citizens.

They also said the government must act to help EU nationals in order to protect the 1.3 million British citizens living in EU countries. Some EU member states, including Spain, have said they will only guarantee the rights of British nationals in their country if the UK government acts to protect their nationals living in the UK.

As the row over the issue deepened, Mr Duncan Smith suggested that the new government would not legislate to help EU citizens because ministers fear the draft law would be “hijacked” by MPs determined to stop Brexit or avert a no-deal outcome.

Mr Duncan Smith told The Independent: “Citizens’ rights will be guaranteed categorically but we don’t want legislation because that opens the door to all sorts of Christmas tree amendments.

“We don’t want legislation in the next period because that legislation will simply get hijacked and without a big majority it’s going to be difficult to stop it.

“If the door opens, [anti-Brexit MPs] will pile in with these amendments and lots of them will be aimed at bogging this thing down.”

He suggested that legislation guaranteeing citizens’ rights could be passed within a week of Britain leaving the EU on 31 October but warned that doing so before then would lead to “all sorts of trouble”.

He said: “Citizens’ rights are not something you can deal with before you leave. If you leave and immediately legislate then the issue would be solved within a matter of days. It’s just a tactical fact that doing so before leaving risks creating a nightmare.”

No 10 refused to comment on Mr Duncan Smith’s claim that the government was reluctant to table new legislation for fear of it being used to block no deal. A Downing Street source said: “Any plans for legislation will be announced in the usual way and with relevant notice to parliament. The commitment to EU citizens shouldn’t be used as a political football.”

But some Tory MPs warned that the matter would become a major “toxic” issue for the party if the rights of EU nationals were not enshrined in law.

Conservative MP Alberto Costa, who has led the campaign to guarantee the rights of EU citizens and British citizens in the EU, told The Independent: “The new prime minister has repeatedly promised and pledged to absolutely, unequivocally guarantee the rights of EU nationals. The way to do that is through the law.

“If anyone intended it to mean something else, then I don’t know which form of democracy we are referring to. I await the proposed law that will absolutely unequivocally guarantee the rights of EU nationals.”

In a clear warning to Mr Johnson, he continued: “If EU nationals’ rights are not unequivocally, absolutely guaranteed as has been repeatedly promised, it will be one of the biggest toxic issues for the Conservative Party.

“It is imperative for the Conservative Party to do the morally right thing in the event of no-deal and that is to uphold the rights of 3 million innocent people who were disenfranchised from the EU referendum.

“That comes first and I would expect every MP in the House of Commons to have that at the forefront of their minds … If the rights of EU nationals are not enshrined in law, I cannot see how they can be protected.”

He insisted that the current settled status scheme was not sufficient because: “It’s created through Home Office rules and Home Office rules can be changed at the whim of the home secretary. That is completely different to the rights that EU nationals enjoy right now – treaty rights underpinned by international law.”

Mr Costa said that protecting the rights of EU nationals was also crucial in forcing European states to guarantee the rights UK citizens living in EU countries. Failure to do so would mean the UK was “abrogating its responsibility to 1.3 million British citizens who rely on those treaty rights in order to subsist, to work, to live, to retire, to access healthcare, to get pension entitlements, to get benefits”.

He said: “We have never seen a peacetime government abrogating its responsibility to over 1.3 million of its own citizens.”

Mr Costa also hit back at Mr Duncan Smith, saying of Brexiteers who insist that legislation is not needed: “They’re putting at risk British citizens and their rights. They’re being glib about those rights and how we protect them.”

He added: “It is the first duty of any government and of members of parliament to protect British citizens and defend their country. The only way of protecting British citizens in the event of no deal is to protect EU nationals here first.

“That has got to be clearly understood by Brexiteers. My priority is the protection of British citizens wherever they may be and I would have thought that that must be the number one priority of any MP regardless of their view on Brexit.

“They cannot have it both ways. They cannot say on the one hand that they will protect EU rights and on the other say that we don’t need any legislation to do so. You either guarantee those rights or you don’t.”

During the 2016 referendum campaign, Mr Johnson was among Vote Leave campaigners who signed a pledge saying there should be “no change” in the rights of EU citizens in the UK after Brexit. It said: “EU citizens will automatically be granted indefinite leave to remain in the UK and will be treated no less favourably than they are at present.”

Critics say the settled status scheme does not meet this test because EU nationals are not “automatically” granted the right to remain in the country and because, without a Brexit deal, their rights will not be enshrined in law once Britain leaves the EU.

Mr Costa said: “That pledge is not honoured if there is no law passed before 31 October. It’s a breached promise to the electorate.”

The Independent understands that a group of MPs from across the Commons travelled to Brussels last week to meet with Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, to discuss the issue of citizens’ rights.

The delegation included Mr Costa, Tory Brexiteer Sir Edward Leigh, Conservative peer Viscount Ridley, Labour’s Baroness Hayter, Liberal Democrat Layla Moran and the SNP’s Stuart McDonald. The group emphasised that there was cross-party support in parliament for the reciprocal rights of citizens to be guaranteed even if there was a no-deal Brexit.

One source said the Remain-backing members of the group had made clear to Mr Barnier “that they cannot rule out no-deal, the spectre of no deal is there, and that he has got to take seriously reopening the withdrawal agreement and carving out citizens’ rights in the event of no-deal”.

Mr Barnier is understood to have been reluctant to do so, because the EU has repeatedly insisted that the current Brexit deal cannot be reopened. Another meeting is scheduled for mid-October, shortly before the 31 October Brexit deadline.

greybeard

29th July 2019, 21:27

Johnson refuses to meet EU leaders unless they scrap backstop
The Guardian Rowena Mason and Libby Brooks,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/johnson-refuses-meet-eu-leaders-141353228.html

Boris Johnson is refusing to sit down for talks with EU leaders until they agree to ditch the Irish backstop, despite invitations to meetings from the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, and the French president, Emmanuel Macron.

His official spokeswoman said the prime minister had made clear that he wanted to strike a deal, but that there was no point in holding face-to-face talks unless the EU agreed to reopen the withdrawal agreement.

But on a visit to the Trident nuclear base at Faslane in Scotland on Monday, Johnson painted a more optimistic picture of the prospects for talks, telling reporters there was “ample scope” to achieve a new deal.

He said: “We are not aiming for a no-deal Brexit at all. What we want is to get a deal and I’ve had some interesting conversations with our European partners. I’ve talked to Jean-Claude [Juncker] and Angela Merkel and we’re reaching out today to Leo Varadkar. The feeling is, yes there’s no change in their position, but it’s very, very positive.”

But he added: “They all know where we are: we can’t accept the backstop, it was thrown out three times, the withdrawal agreement as it stands is dead and everybody gets that. But there is ample scope to do a new deal and a better deal.”

While Johnson has spoken to Merkel and Macron, there are no plans to accept their invitations to visit without a change in their position on the backstop. Irish officials are understood to view the delay in contacting Varadkar, the Irish prime minister, as indicative of an unwillingness to enter serious talks. Varadkar is adamant that the backstop must stay to prevent a return to a hard border on the island of Ireland and preserve the integrity of the single market.
Boris Johnson arrives for a meeting with Nicola Sturgeon in Edinburgh
Boris Johnson arrives for a meeting with Nicola Sturgeon in Edinburgh on Monday. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images

The spokeswoman said: “The PM has been clear that he wants to meet EU leaders and negotiate, but not to sit down and be told that the EU cannot possibly reopen the withdrawal agreement. And that is the message that he has been giving to leaders when he has spoken to them on the telephone so far.

“The EU has said up to now it is not willing to renegotiate [the backstop] … The prime minister would be happy to sit down with leaders when that position changes. But he is making it clear to everybody he speaks to that that needs to happen.”

Related: The Vote Leave gang now running Britain do not want to govern. They want to win | Matthew d’Ancona

Asked about his plans to kickstart negotiations with the EU over the summer, after the foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, appeared to suggest on Monday morning that he would not reopen talks until the EU agreed to ditch the backstop, Johnson said: “I believe in reaching out. I’ve already been talking to colleagues around the table in Brussels, I have absolutely no inhibitions about that. We are going to engage and obviously ask for very profound changes to the current basis for leaving the EU.”

He said that, while the formal position of the EU that there could be no further negotiations on the withdrawal agreement remained unchanged, “I think they understand that the UK and the EU are two great political entities and it is possible for us to come up with a new deal that will be to the benefit of both sides”.

Despite the positivity of Johnson’s outlook in Faslane, where he met naval personnel working inside the nuclear submarine HMS Victorious, his underlying position on talks makes clear that No 10 is proceeding towards a no-deal Brexit unless EU leaders change their minds about not reopening the withdrawal agreement. It is counter to expectations among some of Johnson’s supporters that he would embark on a whistlestop diplomatic tour of European capitals to propose an alternative to the backstop, instead leaving the ball in the court of EU leaders to make a move.

The No 10 spokeswoman added: “I think he has been clear that the backstop has to be abolished. He remains confident that the EU will stop claiming that the withdrawal agreement cannot be changed. But until that happens we must assume that there will be a no-deal Brexit on 31 October.”

Earlier, Raab refused to say whether Johnson was planning to see EU leaders any time soon, saying there would be meetings “in due course”.

Johnson is ramping up planning for no deal with a series of new cabinet committees to prepare for leaving on 31 October.

David Frost, Johnson’s new chief Brexit negotiator, has warned his European counterparts not to underestimate the prime minister. According to a leaked email seen by the Financial Times, Frost sent an email telling them that “you should be in no doubt about this government’s commitment to the 31 October date”.

It added: “I would also add that many people are inclined to underestimate Boris Johnson and I would urge you not to do so.”

The government is also planning an advertising campaign involving spending up to £100m on warning the public and business to get ready. Johnson’s spokeswoman could not say what the exact messages would be or whether the public would be advised to stockpile. It will not involve leafleting every household, but broadcast and billboard advertisements are likely.

On his visit to Scotland, Johnson also heaped praise on the Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson, who on Sunday issued a defiant challenge to the prime minister, pledging that she will refuse to back a no-deal Brexit.

Claiming that he was “with Ruth in wanting to avoid a no-deal Brexit”, he said: “Ruth has been a fantastic leader of the Scottish Conservatives. I am lost in admiration for what she has achieved. I’m a massive fan of the way she has taken the argument to those who would destroy our union.”

Davidson has made no secret of her reservations about the new prime minister, and Johnson infuriated her last week by sacking her ally David Mundell as Scottish secretary against her advice.

The first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, said she intended to set out for Johnson the “considerable damage” that any Brexit, and especially a no-deal Brexit, would do to Scotland’s economy.

Speaking in advance of her first face-to-face meeting with Johnson since he became prime minister, she said: “Boris Johnson has formed a hardline Tory government with one aim: to take Scotland and the UK out of the EU without a deal.”

greybeard

30th July 2019, 09:16

'Complete breakdown': EU rejects Dominic Raab's 'easier' no-deal Brexit claim
The Guardian Jennifer Rankin in Brussels,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/eu-officials-reject-dominic-raab-141827211.html

European Union officials have rejected Dominic Raab’s claim that negotiating a free-trade deal would be “much easier” after a no-deal Brexit.

While the foreign secretary contends that leaving the EU without an agreement would ease the way to solving the disputed Irish border question, European sources fear a no-deal Brexit would trigger an acrimonious blame game.

“It would mean the complete breakdown of political relations and I don’t think there would be much trust on the EU side with the Tories, or with the prime minister,” a senior diplomat said.

“Eventually we would get around it because we are pragmatic, but this would be really, really bad, because of all the rhetoric around blaming.”

A second diplomat, speaking before Raab’s intervention, argued that all contact would cease after a no-deal Brexit. “Our phones will not be connected at that time … I don’t think they will be connected to someone who has reneged on their obligations,” they said.

European officials agree that a precondition of talks would be a British pledge to honour the three core parts of the withdrawal agreement – citizens’ rights, the Irish border and the financial settlement.

At the weekend, the EU budget commissioner, Günther Oettinger, told Der Tagesspiegel the UK’s credit rating would be hit if Boris Johnson carried out his threat not to honour payments promised to the EU.

Tanja Fajon, the Social Democrat member of the European parliament’s foreign affairs committee, said: “To negotiate a free trade agreement usually takes years and I believe the UK doesn’t have that time after a no-deal Brexit.”

The MEP, allied to the Labour party, added: “Who would want to do business with [Johnson] if he is serious with his threats not to pay €60bn (£54bn) debts to the EU? Who wants to deal with the country who doesn’t pay its bills?”

Fajon was citing an unofficial, outdated Brussels estimate of the Brexit bill, which is much higher than the €39bn the British government has calculated.

In reality, both figures need to be adjusted because of the UK’s delayed departure. As an EU member state, the UK continues to make contributions to the EU budget, lowering the final “Brexit bill”, which is based on honouring commitments until 2021.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Raab said both sides needed to be flexible, while giving no hint of compromise from the government. He said it would be much easier to deal with the Irish backstop through a free-trade agreement once the UK was no longer subject to “the demands and unilateral dictates of the EU” as a member of the the bloc.

The EU has ruled out reopening the deal agreed with Theresa May, including the British-designed backstop, which is seen in Brussels as a major concession to the UK.

Brussels sources hope soft-Brexit Tories will prevent the UK leaving without a deal, but think the EU has no choice but to stick to its strategywhen faced with “impossible demands” from London.

Johnson was “playing in the casino”, said the senior diplomat, who argued that the Brexit process, from David Cameron’s referendum to Johnson’s no-deal pledge, was an attempt for Conservative party unity. “How can you negotiate with a partner who has just proven that he is completely irrational and just willing to destroy things to keep his party completely united?” the diplomat said.

After the weekend media blitz from Johnson’s ministers on no-deal planning, a European commission spokesman reiterated that the EU would defend its own interests.

“The UK preparedness is not for us to deal with. Our no-deal preparedness protects the EU and our interests in the case of a no-deal Brexit. A no-deal scenario is not our preferred outcome.”

greybeard

30th July 2019, 09:57

An enormous amount tof tax payers money is spent on this getting ready and now more to be spent on an advertising campaign.
How exactly does Boris and compny expect to get a Brexit with no deal through Parliament?
Wishful thinking I suspect.
Chris

Matthew

30th July 2019, 10:39

If we can't negotiate a leave deal (because the European Commission will never concede, they are hell bent on expanding), then no deal is the reasonable BATNA as passed by UK legislation. When Scotland leave the UK I hope the leave goes more smoothly than this one.

Here's a reminder of the two-faced, surreptitious way the EU operate

https://youtu.be/Jq1U8iUpUbg

Jq1U8iUpUbg

greybeard

30th July 2019, 11:16

The thing is a deal was negotiated and it took years for May negotiating team to get there.
Parliament refused to accept that deal.

Boris states that he can get a whole new deal in several months or leave without.
Thats just fantasy.
Parliament will not accept a no deal exit.
If that should happen then the voters will probably reject the Tory Party at the next General Election I suspect.

I watch with interest.

Chris

greybeard

30th July 2019, 11:33

it would be good if there was some debate on this thread.
If Brexit happens particularly without a deal the repercussions will be great and will affect not just the UK.
Ireland might become one again.
Scotland may leave the UK, the last Independence referendum was actually supported by quite a few in the North of England, that is wanting to join with a separate Scotland if that happened.
Even Wales is not against seperating from England.
Thoughts welcome.
Chris

Matthew

30th July 2019, 11:50

You can engage in debate any time, it would make a change from cut and pasting whole msm articles peddling fear porn :P

Look at the fear mongering that happened when the UK was under pressure to join the Euro. Look how that actually turned out, and how glad are we that we didn't join. This spate of fear porn is no different, and years down the line, people have built a resistance to it's effects

greybeard

30th July 2019, 12:25

One mans fear porn etc.
The news is interviewing people like Welsh farmers who will have to pay a large tariff or rather customers would have to.
Car manufactures, who's customers in Europe have a reduced tariff to pay, came into the UK because it was an easy route to sell their products in Europe---they have said there is a strong possibility they will pull out of UK if a no deal Brexit goes ahead--the result is that many thousands will loose their jobs--no small matter.

Im dont mind leave or stay either way but I think it madness to leave without a deal.

Chris

Matthew

30th July 2019, 13:17

greybeard

30th July 2019, 13:34

Matthew

30th July 2019, 17:28

I think it's madness to try to negotiate without having no deal on the table, which is the madness we have had. Yet, no deal, while very few actually want this, would happen because of the European Commissions denial about what leave means. It's a consequence of prior madness, and more motivation to leave by hook or crook

You may well be right.
The late Edward Heath got us into this of course.
I would not be good at debating this because I dont have a fixed opinion.
However I am interested in what people think away from the media--hype.

Chris

That's too cut and dried, with a single point of blame. Sorry but that is simplifying and misrepresenting the problem.

Look at the EU's methods of expansion, there's a similar story for each country, with a rival constitution being passed as a treaty (Lisborn 'treaty'), multiple referendums till they get the result they want, and how the European Commission goes against what they reassuringly promised (see the video I link in a post above), all as under the radar as they can get away with.

Frankly we have Farage to thank for bringing accountability to the EU parliament, using brutal and cutting humour. Heath alone did not cause the wake of problems. This is more than the damage of one Englishman (a strange way to sum up the problems if you ask me), and the empire builders of the EU commission star as the main culprits

greybeard

30th July 2019, 17:46

greybeard

30th July 2019, 18:58

Johnson says failure to secure Brexit deal will be EU’s fault
PA Media:Ready News UK By David Hughes, PA Political Editor,PA Media:Ready News

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/johnson-says-failure-secure-brexit-162648324.html

It will be the European Union’s fault if the UK fails to secure a Brexit deal, Boris Johnson has claimed.

The Prime Minister has demanded wholesale changes to the deal reached by Theresa May with Brussels, including scrapping the Northern Irish backstop.

Having set out his demands to the EU’s members it was now “their call” whether they wanted a deal, he said.

Mr Johnson made the comments during a visit to Wales where he promised help for farmers facing a “tricky” situation if a no-deal Brexit results in tariffs pricing them out of EU markets.

The Prime Minister was also visiting Brecon and Radnorshire ahead of Thursday’s crunch by-election which could see his Tory-DUP majority in the Commons cut to just one.

The latest stage of Mr Johnson’s tour of the UK came as:

– Sterling continued to take a hammering against the dollar and euro amid concerns over a no-deal Brexit, heading for its worst month for nearly three years

– Ireland’s Leo Varadkar told the Prime Minister the backstop was “necessary” and the Brexit deal “could not be reopened”

– Sheep farmers warned of civil unrest in the event of a no-deal scenario.

The Prime Minister has promised that the UK will leave the EU on October 31 with or without a deal and demanded the abolition of the backstop, the contingency plan aimed at preventing a hard border with Ireland in all circumstances.

Mr Johnson said the UK was not aiming for a no-deal Brexit but the situation was “very much up to our friends and partners across the Channel”.

“They know that three times the House of Commons has thrown out that backstop, there’s no way that we can get it through, we have to have that backstop out of the deal, we cannot go on with the Withdrawal Agreement as it currently is,” he said.

“If they understand that then I think we are going to be at the races. If they can’t compromise, if they really can’t do it, then clearly we have to get ready for a no-deal exit.”

He said it was “up to the EU, this is their call if they want us to do this” but “unless we are determined to do it they won’t take us seriously in the course of the negotiations”.

With an eye on Thursday’s by-election, Mr Johnson pleaded with Leave-supporting voters not to back Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party.

Tory Chris Davies lost the seat following his conviction for submitting fake expenses invoices but is fighting to regain it in the contest triggered by a recall petition.

The Liberal Democrats are hopeful of regaining a constituency they held until 2015 and have been boosted by Plaid Cymru’s decision not to field a candidate in order to avoid splitting the pro-EU vote.

Mr Johnson is clearly concerned that Leave voters could split between the Tories and the Brexit Party.

He said: “The Brexit Party cannot deliver Brexit, only the Conservatives can.”

Chris Davies

Chris Davies will attempt to regain the Brecon and Radnorshire seat after being ousted by a recall petition signed by his constituents (Victoria Jones/PA)

Mr Johnson also faces a difficult meeting with First Minister Mark Drakeford who said he would give him a “very clear message” that “Brexit will be catastrophic for Wales”.

“It will decimate our agricultural and manufacturing sectors and risks ripping the union apart,” he said.

“The PM must stop playing fast and loose with our country.”

Mr Johnson was using the visit to highlight support for farmers, claiming they will be boosted by leaving the EU’s common agricultural policy and by the UK signing new trade deals.

During a tour of a poultry farm near Newport he said: “We’ll make sure (the farming sector) have the support they need. If their markets are going to be tricky, then we will help them to find new markets. We have interventions that are aimed to support their incomes.”

Meanwhile Welsh Secretary Alun Cairns has suggested new global markets, including in Japan, will be available to sheep producers after Brexit.

But the benefits of the EU-Japan trade deal will be lost unless a replacement arrangement is in place by October 31.

In the event of a no-deal, there could be tariffs of around 40% on lamb and sheep meat exports to EU markets if the UK ends up trading with the bloc World Trade Organisation (WTO) terms.

