MPs have backed PM Boris Johnson's plan for the UK to leave the EU on 31 January[Post #162]

[Technics 1210]

The EU do not want UK to be competitors. This is why the deal forbids the UK from reducing corporation tax - one of many examples in the deal!

The only way for total freedom is to break clean.

 

[Knight_Rider]

Yes, I think it will. Project Fear has annoyed so many people that they will vote Leave as an act of rebellion.

Then the Dutch and Danes are likely to leave too, and the whole rotten edifice could come down.

Why exactly is EU rotten?

Many countries incl parts of UK have prospered under EU laws. Britain is no longer a colonial empire of 1800s, so many Brits need to get off their high horse and face the reality. They are not superior to other nations because of their colonial past.

 

[Markhor]

thus we get no deal and a hard border..which is what the DUP want..i suspect

On the one hand the IRA are saying they will bomb any border posts put up, and on the other the UVF are saying if there's a de facto border in the Irish Sea then the "boys will be back in town" in other words.

Most voters want this drama to be over but it'll need Labour MPs. I'd vote for the deal IF allied with a second referendum (Boris's deal versus Remain) and with workers rights enshrined to ensure no race to the bottom.

 

[sweep_shot]

A Conservative MP has said he will stand down at the next election due to disagreements over Brexit.

Mark Field, MP for Cities of London and Westminster, said his beliefs "stand at odds with the current administration's impatient approach to getting Brexit done".

He added he would prefer the UK to remain "in or very closely aligned to the EU".

In June he was sacked as a minister after grabbing a Greenpeace activist.

In a statement on his website, Mr Field said: "It is increasingly clear that divisions over Brexit and our future relationship with the EU-27 will dominate and define domestic politics for many years to come."

He said his preference for ruling out a no-deal Brexit and his support for revoking Article 50 in order to restart the two-year clock and give negotiations more time put him at odds with Boris Johnson's government.

"Yet even if the current proposed deal passes - and naturally I shall support it - we must be clear what lies ahead will not be plain sailing," he added.

He cited disagreements with the handling of Brexit as his reason for stepping down but added: "I have no desire to become a disaffected, dissenting voice from the backbenches, undermining a government under whose colours I have been elected."

He said speculation about an imminent general election "has forced me to reach the very difficult decision not to offer myself as your candidate".

Mr Field was elected in 2001. He was suspended as the Foreign Office minister after grabbing an activist at a black-tie dinner in the City of London during a speech being given by then-Chancellor Philip Hammond.

He was sacked from the role when Boris Johnson entered office and a Whitehall investigation over the matter was later dropped.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-50091561.

 

[Robert]

Why exactly is EU rotten?

Many countries incl parts of UK have prospered under EU laws. Britain is no longer a colonial empire of 1800s, so many Brits need to get off their high horse and face the reality. They are not superior to other nations because of their colonial past.

Blimey, necroposting from 3 1/2 years ago....

I changed my mind and voted Remain. As you can see from all my posts since.

 

[Robert]

The EU do not want UK to be competitors. This is why the deal forbids the UK from reducing corporation tax - one of many examples in the deal!

The only way for total freedom is to break clean.

Your total freedom means economic crash, eroding services, more unemployment, more food banks and more crime. It’s freedom for the rich only. Everyone else will be less free.

German firms pay a total of 30% corporation and trade tax. Doesn’t seem to stop them exporting zillions of Veedubs, Mercs, Beemers and Audis. They have better schools and health care than us, because their companies and citizens pay more tax.

 

[the Great Khan]

Your total freedom means economic crash, eroding services, more unemployment, more food banks and more crime. It’s freedom for the rich only. Everyone else will be less free.

German firms pay a total of 30% corporation and trade tax. Doesn’t seem to stop them exporting zillions of Veedubs, Mercs, Beemers and Audis. They have better schools and health care than us, because their companies and citizens pay more tax.

but but we will be freeeee...

I cant see how brexit is going to make our lives better. Most of us will be worse off. every sector will take a massive hit..and we will lose free access to the largest common market in the world.

In the 1930's the british empire had access to a market of 530 million people. But that market was gained through war, rape murder and all sorts of imperial shenanigans.

here we are the members of a club with a market as large as that and we got in without needing to conquer europe...

I predict the UK will have to increase their defence budget, which will mean less for everyone else. They will privatise massive chunks of the NHS, and other areas. They will try and establish new bases in asia and the middle east to once again influence key markets..

the visit of the prince and princess to pakistan is to ensure the uk gets a piece of the BRI pie. Of course if they had stayed in the EU that was all a default position anyway as the EU is connected to the BRI via rail and soon via roads..but alas..

 

[Robert]

but but we will be freeeee...

I cant see how brexit is going to make our lives better. Most of us will be worse off. every sector will take a massive hit..and we will lose free access to the largest common market in the world.

In the 1930's the british empire had access to a market of 530 million people. But that market was gained through war, rape murder and all sorts of imperial shenanigans.

here we are the members of a club with a market as large as that and we got in without needing to conquer europe...

I predict the UK will have to increase their defence budget, which will mean less for everyone else. They will privatise massive chunks of the NHS, and other areas. They will try and establish new bases in asia and the middle east to once again influence key markets..

the visit of the prince and princess to pakistan is to ensure the uk gets a piece of the BRI pie. Of course if they had stayed in the EU that was all a default position anyway as the EU is connected to the BRI via rail and soon via roads..but alas..

