The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

[greybeard]

Boris Johnson ‘might never enter No 10’ if MPs withdraw support
The Guardian Michael Savage,The Guardian


https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-john...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]

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-hun...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]

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...my-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]

RichPlanet.net

Fake, Five Star Fugitive

Published 1st July 2019

Mr Hall explores the possible hidden motivations behind Brexit...

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

[greybeard]

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-jer...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]

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-john...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]

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-breakin...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]

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-gove...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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Boris Johnson is heading for a landslide victory – and then disaster
The Independent John Rentoul,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-john...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]

Greybeard, Would you like Britain to leave the EU under a no deal Brexit?

[greybeard]

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

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

Regards Chris

[greybeard]

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-john...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]

Boris Johnson's Brexit plan for businesses dismissed by head of WTO
The Independent Andrew Woodcock,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-john...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/e...f-a-wto-brexit

[greybeard]

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-cor...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]

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-membe...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]

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-m...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.”