Helen Roberts, development officer for the National Sheep Association (NSA) in Wales called on Mr Johnson to “stop playing Russian roulette with the industry, which he appears to be doing at the moment”.

Asked about the possibility of civil unrest, including roadblocks and tractor protests, among sheep producers, she told BBC Radio 4’s Today: “I think they will, I think it’s time to come and stand up for ourselves and be counted.”

greybeard

31st July 2019, 15:53

We'll block trade deal if Brexit imperils open Irish border, say US politicians
The Guardian Julian Borger in Washington,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-mess-good-friday-ll-064931491.html

Any future US-UK trade deal would almost certainly be blocked by the US Congress if Brexit affects the Irish border and jeopardises peace in Northern Ireland, congressional leaders and diplomats have warned.

Boris Johnson has presented a trade deal with the US as a way of offsetting the economic costs of leaving the EU, and Donald Trump promised the two countries could strike “a very substantial trade agreement” that would increase trade “four or five times”.

Trump, however, would not be able to push an agreement through a hostile Congress, where there would be strong bipartisan opposition to any UK trade deal in the event of a threat to the 1998 Good Friday agreement, and to the open border between Northern Ireland and the Republic.

The comments came as Johnson was in Northern Ireland in an effort to revive power-sharing talks between his allies in the Democratic Unionist party and Sinn Féin, as well as discuss Brexit preparations.

Johnson’s rise to power, and his demand for the EU to drop the backstop, which is intended to safeguard the open border after Brexit, has galvanised determination in Congress to make a stand in defence of the landmark accord, to which the US is guarantor.

“The American dimension to the Good Friday agreement is indispensable,” said Richard Neal, who is co-chair of the 54-strong Friends of Ireland caucus in Congress, and also chairs the powerful House ways and means committee, with the power to hold up a trade deal indefinitely.

“We oversee all trade agreements as part of our tax jurisdiction,” Neal, a Democratic congressman from Massachusetts, said in a phone interview. He pointed out that such a complex trade deal could take four or five years, even without the Northern Ireland issue.

“I would have little enthusiasm for entertaining a bilateral trade agreement with the UK, if they were to jeopardise the agreement.”

What is the original 'backstop' in the Withdrawal Agreement?

Variously described as an insurance policy or safety net, the backstop is a device in the Withdrawal Agreement intended to ensure that there will not be a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, even if no formal deal can be reached on trade and security arrangements.

It would mean that if there were no workable agreement on such matters, Northern Ireland would stay in the customs union and much of the single market, guaranteeing a friction-free border with the Republic. This would keep the Good Friday agreement intact.

Both the UK and EU signed up to the basic idea in December 2017 as part of the initial Brexit deal, but there have been disagreements since on how it would work.

The DUP have objected to it, as it potentially treats Northern Ireland differently from the rest of the UK, creating a customs divide in the Irish sea, which is anathema to the unionist party.

Hardline Tory Eurosceptics also object to it, as they perceive it to be a trap that could potentially lock the UK into the EU's customs union permanently if the UK & EU cannot seal a free trade agreement. That would prevent the country from doing its own free trade deals with nations outside the bloc.

What was added to May's withdrawal agreement?

Joint interpretative instrument

A legal add-on to the withdrawal agreement was given to Theresa May in January 2019 to try and get her deal through the UK parliament. It gives legal force to a letter from Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk, the presidents of the commission and council. This stated the EU’s intention to negotiate an alternative to the backstop so it would not be triggered, or, if it was triggered, to get out of it as quickly as possible.

Unilateral statement from the UK

This set out the British position that, if the backstop was to become permanent and talks on an alternative were going nowhere, the UK believes it would be able to exit the arrangement.

Additional language in political declaration

This emphasises the urgency felt on both sides to negotiate an alternative to the backstop, and flesh out what a technological fix would look like. However, it failed to persuade the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, who said that while it 'reduces the risk' of the UK being trapped in a backstop indefinitely, it does not remove it.

What happens next?

During their campaigns to become prime minister, both Conservative party leadership contenders Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt appear to have declared the Northern Ireland backstop “dead”, and promised to throw it out of any deal they negotiate with the EU. The EU has repeatedly stated that it will not re-open the Withdrawal Agreement for re-negotiation.

Daniel Boffey, Martin Belam and Peter Walker

Pete King, the Republican co-chair of the Friends of Ireland group, said the threat to abandon the backstop and endanger the open border was a “needless provocation”, adding that his party would have no compunction about defying Trump over the issue.

“I would think anyone who has a strong belief in Northern Ireland and the Good Friday agreement the open border would certainly be willing to go against the president,” King said.

In the event of a hard Brexit, in the absence of guarantees for the Northern Ireland agreement, the strength of sentiment among Irish Americans – a tenth of the population, many of them in swing states – could make it an issue in next year’s presidential and congressional elections.

Johnson has refused to meet EU leaders until the backstop is scrapped. On Tuesday, Ireland’s taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, told Johnson the backstop could not be removed from the UK withdrawal agreement.

After a contentious phone call between the two leaders, a spokesman for Varadkar said that alternatives to the backstop, as a means of guaranteeing the Northern Irish peace agreement “have yet to be identified and demonstrated”.

For the past eight months, Congress has held up ratification of a new trade agreement with Mexico and Canada, the USMCA, which Trump has presented as an extraordinary achievement (though it differs little from its predecessor, Nafta). Representative King said a UK trade deal would face even greater obstacles.

“First of all trade deals are always difficult,” the New York Republican said in a telephone interview. “There’s any number of other labour and environmental issues that get brought up. But to have a solid block on one particular issue would make it very, very difficult to get it through Congress, unless the border issue is resolved.”

The Democratic speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, has said that a US-UK trade deal has “no chance whatsoever” of passing in Congress. Over the weekend, a committee of former members of Congress and foreign policy officials said “all of Irish America will support the Speaker right down the line”.

The adhoc committee to protect the Good Friday agreement, established earlier this year, wrote to the UK’s new secretary for Northern Ireland, Julian Smith, on Sunday to raise its concerns about Johnson’s statements about abandoning the backstop.

A European diplomat in Washington predicted the Irish American caucus would be decisive in holding up an agreement. “I think there is enough meat in the Irish-American lobby to stop a UK trade deal if the Good Friday Agreement is affected,” the diplomat said.

The Irish embassy has been energetically lobbying in defence of the 1998 peace agreement. The ambassador, Daniel Mulhall, said he has been pushing at an open door.

“There is a genuine groundswell of opinion within Irish America in favour of the Good Friday agreement and against anything that would be perceived to undermine that agreement,” Mulhall said.

“Wherever I go, wherever I speak to Irish-American audiences, the first question is always to do with Brexit,” the ambassador added. “And they always reflect a deep concern about Brexit.”

“Politically we have a good caucus here. It’s active … They see the Good Friday agreement and all that’s flowed from it as an achievement for Irish America .. and they’re loathe to see that jeopardised in the Brexit context.”

Amanda Sloat, a former state department official and now a Brexit expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington, said: “Trade deals are always challenging to ratify in Congress … There will be significant resistance, as Speaker Pelosi has said, to ratifying a trade agreement that is seen to harm the Good Friday agreement or the interests of people in Northern Ireland.”

"Fearr porn or reality check?"
Chris

greybeard

1st August 2019, 10:06

Johnson sends 'ditch the backstop' message to EU via Brexit adviser
The Guardian Daniel Boffey in Brussels,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/johnson-sends-apos-ditch-backstop-123042280.html

Boris Johnson has sent his most senior EU adviser and Brexit negotiator to Brussels to deliver in person his message that the UK will leave without a deal unless the bloc abolishes the Irish backstop.

David Frost, a former British ambassador to Denmark who was also an adviser to Johnson when he was foreign secretary, is to hold talks with EU officials over the next 48 hours.

As Johnson’s choice to replace Olly Robbins, Frost is to be the new government’s main interlocutor for fresh negotiations. His contact is the most significant so far between Johnson’s administration and Brussels.

He will meet Clara Martinez Alberola, the head of cabinet for the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker; Stéphanie Riso, a senior official in Michel Barnier’s negotiations taskforce who was a key player in drafting the terms of the backstop, and Ilze Juhansone, the deputy secretary general at the commission.

The meetings will be held over Thursday afternoon and Friday morning but a government spokesman reiterated the prime minister’s position that without a radical EU rethink of the backstop there would be no significant talks.

Johnson has insisted that removal of the “undemocratic” backstop – which would keep Northern Ireland under single market regulations and the whole of the UK in a customs union to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland – is necessary for a deal to be struck on the terms of the UK’s departure.

A government spokesman said: “In his role as the prime minister’s Europe adviser, David Frost is visiting Brussels to have introductory meetings with key officials and to pass on the prime minister’s message in person.

“The UK is leaving the EU on 31 October whatever the circumstances. We will work energetically for a deal but the backstop must be abolished. If we are not able to reach an agreement then we will of course have to leave the EU without a deal.”

During a phone call on Tuesday, Barnier told the Brexit secretary, Steve Barclay, that there was no chance of the EU changing its position or offering a “managed no deal” through side-deals to cushion the economic impact.

The EU’s chief negotiator “confirmed that the EU no-deal measures are unilateral in nature and aim at the protection of the EU27 interests”, a spokesman said of measures already announced to keep planes in the air and haulage routes open for up to nine months.

Frost’s appointment has been well received in Brussels, where he is a known and respected figure. He first worked in Brussels at the UK’s permanent representation to the EU in 1993 and went on to work closely with the current UK ambassador to the EU, Sir Tim Barrow, in the European Union department, of which he would later become director.

From May 2006 until October 2008, Frost was the ambassador to Denmark, after which he became the chief executive of the Scotch Whisky Association. He returned to the Foreign Office as Johnson’s special adviser between 2016 and the foreign secretary’s resignation in 2018.

Frost moved to his current role in Downing Street from his job as chief executive of the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Diplomatic sources who know Frost have counselled against any suggestion that he would be sympathetic to remaining in the EU. He is understood to believe the UK should leave both the single market and customs union in order to benefit from Brexit.

In recent years he has called for better no-deal preparations by the government. Commenting on Theresa May’s ousting, Frost tweeted: “The prime minister’s departure is an unavoidable necessity for moving beyond the country’s political log-jam.”

Related: Boris Johnson wraps up Northern Ireland talks with no sign of progress on reviving power-sharing - live news

Johnson has demanded the ditching of the backstop in phone calls in recent days with the Irish prime minister, Leo Varadkar, the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, and the French president, Emmanuel Macron.

Writing for the Guardian on Wednesday, the European parliament’s Brexit coordinator, Guy Verhofstadt, echoed the recent comments by all EU leaders by insisting the withdrawal agreement would not be reopened.

“Faced with a British government intent on ratcheting up talk of no deal, other European governments have no choice but to prepare for the worst too, but this is far from a desirable path,” he said.

“In the face of such irresponsible posturing, far from feeling threatened, I fully expect EU governments to remain calm and keep their unity. Attempts to put pressure on Ireland will only be met with waves of solidarity from the rest of the EU.”

greybeard

2nd August 2019, 07:25

Lib Dems win Brecon and Radnorshire byelection, cutting Johnson majority to one
The Guardian Steven Morris in Builth Wells,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/lib-dems-win-brecon-radnorshire-015703439.html

Boris Johnson has suffered a major blow after the Conservatives were beaten by the Liberal Democrats in the Brecon and Radnorshire byelection.

The victory for Jane Dodds means the new prime minister’s working majority in the House of Commons has been cut to just one. It will be seized on as a sign voters are concerned by Boris Johnson’s pledge to leave the EU without a deal if he deems it necessary.

The Liberal Democrats won 13,826 votes with the Tories taking 12,401, a margin of 1,425 that overturned the Tories’ previous majority of more than 8,000. It was a sobering night for the Labour party (1,680 votes), which was beaten into fourth place by the Brexit party (3,331), and only just held on to its deposit. Ukip (242) came last behind the Monster Raving Loony party (334).

In her acceptance speech, Dodds said: “I am incredibly humbled by the support. From every walk of life and every political persuasion, people have chosen to believe in my positive liberal vision for something better.

“And by backing that liberal vision, people in Brecon and Radnorshire have sent a powerful message to Westminster: we demand better.”

She continued: “People are desperately crying out for a different kind of politics. There is no time for tribalism when our country is faced with a Boris Johnson government and the threat of a no-deal Brexit.

“My very first act as your MP when I arrive in Westminster will be to find Mr Boris Johnson, wherever he’s hiding, and tell him loud and clear: stop playing with the futures of our communities and rule out a no-deal Brexit.”

The leader of the Liberal Democrats, Jo Swinson, who visited the constituency four times in the run-up to the byelection, said the results showed that the country did not have to settle for Johnson or Jeremy Corbyn.

“Boris Johnson’s shrinking majority makes it clear that he has no mandate to crash us out of the EU. As leader of the Liberal Democrats, I will do whatever it takes to stop Brexit and offer an alternative, positive vision for a richer, greener and safer future. Britain demands better than what the tired old parties can give.”

Swinson also thanked Plaid Cymru and the Green party for not contesting this byelection so as to avoid splitting the remain vote.

Ed Davey, the Lib Dem MP for Kingston and Surbiton, called it “a huge result”, adding: “The Brecon and Radnorshire byelection was the front line of the stop Brexit campaign. This is going to make Boris Johnson’s job that much more difficult, and for those of us who are desperate to stop Brexit it’s a crucial moment.”

The leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price, said: “The people of Brecon and Radnorshire have spoken. It’s now time that people throughout these islands are heard, too, in a final say referendum.

“But if the prime minister is intent on a general election, he should know that Plaid Cymru and the other pro-remain parties are committed to cooperating so that we beat Brexit once and for all.”

The byelection in mid-Wales was called following the ousting from parliament of the Tory MP Chris Davies after he was found guilty of submitting a false expenses claim. Despite the scandal, Davies was chosen to stand again.

After the result, Davies congratulated Dodds and wished her well for the future. He also paid tribute to his family, saying they had had “a difficult time over the past few months”. Earlier, he said his party had run a “clean and positive” campaign but added: “Sadly a few of our competitors have led a dirty campaign.”
Conservative MP Chris Davies after losing his seat.
Conservative MP Chris Davies lost his seat. Photograph: Rebecca Naden/Reuters

Prof Roger Awan-Scully, the head of politics and international relations at Cardiff University, said the Tory vote held up reasonably well. “Until a few days ago people were talking seriously about the Brexit party pushing the Conservatives into third,” he said. “They’ve done well resisting the pressure from the Brexit party. It hasn’t quite been good enough this time round but whenever we get a general election, which might not be far away, this seat is very much in play for the Conservatives.”

Awan-Scully said it had been a dreadful night for Labour. “There’s lots of dissatisfaction with Jeremy Corbyn, lots of dissatisfaction with the direction of the party. In its ultimate historic bastion of Wales I think Labour is in some serious trouble.”

Tory grandees including the Commons leader, Jacob Rees-Mogg, and the chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Michael Gove, toured the constituency during the campaign. Johnson also visited Brecon earlier this week but did not venture into the town centre, leaving onlookers who had waited for him in the rain angry and frustrated.

The election of Dodds brings the total number of Swinson’s party members in the Commons to 13.

During the campaign, farming became a key issue, with union officials warning that farmers could carry out acts of civil disobedience if the UK leaves the EU with no deal. Appropriately the count was held at the Royal Welsh Showground in Builth Wells.

Davies had represented the seat for the Conservatives since 2015. The Liberal Democrats held the constituency from 1997 to 2015.

Matthew

2nd August 2019, 19:03

Bill Ryan

2nd August 2019, 21:28

Matthew

2nd August 2019, 21:40

I'm surprised you have a strong anti-Brexit agreement Bill, but each to their own

Edit
As an anti-establishment oik, I'm personally pleased to hear that

greybeard

2nd August 2019, 22:09

Bill Ryan

2nd August 2019, 22:12

I'm surprised you have a strong anti-Brexit agreement Bill, but each to their own

Sorry! A typo. I'm pro-Brexit. (I'll amend my post :bigsmile: )

Matthew

2nd August 2019, 22:36

Carmody

2nd August 2019, 22:37

I'm pro brexit for all the right reasons and pro anti brexit for all the right reasons.

The balance is close, due to the level of insider corruption that occurred in the beginnings of the EU. It being the Nazi wet dream plan of the early 1940's, in the specific and the details.

Seriously, folks, look it up.

Stepping into the EU is an ever growing spider's web for the new members, as the old guard is long in the tooth and, from my basic comment, one can see, exceeding set in their ways, means and desires.

The important part of the EU, to understand what it is and what is going on: That it never was, not for one second, a simple state of happenstance and luck. This was gamed and planned long before it began.

Easy to get in, slowly ramped up into complexities, difficult to leave cleanly. It is purposely built like a porcupine quill.

Matthew

2nd August 2019, 23:08

I'm pro brexit for all the right reasons and pro anti brexit for all the right reasons.
...

Beautifully said if I might say I hope for two competing European models in the end, each a disruptive force to the other. The disruptive force the EU empire is/has been is very useful in my very humble opinion, and at the same time, as you said...

... This was gamed and planned long before it began. ... purposely built, and the way you describe it, quite poetic.

EU political shakers are currently in the process of getting more detached from democracy, or rather it's version of democracy (in this post above (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?91509-The-UK-Brexit-vote-to-leave-the-EU&p=1307578&viewfull=1#post1307578))

Bill Ryan

2nd August 2019, 23:14

David Icke on Brexit (in a 26 April, 2019 interview). Go to 30:55, just for a few minutes. I'd agree with every word he says.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaUKOQ4rsdQ

greybeard

3rd August 2019, 06:31

'Deeply dishonest' - Dominic Raab accused of misleading the public over no-deal Brexit
Yahoo News UK Ellen Manning,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/dominic-raab-misleading-public-no-deal-brexit-130942789.html

Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has been branded “deeply dishonest” and accused of "misleading the public" over a no-deal Brexit.

Ben Bradshaw, Labour former Foreign Office minister, said Mr Raab had brought the post of Foreign Secretary “into disrepute”.

The Labour MP has written to the Foreign Secretary demanding he apologises for remarks made on BBC Radio 4's Today programme this week.

He said Mr Raab had claimed the prospect of a no-deal exit from the European Union was “widely discussed and considered a realistic prospect during the 2016 EU referendum” - something he said was “simply not true”.

In the letter, Mr Bradshaw told Mr Raab: “Your pronouncements since taking the job just a few days ago risk bringing this great office of state into disrepute.

“I was astonished to hear you claim on the BBC's Today programme on Monday 29 July that the prospect of a no-deal exit from the European Union was widely discussed and considered a realistic prospect during the 2016 EU referendum.

“You must know this is simply not true.”

He said there appeared to be “no evidence at all” of Mr Raab ever suggesting that leaving the EU without a deal was a likely or possible outcome and accused him of suggesting the opposite.

“This is not a subject for debate, it is a matter of public record,” Mr Bradshaw went on. “For you to now try and claim a democratic mandate for no deal, despite failing to discuss the possibility of such an outcome during the referendum, is deeply dishonest and demeans the office of Foreign Secretary.”

A Foreign Office spokesman said: "The Foreign Secretary has given tangible examples of when all eventualities, including a no-deal Brexit, were raised in the run-up to the referendum in 2016."

Labour MP Ian Murray, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, said: "Dominic Raab is continuing the example set by the new Prime Minister of flatly misleading the public when he claims no deal was discussed as a realistic outcome by Leave campaigners including himself during the 2016 referendum.

"It is an insult to the great office of British Foreign Secretary that he holds to twist the truth in this way, and he must be held to account.

"When he appears before the Foreign Affairs Committee on which I sit, I will be asking him about this issue in detail."

greybeard

3rd August 2019, 06:53

One point hardly stated is that we had two world wide wars in relativly quick succession--Since entering closer ties with Europe there has been no conflict between those in the Market.--Coincidence?

One of the reasons I have been posting without much comment, is that Avalon is multinational and those abroad dont have the same ready access to what has been posted--this saves people time and effort.

The media certainly has been constantly showing the difficulties that leaving without a deal would cause.
The media at the time of the referendum was taking an opposite view--all the benefits of leaving--most have since been proved to being over optimistic.

The reality is that a lot of people have change their minds.
The market was working, flaws accepted--but Europe is our nearest and best customer.
Does not make sense to loose that trade at low tariff.

Seeing the way that the tide has turned I suspect that we will not leave--Brexit may well not occur.

Id like to see people post reasons for leaving and reasons for staying.

A few have--mostly through videos though.

I have suggested a debate by those more knowledgeable than I.

Chris

Are you saying that in light of the recent election results at Becon and whatever it was?

I had a quick look at the results and they are very very slight (negligible) split evenly between leave parties and remain parties, but that is with no deal on the table. I believe we are looking at how people feel about no deal. The way leave remain (typo, oops loool >< ) parties would win is because the split of vote between The Brexit Party and the Tories, and Labour voters are using Lib Dem as a protest.

But even if the leave vote is split, the fight to leave will hardly stop... How many successive years have the SNP been strongly voted in with Scottish independence as it's prime mandate; it's puts a second referendum on the agenda like nothing else, and I sincerely hope Scotland get their next referendum, because having the SNP voted in so strongly, with independence as it's mandate, that must be respected as democratic vote should.