Yes! And France and Germany became friends after centuries of war, and Spain and Portugal went from one-time exterminating colonisers to peaceful democracies.

And don't forget how many white people voted Leave because they thought it would get faces like yours and [MENTION=149166]Technics 1210[/MENTION] off "their" streets. They are going to be disappointed when the NHS has to import more South Asian and African clinical staff when the continental Europeans go home.

 

[the Great Khan]

Yes! And France and Germany became friends after centuries of war, and Spain and Portugal went from one-time exterminating colonisers to peaceful democracies.

And don't forget how many white people voted Leave because they thought it would get faces like yours and [MENTION=149166]Technics 1210[/MENTION] off "their" streets. They are going to be disappointed when the NHS has to import more South Asian and African clinical staff when the continental Europeans go home.

so true. you know I remember near the time of the referendum I was on the fence. I had to juggle my thoughts. On one side I thought , from a purely emotional and prejudiced point of view I'll admit, I thought having less eastern europeans in the country would be beneficial to the BAME community. At the same time I thought we could get out of EU restrictions on nationalisation and so forth. On the flip side I wanted my children the ability to travel any where in europe, work wherever and gain experiences I never could. i wanted the UK to remain economically viable in a future where large blocks will be needed to counter trading entitiies like China and the sub continent etc.

Then i read a book on world war 2 and that fact I presented above hit me like a train. i voted remain. It was a no brainer after I read that.

Now we will see racism rise, the far right take more hold of this society and at some point immigrant origin people facing real hardships due to the duality and contradictory situation in british politics.

 

[Robert]

so true. you know I remember near the time of the referendum I was on the fence. I had to juggle my thoughts. On one side I thought , from a purely emotional and prejudiced point of view I'll admit, I thought having less eastern europeans in the country would be beneficial to the BAME community. At the same time I thought we could get out of EU restrictions on nationalisation and so forth. On the flip side I wanted my children the ability to travel any where in europe, work wherever and gain experiences I never could. i wanted the UK to remain economically viable in a future where large blocks will be needed to counter trading entitiies like China and the sub continent etc.

Then i read a book on world war 2 and that fact I presented above hit me like a train. i voted remain. It was a no brainer after I read that.

Now we will see racism rise, the far right take more hold of this society and at some point immigrant origin people facing real hardships due to the duality and contradictory situation in british politics.

Very honest of you [MENTION=253]the Great Khan[/MENTION]. I switched from Leave to Remain because 1. an economics professor explained to me that we have far more clout in Europe than I thought; 2. I realised I was about to vote with the racists who put up that disgusting poster of imaginary immigrants and 3. the Irish border - it cannot come back, it just cannot, it's unthinkable.

Sadly I think you are right about the racism. I thought it was gone after the good Blair and Brown years but it was just under the surface. I have skin in this game too - my blue eyes would protect me from the fascists, but I will have to defend my wife and stepkids.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

so true. you know I remember near the time of the referendum I was on the fence. I had to juggle my thoughts. On one side I thought , from a purely emotional and prejudiced point of view I'll admit, I thought having less eastern europeans in the country would be beneficial to the BAME community. At the same time I thought we could get out of EU restrictions on nationalisation and so forth. On the flip side I wanted my children the ability to travel any where in europe, work wherever and gain experiences I never could. i wanted the UK to remain economically viable in a future where large blocks will be needed to counter trading entitiies like China and the sub continent etc.

Then i read a book on world war 2 and that fact I presented above hit me like a train. i voted remain. It was a no brainer after I read that.

Now we will see racism rise, the far right take more hold of this society and at some point immigrant origin people facing real hardships due to the duality and contradictory situation in british politics.

Don't understand how any British Asian thought the anti-EU movement was going to benefit the BAME community - and believe me I have come across these deluded idiots in my circle as well. You just had to look at the UKIP poster campaign to see who the real undesirables were considered to be.

I stopped taking this personally a long time ago. For me being part of the EU is now purely about business and free movement. I have no problem with the Euro or the metric system. If the Americas can benefit by being part of a huge bloc of countries, I don't see why we should have been so small minded to snub the EU.

 

[the Great Khan]

Very honest of you [MENTION=253]the Great Khan[/MENTION]. I switched from Leave to Remain because 1. an economics professor explained to me that we have far more clout in Europe than I thought; 2. I realised I was about to vote with the racists who put up that disgusting poster of imaginary immigrants and 3. the Irish border - it cannot come back, it just cannot, it's unthinkable.

Sadly I think you are right about the racism. I thought it was gone after the good Blair and Brown years but it was just under the surface. I have skin in this game too - my blue eyes would protect me from the fascists, but I will have to defend my wife and stepkids.

I hear you Rob. I know we have some robust debates on here but you cant do tone on the internet lol..

I'm on the same page as you with this. Put it this way, I had accepted the EU as a daily normal part of my life. It was just normal. I felt it also allowed us to open our horizons a bit and get educated about spain germany france portugal..i mean such deep cultures and fascinating people..

But alas our children have been betrayed by a cadre of old imperialists who wont see the fruits of their xenophobia.

And worst part of this is Britain is now going to be a small fish in a very big pond full of angry sharks..
I mean there are a lot of countries out there that are waiting to get at the UK..for whatever reason..

So we will be left with a choice, bow to the US..or else..

 

[the Great Khan]

Don't understand how any British Asian thought the anti-EU movement was going to benefit the BAME community - and believe me I have come across these deluded idiots in my circle as well. You just had to look at the UKIP poster campaign to see who the real undesirables were considered to be.