Same goes for UK independence, since we successfully voted to leave. But if this is not honoured you'll see more fighting for freedom

No I was saying that months ago--there was a Government poll where over 5 million signed for no exit.
The liberal party did very well in the European elections as did the Brexit party.
Nigel Farage is charismatic as is Boris.
People tend to vote for a person rather than a party.
If an acceptable exit deal and been found we would have been out by now---cant see a deal being approved in the time scale.

Im not against leaving but not for exit with no deal.
As said I will not be affected by it either way and UK will survive either way.

Good to see some debate here.
Its not my thread I just got interested in the subject because if we leave, Scotland will go for home rule.
Im can see massive border problems if England is out and Scotland gets back into Europe.
Scotland is very different from England--only about 7 million residents.
Probably more in Greater London.
I suspect we were miss-lead in the run up to the referendum.
A very rosy picture painted on the Red Bus.
If I was a voter I would be a bit worried about the lack of honesty displayed by politicians on both sides.

I dont mind which way it goes--but then Im old and grey--smiling.

So that's my thoughts--

Chris

greybeard

3rd August 2019, 08:07

Divide and conquer
The "elite" set up situations were the people take opposing sides--that's how they control.
Like Carmody--- for the best possible reasons I can make a strong case for either leave or remain
Both valid arguments.

Now in who's interest is is it to set up conflict?
Farmers in Wales talking of civil disorder.
Leaked documents speaking the same if leaving without a deal.
Fight for freedom--who is fighting who?
If your going to loose your livelihood or even think your going to, then you will think you are forced to fight.

Yes there is more to this than the obvious stay or leave.
Which is probably why I take the middle course.
Though we probably should never have got in in the first place.
The public is continually sold a bill of goods or a pig in a poke.
What are we being sold now?
Chris

greybeard

5th August 2019, 16:22

Brexiters have a death wish and Boris Johnson is the undertaker
[The Guardian]
Letters
The Guardian4 August 2019

I am delighted to hear that the Tory government has brought the era of austerity to an end (Labour attacks ‘appalling waste’ as PM adds £2bn to no-deal fund, 1 August). I gather we now have £2.1bn to spend. No more gloom and doom. Hurrah! One feels like shouting out the Eton Boating Song in joyous celebration.

However, instead of spending this egregious sum on schools, prisons, the criminal justice system, care for young, disabled and elderly people, and the NHS (of course, I forgot – the NHS will be funded by the imminent cessation of our contributions to the EU), I understand we are spending it on, inter alia, stockpiling medicines, ensuring adequate supplies of food and other essentials and, of course, PR, that ubiquitous tool for the manipulation of the masses.

And yet we are not in a state of war or anticipating a natural disaster; we are not in any situation imposed upon us by an external agent; we are in a situation entirely of our own choosing (commonly known as Brexit) which nevertheless apparently requires £2.1bn of taxpayers’ money to mitigate the inevitable, and now acknowledged, damage our foolishness will cause. And this is only a start.

The British nation has a death wish and Johnson, Farage et al are standing by to act as undertakers. The whole situation beggars belief.
Alice Maddalena
Bath

• The total of £6.3bn set aside for no-deal preparation is more than three years’ worth of the pledged £350m per week promised by the leave campaign to the NHS (£1.8bn per year). Puts the latest proposal of £1.8bn NHS cash injection into correct perspective – honouring one pledge but squandering three times as much.
Marion Hine
Framlingham, Suffolk

• I am writing regarding your article “No-deal Brexit: Your financial survival kit” (3 August). It was both informative and revealing, but also lacking in one small area. One thing you overlooked was British pensioners living in Europe and what they can do to avoid possible poverty as a result of the fall in the exchange rate.

If as the article suggests, and is agreed by reputable economists that the pound may fall to parity with the euro in the event of a no deal, that will mean a 23% drop in the value of the pound, this may mean near or actual poverty for a good percentage of the 247,000 (ONS figures) British citizens of pensionable age living in Europe as their pensions will become virtually worthless.

How do they survive? What can they do? The answer, unfortunately and depressingly, is nothing. Couple that with their possible inability to continue accessing NHS-funded medical treatment (as mentioned in the article), and the future is decidedly bleak. The only answer for some is to return to the UK. That’s all that most can do. Thousands upon thousands of ageing citizens descending on the UK looking for a GP, healthcare, housing, benefits etc. Sounds worrying and it should. Thanks, Boris, for your apparent casual acceptance of a possible no-deal Brexit.
Robert Greasley
Balve, Germany

greybeard

5th August 2019, 21:22

Boris Johnson has no intention of renegotiating Brexit deal, EU told
The Guardian Daniel Boffey in Brussels and Rowena Mason,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/no-deal-brexit-boris-johnson-154311871.html

Boris Johnson has no intention of renegotiating the withdrawal agreement and a no-deal Brexit is his “central scenario”, European diplomats have been told, amid hardening evidence in Westminster that the government is expecting to crash out of the EU.

Brussels diplomats briefed after a meeting between the prime minister’s chief envoy and senior EU figures in Brussels said that Britain’s refusal to compromise was understood to have been clear to those attending.

Instead David Frost, the government’s new chief Europe adviser, is said to have sought discussions on how negotiations could be reset after the UK crashes out on 31 October.

“It was clear UK does not have another plan,” a senior EU diplomat said of the meetings with Frost. “No intention to negotiate, which would require a plan. A no deal now appears to be the UK government’s central scenario.”

The disclosure came as No 10 insisted the government was “ready to negotiate in good faith” but made clear that Johnson would only agree to a deal without what he refers to as the “undemocratic backstop” – the mechanism to prevent a hard border on the island of Ireland that could keep the UK in a customs union. The EU has repeatedly said the backstop is not up for negotiation.

The UK’s failure to provide any proposals on how to deal with the controversial Irish backstop was felt to be significant by EU officials who spoke to the Guardian.

Frost was said to have told the officials that a technological solution to the Irish border was the UK’s preferred option before admitting that “it would not be ready now for Brexit”.

“Even if EU gave up the backstop there is no alternative,” a diplomat concluded of the discussion.

“That message has now gone loud and clear to capitals, it was useful to hear it from horse’s mouth,” the EU source said. “Reality is sinking in.”

With no new UK-EU talks scheduled, there were meanwhile signs in Westminster that Johnson’s government was readying itself for a no-deal Brexit and preparing to do battle with Tory MPs who have said they will join with opposition parties to prevent that outcome.

The prime minister’s senior adviser, Dominic Cummings, instructed special advisers across the government to keep on top of preparations for a no deal Brexit early on Monday morning and attacked Philip Hammond, the former chancellor, for failing to get the country ready.

Over the weekend, it became clear he believes that Johnson could simply refuse to resign in the event of losing a no-confidence motion and schedule an general election for November – after leaving the EU at the end of October.

Johnson said on Monday that an election was the “last thing” he wanted. But his official spokesman stressed at his regular briefing for journalists that Brexit would take place on 31 October “whatever the circumstances”, even if parliament has voted against a no-deal departure or passed a confidence motion against the prime minister necessitating an election.

Conservative rebels plotting against a no-deal Brexit are already considering how to thwart No 10, believing an alternative government could potentially be created with a majority to challenge Johnson if he loses a confidence vote.

Corbyn indicated on Monday that he may be prepared to bring a no-confidence vote in the government very soon after parliament returns from its summer break in September.

“We will do everything to stop no deal, including a no-confidence vote at the appropriate very early time to do it,” he said on a visit to flood-stricken Whaley Bridge in Derbyshire. “The prime minister seems to be trying to slip no deal through, slip past parliament and slip past the British people.

“Sorry, no deal will be really serious. Serious for food prices, for medical supplies, for trade, for investment, and drive us straight into the hands of the sort of trade deal that Donald Trump wants to do with Boris Johnson.

“I’m sorry, it’s not on, it’s not acceptable. We will do everything we can to block it.”

Several Conservative MPs, including Hammond, have indicated they could vote with Labour to bring Johnson down if he is set on a no-deal Brexit. Friends of Hammond also hit back at Cummings on Monday, saying it was “simply untrue” that the Treasury had failed to prepare.

“The bigger question is why is Dominic Cummings, the de facto deputy PM, so keen to spend yet more taxpayers’ money on something that his boss insists has only a one in a million chance of happening?” one Hammond ally said.

EU officials increasingly believe the UK is heading for a no-deal exit after their meetings with Frost, who replaced Theresa May’s chief negotiator, Olly Robbins. Last week, Frost met Clara Martínez Alberola, the head of cabinet for the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker; Stéphanie Riso, a senior official in Michel Barnier’s negotiations taskforce, who was a key player in drafting the terms of the backstop, and Ilze Juhansone, the deputy secretary general at the commission.

Related: We need a Brexit deal – so why is Johnson indulging in cynical electioneering? | Simon Jenkins

The demand over the weekend by the Brexit secretary, Stephen Barclay, that Barnier seek a new negotiating mandate from the EU’s leaders to allow fresh talks was seen as mere “noise”.

Diplomats said the message was seen as “confrontational – unhelpful” but that more in that vein was expected at a meeting of the G7 in Biarritz, when Johnson will meet Juncker.

A spokeswoman for the European commission said the impact of the UK crashing out would be proportionally heavier on the British side of the Channel.

The spokeswoman added: “For a negotiation to be successful it takes two to tango. If the music and the rhythm is not right then … you have no dance.

“But that doesn’t mean that it was a failure. I think both sides negotiated with the very best intentions and very best efforts. The outcome on the table is the best deal possible and I don’t think there is any fault or blame to be looked for in this.”

A UK government spokesman said: “We are ready to negotiate in good faith an alternative to the anti-democratic backstop.

“There is abundant scope to find the technological solutions necessary – and these solutions can and will be found, in the context of the free trade agreement that we will negotiate with the EU after 31 October.”

The spokesman added: “The prime minister wants to meet EU leaders and negotiate a new deal – one that abolishes the anti-democratic backstop.

“We will throw ourselves into the negotiations with the greatest energy and the spirit of friendship. The fact is the withdrawal agreement has been rejected by parliament three times and will not pass in its current form so – if the EU wants a deal – it needs to change its stance. Until then, we will continue to prepare to leave the EU on 31 October.”

greybeard

5th August 2019, 22:43

What I dont get is, if Uk crashes out without a deal , where does that leave the situation between North an South Ireland? Surely there would then have to be a border of some sort?
Its all beyond my comprehension.

Chris

Matthew

5th August 2019, 23:05

It doesn't need to go from what it is to Israel grade walls, surely there will be only as much hard authority as any one side chooses, depending on trust. It may evolve to accommodate actual problems although knowing the European Commission as I cynically do (or perhaps, don't), they would love the authority of a hard border. Just scribbling out thoughts

greybeard

6th August 2019, 07:48

greybeard

6th August 2019, 10:11

MPs can still thwart Boris Johnson over no deal. Here’s how
The Guardian Vernon Bogdanor,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mps-still-thwart-boris-johnson-050018263.html

Can parliament prevent a no-deal Brexit? There may well be a majority in the Commons against it. But Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s special adviser, says it is too late.

For Brexit is currently the default position. In February 2017, the Commons passed the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act by a vote of 494 to 122 – a majority of 372 – empowering the government to implement the decision of the 2016 referendum. The EU was told that, under article 50 of the Lisbon treaty the UK would withdraw by 29 March 2019. This has been put back by two extensions to 31 October, but Johnson has insisted that, come hell or high water, there will be no further extensions.

A no-deal Brexit can be prevented only by legislation, not by a mere expression of parliamentary opinion or motion

Cummings believes there is now no time to reverse parliament’s decision. The Commons does not return from its summer break until 3 September, just eight weeks before Brexit day. Standing order 13 provides that only the government can seek an early recall.

Is Cummings right? Not necessarily, but proving him wrong will be a herculean task for backbench MPs navigating uncharted constitutional waters. A no-deal Brexit can be prevented only by legislation, not by a mere expression of parliamentary opinion, nor by a motion. Neitherof these has any legal effect. But there are, in theory, five ways in which the Commons could act.

First, it could legislate to require the prime minister to seek a further extension. The EU27 would then have to decide by unanimity whether to grant it, and under what conditions.

Second, it could legislate to prevent the government from leaving without a deal. But that would in effect repeal the act withdrawing Britain from the EU, since if the Commons were then to reject every deal put to it, the UK would remain in the EU ad infinitum.

Third, the Commons could legislate for a referendum before Brexit. Fourth, it could legislate to repeal the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act and reinstate the European Communities Act, in which case the UK would remain in the EU.

Finally, the Commons could vote no confidence in the government. There might then be either an alternative government prepared to delay or prevent Brexit or a general election.

How plausible are these scenarios? Of the five, all but the last require the Commons to take control of the legislative process. That could be achieved by the Commons agreeing to suspend standing order 14, which gives priority to government business. In April the Cooper-Letwin bill, which passed third reading by one vote, did precisely that, requiring Theresa May to seek an extension to the Brexit date to avoid a no-deal Brexit.
Dominic Cummings enters 10 Downing Street
‘Is Cummings right? Not necessarily, but proving him wrong will be a herculean task for backbench MPs.’ Dominic Cummings outside 10 Downing Street. Photograph: Alastair Grant/AP

But any legislation designed to postpone or prevent Brexit has public spending implications. For were the UK to stay in the EU beyond 31 October it would have to make further budget contributions. But standing order 48 requires any charge on public revenue to be recommended by the crown, which, for practical purposes, means a government minister responsible to parliament and through parliament to the people, not backbenchers. So that standing order too would have to be suspended.

The practical difficulties would be enormous. Backbenchers would have to steer the relevant legislation through all of its stages in the Commons, and deal with a host of amendments in committee together with endless filibustering by enraged Brexiteers.

If backbenchers were to succeed in taking over the legislative timetable, they would in effect be taking over the functions of government. Logic surely requires that they themselves become the government. That would require a no-confidence vote in which enough Conservatives would have to abstain or vote against the government to counter Labour Brexiteers prepared to abstain or vote with the government. But a no-confidence vote can only be moved by the leader of the opposition, Jeremy Corbyn.

A successful no-confidence vote does not mean, as would have been the case before the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, an immediate dissolution. Instead, there is a 14-day window in which to find an alternative government capable of securing the confidence of the Commons. A Corbyn government would be unlikely to secure that confidence. Conservatives, the DUP and Liberal Democrats would vote against it. Another possibility, however, would be a government of national unity to forestall Brexit, led perhaps by someone such as Yvette Cooper or Keir Starmer.

Normally when a government resigns the Queen would send for the leader of the opposition. To depart from accepted practice, she would need a cast-iron guarantee in writing from a majority of MPs that they would support a government of national unity under a named prime minister.
Boris Johnson on the Tory frontbench with Sajid Javid and Dominic Raab
‘Were Johnson to delay the election date beyond 31 October, he would be accused of acting unconstitutionally but it would not be unlawful.’ Photograph: Jessica Taylor/AFP/Getty Images

The alternative is a general election, which would inevitably take on the character of a second referendum. The election would be called by the prime minister following the closure of the 14-day window. After dissolution there must be 25 working days before the election. So if a vote of no-confidence took place on 5 September it could be held on 17 October just in time for the new parliament to prevent a no-deal Brexit.

Related: Brexit will happen on 31 October 'whatever the circumstances' - No 10

The trouble is that dissolution need not follow immediately after the 14-day window closes. Under section 2 (7) of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act it is for the prime minister to recommend a suitable election date to the Queen. Only when he has done so is the date of dissolution determined. Were Johnson to delay the election date beyond 31 October he would be accused of acting unconstitutionally, but it would not be unlawful.

The caretaker convention dictates that no alteration of policy should occur during the pre-election period. Suppose the Commons had clearly indicated that it was opposed to a no-deal Brexit. How should the convention then be interpreted? Constitutionally, there is no clear answer. The logic of democracy suggests that the people should decide.

• Vernon Bogdanor is professor of government at King’s College, London, and author of Beyond Brexit

scanner

6th August 2019, 10:27

Hi Yo YoYo
Because of the different level of tariffs that would have to apply after a Brexit without a deal there would surely have to be a check on all shipments/goods coming from North to South and vice versa.
YoYoYo I cant see who the good guys are so to speak--the MPs for leaving or the MPs for staying.
Or which would now be the better option for the "people"--your average "joe"
Bemused.

Regards ChrisThere in lies the problem. There is no problem, well except the one the EU is making. All the systems are in place already and would only need a tweaking to allow for no backstop. Project fear is in full swing, the damns going to break, no it's not. It's the EU's car industries, fishing industries and food industries that will be hit the most, not Britains. I don't think Aldi (a huge food supplier) or BMW, will allow its unelected leaders to slash their income. Both German Corporations, have massively invested in the UK in recent years. Along with many others.

It is the EU, who is on the back foot. Using the useful idiots, in our own Parliament (who probably have vested interests in the EU) to spread this fear. I'm not saying there won't be massive changes, but we've coped for a thousand years and are still here to tell the tale. The Romans, we sent packing and all after who came. The Scots did the same to all who tried. Wasn't it that builder, oh what's his name, Hadrian who built an 80-mile wall to keep you buggers out, or was it to keep you in lol.

greybeard

6th August 2019, 12:50

Former Treasury Secretary slams likelihood of a post-Brexit UK-US trade deal
Ben Gartside,Yahoo Finance UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/finance/news/former-treasury-secretary-casts-doubt-on-ukus-trade-deal-082919388.html

Barack Obama’s former trade secretary Larry Summers has cast doubt upon a potential US-UK Trade agreement post-Brexit.

Summers told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that he could not see an agreement between the UK and the US being made.

He said even if a deal was sealed, it would be on significantly worse terms than the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership agreement — a proposed trade agreement between the European Union and US.

“I don’t see that Britain could gain very much [from a trade deal with the US], the most thorough evaluation of the issue was done by scholars at my centre at Harvard,” said Summers.

“Their study concluded that there really wasn’t that much in it for Britain, certainly relative to what Britain might lose [with the EU]. I find it unlikely there would be a substantial increase in British-US trade, and close to inconceivable that there would be an increase nearly so large to make up with what Britain is losing in terms of reduced access to the EU.”

Summers also predicted that the UK would not receive an easier negotiation process despite US president Donald Trump’s favourable view towards new prime minister Boris Johnson.

“[Former UK prime minister Henry] Palmerston used to say nations are driven by their interests not by their friendships, so I think a personal relationship is at best a small factor,” said Summers.

“Much more important for a trade agreement will be economic interests — I have some ideas in areas like chlorine chicken and genetically modified foods with what the United States will want.

“I suspect the bar for Britain will be higher than its bar for [the EU] in its earlier negotiations. I’m not sure what Britain want from the United States, that it can plausibly imagine the United States will give.

If Britain thinks that the American financial regulators, who have great difficulty coming together on anything are going to come together to give greater permissions and less regulations of UK firms, I would call that belief close to delusional.”

Summers’ intervention comes as 45 Republican Senators sent a letter of support to Johnson over his Brexit strategy, and pledged future agreements even in the case of a no-deal Brexit, contradicting previous statements made by House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
United Kingdom and United States flags together realtions textile cloth fabric texture
Larry Summers thinks a US-UK trade deal wouldn't be the best deal for Britain, regardless.

Secretary Summers, who also served under Bill Clinton, said he believed an agreement would not be ratified between the UK and US, due to poor negotiating conditions and a lack of a sense of priority in the US.

“When you have a desperate partner you strike the hardest bargain. The last thing you do is quit a job before you look for your new one. In the same way, establishing absolutely in a matter of sacred principle that you’re leaving [the EU] has to be the worst way to give you leverage with any new potential partners,” he said.

“There will not be a completed agreement that is submitted for ratification would be my best guess. I think you need to recognise that while this is the top of your agenda, in the US we have an election that would be more pre-occupying than any Presidential election in the last 50 years, we have economic conflict with China, and even on top of that the deterioration of the pound is going to further complicate the negotiating picture as we will see it as giving Britain an artificial comparative advantage and make us think about the needs to retaliate against Britain not to welcome Britain with new trade agreements.”

There are 86 days until the UK leaves the EU with or without a deal.

greybeard

6th August 2019, 20:02

The Tories are flinging us into a debt-laden Brexit calamity – the least they can do is give the people a Final Say
The Independent Margaret Beckett,

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/tories-flinging-us-debt-laden-090600311.html

On 15 September 2008, when Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy, it marked the beginning of the global financial crisis. Right now, we are hurtling towards a new calamity, entirely of our own making, and apparently unwilling to ask the people if they are happy to come along for the ride.

In truth, the disaster that befell the world economy more than a decade ago was much more than a financial crisis. It was a social and political crisis – a landmark moment in the erosion of trust between citizens, authorities and experts in those countries most affected.

In the UK it was cynically and cleverly recast not as an international crisis but a domestic one, by then shadow chancellor George Osborne. He talked of an “Age of Irresponsibility” blaming the then Labour government for failed regulation and soaring debt.

A year later, he talked of spending on the nation’s credit card: “Free social care. Free hospital parking. Free childcare places. We would all like those things. But where is the money coming from? He [Gordon Brown] is treating the British people like fools.”

Boris Johnson’s elevation to No 10 seems to have marked the end of the hard austerity that followed and every new day seems to bring further promises of increased government spending. This time £1.8bn for the NHS, to add to the £7bn to raise the income tax threshold, £1bn for extra police officers, and tens of billions on free ports, full fibre broadband, and HS3 linking Leeds and Manchester.

When asked where the money is coming from, ministers resort to smoke and mirrors, even claiming that the extra “fiscal headroom” Philip Hammond once said would be available if we left the EU with a deal, as opposed to without one, is a real stash of cash burning a hole in the Treasury’s pockets.

But it begs the question, what would Osborne say about the level of debt his former government is getting itself in to resolve Brexit? The self-inflicted domestic crisis?

In the week after the Bank of England has downgraded its economic forecasts for the UK economy predicting a one-in-three chance of a recession, we are faced with the prospect of government borrowing in excess of £6bn to plan for no deal?

The nation’s debt in 2019 is approaching £2 trillion, totalling 85 per cent of gross domestic product. Compare that to two years after the financial crisis, when debt was less than £1 trillion and at 70 per cent of GDP?

There was once talk of “fixing the roof while the sun was shining,” but borrowing in June 2019 was at its highest since 2015. And now our government is recklessly rain-dancing as we edge towards no deal. We could be about to walk into a hurricane, but the chief roofer seems to be determined to break every tile in sight.

Of course, I reject Osborne’s suggestion at the time that Labour failed to repair the roof and we most certainly did not smash a hole in it, then “max out the credit card” on raincoats. Nor did we tour the country in the midst of a crisis promising everything to everyone as Boris Johnson is doing, claiming there is “fiscal headroom”. Johnson is genuinely “treating the British people like fools”.

This is debt for future generations, many of whom never had a say in the issue to which it relates. It is debt for future generations, millions of people who were not in the 0.1 per cent of the population who selected this prime minister.

This is not good enough.

What we have now is a very real domestic crisis. We are not being brought to the brink by events out of our control. We are deciding the course of our future; except of course we (italics) are not being given a Final Say. Everything that is wrong about our country can be fixed by everything that is right about our country. Our principles. Our values. Our belief in the fundamentals of democracy. Our people.

Earlier this year, I put forward a compromise motion to ensure any Brexit deal went back to the people for ratification via a People’s Vote. I put my faith in them. It is time this government did too.

Margaret Beckett is Labour MP for Derby South

greybeard

7th August 2019, 09:49

Boris and Brexit have killed the union – it is now only a matter of time before Scotland is independent
The Independent Sean O'Grady,The Independent Mon, 5 Aug

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-brexit-killed-union-now-125919477.html

He might be good at energising the moribund Conservative Party. He might, more fancifully, deliver a Brexit deal. Boris Johnson is, however, the worse possible choice as far as Scotland goes. The Tories could scarcely have come up with a more “English” prime minister if they’d tried. Styling himself, as he does, as “minister of the union” simply adds insult to injury.

He sounds comically English. He is English (despite some cosmopolitan ancestry). And, more than anything, he is turning his party into an English National Party, whatever he says. “Do or die” Brexit means the most blatant disregard for the views of the Scottish people, who voted, lest we forget, to remain in the EU. They do not want to be railroaded out of it by a Westminster parliament run by a minority of English Conservative MPs, with a prime minister elected by 92,000 Tory party members, overwhelming, white, male, rich – and English.

Even his own Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson has made her frustrations with his policies and style perfectly clear. In response, Johnson chose to sack her ally, the blameless Scottish secretary of state David Mundell. Not since Margaret Thatcher inflicted mass unemployment and the poll tax on the long-suffering Scottish people has there been such a mutual incomprehension between Number 10 and the Queen’s subjects north of the border. They’ve even gone back to the old device of appointing an English MP sitting for an English seat (Worcester man himself, Robin Walker MP). Expect to see him modelling a kilt soon enough.

What a fankle!

Like an unhappy marriage, no union can survive such abuse of a partner. It should, then, be no surprise that, in the latest polling, there seems a decisive tilt towards independence, were a referendum to be run in Scotland on the issue – 52-48 per cent in favour of leaving the UK, funnily enough.

Back in 2014 the vote in favour of staying in the UK was 55.3 per cent to 44.7 per cent, hardly overwhelming anyway. Since then the Scots have found themselves on the thick end of austerity, ignored over Brexit and patronised, yet again, by a UK government run by and for the interests of the English.

So the next referendum should signal the end of the three-centuries old union of Scotland and England?

Maybe not yet.

First, the decision to hold a referendum rests in London, not Edinburgh. It is a “reserved matter”, as the saying goes, meaning that Scotland cannot unilaterally declare independence or run an official referendum on its own account that would be, in Nicola Sturgeon’s words, “beyond doubt or challenge”.

Ms Sturgeon says she wants another referendum – indyref2 – by 2021, but she will find some difficulty in getting London to agree. To do so she would have the repeat the same sort of process that occurred in 2012 to 2014, when a series of agitations, including legal moves and a threat to hold a unilateral referendum, forced David Cameron to agree to the 2014 vote.

Ms Sturgeon is careful, at the moment, to say she wants a vote during the term of the current Scottish parliament, which means before May 2021. There is a big problem with this, however – Brexit.

On the one hand, Brexit, particularly a no deal version, would enrage the Scots and create a very powerful patriotic feeling about what was being done against their will. The emotional case couldn’t be put more strongly, or humiliatingly, for Scotland to be treated in the same way as, say, Bath or London – as just another strongly pro-EU part of the UK being dragged out of the EU, rather than some partnership of equals. The solution would be to grant Scotland (and possibly Wales and Northern Ireland) a veto in a second referendum. That would help preserve the UK.

But then there’s money. Brexit will mean a huge economic hit to Scotland, but it will, if it does happen at all, be over by the time indyref2 gets underway. Indeed it might even be over on the evening of 31 October. A no-deal Brexit will inflict an even heavier financial cost on Scottish businesses, people and public services. All true, but then would the Scottish people want to get themselves kicked up the bahookie again by severing their economic links with England? They might hate the English (understandable), but would they want their cars and lorries stuck on the new international EU (Scotland)-England border from days on end? Do they want tariffs on Scotch? Doe anyone in their right mind?

Mirroring Brexit, geography and economics count for much in this indyref2 debate, as we saw in 2014. I hope not disparagingly, I was surprised at how much of the debate then was about whether the Scots would be worse or better off by sticking in the UK – there was less talk about national pride and self-determination. Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn’t augur so well for a post-Brexit poll, because the Scottish people would already be suffering financially from the immediate Brexit shock. There is no way that Brussels or the EU can make up for lost trade and incomes as Scotland leaves the UK and enters the EU, with most of what it imports and exports to and from Europe travelling via English ports and bought in the rest of the UK.

What’s more, as Johnson teases them, they would have to commit to joining the euro and giving up exclusive rights to Scottish fisheries. There you go.

The shame of it is that the debate about Scottish independence south of the border is virtually non-existent. Asked about the subject, most of the English simply shrug, regarding it as purely a matter for the Scots. They are not bothered, I’m afraid, and the Conservatives even less. Many I am sorry to say agree with the prospective Conservative candidate in Bedford, a Ryan Henson. In 2014 he wrote that: “Scotland’s single biggest offering to the union over the past 50 years has been to provide the Labour party with parliamentary lobby fodder.”

“In exchange, the people of England have seen their prescriptions and their university fees go up, while in Scotland both have been abolished – using English taxes to pay for it.”

“Like a marauding tribe from the Dark Ages, Scottish Labour MPs have travelled south every four years to pillage their hard-working, wealthier and more politically sound neighbours. Enough is enough.”

And that, you see, is the root of the problem. For the moment the referendum might be delayed, or lost by the SNP, simply because of the chaos caused by Brexit, but it will come eventually, and it will be acrimonious. The marriage is over, even if the two parties can’t quite believe it. They will both be poorer and they won’t agree on the divorce terms. It will end in tears. Sounds familiar.

greybeard

8th August 2019, 06:56

New rebel bid to halt no-deal Brexit amid fury at PM’s enforcer
The Guardian Rowena Mason and Jessica Elgot,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/rebel-bid-halt-no-deal-201018757.html

Rebel MPs are working on a plan to thwart Boris Johnson pursuing a no-deal Brexit on 31 October that involves forcing parliament to sit through the autumn recess, amid growing outrage about the power and influence of his controversial aide, Dominic Cummings.

The cross-party group of MPs is looking at legislative options with mounting urgency because of the hardline tactics of Cummings, who one Conservative insider described as running a “reign of terror” in No 10 aimed at achieving Brexit on 31 October at any cost.

Three MPs have told the Guardian that one method under discussion is for members to amend the motion needed for parliament to break for party conferences in mid-September. This could give MPs another three weeks of sitting time to stop a no-deal and potentially open the door for days to be set aside for rebels to control parliamentary business. The ultimate aim would be to pass a bill forcing the government to request an extension to article 50 from Brussels.

Since joining Johnson’s administration, Cummings has told government advisers that No 10 stands ready to do whatever is necessary to bring about Brexit on 31 October – deal or no deal. This could include proroguing parliament, or ignoring the result of any no-confidence vote in Johnson and calling a “people v politicians” general election – to be held after the UK had left the EU.

However, it is understood that alarm is mounting within No 10, among some special advisers and Tory MPs about the scale of Cummings’ influence and willingness to defy parliament.

Related: Deal or no deal? It’s not really up to Dominic Cummings | Martin Kettle

One Conservative insider said that Cummings had in effect demanded control over Johnson’s operation as his price for entering government and proceeded to sideline more moderate advisers, such as ex-City Hall stalwart Sir Eddie Lister, while installing a team of “true believers” in hard Brexit largely from the former Vote Leave campaign.

The source described Cummings’ grip over No 10 as a “reign of terror”, with advisers petrified about keeping their jobs and being told they are expected to be working flat out to deliver Brexit come what may by the 31 October deadline.

Lister was initially briefed to the media as Johnson’s newly appointed chief of staff and is described by some inside Downing Street as one of “the sensibles”. But an internal No 10 email shows that Cummings is now styled as “assistant to the prime minister” in charge of Brexit and domestic policy, while Lister has been downgraded to “chief strategic adviser” responsible for foreign affairs, business and security.

A Tory special adviser told the Guardian that Cummings was “absolutely running the show” and was even more ruthless and difficult to work with than Theresa May’s former advisers Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill: “The level of terror is greater than Priti Patel would like to exert on the criminal classes. It is far, far scarier than under Nick Timothy. He is two Fionas plus a Nick rolled into one. It’s the worst of both worlds in one person.”

Cummings does have some supporters, including one special adviser who worked under the last two administrations, who said: “Dom wants people who can do the job well, will actually deliver on the PM’s priorities and will give honest answers when there are problems. In the last government you could get fired simply because someone else was having a bad day.”

But some Conservative MPs told the Guardian they were already very worried about the amount of power Cummings had accumulated so quickly as an unelected political appointment. One centrist Tory MP said: “Cummings is an unelected backroom adviser, and there’s a worry the PM is becoming just a front for his ideological plans.”

A No 10 source denied that Cummings had sidelined Lister, saying: “Eddie is the PM’s chief strategic adviser who has known the PM for 20 years, advising the PM on policy and strategy at all key meetings. Any suggestion that he is not in the room is total nonsense.”

The cross-party rebels are returning to ways to block no-deal in law partly because Labour has made it clear it could not support a national unity government formed in the wake of a no-confidence vote.The party would prefer to push for a general election or minority Labour administration led by Jeremy Corbyn as opposed to supporting a compromise candidate such as Yvette Cooper or Ken Clarke.

John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, told an audience in Edinburgh that if Johnson lost a confidence vote then Corbyn would seek to form a caretaker government instead, with the support of other opposition parties and rebel Conservative MPs.

If the Conservative leader failed to quit, McDonnell quipped that he would not “want to drag the Queen into this but [he] would be sending Jeremy Corbyn in a cab to Buckingham Palace to say ‘we’re taking over’”.

However, rebel Conservative MPs would be extremely wary about a plan that installed Corbyn as even a temporary prime minister and many prefer the option of legislation to block no-deal rather than a vote to collapse the government.

Peter Kyle, a Labour MP who led a compromise plan to put any deal to a second referendum, said he was completely confident that any plans by Johnson and Cummings to push through no deal against the will of parliament could be stopped.

“Of course we can decide to sit through recess. Of course we can decide to amend precedent. If government acts unconventionally and flouts the sovereign power of parliament, parliament will rise to the challenge and if they break the rules, we will make new rules,” he said. He said MPs would not be cowed by Cummings who is a “maverick populist who spouts off to his blogger friends” about no-deal.

But Chuka Umunna, the Liberal Democrat MP and Treasury spokesman, said the “vital cross party work” would only succeed if enough Labour and Tory MPs stand ready to stop a no deal.

“It will all come to nothing so long as there is the continuing alliance between at least 25 Labour MPs, including eight frontbenchers, and most Tory MPs who persist in voting against legally binding measures to stop a no-deal Brexit in the House of Commons,” he said.

Experts said it was a plausible plan for cross-party rebels to seize control of the order paper via motions for recess, which are called “periodic adjournment motions”. They are not normally amendable, but John Bercow, the Speaker of the Commons, caused major controversy in January when he defied this convention and allowed Tory MP Dominic Grieve to amend a similar motion, which set a three-day deadline for the then prime minister to come back to the Commons with new plans if her Brexit deal was voted down. Grieve declined to comment on the idea of amending the September recess motion.

But the former attorney general, has said it would be unconstitutional for Johnson to defy any vote of no confidence and remain in Downing Street until after the Brexit deadline of 31 October.

When approached by Sky News outside his home on Tuesday, Cummings gave a rare public comment suggesting that parliament would be unable to find a way of forcing the prime minister out in order to stop a no-deal Brexit.

“The most simple thing is the prime minister believes that politicians don’t get to choose which votes they respect, that’s the critical issue,” he said. “I don’t think I am arrogant. I don’t know very much about very much. Mr Grieve … we’ll see what he’s right about.”

greybeard

8th August 2019, 08:31

I am somewhat concerned that no10 seems to want to rail road through Brexit without the approval of Parliament--that's not democracy.
Majority of MP's have expressed that they are not for a no deal--the referendum was not presented as a no deal exit come what may. It was presented as an orderly exit.

Interesting to see where all this goes.

Chris

greybeard

8th August 2019, 11:21

Jeremy Corbyn to tell Queen 'we're taking over' if Boris Johnson loses no confidence vote, John McDonnell claims
Evening Standard Sean Morrison,Evening Standard

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/jeremy-corbyn-tell-queen-were-225300893.html

Jeremy Corbyn will go to Buckingham Palace in a cab to tell the Queen “we’re taking over” if Boris Johnson loses a vote of no confidence, John McDonnell has claimed.

The Shadow Chancellor said Mr Corbyn’s party was preparing to bring down Mr Johnson’s government and block a no-deal Brexit with cross-party support.

He said Labour would demand the keys to Number 10 from prime minister Mr Johnson if he loses his grip on power, and would call on the monarch to appoint Mr Corbyn.

Speaking at Edinburgh Festival Fringe on Wednesday, Mr McDonnell said: "I don't want to drag the Queen into this but I would be sending Jeremy Corbyn in a cab to Buckingham Palace to say we're taking over."
John McDonnell during an interview at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival (PA)

Mr Johnson faces the threat of a no-confidence vote - fuelled by a promise to take Britain out of the EU on Halloween "do or die" and a refusal to rule out suspending parliament.

Mr McDonell's comments came after SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon hinted at possible “progressive alliance” that would “lock the Tories out of government”.

The Scottish First Minister said she does not envisage any formal coalition with Labour but wants the SNP to be part of a "progressive alternative" to the Tories at Westminster.

Mr McDonnell later ruled out forming a pact with the SNP, saying they are not progressive and are "Tories".

Ms Sturgeon said during 2015 and 2017 General Elections she wanted her party to be "part of a progressive alliance against the Conservatives" if the post-election arithmetic lent itself to this.

"I think it's even more important now that we try to build that kind of progressive alliance that gets the Tories out because they are intent on taking the country down a catastrophic Brexit path," she said.

"So my position hasn't changed - I don't envisage any formal coalition with Labour but I want the SNP to be part of efforts to get things on to a better track than they are on now.

"The stumbling block to that is Labour - Labour are still on the fence on Brexit and Jeremy Corbyn is abdicating his position of leadership by not giving that clear direction.

"So we need to get Labour off the fence and then we can look to stopping Boris Johnson in his tracks, hopefully."

greybeard

8th August 2019, 11:40

Suspect there might be quite a few Conservatives who are sorry they did not back Teresa May's deal.
If Boris does not change direction. His party may be un-electable for years.
If he gets his way and we exit deal or no deal and the end result is a mess heaven, help him.

It would seem massive changes are in the offing--one way or another.
Home rule for Scotland?
Ireland become one nation again?
Just seems that many are being thrown under the bus in the pursuit of "My way or no way"
Many jobs at stake as far as I can see.

The views expressed are just a possibility--
Chris

greybeard

9th August 2019, 07:54

The Tories can’t discredit the allure of a Labour-SNP pact this time – Brexit has made Scottish independence far too attractive
The Independent Andrew Grice,The Independent Wed, 7 Aug
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/tories-t-discredit-allure-labour-111400372.html

As I interviewed Ed Miliband on his 2015 election battle bus, his exasperated aides frantically tried to persuade the BBC not to go big for a fourth day running on the prospect of a minority Labour government being propped up by the Scottish National Party.

“How damaging is it?” the then Labour leader asked me. “Bad,” I replied. He wasn’t convinced. But the Tories’ repeated warnings of a “coalition of chaos” if Miliband became prime minister in a hung parliament undoubtedly damaged Labour’s prospects.

It seems history is repeating itself. John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, said last night a Labour government would not block the Scottish Parliament’s call for a second referendum on independence.

He even adopted SNP language by describing Westminster as the “English parliament.” His remarks at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe contradict Dick Leonard, the Scottish Labour leader, and the party’s 2017 election manifesto. They came a day after Nicola Sturgeon, the SNP first minister, raised the prospect of a “progressive alliance” with Labour to keep the Tories out.

What’s going on? As in 2015, Labour can’t admit it, but knows it will be difficult to win an overall majority. Although he didn’t need to say it in public, perhaps McDonnell was preparing the ground for a post-election Lab-SNP deal – not a coalition, but a pact in which the SNP supported Labour in key votes in return for an independence referendum. If Brexit had not happened by then, their common agenda could include a Final Say referendum.

Inevitably, the Tories are reprising their 2015 attack, with their chairman James Cleverly warning: “This Sturgeon-Corbyn alliance would be a nightmare prospect for Britain.”

In 2015, the Tories hoovered up seats in the south west held by their Liberal Democrat coalition “partners” in a below the radar campaign, claiming a Lab-SNP pact would see government money switched from the region to Scotland. No doubt Team Boris will soon warn that the billions he would spend on transport projects in the north of England would be diverted to Scotland. It could boost his campaign to target 2016 Leave-voting seats held by Labour.

Yet the Tories should not assume they have a magic bullet. A lot has changed since 2015. Warning about a “coalition of chaos” would look pretty rich to some voters after the chaos of Tory rule since 2016, including a “regressive alliance” with the Democratic Unionist Party and a £1bn bung for Northern Ireland to seal the deal.

Brexit has dramatically changed the dynamics of the Scottish question. A poll taken after Johnson’s visit to Scotland last week found that 52 per cent of Scots would vote for independence, with 48 per cent against.

Some 56 per cent of 2016 Remainers want a referendum in the next two years and 59 per cent would support independence. Scotland voted to Remain in 2016, so it is hardly surprising that Johnson’s 100mph drive towards the no-deal cliff edge has fuelled support for independence. It’s not great news for the Scottish Tories, whose gains in 2017 allowed May to remain in power. Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, has warned Johnson against no deal and sent Downing Street the Scottish media coverage of this week’s poll. Of course, opinion could switch back if the UK leaves the EU. Would Scotland risk losing its single market with the rest of the UK for one with the EU? The messy Brexit process might not be a good advert for divorce.

But the apparent rise in support for independence is another reminder of the forces unleashed by Brexit, particularly a no deal one. The impact in Scotland would be bad enough. In Northern Ireland, it would potentially be even more dangerous. Boris Johnson styling himself “minister for the Union” might not be enough to stop a drift towards a united Ireland. Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary must call a border poll if there is likely to be public support for the province to leave the UK. Karen Bradley, the previous holder of the post, warned May’s cabinet that a no-deal exit would make such a poll far more likely.

So Johsnon is playing with fire. His own party might not care. Remarkably, a YouGov survey found that six out of 10 Tory members would rather Brexit happened even if it meant Scotland or Northern Ireland leaving the UK. So much for the Conservative and Unionist Party. It's the Brexit Party now.

In 2015, the Lab-SNP spectre helped David Cameron win an unexpected overall majority, the high point of a career cut short by his unnecessary EU referendum. After winning the 2014 vote on Scottish independence, Cameron wanted to be remembered as the PM who kept Scotland in the UK and Britain in Europe. Will his legacy now be as the man who spectacularly did the opposite on both?