I stopped taking this personally a long time ago. For me being part of the EU is now purely about business and free movement. I have no problem with the Euro or the metric system. If the Americas can benefit by being part of a huge bloc of countries, I don't see why we should have been so small minded to snub the EU.

yup..agree..for me it was all business..but I did think about the BAME thing for a short period then dismissed it from my list lol..

 

[Technics 1210]

Your total freedom means economic crash, eroding services, more unemployment, more food banks and more crime. It’s freedom for the rich only. Everyone else will be less free.

German firms pay a total of 30% corporation and trade tax. Doesn’t seem to stop them exporting zillions of Veedubs, Mercs, Beemers and Audis. They have better schools and health care than us, because their companies and citizens pay more tax.

Not the point. The irony is that EU are stiffing capitalism and competition! You are ok with this are you?

 

[MenInG]

Boris Johnson has urged MPs to "come together" to back the Brexit deal he has secured with the EU, insisting there is "no better outcome".

The prime minister told the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg he wanted the country to "move on" from Brexit, which he described as "divisive".

And he said he was hopeful the deal would pass the Commons on Saturday.

The government's former allies in the DUP and every opposition party plans to vote against it.

Latest as PM tries to get MPs to back dealSaturday's Brexit debate: What to expectWhat is in Boris Johnson's new Brexit deal?Could the Letwin amendment delay Brexit?

The new deal, agreed by Mr Johnson and the EU on Thursday, is similar to the one agreed by Theresa May last year - but it removes the controversial backstop clause, which critics say could have kept the UK tied indefinitely to EU customs rules.

ADVERTISEMENT

Northern Ireland would remain in the UK's customs union under the new agreement, but there would also be customs checks on some goods passing through en route to Ireland and the EU single market.

Mr Johnson and his team are trying to persuade enough Labour rebels, former Conservatives and Brexiteer Tory rebels to get it across the line in Parliament.

He told the BBC's political editor: "I just kind of invite everybody to imagine what it could be like tomorrow (Saturday) evening, if we have settled this, and we have respected the will of the people, because we will then have a chance to to move on.

"I hope that people will think well, you know, what's the balance, what do our constituents really want?

"Do they want us to keep going with this argument, do they want more division and delay? Look, you know, this has been a long exhausting and quite divisive business Brexit."

He repeated his commitment to leave the EU on 31 October, adding: "There's no better outcome than the one I'm advocating tomorrow."

Mr Johnson has repeatedly said Brexit will happen by the end of the month with or without a deal.

But MPs passed a law in September, known as the Benn Act, which requires the PM to send a letter to the EU asking for an extension until January 2020 if a deal is not agreed - or if MPs do not back a no-deal Brexit.

Former Tory Sir Oliver Letwin - who was kicked out of the party for backing the law - has put an amendment down to ensure the extension is asked for even if MPs back the deal in the Commons on Saturday.

He said the government could still leave without a deal on 31 October if the PM's proposals had not passed every stage in Parliament to become law - so the motion would withhold MPs' approval until that final hurdle is passed.

It really is extremely tight. It would be foolish to make a guess on which way it will go.

What we do know might happen tomorrow is rather than there being a thumbs up or thumbs down vote to the deal, there could be an attempt by some MPs to bring in what they see as an insurance policy.

This could mean another delay in case this deal falls through in the next couple of weeks.

That is potentially being put forward as an amendment so MPs will have a chance to vote on it.

Without going in to all the potential machinations it could mean tomorrow turns, not just into MPs giving an opinion on Boris Johnson's deal, but also wrangling again about a potential delay.

This could make things more fuzzy, and certainly more frustrating for Downing Street.

It will be a showdown of sorts.

Downing Street always knew that Parliament would be a very tricky hurdle.

Media captionIn full: Laura Kuenssberg grills Johnson on Brexit deal

Mr Johnson was also quizzed about the deal he has struck with the EU to resolve the issues over the Irish border.

He denied breaking a promise to the DUP, saying: "No I don't accept that at all.

"I think that what you have is a fantastic deal for all of the UK, and particularly for Northern Ireland because you've got a single customs territory. Northern Ireland leaves the EU with the rest of the UK."

The DUP has accused Mr Johnson of "selling Northern Ireland short" by accepting checks on some goods passing through Northern Ireland to get a deal with the EU.

The party's deputy leader, Sammy Wilson, has described the deal as "toxic" and is urging Conservative MPs not to back it.

The pro-Brexit European Research Group has previously given its full backing to the DUP.

But while its vice-chairman, Mark Francois, said he "still had some concerns", another member, Andrew Bridgen, said the "vast majority" of the group "will come to the conclusion that this deal is tolerable".

Media captionWill MPs support Boris Johnson's new Brexit deal?

Labour plans to vote against the government motion, with shadow chancellor John McDonnell saying it was a "worse deal" than the one Theresa May struck with Brussels.

The party also attacked the deal after one Conservative MP, John Baron, told the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme the UK would be able to leave the EU "on no-deal terms" if trade talks failed at the end of the so-called transition period in December 2020.

Labour chairman Ian Lavery said: "The cat has been let out of the bag... [and] no one should be in any doubt that Johnson's deal is just seen an interim arrangement."

The SNP's Westminster leader Ian Blackford has also tabled an amendment, calling for a three-month extension to Brexit to allow for an early general election.

Commons business will start at 9:30 BST on Saturday - the first weekend sitting since the invasion of the Falklands in 1982.

Mr Johnson will make a statement to the House and face questions from MPs, before they move on to a debate about the deal.

The timing of any votes depends on which amendments are chose by the Speaker of the Commons, John Bercow.

 

[sweep_shot]

Parliament is sitting on a Saturday for the first time in 37 years to debate and vote on Boris Johnson's Brexit deal - here is what to expect.

What time is Parliament sitting?
MPs will gather in the House of Commons at 09:30 BST. We don't know what time they will finish.

Peers sit a little later at 10:00 and are due to finish at 15:00.

What will happen then?
Commons proceedings will get under way with a statement from Prime Minister Boris Johnson, as confirmed by Saturday's order paper.

He is expected to take questions on his Brexit deal from MPs for a couple of hours.

The main debate on the deal will follow. Commons Speaker John Bercow will reveal which amendments - suggested changes to the government's motion asking MPs to approve the deal - have been selected.

A government minister, yet to be confirmed by Downing Street, will then open the debate.

What time can the voting start on Mr Johnson's deal?
It's likely to begin after 14:30.

If there are amendments selected by the Speaker, the votes on these will be held first.

So we can't at this stage say exactly when the vote on the prime minister's deal will be held.

But things may become clearer at the start of the debate on Saturday.

How can you follow the debate?
You can find out the latest developments on the BBC News website and app, where we'll have live coverage in text and video and analysis from our experts.

There will also be coverage on BBC One from 09:00 to 13:15, BBC Two from 13:15 to 16:30, and continuous coverage on the BBC News Channel.

There will also be extended editions of BBC News at Six and News at Ten, as well as a special edition of BBC Newsnight.

What happens if MPs vote for the deal?
If the government motion is passed by MPs without any amendments, it will just be the first stage of getting the deal into law.

The government is likely to want to move quickly so it can meet Boris Johnson's 31 October deadline.

The Withdrawal Amendment Bill, which implements the legally-binding treaty, could be presented to Parliament early next week.

If the government motion is passed with amendments, then a delay to Brexit becomes more likely.

What happens if MPs reject the government's motion?
If MPs reject the deal, there is the possibility they could be given the chance to vote in favour of a no-deal Brexit - listed as a second government motion on the Commons order paper.

Labour MP Peter Kyle has tabled an amendment to this second motion that rejects leaving without a deal and says any "final decision" on the UK and EU's future relationship should be subject to a confirmatory referendum.

However, MPs have previously rejected the proposals of leaving without a deal, so it's unlikely this government motion will pass if it is put to the House.

So, with no approval for either a deal or no-deal, the prime minister will have to write to the EU to request a Brexit extension.

What are the amendments?
MPs have tabled three amendments to the government motion on Mr Johnson's Brexit deal so far. However, this does not mean they will automatically be debated and voted on by MPs - Mr Bercow will have to select them for debate.

There are two from the SNP:

An amendment to revoke Article 50 and cease the Brexit process, tabled by Angus MacNeil
An amendment from the SNP's Westminster leader Ian Blackford rejecting the new Brexit deal and calling for an extension until at least 31 January 2020 to allow for an early election
Mr Blackford has called on opposition parties to "quit dithering, back our amendment, and finally act to bring this appalling Tory government down and stop Brexit".

He and his party are against Mr Johnson's Brexit deal, which Mr Blackford has said would be "devastating for Scotland".

The third amendment, which has cross-party support, increasing its chances of being selected, is:

An amendment from former Tory MP Oliver Letwin to withhold House of Commons approval of the deal until the legislation to implement the agreement is passed
Labour's Hilary Benn, Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson and Plaid Cymru's Westminster leader Liz Saville Roberts - as well as former ministers David Gauke and Philip Hammond - have thrown their weight behind this proposal.

Mr Letwin's aim is to prevent a no-deal Brexit, even if MPs back Mr Johnson's deal. He his concerned that some MPs who vote for it might change their mind as the legislation passes through Parliament - or it could be held up in the House of Lords.

So, if this proposal - you'll hear it referred to as the "Letwin amendment" - is passed by MPs along with Mr Johnson's Brexit deal, the prime minister would still have to write a letter on Saturday requesting a further postponement of Brexit until 31 January.

Why is the Letwin amendment significant?

The latest gambit by the alliance of MPs around Sir Oliver Letwin looks like a real problem for the government whips, writes our parliamentary correspondent Mark D'Arcy.

The lesson of the Brexit battles so far is that it is the cross-party amendments and motions that are the most dangerous.

Single-party proposals are mostly efforts to signal a position, it's the proposals that MPs from several parties can sign up to that pose a more serious threat.

It's a cunningly crafted proposition which, crucially, could be voted for by MPs who want a deal, but don't trust this one, and don't trust the government.

It rests on the idea that were Parliament to approve the deal for the purposes of the Benn Act now, there might then be a danger that the subsequent legislation to enact it might be, somehow, derailed, resulting in a no-deal exit on 31 October.

Read Mark's full blog

What happens if the Letwin amendment passes?
If it passes, and the main motion - approval for Mr Johnson's Brexit deal - passes as amended:

The prime minister is required to request an extension from the EU to 31 January by the end of Saturday
He is then expected to introduce the Withdrawal Agreement Bill (WAB) which is there to implement any withdrawal agreement
Section 13 of the 2018 EU Withdrawal Act requires both a meaningful vote and the WAB to pass before the UK leaves the EU
But the new WAB could include a provision to get rid of the need for a meaningful vote - therefore, once the WAB is passed the deal is done
The UK could technically still leave on 31 October if Mr Johnson passes the legislation very quickly
But legislation could take longer and opens the door to amendments from MPs and Lords.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50095368.