The only people who can prevent it are MPs. The Union is yet another reason why they must find a way to prevent no deal when they return from their summer break next month.

greybeard

9th August 2019, 10:53

Jeremy Corbyn has called Boris Johnson’s bluff. Let’s see if the PM would defy the Commons now
The Independent Sean O'Grady,The Independent vor 17 Stunden
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/jeremy-corbyn-called-boris-johnson-165439759.html

As a weak and divided opposition party trying to gain some traction on the main political story of the moment, and at a time when parliament is on holiday, the usually clueless Labour leadership is employing unexpectedly smart tactics on Brexit. Jeremy Corbyn’s letter to the cabinet secretary, Mark Sedwill, about the constitutional propriety of some of the wilder schemes emanating from Downing Street cannot be simply ignored. A protest from the leader of the opposition to the head of the civil service demands some kind of substantive response. If it doesn’t elicit one, that is itself a story. If it does, then it will take the controversy on a step or two.

The letter follows the shadow chancellor’s threat, half joking, to pack Mr Corbyn into the nearest taxi cab and send him to Buckingham Palace to see the Queen if Boris Johnson attempts to squat in No 10 in defiance of a lost vote of confidence and of the terms of the Fixed-term Parliament Act 2011. The whole spirit and intent of the act is plainly to allow for the Commons to select an alternative government that can command the support of the house if the existing administration, in this case the Johnson government, has lost it. If Mr Corbyn was able to demonstrate beyond doubt he could win a vote of confidence with the support of MPs from across various parties, then he would have a right, under that act, to put his case to the Commons and to win a vote. If he lost the vote then there must be an election.

There is no volume of bluster from Mr Johnson or Dominic Cummings to alter the legal facts. If Mr Johnson wants to break the law and ignore the 2011 act then he would have to face the consequences in court – the threat alone should be enough to concentrate his mind. The latest wheeze to be hatched in the mind of Mr Cummings is for a general election on Friday 1 November, the day after Brexit, on the theme of “politicians vs the people”. This, it is imagined, would be sufficient to summon up the spirit of the 2016 Vote Leave campaign and marginalise Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party, and consolidate the broad right wing of the voting public behind Mr Johnson’s Conservatives, rewarding their delivery of Brexit with a five-year term and a working majority.

It is, at best, fanciful, but it wouldn’t matter in the sense that by then Brexit would be over, and the UK would be a new political country – the Johnson gamble.

The real question is whether Brexit can be stopped, either by means of a vote of no confidence and the operation of the Fixed-term Parliament Act, or by some other stratagem.

The answer to this must be “yes”. As the leader of the Commons, Jacob Rees-Mogg is fond of pointing out parliament only speaks through lawmaking, and the business of the house is conventionally controlled by the government – in effect Mr Rees-Mogg. Yet as Mr Johnson and Mr Cummings so often seem to think, conventions are there to be broken, and the Commons has previously seized control of the parliamentary agenda to thwart a no-deal Brexit not approved of by a parliamentary vote. If enough MPs wish to do so again, then they will find a method to do so, and the likes of Dominic Grieve, Hilary Benn, Yvette Cooper and Oliver Letwin will be setting to work to engineer one. One move might be to cancel the usual recess for the party conferences – perfectly justifiable in the circumstances when MPs have better things to be doing than propping up conference hotel bars. Remember when Donald Tusk told the UK not to waste its six-month Article 50 extension?

In this endeavour the rebels will be supported by a new cadre of experienced and respected ministers sacked by Mr Johnson in his reshuffle, including Philip Hammond and David Gauke. This time round, too, they will find more useful and wholehearted support from the Labour leadership. Whether Mr Johnson lost the vote of confidence or not, and whether he chose to try to defy the Commons or not, then or later a short act could be passed that would stop a no-deal Brexit from happening without prior parliamentary approval. Indeed, that very act would show, just like a vote of confidence, that the government cannot command a majority in the House of Commons, and has no right to pretend that it does.

Labour is playing a shrewd game in dragging the civil service and the Queen into this argument. To be fair, it is Mr Johnson and his “reign of terror” special adviser Mr Cummings who have done so already by threatening to break the law themselves. The courts and the speaker, John Bercow, can also be relied on to enforce the democratic prerogatives of the House of Commons dating back to the Civil War. Mr Corbyn is right to call Mr Johnson’s bluff.

scanner

9th August 2019, 11:00

Just more evidence, it doesn't matter what the 17.4 million people voted for. And, Corbyn saying we're taking over. How is any of the above democratic ? Leave meant leave, not start a debate about it or get any deals. Only proves, we're surfs and nothing more, they all disgust me. I shall never vote again, it's nothing more than a sham, smoke and mirrors.

Thanks for the updates Chris.

greybeard

9th August 2019, 21:14

Boris Johnson prepared to brush aside legal warnings over Brexit because date is 'set in stone', minister insists
Evening Standard NIcholas Cecil,Evening Standard

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-prepared-brush-aside-084000871.html

Prime Minister Boris Johnson is prepared to brush aside legal warnings and Parliament to crash Britain out of the EU because the October 31 exit date is “set in stone”, a minister signalled today.

Business minister Kwasi Kwarteng intervened in the growing row over whether the Government would ignore Cabinet Secretary Sir Mark Sedwill if he received legal warnings that it should not push the country out of the EU in the middle of a general election.

Sir Mark is believed to have had legal advice that during an election campaign the “status quo” — of Britain being in the EU — should be maintained. Brexiteers argue the status quo is that the UK is due to quit the EU by law on October 31.

Jeremy Corbyn has written to Sir Mark asking him to confirm that if the UK is due to leave the EU without a deal while an election is under way, the Government should seek another time-limited delay to Brexit to allow voters to make such a historic decision.

The Labour leader said that to act otherwise would be an “unprecedented, unconstitutional and anti-democratic abuse of power”.
Boris Johnson is prepared to brush aside legal warnings and Parliament over Brexit because October 31 date is “set in stone”, a minister has said (AP)

However, Mr Kwarteng told Good Morning Britain: “That 31st of October date, I’m afraid for the Remainers, is set in stone … unlike last time, we will not be asking for an extension.”

He was also confident the Tories would win a general election, with Labour so divided. “The idea that Labour is going to win a vote of no confidence and then win a subsequent election, I think is pretty far-fetched,” he added.

However, amid talk of a November 1 election, leading political expert Sir John Curtice, of Strathclyde University, warned the Tories that if there is a poll before Britain has left the EU then their hopes could be hit by the Brexit Party.

“What Brexit supporters are saying when they’re asked these hypothetical questions is, if we leave after October 31 … at least half of them say they’ll switch to the Tories,” he told an event at the Edinburgh Fringe.

“If on the other hand the Government tries to hold an election before October 31 and we haven’t left … they say they’ll stick with the Brexit Party.” If the election happens after Brexit, then he believes the Conservatives could get a Commons majority.

With a “Parliament v Government” clash looming in September, Tory rebel MPs could join forces with the Opposition to try to seize control of the Commons timetable and pass a law to stop a no-deal departure. They could also bring down Mr Johnson’s government in a confidence vote and seek to form a national unity government to delay Brexit and avoid a crash-out.

However, opposition MPs are deeply divided over the prospect of a unity government, possibly without Mr Corbyn at the helm. Shadow transport secretary Andy McDonald insisted Labour would try to form a government, and said: “We must stop no deal no matter what.”

Constitutional expert Vernon Bogdanor, a professor at King’s College London, suggested a new government opposed to no deal could scrap such a departure even if it had happened, though politically this may be difficult.

“A sovereign parliament could legislate retrospectively, with the agreement of the EU, so as to extend the Brexit date and deem Britain not to have left the EU on October 31!” he wrote in The Times.

On a visit to Mexico, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab stepped up the blame game if there is no deal, insisting the EU was refusing to re-open the Withdrawal Agreement.

He said the Northern Ireland backstop could be solved by checks away from the border. Downing Street has rejected a November 1 bank holiday, while special advisers’ summer leave is cancelled to deal with the Brexit crisis.

greybeard

10th August 2019, 18:54

British PM eyes fund to help businesses at risk of post-Brexit collapse: The Times
Reuters Reuters

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/british-pm-eyes-fund-help-033407427.html

(Reuters) - British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is drawing up plans for a bailout fund to prop up businesses in the event of a no-deal Brexit, The Times reported.

The government has drawn up a secret list of big British employers that are considered to be most at risk of collapse and the construction and manufacturing sectors are expected to be the worst affected, Times said.

Michael Gove, the British government minister responsible for planning for a "no-deal Brexit", confirmed for the first time that ministers were working on a package to help companies at risk, the newspaper added. Johnson's Brexit war cabinet is expected to discuss the bailout plans, known as "Operation Kingfisher", next week, the newspaper said.

(Reporting by Rishika Chatterjee in Bengaluru, editing by G Crosse)

" All very well and good--but where is the money coming from?
I thought it was going to be a land of milk and honey.
The tax payer must have very deep pockets"
Chris

Angels1981

10th August 2019, 19:21

I'm british and I always mention about fear v love and that I see you mentioning that fear is being spread. They are literally making a prison within the UK and then once that Brexit is in place they will venture of creating poverty and if they do the opposite I am going to be gobsmacked. The government does not create it destroys and they lie just like the devil. I thank you for making it all into English as I don't listen to what they say in truth because they don't rule me Love does. The whole politic thing lol I am puzzled and I guess they have that on the agenda. Pulling out waiting times and then dud duh dah another booo we don't do what the people want any more speech. Sorry that's how I feel at the moment but I found the whole posts really interesting because you made more sense to me then no 10 . thank you.

snoman

10th August 2019, 21:51

I see Brexit as a dice roll.
Anything that threatens the entrenched grip of democratic corporate market servitude is kind of ok with me.
I'm an anarchist, so a serious bad roll of the dice and total economic chaos appeals somehow.
I'm lucky to not be afraid, but I do pity everyone who is terrified of the possibility of what could come.

greybeard

11th August 2019, 10:17

Boris Johnson’s drive towards a no-deal Brexit is no bluff – he really believes in it now
The Independent Andrew Grice,The Independent Sat, 10 Aug 10:41 BST
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-drive-towards-no-094153983.html

Normally, Downing Street is half-empty in August, due to the holiday season and parliament being in recess. This year, No 10 is buzzing with activity; this week, I was surprised to see every desk occupied.

Political advisers have been banned from taking holidays until 31 October. Boris Johnson has written to all civil servants, urging them to prepare “urgently and rapidly” for exit day as their top priority. Michael Gove, the minister responsible for no-deal planning, has disclosed that a support fund will prop up companies hit by a no-deal exit.

Is it, as some MPs believe, all an elaborate wind-up, designed to show the EU that Boris is serious about leaving with no deal, so it makes concessions? I don’t think so. Johnson believes the EU is now getting his message, and is more optimistic than some of his allies that a revised agreement can still be reached.

But if that doesn’t happen, he will not pull back from the cliff edge. As I left Downing Street, some words from Tony Blair came into my mind. After his 2001 election victory, a long-standing colleague told him: “Come on Tony, now we’ve won again, can’t we drop all this New Labour and do what we believe in?” Blair replied: “It’s worse than you think. I really do believe in it.”

Today, it’s worse than the doubters think; Boris and his team really do believe in it. They talk openly about “the election”, not whether there will soon be one. The crowded No 10 offices reflect not just war-style planning for Brexit but action on the domestic front. The past week was “NHS week”.

There were announcements of more money and changes to senior doctors’ pension rules, and plenty of TV pictures of Johnson visiting hospitals. It wasn’t just a token effort to cover up the Tories’ Achilles heel. Boris will keep banging on about the NHS. He has rejected the mantra of Sir Lynton Crosby, the Australian campaign guru who helped him win two London mayoral elections, that there is no point in the Tories talking about health because they can’t win on the issue.

Next week the government will talk tough on crime, on which Team Boris thinks the Tories have lost ground. There are plans for more prison places, and the former justice secretary David Gauke’s proposal to abolish jail sentences of six months or less for all but the most serious offenders will likely be binned.

Then Johnson will turn his attention to education, with more money for schools likely to be announced as children return from their summer break.

If Johnson defies the odds by getting a new Brexit deal, he would probably delay the election until next spring. But he has told his aides: “We can’t have an election before we deliver Brexit.”

It’s easy to see why he is attracted by the idea of an election immediately after 31 October, even if that provokes a huge controversy about shutting down parliament so it cannot stop no deal. Sir John Curtice, professor of politics at Strathclyde University, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme this morning the Tories probably need to be eight points ahead of Labour in the share of the vote to win an overall majority.

At present, the opinion polls suggest a Tory lead of about five or six points. So the Tories “need to squeeze the Brexit Party vote further”, Curtice said. Nigel Farage’s party has slipped to 13-14 per cent since Boris became PM. Crucially, about half the Brexit Party’s supporters would switch to the Tories if they delivered Brexit. So that could make all the difference.

However, the chances of another hung parliament are high. Curtice pointed out that we could see a record number of MPs for parties other than the Tories and Labour, making it harder for either of the traditional big two to win a majority.

With Labour on 25-26 per cent and the resurgent Liberal Democrats at about 18 per cent, Tory strategists hope the divide among their opponents will work to their advantage. They believe Jeremy Corbyn’s fence-sitting on Brexit has lasted so long that Labour would be unable to scoop up the Remain vote even if he jumped off it now. They might be proved right: in some seats, the split between Labour and the main pro-Remain candidate could allow the Tories to win.

For Remainers, this makes it even more important that the Lib Dems, Greens and Plaid Cymru join forces in as many seats as possible. There are signs that Unite to Remain, the organisation set up by the former Tory and now independent MP Heidi Allen, is making progress. The three parties are likely to sign a non-aggression pact in about 30 constituencies this month, before moving on to areas where it might be more difficult to reach agreement locally on which party should run on a Unite to Remain ticket.

Giving up seats to another party is a painful thing to do but the bigger the sacrifice, the bigger the reward, and greater the chance of stopping Boris and Brexit.

greybeard

11th August 2019, 19:19

Gordon Brown has warned that under Boris Johnson the union of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is "sleepwalking into oblivion".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49309113?intlink_from_url=&link_location=live-reporting-story

Writing in the Observer, Mr Brown blamed "destructive, nationalist ideology" and said the ideal of Britishness as tolerant "could not survive" a no-deal Brexit.

"We are, at best, only a precariously united kingdom," Mr Brown wrote.

He also criticised the prime minister's new adviser, Dominic Cummings.

It comes after Mr Johnson travelled to all four parts of the UK in his first few weeks in office, with No 10 saying he was a "passionate believer in the power of the Union".

Mr Johnson has said the UK will leave the EU on the current deadline of 31 October, whether a Brexit "divorce" deal - which sets out how Britain leaves - is agreed in time or not.

Will Brexit break Britain, and would England care?
What does Boris Johnson's UK tour tell us?
Who are Boris Johnson's key advisers?

Mr Brown criticised Mr Johnson's government, which he said was driven "not by the national interest but by a destructive, populist, nationalist ideology".

"We must recognise that nationalism is now driving British politics," he wrote.

Under Mr Johnson's premiership, claimed Mr Brown, the UK is "devoid of a unifying purpose powerful enough to hold it together and to keep four nationalisms - Scottish, Irish, English, and also a rising Welsh nationalism - at bay.

"What is most worrying is not just that so many think the union will end but how, at least for now, so few appear to care."

A recent opinion poll indicated that most Conservative Party members prioritise leaving the EU over preserving the union.

Some 63% of respondents said they would rather Brexit took place even if it led to Scottish independence - 59% expressed the same view about Brexit leading to Northern Ireland leaving the UK.

Speaking later on Sunday at a Fringe by the Sea event in North Berwick, Mr Brown repeated his assertion a no-deal Brexit would be a "complete disaster", arguing it would place new strain on the union.

He also said withholding UK contributions to the EU in the event of a no-deal Brexit would be the "economic equivalent of declaring war" and create hostility between the UK and Europe.

He called for a constitutional convention to consider the future of the whole UK and a new senate of the nations and regions to replace the House of Lords.
'Must stop no deal'

In his Observer article, Mr Brown also attacked the style of Mr Johnson's cabinet, saying the UK's approach to leadership now included "choosing an enemy and accusing opponents of treason".

He described the PM's new adviser, Mr Cummings, as someone who "depicts the House of Commons as the enemy in a 'people v parliament' election".

Mr Brown also criticised shadow chancellor John McDonnell, who he said "fell into the nationalist trap" over comments made earlier this week about a future Labour government not blocking a second Scottish independence referendum.

Mr Brown added that Britain needed to rediscover virtues such as empathy and co-operation - and that the idea of a Britishness, which is tolerant, inclusive and outward-looking, "could not survive" a no-deal Brexit.

"To prevent the rise of dysfunctional nationalism, the first step is to stop no deal in its tracks," he added.

greybeard

13th August 2019, 11:17

Brexit Poll Suggests Support For Boris Johnson To Push Through No-Deal

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-suspend-parliament-push-210005121.html

The prospect of Boris Johnson forcing through a no-deal Brexit appears to have support from the public, with a poll indicating a large proportion want to leave the EU by any means necessary.

A ComRes poll for The Telegraph found 44% of the public agree that the prime minister “needs to deliver Brexit by any means, including suspending parliament if necessary, in order to prevent MPs from stopping it”, while 37% disagreed and 19% did not know.

The finding was billed as 54% supporting the move after stripping out the ‘don’t knows’. The survey of 2,011 British adults is available here.

The PM has refused to rule out a move to prorogue - or suspend - parliament in the weeks before October 31 to stop politicians passing laws to stop Britain leaving the EU without a deal.

The ComRes findings contrast to a YouGov poll in June that found by 47% to 24% British people oppose proroguing parliament in order to force through a no-deal Brexit.

However, ComRes also found 51% of respondents agree that “Brexit should be halted if problems over the Northern Ireland border threaten to split the Union” (or 39% agree, 37% disagree and 25% don’t know).

The survey also indicated the Conservatives had extended their lead over Labour.

According to the figures, 88% of respondents feel parliament is “out of touch” with the British public, and that 89% feel MPs “ignore the wishes of voters and push their own agendas” on Brexit.

As well as this, the poll found 77% of respondents agree the Queen should “remain above politics and refuse to get involved in Brexit”.

Andrew Hawkins, chairman of ComRes, said: “With the largest Tory lead over Labour from ComRes this year, this poll is confirmation that the Boris Bounce is real and shows no sign of disappearing despite the Parliamentary break.

“Boris’s support has been boosted by him outperforming expectations, including among a third of Labour and Lib Dem voters.

“It will not be lost on Jeremy Corbyn as he contemplates attempting to call a vote of no confidence that Boris could win an election with barely a third of the vote because support is so fragmented across all the parties.

“If Boris can deliver Brexit, without too much collateral damage to the economy, he stands to win big.

“He is within touching distance of an overall majority even without the support of the one in five 2017 Tory voters who are still lending their support to the Brexit Party.

“If he can woo them back by delivering on his promise to leave the EU, apparently even if it means suspending Parliament, then he could well be on track to win a working majority”.

greybeard

13th August 2019, 15:49

Legal bid to stop PM pushing through no-deal Brexit to go before judge
PA Media: UK News By Tom Eden, PA Scotland,PA Media: UK News
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/legal-bid-stop-pm-pushing-110023706.html

A legal challenge to prevent Boris Johnson forcing through a no-deal Brexit by suspending Parliament has been allowed to proceed by the Scottish courts.

The legal bid, backed by more than 70 MPs and peers, is seeking to get the Court of Session in Edinburgh to rule that suspending Parliament to make the UK leave the EU without a deal is “unlawful and unconstitutional”.

The petition has been filed at the Edinburgh court, which sits through the summer, and was granted permission to be heard by a judge.

An initial hearing is due to take place before Lord Doherty at the Court of Session on Tuesday morning to determine how the legal challenge will proceed.

A cross-party group of politicians is backing the legal petition, supported by the Good Law Project, which won a victory at the European Court of Justice last year over whether the UK could unilaterally cancel Brexit by revoking Article 50.

Jolyon Maugham QC, director of the Good Law Project, said: “A man with no mandate seeks to cancel Parliament for fear it will stop him inflicting on an unwilling public an outcome they did not vote for and do not want.

“That’s certainly not democracy and I expect our courts to say it’s not the law.”

greybeard

13th August 2019, 15:59

As said Im neutral as to which way it goes but a posture of "my way do, or die"overriding the process of Parliament bothers me somewhat.
Chris

greybeard

13th August 2019, 22:11

Hammond warns Johnson against ‘betraying’ referendum with no-deal Brexit
[PA Media: UK News]
By Sam Blewett, PA Political Correspondent
PA Media: UK News13 August 2019

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/hammond-warns-johnson-against-betraying-214700876.html

Boris Johnson would commit a betrayal of the referendum if he enacted a no-deal Brexit by listening to the “unelected” saboteurs “who pull the strings” of his Government, former chancellor Philip Hammond has argued.

Mr Hammond, who resigned in anticipation of Mr Johnson becoming Prime Minister, urged the Tory leader to take the UK out of the European with a deal in place.

But he said early signs for that “are not encouraging”, warning that demands to abolish the backstop has become a “wrecking” stance over a deal.