 

[sweep_shot]

The mood among Europe's leaders was triumphant. They had a deal and as they left Brussels everyone was happy. But will the EU's relief be short-lived?

Across the capitals of Europe all eyes will now turn to Westminster, for a rare Saturday session of Parliament to decide the fate of the revised Brexit deal.

"It is now a matter of putting faith in the British parliament to take its decision," said Germany's Angela Merkel.

They have been here before. Theresa May's deal was rejected three times by MPs. Yet more than 90% of the new deal is… Theresa May's deal.

The challenge of having a porous EU external border in Northern Ireland was the stumbling block that needed solving.

Finally the Eurosceptic Boris Johnson, famous for poking fun at EU bureaucracy, won generous praise from EU leaders at the Brussels summit.

One of his fiercest EU critics on Brexit, French President Emmanuel Macron, spoke of the Mr Johnson's "strategic thinking, his willingness to engage and a wish to persevere". He added that "he's colourful sometimes".

Summit chairman Donald Tusk warmly patted Mr Johnson on the shoulder and Luxembourg PM Xavier Bettel beamed at him - having only recently mocked him for dodging a press conference.

After more than three years of tortuous negotiations the EU believes it now has an innovative solution for the Northern Ireland border.

In one-on-one talks with Irish Taoiseach (PM) Leo Varadkar, before the summit, Boris Johnson accepted that Northern Ireland could keep EU regulatory standards and have a unique customs inspection system.

It means in effect a customs border in the Irish Sea, with new checks on goods at Northern Ireland's ports and Belfast airport.

Goods destined for the Republic of Ireland - the EU - will come under the EU tariff regime.

The special arrangement was dictated by both sides' commitment to the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. That peace accord demands that there be no "hard" land border on the island of Ireland.

But the Brexit deal would take the UK out of the EU single market and customs union - commonly described as a "hard" Brexit.

What next?
So much for the legal technicalities. The big question now is whether Mr Johnson can get the deal through the House of Commons.

A day of high drama is expected, as the vote will be on a knife edge. The government's recent suspension of Parliament - ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court - angered many MPs.

There was discomfort among EU leaders when asked what they would do if Westminster rejected this deal.

Would they grant another, third, extension to the Brexit negotiations?

Mr Varadkar was asked if there was an EU Plan B. His reply: "Plan B is no deal. Let's hope that doesn't happen."

There was no guarantee of another extension, he said.

The pressure to meet the 31 October deadline is there in the summit conclusions, calling for the EU to prepare for the deal to "enter into force on 1 November".

The deal allows a transition period until the end of 2020. In contrast, a no-deal scenario would make the UK a "third country" overnight, subject to EU tariffs and other barriers immediately.

The EU's Donald Tusk did not rule out another extension. But President Macron said: "I don't think that a new delay should be agreed on. I think we need to end the negotiations and move on to talks about future relations."

A year is not much time for the EU to negotiate a free trade deal with the UK.

And the risk of a no-deal Brexit has not gone away.

Belgium alone could lose 42,000 jobs in the worst-case scenario, according to a Leuven Catholic University study. The port of Zeebrugge does about half of its trade with the UK.

Amid European sadness and frustration over Brexit, there is also some optimism.

Mr Varadkar said the EU had shown "enormous solidarity" with Ireland, and he called it a union "in which small states are protected". And Ulrich Ladurner, Brussels correspondent for Germany's Die Zeit daily, told the BBC: "Many Europeans feel Brexit has shown the strength of the EU".

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50094831.

 

[MenInG]

Parliament will sit on a Saturday for the first time in 37 years to vote on Boris Johnson's Brexit deal.

The PM has been trying to convince MPs to support the agreement he secured with the EU, ahead of what is expected to be a knife-edge vote in the Commons.

His former DUP allies and opposition parties plan to vote against it.

Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay admitted the vote could be "close" but said the government has "listened to the concerns of MPs across all sides".

"Now it's time for MPs to step up to their responsibility to get this deal passed, and allow the country to move forward," he told BBC Breakfast.

At least nine Labour MPs are expected support the government while the PM is hoping to be backed by some of the 21 Tory MPs he sacked for opposing him last month.

Steve Baker, the chairman of the European Research Group, a group of Tory Brexiteers, recommended its members vote in favour of the deal at a meeting on Saturday morning.

BBC deputy political editor John Pienaar said numbers for the vote looked "painfully tight".

Business in the House of Commons will start at 9:30 BST - the first weekend sitting since the invasion of the Falklands in 1982.

Mr Johnson will make a statement to MPs and face their questions before the House moves on to a debate about the deal.

Letwin amendment
The timing of any votes depends on which amendments are chosen by the Speaker of the Commons, John Bercow, but they are not expected before 14:30.

The most significant and controversial amendment is one put down by former Tory Sir Oliver Letwin, who now sits as an independent, which would withhold parliamentary support for the deal unless and until legislation implementing the agreement in UK law is passed by MPs.

If this is passed, it would force the prime minister to seek a further delay to Brexit beyond the 31 October deadline - under the terms of the Benn Act passed last month.

The BBC's political editor Laura Kuenssberg said its "brutal effect" would be to deny the PM the opportunity of having the "conclusive" vote on his deal he so badly wants.

Former Tory Chancellor Philip Hammond, who is backing the amendment, told the BBC it was an "insurance policy" to ensure the UK did not leave the EU later this month without a deal if the necessary legislation was not passed in time or was scuppered by MPs.

"This cannot be the final vote because we don't know the full shape of the package," he told BBC Radio 4's Today.

He insisted he was not trying to stop Brexit and it might only lead to a delay to the UK's departure of a matter of weeks.

And after three years of chicanery, on Saturday another decision will be put before the Commons - one that gives MPs what sounds like an elegant way to give only qualified approval to his deal, which might have brutal political effect.

The Letwin amendment is at best is a mere insurance policy that avoids an accidental departure without a formal agreement.

But by the author Oliver Letwin's own admission, it blurs today's decision.

And at worst, it's seen by government as one more rock cast in the path towards departure, another excuse for reluctant MPs to apply the brakes.

So today may not be a moment of saying the simple yes or no the prime minister craves.

The Commons once more will be asked to pick, between this deal, no deal, or another delay.

But the prime minister will keep, and keep, trying to force a moment of clarity.

Read more from Laura here

Mr Johnson's revised deal with the EU, secured at a Brussels summit on Thursday, ditches former PM Theresa May's backstop, the measure designed to prevent a return to physical checks on the Irish border.

Instead it will, in effect, draw a new customs border along the Irish Sea.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50104789

 

[Robert]

Not the point. The irony is that EU are stiffing capitalism and competition! You are ok with this are you?

Capitalism and competition must be yoked to serve the people, else you get more and more inequality, and power concentrated in fewer and fewer hands.

 

[James]

Ian Blackford could put a glass eye to sleep.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Ian Blackford could put a glass eye to sleep.

The SNP keep on going on about Scotland's voice not being heard yet all he does is talk and talk and talk..... Zzzzzzzz

 

[Gabbar Singh]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Government has lost, Letwin amendment has won. Prime Minister preparing response. Makes Brexit extension likely. No vote on deal today. No leaving October 31st.</p>— Andrew Neil (@afneil) <a href="https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1185553618587607040?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 19, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Brexiteers not happy. So the fun and games continue.

 

[Technics 1210]

Capitalism and competition must be yoked to serve the people, else you get more and more inequality, and power concentrated in fewer and fewer hands.

Should be yoked? You sound like a Corbyn supporter, but perhaps you do agree with his socialism deep down?

When Remainers say how will the UK be competitive the answer is lower business related taxes, but UK has zero control over said taxes. The other way is to weakened the GBP to attract foreign investment, Remainders still crying over a weak GBP because it adds 5 points on their holiday.

Essentially what I mean is for the sake of staying in the EU, you are not a liberal democrat, but just a liberal, and you do not support capitalism, thus have no right to complain about the UK being economically worse with Brexit, because you think Capitalism and competition must be yoked.

 

[MenInG]

Boris Johnson has said he will press on "undaunted" with his Brexit strategy despite MPs backing the principle of a further delay to the process.

The PM vowed to introduce legislation needed to implement his "excellent" agreement in Parliament next week.

But he will have to ask the EU for an extension beyond 31 October after MPs backed a motion designed to rule out a no-deal exit by 322 votes to 306.

The EU said it was up to the UK to "inform it of the next steps".

Ministers have signalled a potentially decisive vote on the PM's revised Brexit agreement could now take place on Monday, depending on what the Speaker decides.

During the first Saturday parliamentary sitting for 37 years, MPs delivered a blow to the PM's Brexit strategy.

They backed a motion, tabled by Independent MP Sir Oliver Letwin, which "withholds approval" for Boris Johnson's Brexit deal until legislation implementing it has been passed.

It was due to be followed by a vote on the main government motion - whether or not to back the deal.

The motion - amended because of the vote on Sir Oliver's amendment - was approved without MPs going into the division lobbies.

A vote on a cross-party amendment on preventing a no-deal referendum and holding a second referendum was also dropped.

'Unchanged'
The defeat is a major setback for the PM, who has repeatedly insisted that the UK will leave at the end of the month come what may.

But Mr Johnson said he was not "daunted or dismayed" and he still believed the best thing for the UK was to leave the EU later this month on the basis of his "excellent deal".

"I will not negotiate a delay with the EU and neither does the law compel me to do," he said.

He said he did not believe the EU would be "attracted" by a further delay and his policy remained "unchanged".

But Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the defeat represented an "emphatic" rejection of the PM's strategy and he must now comply with the law in seeking a further extension.

Sir Oliver Letwin said the move meant the UK would not "crash out" of the EU on 31 October without a deal if the necessary legislation was held up or derailed.

His motion was supported by 10 former Tory MPs who have either quit or been forced out of the party over Brexit, including Philip Hammond, David Gauke and Amber Rudd.

The Democratic Unionists, who backed the Letwin amendment, said the delay would allow for further scrutiny of the PM's agreement - emphasising that its support would depend on preserving the "constitutional and economic" integrity of the UK.

But Brexiteers reacted with anger, Tory MP Peter Bone saying it had been "a complete waste of time".

Under the terms of the Benn Act passed last month, the PM is legally obliged to ask the EU for a further delay if Parliament has not approved an agreement by then.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50110601

 

[James]

Withdrawal Agreement Bill is going to get an unamended 2nd Reading in the early part of the coming week anyway, so things have changed somewhat and yet they have not significantly changed.