“The unelected people who pull the strings of this Government know that this is a demand the EU cannot and will not accede to,” the Tory backbencher wrote in The Times on Wednesday.

Mr Hammond said he was busting two “great myths” over a no-deal Brexit, arguing it will be damaging to the nation – both economically and to the union – and that voters do not back the move.

“Most people in this country want to see us leave in a smooth and orderly fashion that will not disrupt lives, cost jobs or diminish living standards, whether they voted Leave or Remain in 2016,” he wrote.

“Parliament faithfully reflects the view of that majority and it will make its voice heard. No-deal would be a betrayal of the 2016 referendum result. It must not happen.”

Mr Hammond also accused “some key figures in the Government” of “absurdly” suggesting no-deal would boost the UK’s economy.

Meanwhile, Speaker John Bercow warned he “will fight with every breath in my body” any attempt by the PM to suspend Parliament to force through no-deal against MPs’ wishes.

And Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd said she would urge Mr Johnson not to take that controversial move as part of his “do or die” commitment for Brexit by the October 31 deadline.

Mr Bercow told an audience at the Edinburgh Fringe festival that he “strongly” believes the House of Commons “must have its way”, in remarks reported by the Herald newspaper.

“And if there is an attempt to circumvent, to bypass or – God forbid – to close down parliament, that is anathema to me,” he said.

“I will fight with every breath in my body to stop that happening.”

Ms Rudd warned that the Government must not work against MPs by proroguing Parliament.

“I will play my part in Cabinet and privately with the Prime Minister and with ministers in arguing strongly for respecting parliamentary sovereignty,” she told the BBC.

“And you know, I’m a Member of Parliament, the Prime Minister and all Cabinet members are Members of Parliament, we need to remember where our authority comes from.”

Meanwhile on Tuesday, Mr Johnson conceded he expects negotiating a post-Brexit trade deal with the US would be a “tough old haggle”.

But he said he remains confident that the UK “will get there”.

His remarks came in response to US President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, who said the UK would be “first in line” for a deal.

John Bolton added that it could occur on a “gradual sector-by-sector” basis.

But Mr Johnson’s Brexit plans may be jeopardised early next month after a court agreed to fast-track a hearing on whether he can legally prorogue Parliament.

A judge in Edinburgh agreed to expedite a legal challenge from anti-Brexit campaigners including more than 70 MPs and peers.

Matthew

13th August 2019, 22:19

greybeard

13th August 2019, 22:32

As said Im neutral as to which way it goes but a posture of "my way do, or die"overriding the process of Parliament bothers me somewhat.
Chris

From my point of view, it's hard to, well, believe. Let me try and explain: if I posted non stop articles peddling fear porn against Scottish independence, which only included mentions of the SNP with a tainted bias... well, it might look like I had a bias. If I then said "I have no horse in this race" - how would that look to you? So this is why I can't shift the sense you are not neutral, e.g. you missed the launch of The Brexit Party

greybeard: what's the function of a healthy ego?

I only post what is on yahoo--lazy you may say.
Possibly Yahoo is biased--therefore I might be seen to be.
There is no such thing as a healthy ego --smiling

Im also neutral on Scottish independence

Neutrality is seeing all the arguments without taking sides.
UK will survive one way or another but may be not as we know it.

Your obviously not neutral YoYoYo.
You are not a true Yo --yo in that you are consistent--good on you.
Why dont you post what you can find in support-- in favour of a no deal Brexit?

Regards chris

Ps I posted this
Brexit Poll Suggests Support For Boris Johnson To Push Through No-Deal
Ch

Matthew

13th August 2019, 22:52

>>I only post what is on yahoo--lazy you may say

Too frequent for me to accuse you of being lazy - arf arf

So I ultimately would bow to your wisdom on the ego, because you've made a serious study of it, or of not it.. ;)

For me, the function of a healthy ego is to hold ones bias, ones opinion. We all have one, and these things the ego holds - like opinions - get challenged brutally.

We start with an opinion and it evolves because we care about what people think, what people say, what we read and hear. The ego holding opinion is the first to get bruised, as beliefs, opinions, bias - call it what you will - are rightfully challenged. It's when the ego, which cares so deeply about what others think, is overwhelmed - hurt too much, that it breaks and we get problems like egotisticalness, delusions of grandeur etc etc - but that's not what I think of as a healthy ego.

So I currently believe the ego is useful, if healthy, to take responsibility for ones own opinion

greybeard

14th August 2019, 06:54

While its off topic or not.
What you describe I would call self esteem and thats healthy.
Ego takes over when--the others point of view is ridiculed.
The ego cant be wrong---it makes others wrong in order to survive.
There is a lot of ego on both sides of the Brexit "debate" if this were not so we would have left by now with a satisfactory deal.
Im neutral but not to the degree that I condone either side.
There will be people loosing their jobs--being hurt by this indecision, that Im concerned about.
Chris

greybeard

14th August 2019, 09:48

Bercow will 'fight with every breath' to stop Johnson closing parliament for no deal
The Guardian Jessica Elgot Chief political correspondent,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/bercow-fight-stop-johnson-closing-223209660.html

The House of Commons Speaker, John Bercow, has said he will “fight with every breath in my body” to stop Boris Johnson from proroguing parliament to force through a no-deal Brexit without the consent of MPs.

Related: No-deal Brexit would be a betrayal, says Philip Hammond

Bercow, who has previously said he did not believe it would be possible to suspend parliament to force through no deal, gave his strongest signal yet he was prepared to personally intervene to stop prorogation.

Speaking at the Edinburgh festival fringe, the Speaker said he would insist on the right of parliament to continue to sit and debate. “The one thing I feel strongly about is that the House of Commons must have its way,” he said. “And if there is an attempt to circumvent, to bypass or – God forbid – to close down parliament, that is anathema to me.

Related: Brexit: judge fast-tracks challenge to stop Johnson forcing no deal

“I will fight with every breath in my body to stop that happening. We cannot have a situation in which parliament is shut down. We are a democratic society and parliament will be heard.

“Nobody is going to get away, as far as I’m concerned, with stopping that happening. Nobody should be afraid to say what he or she thinks.”

Asked by an audience member if parliament was able to stop a no-deal Brexit, Bercow replied: “Yes.”

Speaking in the Commons in June, Bercow warned the then-Tory leadership candidates that prorogation was not an option. “That is simply not going to happen. It is just so blindingly obvious that it almost doesn’t need to be stated, but apparently, it does and therefore I have done,” he told MPs.

Bercow’s interventions could be crucial in the coming weeks as MPs against no deal attempt to find a parliamentary route to blocking plans for the UK to exit on 31 October, with or without a deal.

A cross-party group are working on a plan to thwart Johnson, which could involve either forcing parliament to sit through the conference recess or amending the Commons motion that grants the September recess to allow them time to pass legislation against a no-deal Brexit.

Constitutional experts have said it is a plausible plan for cross-party rebels to seize control of the order paper via motions for recess, which are called “periodic adjournment motions”. They are not normally amendable, but Bercow caused major controversy in January when he defied this convention and allowed Tory MP Dominic Grieve to amend a similar motion.

Any amendment could suggest on a specific date or dates that “standing order 14 be set aside”, which is the order that gives the government precedence on business in the Commons – the tactic used to pass Yvette Cooper and Oliver Letwin’s bill against no deal in the spring. Dates could also potentially be reserved in late October.

Bercow’s comments came as a Scottish judge fast-tracked a legal challenge backed by 75 MPs and peers to prevent Johnson proroguing parliament, led by the Scottish National party MP Joanna Cherry QC.

The claim alleges it would be illegal and unconstitutional for the prime minister to suspend the Commons to prevent MPs blocking a no-deal Brexit before 31 October. An urgent hearing of the case will place on Friday 6 September, the week parliament returns from recess.

Matthew

14th August 2019, 12:45

...
The ego cant be wrong---it makes others wrong in order to survive.
...

My point is about the political bias in the articles you post, and you post a lot. The biased articles are put by you, then you say you are neutral, but you missed the launch of The Brexit Party, which is why I questions your 'lack of bias'. It's all very well hiding behind yahoo news, but you've been selective in what you propagate here. I think this shows your bias

I believe a healthy ego's job is to take responsibility for ones own bias and opinions, and the subject of Brexit is very much in the domain of opinion. But you claim to be neutral, but you post a lot and yet miss important and relevant events out, like the launch of The Brexit Party. I'm afraid to say, I'm not convinced you are neutral

I might be right i might be wrong, I;m working with what I see in this thread. Life goes on and this conversation will soon be swamped by main stream news articles you cut and paste, which can be found absolutely everywhere else. We should rename this thread to Yahoo News Brexit Archive

greybeard

14th August 2019, 13:26

greybeard

14th August 2019, 14:03

Top Tory admits Government continually lied about no-deal Brexit preparations
Yahoo News UK Andy Wells,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/top-tory-admits-government-continually-lied-about-nodeal-brexit-preparations-115206663.html

A prominent Tory has extraordinarily claimed that the Government continuously lied about making preparations for a no-deal Brexit.

Iain Duncan Smith hit out at former chancellor Philip Hammond for doing "nothing to prepare us for leaving with no deal”.

The former Conservative Party leader told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: "By not preparing to leave with no deal, they made it certain that we'd have to swallow everything that the European Union gave us.

Matthew

14th August 2019, 15:19

Yo Yo Yo its not my thread---you can easily cut and paste about the Brexit party or any other pro Brexit news--I wish you would--it would give a different perspective from Yahoo stuff that I post thats true.
There is more anti no deal exit news than pro as far as I can see.

Hi Chris, I certainly do post my own opposing bias to the bias you post (your own personal bias or not, but you post a lot of the same spin, go figure). Any other posts in this thread gets swamped under main stream news rubbish that can be found absolutely anywhere else. I wasn't the first to draw attention to this behavior of yours :P, but I will echo it because something's not quite right with what I hear you say... neutral - pull the other one

greybeard

14th August 2019, 15:55

YoYoYo.
There have been those who thanked me for the posts--particularly those from abroad who do not have ready access
You make assumptions--several time you have made comments about the SNP whom I have never voted for and will never vote for.
Im neutral about home rule for Scotland.
I could say that Im both for it and against-- I could argue strongly for either --I could argue strongly for or against Brexit--that would be a mental construct.

With respect my main interest is spirituality--the middle path--and with study of that you could see why I say.
im neutral yet seem to post contrary to that.

Im not for the division and turmoil any of this causes incluidng home rule for Scotland.
There would be a hard border as I pointed out way back if England leaves and Scotland some how remains

However Im in acceptance of what ever way any of it goes.
Acceptance is neutral--the middle path.
Thats my ultimate definition of neutral.--I dont mind
.
So if you are unhappy with the "bias" of the media input on this thread please post alternative views,
I would point out on the run up to Trump election there were screeds of cut and paste going on in the various threads--Avalon is full of cut and paste--the originator of this one was a master at it.--smiling.

Best wishes
Chris

avid

14th August 2019, 16:18

To anyone who is interested in this Brexit fiasco, Greybeard has consistently posted generic-type info from search engines’ news, thanks. I do not necessarily agree with these posts, but they are informative, and I am grateful for the info, so I can ‘sense’ changes in the media.

Chris has consistently stated he is of no opinion, as we get older we tend to sit back and watch the stupid mistakes current governance is making, knowing full well that our wise opinions will be disregarded.

Terrible things have happened politically, unfairly, and there is obvious coercion by corporations in this vile ‘arm-twisting’ issue, so please don’t haul the ‘observers’ over the coals, we are pawns in the banksters/globalists giant long-term ‘game’.

All I want, personally, is to free ourselves from these evil beings, and take over our sovereignty, stop being forced to use toxic products, eat what our lands can grow naturally, fish our own waters, choose who lives here, make our own laws again, and stop the destruction of what was a reasonable infrastructure healthwise, utilities, transportation, and agriculture.

Is that such a bad thing? Thanks Chris for posting the good and the bad - much appreciated.

greybeard

14th August 2019, 16:20

avid

14th August 2019, 16:31

Chris, there is so much conflicting stuff out there, you are right, people should be more concerned, it’s almost a ‘religion’ in conflict of opinions, which would turn this thread into an avalanche of negativity. Meanwhile, I really applaud your stoicism without influence. I have family both sides of the border, so whatever happens could be affecting our lives.
Praying for a reasonable, logical, peaceful solution.

ulli

14th August 2019, 16:41

To be honest Itssomewhat disappointing that there is not a spread of posting on the thread.
This subject is very important to the future of the UK.
If similar happened in The USA there would be an avalanche of posts.
How am I to learn anything about different view points on this
There is a wealth of information on exiting without a deal and the consequences of this.
Very little media on the benefits at least not readily available on Yahoo.
Chris

Brexit is about sovereignty of nations. This sovereignty does not exclude negociating with other nations on a given issue.

The EU is not about sovereignty, but instead it is about top-down control.
If EU leaders had shown more willingness to communicate and negociate with member governments it would never have come for a need to leave.

Even their unwillingness to accept a no-deal departure shows how crooked and disrespectful they are.
No way can there ever be a Union if there is oppression.
The EU needs to start over from scratch, with a different election process altogether, that listens to the voices from all levels, including the grassroots.
There ya go, Chris. My input.

greybeard

14th August 2019, 16:47

I had to look up the word stoicism avid--I have to thank you.
Yes there might be an avalanche of conflicting opinions if more posted, but for all that I wish people would join this thread --opinion with respect is a good thing.
Best wishes
Chris

Matthew

14th August 2019, 16:57

greybeard

14th August 2019, 17:19

I have to say for the record it's sad to see this thread fill up with non stop cut and pasted main stream articles, because they have exactly the same bias as all main stream news, and are really easy to find already. You don't need to go to a special forum to find them

Hi avid, I hear you. But I stand by this I posted before, it sums it up best as I can express it

Edit: or rename the thread to yahoo Brexit news archive, this idea fits and is ...fair

Its not my thread so I cant change the title YoYoYo.
I have no objection what so ever to a change in the name of the thread--you could request one to the moderators.
One other thing--the subject is important and I wanted to keep it upfront--believe you me if others had taken the time to post I would have posted a lot less.
What ever way it goes it will have consequences that are far reaching.

Thanks for your post Ulli which is appropriate and the truth.

Chris

Matthew

14th August 2019, 17:49

It wasn't a request to you to change the thread title greybeard, where did you get that idea from? (lol)

It was a cynical jibe too close to the truth :P

Peter UK

14th August 2019, 18:39

UK 'first in line' for US trade deal, says John Bolton

13 August 2019

41395

The UK is "first in line" for a trade deal with the US, President Trump's national security adviser has said.

John Bolton said the US supported a no-deal Brexit and added Washington would propose an accelerated series of trade deals.

Mr Bolton claimed deals could be done on a "sector-by-sector" basis, with an agreement on manufacturing made first.

However, critics warned the UK would have to give in to some US demands in return for any trade agreement.

His comments came after meeting Prime Minister Boris Johnson at No 10.

According to Mr Bolton, a bilateral agreement or "series of agreements" could be carved out "very quickly, very straight-forwardly".

A trade deal for financial services and agriculture would not be the first to be agreed, he added.

Mr Bolton said "doing it in pieces" was not unprecedented and the US understood the importance of doing as much as possible as rapidly as possible before the 31 October exit date.

He said there would be enthusiastic bipartisan support in Congress for speedy ratification at each stage.

Mr Johnson said there "all sorts" of opportunities for UK business in the US, particularly service companies, but the negotiations will be a "tough old haggle".

"The single biggest deal we need to do is a free trade deal agreement with our friends and partners over the Channel," he said.

But Nancy Pelosi, who leads the Democrats in the US House of Representatives, said in April that a US-UK trade deal would not be "on the cards" if Brexit damaged the Good Friday peace agreement in Northern Ireland.

Asked whether his proposed plan would follow World Trade Organisation rules, Mr Bolton said "our trade negotiators seem to think it is".

And he insisted the UK was "constantly at the front of the trade queue" for the Trump administration.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49325620

greybeard

15th August 2019, 06:18

Jeremy Corbyn urges opposition leaders and Tory rebels to help oust PM

Labour leader claims Johnson has no mandate for no-deal Brexit and calls for caretaker government

Rowena Mason Deputy political editor

Thu 15 Aug 2019 00.00 BST
First published on Wed 14 Aug 2019 22.30 BST

Jeremy Corbyn has called on rebel Tories and opposition leaders to stop a no-deal Brexit by ousting Boris Johnson as prime minister and allowing Labour to form a caretaker government until a general election.

The Labour leader proposed that he should lead a temporary administration on a “strictly time-limited” basis with the aim of calling a general election.

His letter threw down the gauntlet to the Lib Dems, the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the Greens and rebel Tories, at a time when MPs opposed to no deal have been discussing a “national unity government” led by a centrist figure.

Corbyn’s proposal makes it clear that the Labour frontbench consider he is the only politician who could lead a caretaker government, rather than a backbench candidate such as Tory veteran Ken Clarke or Labour’s Yvette Cooper.

Jo Swinson, the leader of the Lib Dems, immediately dismissed the idea that Corbyn could be a caretaker prime minister, saying: “Jeremy Corbyn is not the person who is going to be able to build an even temporary majority in the House of Commons for this task – I would expect there are people in his own party and indeed the necessary Conservative backbenchers who would be unwilling to support him. It is a nonsense.”

But others were more amenable with the SNP and Plaid Cymru responding to say they would be willing to enter talks, although Liz Saville Roberts, the Plaid leader, said it was “extremely disappointing” that Corbyn would not support a second referendum first and general election second.

Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, agreed with Plaid Cymru that the offer of talks was welcome but she argued “holding a general election before a people’s vote is the wrong way around”.

Ian Blackford, the SNP leader in Westminster, who had previously asked Corbyn to join talks, said: “I am pleased to receive his letter today confirming that Labour will now work with the SNP and others collaboratively to stop the UK government – but this means Labour needs to get off the fence on Brexit.”

The others approached for talks were Dominic Grieve, Caroline Spelman, Oliver Letwin and former Conservative Nick Boles, but not any of the Independent Group for Change UK MPs, independent or other former Labour MPs who have left the party. Grieve said he would be “considering it with colleagues” but several Conservative would-be rebels told the Guardian they could not contemplate a national unity government that made Corbyn prime minister.

In his letter, Corbyn said: “This government has no mandate for no deal, and the 2016 EU referendum provided no mandate for no deal. I therefore intend to table a vote of no confidence at the earliest opportunity when we can be confident of success.

“Following a successful vote of no confidence in the government, I would then, as leader of the opposition, seek the confidence of the House for a strictly time-limited temporary government with the aim of calling a general election, and securing the necessary extension of article 50 to do so.”
Labour bloc plans 'radical' move to push through Brexit deal
Read more

The Labour leader said he was offering talks with MPs across the parties in order to build support for a vote of no confidence in the government, although he did not say when this would be brought. The Labour leadership’s argument is that if MPs are serious about stopping a no-deal Brexit then they will have to get behind his plan.

The opposition could attempt an immediate vote in the first week of September in the hope an election could be fitted in before Brexit deadline day of October 31, but it is not clear there is yet enough support from Conservative backbenchers for this to be successful.

Corbyn’s letter came on a dramatic day in parliamentary recess, as Johnson ramped up his rhetoric against MPs who are working to block a no-deal Brexit.

The prime minister was accused of echoing the rhetoric of the second world war as he said some MPs were in “terrible collaboration” with the EU to prevent the UK leaving on 31 October.

His comments were an apparent swipe at Philip Hammond, the former chancellor, who on Tuesday wrote with 19 colleagues to the prime minister accusing him of setting the bar too high for a deal with the EU and warning that crashing out without a deal would be a betrayal of the referendum result

One Conservative MP, Guto Bebb, said Johnson’s language was “despicable” and “absolutely disgraceful” in light of threats made to some MPs over the issue of Brexit and the murder of Labour’s Jo Cox.

However, Downing Street sources said Johnson had simply been trying to make the point that the EU is “looking at what is happening here and getting the entirely wrong message that parliament is somehow going to block Brexit on 31 October”, which he claims will make Brussels less likely to offer concessions.

On a Facebook live stream, while answering pre-selected questions from the public, Johnson conceded that the chances are a no-deal Brexit are now becoming more likely, while dismissing the idea that MPs will be able to stop him.

In a sign that Whitehall preparations are stepping up, the Department of Health and Social Care announced a £25m contract to set up an “express freight service” to deliver medicines and medical products into the country in the event of a no-deal Brexit, potentially lasting for up to two years.

MPs are deeply divided over how and whether it is possible to stop no deal on 31 October but most Conservatives battling that outcome would rather start with legislative options to prevent the UK from crashing out. The primary method would be to amend legislation to mandate the prime minister to seek an extension.

What the Tories refer to as the “nuclear option” is a vote of confidence in the prime minister, which could bring down the government and give rebels a 14 day period to form a new administration to ask for an extension from the EU. They are also looking at the possibility of trying to use this period to force Johnson as prime minister to seek an extension from the EU, without ousting him from No 10.

If no MP can win a confidence vote in the fortnight after the first vote, then a general election is triggered. Johnson refused on Wednesday to rule out the idea that he could simply schedule an election for after 31 October, when the UK is due to leave with or without a deal.