 

[Technics 1210]

The probability of a General Election is rising, and if the Tories win with a majority or via a coalition, all this bravado by these Remain MPs will be water over a sandcastle and their careers finished. Then it's open season and the current MPs would've wished they'd voted for this deal.

 

[sweep_shot]

The UK Parliament just sat on a Saturday for the first time in 37 years to try and get Prime Minister Boris Johnson's Brexit deal agreed.

What was supposed to be the deciding moment - a Yes or No on Brexit - wasn't. And now there might be another delay.

Having déjà vu? Here's what happened.

The UK parliament narrowly voted for a controversial amendment to hold off approval for the prime minister's new Brexit deal.

As a result, the PM is now required to ask the EU to extend the 31 October deadline - something he is dead set against.

How did we get here?
The background here is that on Thursday, Boris Johnson achieved what was thought unlikely - a revised Brexit deal with the EU.

But it has to be approved by the UK parliament. The deal negotiated by Mr Johnson's predecessor, Theresa May, was voted down three times and ended her term as prime minister.

In addition, a law passed weeks ago said that if Mr Johnson didn't have a deal done by midnight on Saturday, 19 October, he'd have to ask the EU for another extension.

Mr Johnson has always promised the UK will leave on 31 October, no matter what.

What happened on Saturday?
MPs were supposed to be voting on whether to approve the PM's deal with the EU in principle.

Mr Johnson presented his deal as the only option, confident he would win - even though he recently lost his majority in parliament.

However, many MPs feared that the UK could still end up leaving the EU without a deal on 31 October if legislation to make Brexit a reality had not been approved in the meantime.

And one MP, Sir Oliver Letwin, came up with what our parliamentary correspondent called " a cunningly crafted proposition".

The Letwin amendment holds off on giving final approval for the UK-EU deal until after that detailed legislation - the Withdrawal Agreement Bill - is passed.

So without a deal by a legal deadline of Saturday, Boris Johnson must ask for that third Brexit extension.

Why would MPs want that?

Some were unhappy that Mr Johnson's deal was only unveiled two days before the vote - there wasn't much time to analyse it.

But Mr Johnson's government views the Letwin amendment as another way for opponents to try to stop Brexit altogether. If delayed, there could be an opportunity to pick apart the deal.

So for MPs who wanted to see more detail, or those who didn't trust the prime minister, the Letwin amendment was very tempting.

The arithmetic going into the vote was too close to call - just a handful of votes between the options.

Former PM Theresa May gave her first speech on Brexit since she resigned as prime minister - backing the deal, and cracking a joke that she had "a distinct sense of déjà vu" of trying to get a deal passed.

Skip Twitter post by @nickeardleybbcEnd of Twitter post by @nickeardleybbc
A key bloc of votes came, somewhat surprisingly, from the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), the government's allies in Northern Ireland. DUP MPs had been extremely critical of Mr Johnson's deal.

However, they backed the Letwin amendment because it gave them more time to scrutinise its impact.

The amendment passed by 322 votes to 306, making another delay to Brexit the most likely outcome.

So what next - an extension?
Probably - but with Brexit, nothing is certain.

Under another piece of legislation called the Benn Act, if parliament hadn't passed a deal by midnight on 19 October, Mr Johnson was obliged to ask the EU for an extension.

It's the law - but the prime minister disagrees.

Late on Saturday evening, Mr Johnson sent the request to the EU - but without his signature.

The request was accompanied by a second letter, signed by Mr Johnson, which says he believes that a delay would be a mistake.

Skip Twitter post by @bbclaurakEnd of Twitter post by @bbclaurak
What will the EU make of this? Will it grant a third extension to a UK government that doesn't want it anyway? France and Ireland have already warned that a further delay isn't guaranteed.

EU Council President Donald Tusk confirmed that he had received the extension request, saying he would now consult EU leaders "on how to react".

For now, the UK government will work to get its legislation through parliament, starting on Monday - and it may still get the final approval it seeks in time for Brexit to happen on 31 October.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50110214.

 

[James]

So Johnson has “obeyed the law” and asked the EU in writing for a delay to Brexit - but he has got a senior civil servant to add a glib covering letter, and then Johnson himself has added on a THIRD letter to President Tusk saying that an extension is unnecessary!

This drama just moved up a gear - again!

One can’t deny the sheer entertainment. It’s nonstop.

 

[Robert]

An amoral disgrace of a Prime Minister. Unfit to hold office.

 

[Robert]

Should be yoked? You sound like a Corbyn supporter, but perhaps you do agree with his socialism deep down?

When Remainers say how will the UK be competitive the answer is lower business related taxes, but UK has zero control over said taxes. The other way is to weakened the GBP to attract foreign investment, Remainders still crying over a weak GBP because it adds 5 points on their holiday.

Essentially what I mean is for the sake of staying in the EU, you are not a liberal democrat, but just a liberal, and you do not support capitalism, thus have no right to complain about the UK being economically worse with Brexit, because you think Capitalism and competition must be yoked.

I care about the people who will lose their jobs and have to resort to food banks. I care about the elders who cannot get sufficient health care and social care. I care about arresting the societal disintegration which puts kids at risk of failing in education and drifting into crime.

Broadly speaking, I agree with the Nordic model of capitalism with a degree of governmental control over business, high taxation and strong public sector services.