“I think the British public have had a lot of elections and electoral events,” he said when asked if would call one for the days after Brexit. “There was the election in 2015, the referendum in 2016, another election in 2017. I think what they want us to do is get on and deliver Brexit on 31 October. I never tire of telling you that’s what we’re going to do.”

Corbyn wrote to Mark Sedwill, the cabinet secretary, last week demanding that he intervene to make clear the prime minister would not be allowed to do that under purdah rules, which restrict policy-making during election periods. Sedwill replied on Wednesday declining to clarify the purdah rules, saying they would be applied according to the circumstances.

A No 10 spokesman responded to Corbyn’s letter saying there was a “a clear choice: either Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister who will overrule the referendum and wreck the economy, or Boris Johnson as prime minister who will respect the referendum and deliver more money for the NHS and more police on our streets”.

‘This government believes the people are the masters and votes should be respected, Jeremy Corbyn believes that the people are the servants and politicians can cancel public votes they don’t like,” he added.

The Yahoo news well not exactly.
It comes through Yahoo and other search engins but its usualy sourced from main stream news papers this from the Guardian which claims to be truly independent
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/14/jeremy-corbyn-urges-opposition-leaders-and-tory-rebels-to-help-oust-pm

Chris

greybeard

15th August 2019, 08:05

THE SUN SAYS Philip Hammond hangs around like a bad smell only to sabotage another PM and kill Brexit
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9725494/philip-hammond-bad-smell-sabotage-brexit-boris-johnson/

The Sun

15 Aug 2019, 1:37

Rotten Ham

LIKE a particularly unpleasant smell, it appears Philip Hammond is intent on hanging around.

Yes, the human sleeping pill is back, continuing the work that so endeared him to the country during the three years he spent in the Treasury: undermining our negotiations in Brussels, attaching ludicrous conditions to the 2016 Referendum and talking the country down.
Philip Hammond is intent on sabotaging a SECOND Government trying to deliver Brexit

A nation yesterday sighed in unison as he mounted another assault on the possibility of Britain leaving the EU with a clean break. Plague and pestilence, imminent recession, everything short of

the apocalypse itself. He morphs ever more into a 21st century Grim Reaper with every passing day.

The former Chancellor’s failure to prepare for No Deal in the Treasury is, more than anything else, the very reason that we’re still stuck in Brexit limbo.

Brussels knew that with him holding the country’s financial levers, there was no way we’d be ready to leave with a clean break. So they pushed, and pushed, and pushed Theresa May until she was forced to accept a terrible deal and the hated backstop.

For those who think our judgment harsh, we are confident that history will be even punchier.

And now, with a Government that actually believes Britain can prosper outside the EU, he’s back to blow up another attempt at negotiations.

Brussels will be watching his Eeyore act and calculating that Parliament will be able to stop No Deal. The odious toad of a Speaker John Bercow is sure to help out, as he confirmed yesterday.

The Eurocrats will gamble they don’t need to renegotiate the deal, and British Remainers — like the former Chancellor — will push for the Second Referendum they’ve wanted from the off.

It takes some political skill to sabotage two different Governments in the space of a couple of years, but Hammond seems keen to see if he can manage it. If he’s successful this time, he risks a historic constitutional crisis and Jeremy Corbyn in Downing Street. It doesn’t bear thinking about.

The sooner he moves on from public life the better.
Trading blows

WE trust the Remainers who cheered the UK’s negative growth figures last week will be equally thrilled that Germany appears headed to recession. No? Hmm.

The news comes as Irish consumer confidence has fallen to the lowest level in years. We take no glee in any of this.

ulli

15th August 2019, 15:53

https://scontent.fsyq1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/67943518_10212157129721805_5547903698279071744_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&_nc_oc=AQnNBBsYzVGDvYKobdmDsvalAJmE0lglvDly_riUyLiiwDMLI9WQT0ClpWJ132GF97A&_nc_ht=scontent.fsyq1-1.fna&oh=ef48c30c22bab45fda7c445f05b3a31a&oe=5DD110B3

Ba-ba-Ra

16th August 2019, 18:22

Something to consider:

Have Trump and Boris made a deal to trap the Central Banks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y34qTJb4Q7k&list=UUB1o7_gbFp2PLsamWxFenBg&index=4

greybeard

16th August 2019, 18:37

My Son Stephen was round today, he has his own business installing Kitchens and Bathrooms--many of the components used come from other countries.
I asked his point of view on Brexit.

From the point of view of his business it would be better to stay in the CM.
If so he would not vote for Home Rule for Scotland if that comes up.

However if Brexit happens then he would vote for an independent Scotland.
He said Scotland would be welcomed with open arms and be given excellent trade terms to show England what its missing.

I have never discussed Brexit or Politics with Stephen so his response was without any bias to any thoughts he might think I had about the subject.

Ive already voiced my thoughts on a border between Scotland and England--not a good idea.
So that must also apply to a hard border between North and South in Ireland.

Boris has not, to my knowledge, fully addressed what would happen in an instant Brexit without a deal, with regard to this border which would be needed as far as I can see day one of exit.

Chris

Matthew

16th August 2019, 18:56

I can happily agree there are good things about the European project

But the vote has been had, the result was brexit

It's not so much about in or out any more; it's more about the integrity of democracy.

If your son voted against Scottish independence, or will vote for independence... I sincerely hope the referendum result will be honoured in either case

greybeard

16th August 2019, 19:32

We are in agreement YoYoYo
Its about the integrity of democracy and the honesty there in.
I dont think people voted for a no deal exit--they were promised all kind of things before the referendum so not surprisingly they voted to leave.

If I was for voting I would probably voted to leave given the information of that time.
Now its a total mess.

The AA prayer is my bedrock.
"God grant me the serenity
To accept the things I cannot change
Courage to change the things I can
And Wisdom to know the difference."

Basically this situation has a life of its own--there is nothing I can do about it so Im fully in acceptance of the end result regardless of how it goes.

Chris

Matthew

16th August 2019, 21:06

Ha yes, it is a total mess. Nothing is quite what it seems, I'm sure. There are both good and undesirable consequences both ways, and the best hope any side has is in the hands of people no one trust or likes. I blame them humans, it's their fault. I should start a thread about it.

ehem and back in the thread.

I will put my opinion forward that brexiteers knew what they were voting for, and the argument that they didn't is something remainers say a lot.

Every deal has 'walk away' underpinning it, or it is tyranny. I've walked away from all sorts of things, it's an important part of freedom. This concept simply does not compute in the tyrannical model of the EU. In a video I posted above, in this thread, by Mahyar Tousi catches the creep of tyranny in a some EU legislation passed recently

greybeard

17th August 2019, 13:10

Most people don't want a no-deal Brexit, poll reveals
Yahoo News UK Ellen Manning,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/most-people-dont-want-no-deal-brexit-poll-reveals-090631223.html

The majority of the public don’t want a no-deal Brexit, a new poll suggests.

Just 34% of voters want Boris Johnson to stick to his vow of taking Britain out of the EU without a deal if necessary on October 31, a poll for The Independent revealed.

The poll of 1,515 adults, carried out by BMG Research, also revealed that nearly half of voters (49%) want the Prime Minister to either delay or cancel Brexit or stage a fresh referendum.

Just one in five people (19%) believe Mr Johnson will manage to negotiate a fresh deal, while only 7% want an extension to Article 50 to be used to try to reach a deal, suggesting many people think it’s unlikely.
Young activists from Our Future, Our Choice held a protest outside the Scottish Conservative's HQ in Edinburgh to warn that a no-deal Brexit threatens the future of the Union

According to the poll, carried out by BMG Research, 20% of people back a Final Say referendum, with 22% in favour of revoking Article 50 to scrap Brexit.

Opponents of a no-deal Brexit have used the poll as evidence that Mr Johnson - who has vowed to take Britain out of Europe on October 31 “do or die” - doesn’t have a mandate to leave without a deal.

Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson told the Independent: “A no-deal Brexit must be taken off the table.

“Not only, as the poll shows, is there no public support for it, it is also incredibly irresponsible for any government to pursue something that will result in job losses, damage to our economy and hit our public services.”

The poll comes as a secret document revealed that the German government thinks Britain will leave without a deal because of the impossibility of an agreement over the Irish backstop.

Boris Johnson is expected to meet the leaders of Germany and France ahead of next weekend’s European Council in an attempt to reach an agreement.

greybeard

18th August 2019, 08:59

No-deal Brexit will cause food shortages, ports chaos and hard Irish border, claims government leak
Yahoo News UK Ross McGuinness,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/nodeal-brexit-will-cause-food-shortages-ports-chaos-and-hard-irish-border-claims-government-leak-075812202.html

Long delays are expected at Dover in the event of a no-deal Brexit (Picture: PA/Getty)

The UK will be hit with food, fuel and medicine shortages, a three-month period of chaos at its ports and a hard border in Ireland in a no-deal Brexit, leaked government documents have revealed.

The leaked batch of documents, compiled by the Cabinet Office under the codename “Operation Yellowhammer”, were published by the Sunday Times.

A senior Whitehall source told the newspaper: “This is not Project Fear - this is the most realistic assessment of what the public face with no deal.

“These are likely, basic, reasonable scenarios - not the worst case.”

The newspaper claimed the documents offer the most detailed assessment of Britain’s readiness for leaving the EU without a deal, which looks increasingly likely as prime minister Boris Johnson insists on exiting by October 31.

It comes after reports the German government is expecting a no-deal Brexit.

The UK government files warned that businesses and the public are largely unprepared for a no-deal scenario and that contingency planning has been hampered by growing “EU exit fatigue”.

The leak revealed the government predicts the return of a hard border in Ireland as current plans to avoid checks will be “unsustainable”.

The government warned this may lead to protests, road blockages and “direct action”.

Jeremy Corbyn's plan to become caretaker PM dealt blow as Tory MP rejects proposal

It predicted disruption at ports will last up to three months before traffic flow manages to reach 50% to 70% of its current rate.

In addition, months of border delays will have a significant impact on fuel distribution in London and the southeast of England, the documents said, while up to 85% of lorries using the main Channel crossing “may not be ready” for French customs, potentially leading to delays of up to two and a half days.

The document said petrol import tariffs will lead to the closure of two oil refineries, job losses of 2,000 and widespread strike action and fuel availability issues.

Because three-quarters of Britain’s medicines enter the country through the main Channel crossings, medical supplies will “be vulnerable to “severe extended delays”.

Fresh food availability will also be affected and prices will rise, which could affect “vulnerable groups”, the government warned. The cost of social care is also expected to rise.

Passengers at Dover, Eurotunnel, St Pancras and EU airports will face delays.

A Cabinet source told the Sunday Times: “Successive UK governments have a long history of failing to prepare their citizens to be resilient for their own emergencies.”

Jayke

18th August 2019, 09:58

The Brexit leave date has now officially been signed into law:

https://mobile.twitter.com/DExEUgov

=========

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/brexit-secretary-signs-order-to-scrap-1972-brussels-act-ending-all-eu-law-in-the-uk

Brexit Secretary signs order to scrap 1972 Brussels Act - ending all EU law in the UK

The Government has signed into law legislation to repeal the Act of Parliament which set in stone Britain’s EU (EEC) membership in 1972.

From:
Department for Exiting the European Union (https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-exiting-the-european-union)
Secretary of State for Exiting the EU Steve Barclay
The 1972 Act is the vehicle that sees regulations flow into UK law directly from the EU’s lawmaking bodies in Brussels.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/image_data/file/90964/s300_govvuk_SoS_SigningReal_3.jpg

The announcement of the Act’s repeal marks a historic step in returning lawmaking powers from Brussels to the UK. We are taking back control of our laws, as the public voted for in 2016.

The repeal of the European Communities Act 1972 will take effect when Britain formally leaves the EU on October 31.

Speaking after signing the legislation that will crystallise in law the upcoming repeal of the ECA, the Secretary of State for Exiting the EU Steve Barclay said:

This is a clear signal to the people of this country that there is no turning back - we are leaving the EU as promised on October 31, whatever the circumstances - delivering on the instructions given to us in 2016.

The votes of 17.4 million people deciding to leave the EU is the greatest democratic mandate ever given to any UK Government. Politicians cannot choose which public votes they wish to respect. Parliament has already voted to leave on 31 October. The signing of this legislation ensures that the EU Withdrawal Act will repeal the European Communities Act 1972 on exit day.

The ECA saw countless EU regulations flowing directly into UK law for decades, and any government serious about leaving on October 31 should show their commitment to repealing it.

That is what we are doing by setting in motion that repeal. This is a landmark moment in taking back control of our laws from Brussels“
======

greybeard

18th August 2019, 20:44

Brexit news latest: Boris Johnson urged by more than 100 cross-party MPs to recall parliament over no-deal threat
Evening Standard Stephanie Cockroft,Evening Standard 14 hours ago

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-news-latest-boris-johnson-054400138.html

Boris Johnson has been urged by more than 100 MPs from across the Commons to immediately recall parliament from the summer recess, amid claims of a "national crisis".

The letter, signed by MPs representing every political party in Westminster apart from the DUP, claims that the country is on "the brink of an economic crisis" and that it is "unacceptable" for parliament to wait until next month to sit again amid the threat of a no-deal Brexit.

The Commons is due to return from summer recess on September 3. The Speaker can only recall parliament at the behest of the government.

Tory former ministers Dominic Grieve and Guto Bebb are among the signatories of the letter.
Dominic Grieve is among those who have signed the letter (Reuters)

The Westminster leaders of the SNP, Liberal Democrats, Plaid Cymru, Change UK, and the Green Party's Caroline Lucas also backed the call, along with several Labour MPs.

The letter says: "Since the Second World War, Parliament has been recalled multiple times in every decade for a wide range of political, security and economic reasons...

"Our country is on the brink of an economic crisis, as we career towards a no-deal Brexit which will have an immediate effect on food and medical supplies, damage our economy, jobs, the public finances, public services, universities and long-term economic security.

"A no-deal Brexit also threatens our crucial security co-operation to keep our country safe from criminals and terrorists."

They added: "We face a national emergency, and Parliament must be recalled now in August and sit permanently until 31 October, so that the voices of the people can be heard, and that there can be proper scrutiny of your government.

"A true democrat should not fear such scrutiny. The question is whether you are one."

The letter also criticises Mr Johnson's approach to the Brexit negotiation and claims a "creeping and disturbing populism" is taking over Mr Johnson's discourse with the EU.

It adds: "As prime minister you have made policy announcements to the media rather than at the dispatch box. Your plans involve the spending of billions of pounds of taxpayers’ cash to back up your reckless no-deal plans.

"You have failed to conduct any substantive negotiations with EU partners. And you have shown utter disregard for the crucial relationship between the UK and the Republic of Ireland. These are grounds in themselves for a recall of parliament."

After the letter was published, #recallnow was trending on Twitter, as MPs shared the letter and made further pleas.

greybeard

19th August 2019, 11:15

UK to end freedom of movement for EU citizens on day one of Brexit, under new government plan
The Independent Rob Merrick,The Independent 4 hours ago

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/uk-end-freedom-movement-eu-143700458.html

Free movement for citizens will end on day one of a no-deal Brexit, under new Home Office plans – despite warnings of chaos and of people trapped in legal limbo.

Priti Patel, the new hardline home secretary, is pressing for border restrictions to be imposed immediately on 31 October, even though no replacement system is ready, The Independent has been told.

Previously, ministers had intended to delay scrapping free movement until new rules are in place, with a Bill stuck in the Commons and fierce rows over what those rules should be.

The Liberal Democrats condemned the acceleration as “brutal”, warning it exposed Ms Patel as being “completely detached from reality”.

And the organisation representing more than 3 million EU citizens in the UK said: “This will open the door to discrimination. There are no systems in place.”

The dramatic shift comes despite the government declining to bring forward the stalled Bill which would end free movement under a slower timetable, for fear of a Commons ambush.

Instead, Ms Patel believes she can act through secondary legislation, in a way that would bypass MPs of all parties who would oppose it.

Home Office officials have been sent to Singapore to copy its solution to technical issues, with the home secretary convinced it can be introduced quickly.

But Ed Davey, the Lib Dem home affairs spokesperson, said: “It is completely detached from reality and is next chapter in the never-ending saga of the utter mess they are making of Brexit.

“What would this mean for EU citizens who have made their home in the UK who have travelled abroad when they try to return?

“Are the government seriously suggesting an NHS nurse who is an EU national may not be allowed to return to the country if they happen to have been on holiday? It is absurd.”

Sir Ed also disputed that Ms Patel could avoid passing an act of parliament, describing any such attempt as “outrageous”.

And Nicolas Hatton, head of the3million group of EU citizens in this country, said: “There are no systems in place and nothing is ready. This is a political gesture, but it will have a real impact on people’s lives.

“This will open the door to discrimination. How will they distinguish between the ‘legacy people’, those already here, and those who will arrive afterwards?”

Sajid Javid, Ms Patel’s predecessor, had dismissed a day-one end to free movement as not “practical” for employers and others, saying: “There will need to be some kind of sensible transition period.”

The new plan may be viewed as part of efforts to force the EU into reopening Brexit negotiations, by signalling an uncompromising stance that would also cause huge upheaval across the Channel.

The government will not bring back the existing immigration bill because it fears it will be hijacked by MPs seeking to block a no-deal Brexit, who could table amendments.

In any case, business and public service leaders, as well as some ministers, are fighting a mooted £30,000 salary threshold for would-be immigrants – fearing severe staff shortages.

Boris Johnson further muddied the waters when he said advisers would now be told to work up plans for “an Australian-style points based system”, declining to set any limit on numbers.

In the Commons last month, the prime minister made no mention of the bill, instead telling MPs: “No one believes more strongly than me in the benefits of migration to our country.”

A senior Home Office source told The Independent that Ms Patel wants free movement “to end on 31 October”.

“Priti wants to toughen the Home Office’s stance,” the source added. “She thinks Saj [Mr Javid] did a great job but, with a new prime minister and new priorities, changes needed to be made.

“For a start that means properly preparing for no deal, it’s clear those in the centre had no intention of preparing for no deal.”

No 10 declined to comment on the new approach, but it is believed to be endorsed by Downing Street and Dominic Cummings, the controversial chief aide.

Last autumn, Mr Javid said of ending free movement immediately: “We’ve just got to be practical.

“If there was a no deal, we won’t be able to immediately distinguish between those Europeans that were already here before 29 March [the then-exit date], and those who came after. There will need to be some kind of sensible transition period.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “The home secretary has been clear in her intention to take back control of our borders and end free movement after 31 October.

“Ending free movement means we are no longer required to give unlimited and uncontrolled access to those from EU countries when they are coming here seeking to work.”

greybeard

19th August 2019, 12:43

Well that's what was voted for--was it not?
Im just an innocent bystander--smiling.
Lord knows where this is going but it sure is interesting.
Ch

Tintin

20th August 2019, 10:00

Instead of starting a new thread for this piece from Craig Murray I think it is still sufficiently on-topic to share here.

I'd hunched some time ago that the 'leave' vote may very well suit a longer term possible plan to cement even further the US/UK/Israel trifecta (a.k.a 'The Crown') as a new (sic) geo-political order, although it should fairly be argued that it has always been there, flexxing its peculiarly nefarious muscles more covertly, behind the scenes.

Signalling its intent with a little more fanfare here then, this article from Craig is an update to one he posted a few months ago where an inside source at the FCO had tipped him off that this move was afoot. At the time of course information was not available as to when this move was planned. Timing it post-Brexit would seem to make a lot of sense.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"Johnson heads the most radically pro-Israel cabinet in UK history and the symbolic gesture of rejection of Palestinian rights is naturally appealing to his major ministers Patel, Javid and Raab."

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

FCO Speeds Up Planning to Move UK Embassy to Jerusalem
18 Aug, 2019 in Uncategorized by craig (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/08/fco-speeds-up-planning-to-move-uk-embassy-to-jerusalem/)

Following US National Security Adviser John Bolton’s talks with Boris Johnson and his ministers in London last week, FCO officials have been asked to speed up contingency planning for the UK to move its Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, with an eye to an “early announcement” post Brexit.

The UK is currently bound by an EU common foreign policy position not to follow the United States in moving its Embassy to Jerusalem. As things stand, that prohibition will fall on 1 November. FCO officials had previously been asked to produce a contingency plan, but this involved the construction of a £14 million new Embassy and a four year timescale. They have now been asked to go back and look at a quick fix involving moving the Ambassador and immediate staff to Jerusalem and renaming the Consulate already there as the Embassy. This could be speedily announced, and then implemented in about a year.

Johnson heads the most radically pro-Israel cabinet in UK history and the symbolic gesture of rejection of Palestinian rights is naturally appealing to his major ministers Patel, Javid and Raab. They also see three other political benefits. Firstly, they anticipate that Labour opposition to the move can be used to yet again raise accusations of “anti-semitism” against Jeremy Corbyn. Secondly, it provides good “red meat” to Brexiteer support in marking a clear and, they believe, popular break from EU foreign policy, at no economic cost. Thirdly, it seals the special link between the Trump and Johnson administrations and sets the UK apart from other NATO allies.

Bolton also discussed the possibility of UK support for Israeli annexation of areas of the West Bank to “solve” the illegality of Israeli settlements on occupied territory. My FCO sources believe this is going to be much more difficult politically for the Cabinet to agree than simply moving the Embassy, due to lack of support on their own backbenches.

This is an insight into the future of British foreign policy if the Johnson government, and the UK, both survive. In the massive defeat of the UK at the UN General Assembly two months ago over the illegal occupation of the Chagos Islands, the UK was in a voting block with only the USA, Israel, Australia, Hungary and the Maldives, against the rest of the world. The Maldives had a particular maritime interest there, but the leadership of the others – Donald Trump, Viktor Orban, Scott Morrison, Benjamin Netanyahu and now Boris Johnson – constitute a distinct and extreme right wing bloc. These are very worrying times indeed.

This article was updated to add the third point above after my source alerted me that I had missed it.

greybeard

20th August 2019, 10:03

There does seem to be an agenda Tintin--thanks.

greybeard

20th August 2019, 10:34

Boris Johnson willing to give 'commitments' to avoid backstop
Sky News

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-willing-eu-commitments-over-backstop-211400959.html

Boris Johnson says he is willing to give the EU the "commitments" it needs that alternatives to the Northern Ireland backstop can be put into effect.

Striking a new tone in the Brexit negotiations, the prime minister's letter to EU Council President Donald Tusk will be seen as an attempt to convince Europe's leaders that he is willing to provide guarantees that other arrangements will be viable.

He wrote: "The backstop should be replaced with a commitment to put in place [alternative arrangements] as far as possible before the end of the transition period, as part of the future relationship.

"I recognise that there will need to be a degree of confidence about what would happen if these arrangements were not all fully in place at the end of [the transition] period.

"We are ready to look constructively and flexibly at what commitments might help."

"Alternative arrangements" to the backstop have long been touted by supporters of Brexit as a potential solution to the Northern Ireland border problem. They include livestock checks away from the border and a "trusted trader" programme for goods.

Mr Johnson also reiterated his opposition to the backstop - which would force the UK into a customs union with the EU if the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland could not be kept open.

He wrote that the backstop is "simply unviable" and "anti-democratic and inconsistent with the sovereignty of the UK as a state".

In the same letter, he challenged the EU to make a legal promise not to impose a hard border. The prime minister wrote: "We would be happy to accept a legally binding commitment to this effect and hope the EU would do likewise."

Details of the letter to Mr Tusk emerged as a senior US politician warned that legislators would move to block a future US-UK trade deal if it puts the Good Friday Agreement at risk by introducing a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

US Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer has written to US secretary of state Mike Pompeo warning that Congress could work on a cross-party basis to block a deal.

Mr Schumer called for the Trump administration to stop "over-promising an unconditional and unrealistic" post-Brexit trade agreement with the UK. The letter was also sent to Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab.

Mr Schumer's intervention coincided with President Trump tweeting details of a phone call with Mr Johnson on Monday about a future trading relationship.

He tweeted: "Great discussion with Prime Minister @BorisJohnson today.

"We talked about Brexit and how we can move rapidly on a US-UK free trade deal.

"I look forward to meeting with Boris this weekend, at the @G7, in France!"

A Downing Street spokesperson said: "The prime minister spoke to President Trump today, ahead of the G7 Summit in Biarritz.

"They discussed economic issues and our trading relationship, and the Prime Minister updated the President on Brexit. The leaders looked forward to seeing each other at the Summit this weekend."

My son Stephen said
"If Boris comes out waving a peace of paper shouting I got an agreement!!"
He would be happy--if not Scotland facing home rule for sure.
Chris

Tintin

20th August 2019, 11:32

Boris Johnson

A brief intermission if I may :)

I don't know if anyone else here in the UK remembered seeing it, but, 'Who do you think you are?' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/whodoyouthinkyouare/past-stories/boris-johnson.shtml) often throws up some very interesting and genuinely moving stories around peoples' genealogy, and none really more fascinating than Boris' own lineage.

As summarised via the link above:

"Returning to western Europe, Boris sets off in search of the truth about Granny Butter's background, and follows an intriguing family trail that leads him to a surprising conclusion."

Well, that conclusion was that he was related to Jesus, and if of course you trace that back further, there then being an inference mightier even than Thor's own hammer :)

I don't imagine Boris playing God - Jeremy Corbyn probably qualifies more appropriately in the archetypal looks department there - but it'll be fascinating to see how this all plays out. :)

greybeard

21st August 2019, 16:09

UK government makes major move that signals a no-deal Brexit
Lianna Brinded,Yahoo Finance

https://uk.yahoo.com/finance/news/uk-government-made-a-major-move-that-points-to-a-nodeal-brexit-073537400.html

Britain’s government declared that it will automatically enrol UK businesses into a customs system that will allow them to continue trading with the European Union in a no-deal Brexit.

The move is a major signal that the UK government is looking to leave the EU without a deal and that it is speeding up the country’s preparations in the event of a hard Brexit.

The auto-enrolment into the customs system will see all VAT-registered firms in the UK receiving an ID number within the next two weeks via the tax man — Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs.

READ MORE: CBI chief warns UK can never be fully prepared for a no-deal Brexit

The ID will be an Economic Operator Registration and Identification (EORI) number that will allow businesses to continue trading with the bloc even in the event of Britain leaving the EU without any agreements in place on 31 October.

If firms do not have number when a no-deal Brexit happens, then they won’t be able to trade with customers and suppliers in EU member states after Brexit.

Only 72,000 firms have registered for an EORI number so far, but the auto-enrolment will see at least another 88,000 more firms receiving an ID.

Meanwhile new UK prime minister Boris Johnson is pushing Britain closer to a no-deal Brexit.

Johnson, a staunch Brexiteer, is in Germany this week to reiterate his call for the Irish backstop plan to be scrapped to chancellor Angela Merkel.

READ MORE: Brexit explained: what does the Irish backstop mean

The backstop is a fall-back plan to ensure the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland remains as smooth and low-key as possible, whatever the terms of Britain’s exit from the EU.

The EU have repeatedly said that it will not renegotiate the Brexit deal agreed with former prime minister Theresa May and that it won’t look to get rid of the backstop mechanism.

So far, Johnson has not made headway with the bloc on any new terms of a deal and analysts have said his “plans” are just “unicorns with a lick of paint.”

While UK chancellor Sajid Javid said the move would help "ease the flow of goods at border points and support businesses to trade and grow," business lobby groups said that more should be done to prevent a no-deal Brexit in the first place.

Carolyn Fairbairn, director general of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), said on Monday “we have become more prepared for the short-term disruption – not fully prepared, I don’t think that can be done. If you have any delays at borders that will be significant.”

She added that customs checks would cost the UK and trading partners £20bn ($24.1bn) a year, costs that “cannot be fully mitigated.”

The Bank of England previously warned that British businesses are totally unprepared for a no-deal Brexit despite having years to plan ahead. In a report, BoE governor Mark Carney said:

Less than 50% of UK-based businesses have begun making contingency plans for a potential no-deal Brexit.

Less than 20% of small UK businesses have worked on contingency plans.

Up to 250,000 businesses have never completed a customs declaration form, which would be required after a no-deal Brexit to continue trading with the European Union.

greybeard

26th August 2019, 14:35

Brussels fires warning shot at Boris Johnson over £39bn Brexit bill
PA Media: UK News By David Hughes, PA Political Editor, Biarritz,PA Media: UK News
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brussels-fires-warning-shot-boris-113311924.html

Boris Johnson has been warned by senior figures in Brussels that failing to pay the £39 billion divorce bill would damage relations between the UK and the European Union and jeopardise future trade talks.

The Prime Minister has said that if there is a no-deal Brexit “the £39 billion is no longer legally pledged” to the EU.

But officials in Brussels said the UK must honour commitments made during its EU membership and pointedly said that “settling accounts is essential to starting off a new relationship on the right foot”.

European Commission spokeswoman Mina Andreeva said: “All commitments that were taken by the 28 member states should be honoured and this is also and especially true in a no-deal scenario where the UK would be expected to continue to honour all commitments made during EU membership.

“Rather than going now into a judicial action threat, I think it is important to make clear that settling accounts is essential to starting off a new relationship on the right foot based on mutual trust.

“I would also say that as far as I understand this issue has not been raised with the EU side, for the time being, officially.”

Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament’s Brexit co-ordinator, said: “If the UK doesn’t pay what is due, the EU will not negotiate a trade deal.

“After a ‘no deal’, this will be a first condition of any talks. Britain is better than this.”

Mr Johnson said on Sunday that there would be “very substantial sums” available from the £39 billion to spend on domestic priorities if there was a no-deal Brexit.

Meanwhile, the Government said EU leaders should not expect MPs to block a no-deal Brexit.

“The Prime Minister has been repeatedly clear that Parliamentarians and politicians don’t get to choose which votes they respect,” a senior Government official said .

“The Prime Minister has been very clear to European leaders that he has seen in the last week that the idea that Brexit is going to be stopped is incorrect.

“We are leaving on October 31 with or without a deal.

“European leaders should not be listening to the very wrong messages emerging from some parliamentarians who think they will be stopping Brexit.”

greybeard

26th August 2019, 16:24

Britain can easily cope with no-deal Brexit, claims Boris Johnson
The Guardian Heather Stewart and Julian Borger in Biarritz,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/britain-apos-easily-cope-apos-194551452.html

Britain could “easily cope” with a no-deal Brexit, which would be the fault of EU leaders’ “obduracy”, Boris Johnson claimed at the summit of G7 countries in France, as he continued to resist mounting pressure to spell out his own plans for breaking the deadlock.

“I think we can get through this, this is a great, great country, the UK, we can easily cope with a no-deal scenario,” Johnson insisted in Biarritz, as he made his debut on the international stage as prime minister with a series of bilateral meetings with world leaders including Donald Trump, the EU council president, Donald Tusk, and the Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi.

Johnson said preparations for no deal were being ramped up to help secure an agreement, but also “so that if and when we are forced by the obduracy by our European friends to come out on 31 October without a deal that things are as smooth as they can possibly be”.

Johnson claimed food shortages – one of the risks outlined in the leaked Operation Yellowhammer documents on no-deal planning – were “highly unlikely”, and offered a “guarantee” that patients would be able to access medicines unhindered.

The prime minister said that in the event of no deal the UK would withhold much of the £39bn financial settlement agreed by Theresa May – and insisted it was up to the EU27 to avert that eventuality.

“If we come out without an agreement it is certainly true that the £39bn is no longer, strictly speaking, owed,” he said. “There will be very substantial sums available to our country to spend on our priorities. It’s not a threat. It’s a simple fact of reality.”

During the Conservative leadership campaign, Johnson suggested the entire £39bn would be retained in the hope of using it as leverage to win a better future trading relationship from the EU27. But Downing Street appears to have conceded that legal obligations for past liabilities may mean up to a quarter of it may still have to be paid.

Johnson is battling to keep alive the prospect of striking a reworked exit deal with the EU27 in time for Britain to leave by the Halloween deadline, which he has made it a “mission” of his government to meet.

But with just a week until MPs return to Westminster, preparing to seize any opportunity to bind his hands, Johnson has so far presented no detailed plan.

After Johnson met Tusk on the sidelines of the G7 summit on Sunday, an EU official said, “nothing really happened”. “It was essentially just a reconfirmation of of the views of both sides. There were no new substantive elements from any side, and obviously not from the UK side,” the official said.

“What we ideally would have been hoping for and looking for are new ideas that unblock this situation,” the European official said. “So we are waiting … We need input from their side.”

Meanwhile, it emerged this weekend that Downing Street has sought legal advice from the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, about the possibility of shutting down parliament from September.

Asked about the issue on Sunday, a senior government official said, “No 10 commissions legal advice on a whole range of issues, but the PM is clear that he is not going to stop MPs debating Brexit”.

Johnson’s parliamentary opponents appear unable to present a united front, however. The shadow trade secretary, Barry Gardiner, accused the Liberal Democrat leader, Jo Swinson, of being “extremely petulant” on Sunday, after she raised doubts about whether Jeremy Corbyn was the right person to lead a caretaker government to prevent a no-deal Brexit.

Gardiner told Sky News that the Labour leader was offering a “failsafe” way of achieving the Lib Dems’ Brexit aims, but he said Swinson had concluded, “oh well, we are not going to cooperate if Jeremy Corbyn is going to be the person who does it”.

Labour has suggested it could table a vote of no confidence in Johnson’s government – but is unlikely to do so immediately after MPs return from summer recess unless it is convinced Tory rebels are ready to back it.

Swinson has written to Corbyn, suggesting an agenda for the meeting and warning that if he insists on leading the charge it could prevent the plan succeeding.

“In the last week, many MPs who stand opposed to no deal, in particular key Conservative MPs, have rejected your proposal to lead an emergency government. Insisting you lead that emergency government will therefore jeopardise the chances of a no confidence vote gaining enough support to pass in the first place,” she wrote.

The former chancellor Philip Hammond revealed the extent of the bad blood between Downing Street and Conservative moderates on Sunday, as he wrote to the PM demanding an apology for briefings that suggested the Yellowhammer leak came from former ministers.

Hammond said it had since emerged the document was dated to August, and thus could not have been leaked by one of the moderates dispatched to the backbenches in Johnson’s summer reshuffle.

A government official said Johnson would respond, “in due course”.

On Sunday, Johnson claimed the Brexit mood music had improved significantly over recent days; but it remained “touch and go” whether a deal was achievable.

Throughout the summit in Biarritz, Johnson has sought to stress the UK’s determination to remain internationalist – and to distance itself from Trump’s White House on some questions.

At a dinner of G7 leaders on Saturday night, which sources said was occasionally testy, Johnson sided with Germany, France and others against the US president’s argument that Russia should be readmitted to the group.

greybeard

26th August 2019, 21:33

Boris Johnson Refuses To Rule Out Suspending Parliament To Force Through No-Deal Brexit
HuffPost UK Paul Waugh,HuffPost UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-refuses-rule-suspending-175934456.html

Boris Johnson has warned Commons speaker John Bercow and other MPs to “respect the will of the people” as he repeatedly refused to rule out suspending parliament if it blocked a no-deal Brexit.

Speaking at the end of the G7 summit in France, the prime minister refused three times to say how he would react if backbenchers found a way to legally force him to keep the UK in the EU beyond October 31.

Johnson did however send a stark message to Bercow, who many MPs believe will tear up parliamentary precedent to help rebels to compel the PM to seek an extension to Britain’s membership of the 28-nation bloc.

Asked directly if he had confidence in Bercow, he refused to give the Speaker his backing. “It’s not the function of the prime minister to express confidence in the Speaker. I hope that all parliamentarians will use their good offices to respect the will of the people and get Brexit done.”

Challenged repeatedly to explain whether he would ‘prorogue’ parliament to stymie MPs attempts to halt a Halloween exit without agreement, Johnson ducked the question.

“I rely on parliamentarians to do the right thing and honour the pledge that they made to the people of this country,” he said.

At a press conference on the final day of the gathering of world leaders in Biarritz, Johnson also brushed aside threats from Brussels that the UK would not get a trade deal with the EU if it withheld its £39bn ‘divorce bill’ payments.

In a brutal assessmment on Monday, a European Commission spokeswoman said the UK must honour commitments made during its EU membership and pointedly said that “settling accounts is essential to starting off a new relationship on the right foot”.

As Jeremy Corbyn met other party leaders to plot ways to bind the PM’s hands, No.10 also said that he had urged leading European figures not to draw “very wrong messages” from British politicians over coming weeks.

The meeting will be attended by the SNP, Liberal Democrats, Change UK, Plaid Cymru and the Green Party. However, no pro-Remain Conservatives are expected to be present.

MPs are due to return from their summer break next week and Downing Street is braced for a constitutional clash with the Opposition and rebel Tory MPs.

An official said: “We are leaving on October 31 with a deal or without. The prime minister would prefer it to be a deal but we will be leaving on October 31 and he is very clear about that.

“He thinks European leaders should not be listening to the very wrong messages emerging from some parliamentarians who think that they will stop Brexit.”

He added that Johnson had been “repeatedly clear that parliamentarians and politicians don’t get to choose which public votes they respect”.

Earlier, European Commission spokeswoman Mina Andreeva said: “All commitments that were taken by the 28 member states should be honoured and this is also and especially true in a no-deal scenario where the UK would be expected to continue to honour all commitments made during EU membership.

“Rather than going now into a judicial action threat, I think it is important to make clear that settling accounts is essential to starting off a new relationship on the right foot based on mutual trust.

“I would also say that as far as I understand this issue has not been raised with the EU side, for the time being, officially.”

Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament’s Brexit co-ordinator, said: “If the UK doesn’t pay what is due, the EU will not negotiate a trade deal.

“After a ‘no deal’, this will be a first condition of any talks. Britain is better than this.”

Johnson hit back: “Under any circumstances if there is a no-deal outcome, then substantial sums will be available from the £39bn to the UK to spend on our priorities, including managing that no-deal scenario. “It all depends on how seriously they wish to get a deal”.

greybeard

27th August 2019, 07:18

News
Voters are bored of Brexit. If Remainers want to stop no-deal, they need to start talking about the other union

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/voters-bored-brexit-remainers-want-090709642.html

The Independent Ed Davey,The Independent

Brexit is a tale of two unions. Attention has been on the first, the European Union, and attempts by Boris Johnson to engineer what tabloids in a different context would call a “messy” divorce. Thus free, he could consummate his latest infatuation with Donald Trump.

Johnson is busy painting himself as a heroic, resilient figure in the manner of Gloria Gaynor singing “I Will Survive”. But will our country survive him? For there is another union threatened by Brexit, the Union between four nations which, in more innocent times, went by the married name of “the United Kingdom”.

At least two of those nations are falling out of love with the partnership. While England’s adultery with no-deal will be cited in any divorce petition, the underlying cause of the rift – as in so many unsuccessful marriages – is neglect.

Scotland is increasingly aware that Johnson simply doesn’t care if it leaves. Indeed, members of the so-called Conservative and Unionist party have expressly said that end of our three centuries old Union is a price worth paying for their blind infatuation with Brexit. While the Scottish National Party (SNP) likes to fulminate against Johnson, privately Nicola Sturgeon must be dancing a jig of joy: since 62 per cent of Scots voters rejected Brexit, Johnson’s breezy, careless English nationalism is the greatest recruiting sergeant for Scottish nationalism since the Highland clearances.

In Northern Ireland, the Westminster government is planning to draft in mainland police to guard a border many thought redundant. Simon Byrne, chief constable of Northern Ireland, warns that republican terrorists will exploit Brexit: 10 terrorist attacks have been averted recently. And support for a new referendum on prospects for a united island of Ireland, with Northern Ireland ceding from the United Kingdom, is now increasing.

Meanwhile, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has effectively offered the SNP a second referendum on independence if they help to install him in Number 10. We know Corbyn doesn’t really oppose Brexit, and suspect he secretly wants it – so he can blame the Conservatives for the resulting carnage. Now, it appears Corbyn doesn’t even care about the United Kingdom.

Former prime minister Gordon Brown is right to warn that Brexit threatens the very existence of the UK. And this, I believe, is what Remainers should now emphasise.

In any election, I’m confident the resurgent Liberal Democrats will prosper as the only major party fighting for Remain. But against an historically unpopular Leader of the Opposition, who still can’t answer whether he supports or opposes Brexit, Johnson and the Conservatives could still do worryingly well. Sure, opinion polls show growing opposition to a no-deal Brexit, but is that issue enough to be decisive?

A sizeable section of the electorate has been assured by Michael Gove, the new architect of no-deal, that there will be nothing more inconvenient than a few bumps in the crash-out road – in stark contradiction to the Yellowhammer report he himself commissioned. Nevertheless, the Conservatives’ poll rating has risen.

As the largest pro-Remain party, the Liberal Democrats will continue to call out the Brexit lies. But we need to recognise that a sizeable section of the electorate is Brexit weary, wants it all over by Christmas and mistakenly believes that no-deal offers an early end to this crisis. So we need to open up a second front: stop Brexit, to save the United Kingdom.

Polls already suggest a sizeable minority of Conservative voters put keeping Scotland in the United Kingdom before Brexit. Even more might back a clarion call to “Save the United Kingdom” if it also meant avoiding the real risk of a return to terrorist violence in Northern Ireland, and stopping the United Kingdom being reduced to the Union of England and Wales.

The union that is the United Kingdom has been extraordinarily successful. Our British family has cooperated brilliantly, working together with shared goals and values, to make a unique four-country multinational success. It is vital we save this union from Johnson's Brexiteers, who clearly don’t value Britishness despite their protestations.

And our other union – the European Union – is remarkably successful too – in the terms it has been created, for international prosperity and peace. It’s a union highly valued in Scotland and Northern Ireland, if less so by English nationalists. Yet there are British people who are English too and who value being part of Europe.

Alone, outside the EU, our United Kingdom might just survive or, more likely, it might break up. Either way, it will be a less prosperous and less happy union. That’s why we should stop singing “I Will Survive”, in favour of another seventies pop anthem: “Let’s Stick Together."

Ed Davey is Liberal Democrat MP for Kingston and Surbiton. He is the party's Treasury spokesperson
News