 

[IMMY69]

Should be yoked? You sound like a Corbyn supporter, but perhaps you do agree with his socialism deep down?

When Remainers say how will the UK be competitive the answer is lower business related taxes, but UK has zero control over said taxes. The other way is to weakened the GBP to attract foreign investment, Remainders still crying over a weak GBP because it adds 5 points on their holiday.

Essentially what I mean is for the sake of staying in the EU, you are not a liberal democrat, but just a liberal, and you do not support capitalism, thus have no right to complain about the UK being economically worse with Brexit, because you think Capitalism and competition must be yoked.

Trying to make Britain into a Switzerland / Singapore type tax regime will break the fabric of the country.
Lower taxes will result in far higher government borrowing, an even bigger depletion of services with rich getting richer and the poor (ironically many Brexit voters) suffering the most.

You look up any neutral report on the affects of UK’s membership in the EU and you’ll see how much more the UK had prospered from being inside the EU.
God knows where we would be without the immigration.

 

[Technics 1210]

I care about the people who will lose their jobs and have to resort to food banks. I care about the elders who cannot get sufficient health care and social care. I care about arresting the societal disintegration which puts kids at risk of failing in education and drifting into crime.

Broadly speaking, I agree with the Nordic model of capitalism with a degree of governmental control over business, high taxation and strong public sector services.

You change your view everyday mate, I really don't know what you believe in anymore.

I honestly would not be surprised if you voted Labour within the next 5 years.

 

[Technics 1210]

To all of you tree hugging loving Single Market & Customs union defenders, ask yourself why is it that Western economies, including the Euro zone, have been left for dust while markets around the rest of the world are not only developing but becoming true forces in the Global economic market?

Single market this, largest trading bloc that, go sell this nonsense to someone else. You only have to look at the state of this so called Single Market, and the Worlds Largest Trading Blocto see the system is broken.

Earnings slashed, youth & adult unemployment among the highest, anaemic GDP growth (below 1% which is considered negligible), right-wing & fascism on the rise, religious intolerance on the rise, this is the state of the EU right now, and it's going to get worse.

If there was a referendum to join the EU, most people would not vote to join given the state of the EU. It's a economic, political, and social mess.

 

[shaz619]

To all of you tree hugging loving Single Market & Customs union defenders, ask yourself why is it that Western economies, including the Euro zone, have been left for dust while markets around the rest of the world are not only developing but becoming true forces in the Global economic market?

Single market this, largest trading bloc that, go sell this nonsense to someone else. You only have to look at the state of this so called Single Market, and the Worlds Largest Trading Blocto see the system is broken.

Earnings slashed, youth & adult unemployment among the highest, anaemic GDP growth (below 1% which is considered negligible), right-wing & fascism on the rise, religious intolerance on the rise, this is the state of the EU right now, and it's going to get worse.

If there was a referendum to join the EU, most people would not vote to join given the state of the EU. It's a economic, political, and social mess.

There may be some benefits to leaving the single market and what not, but Tory austerity, policy, intolerance and ignorance has nothing to do with the issues you have highlighted People like Corbyn will always thrive in such a scenario as a political leader of any kind, he's a product of the mess which Torytards have created and it is they who should be criticised above all, it's their government and has been for a while, the root of all our evils and the reason behind damaged brain cells among Conservative supporters.

Brexiters may be thick or just too narrow minded with that silver spoon which is stuck in their brain but I would like to move on so accept our imminent fate beyond the single market.

 

[Technics 1210]

There may be some benefits to leaving the single market and what not, but Tory austerity, policy, intolerance and ignorance has nothing to do with the issues you have highlighted People like Corbyn will always thrive in such a scenario as a political leader of any kind, he's a product of the mess which Torytards have created and it is they who should be criticised above all, it's their government and has been for a while, the root of all our evils and the reason behind damaged brain cells among Conservative supporters.

Brexiters may be thick or just too narrow minded with that silver spoon which is stuck in their brain but I would like to move on so accept our imminent fate beyond the single market.

Prior to 2008, the EU was not an issue, neither was immigration, hardly heard of it in the news, because the economy was booming.

It's all about capitalism, and until the remainers understand this fact, they will remain in a state denial.

Happy protesting!

 

[IMMY69]

Prior to 2008, the EU was not an issue, neither was immigration, hardly heard of it in the news, because the economy was booming.

It's all about capitalism, and until the remainers understand this fact, they will remain in a state denial.

Happy protesting!

Immigration has been a massive issue and has been in the news regularly for decades.
I know because I lived through it.

 

[IMMY69]

Brexit is not a conservative vs socialism issue.
That’s why parties all across the political spectrum are divided on this.

 

[Technics 1210]

Immigration has been a massive issue and has been in the news regularly for decades.
I know because I lived through it.

Me too! My experience starts in 1975 in the UK. Yours?

You know what this means? Immigration has always been in the news, BEFORE the EU, DURING the EU, and will do much AFTER the EU. In our days it was far far WORSE! As you would know of course.

So you see, Brexit is a symptom, the real problem is deeper down.

(My actual post was referring to media reporting and main stream UK Politics)

 

[IMMY69]

Me too! My experience starts in 1975 in the UK. Yours?

You know what this means? Immigration has always been in the news, BEFORE the EU, DURING the EU, and will do much AFTER the EU. In our days it was far far WORSE! As you would know of course.

So you see, Brexit is a symptom, the real problem is deeper down.

(My actual post was referring to media reporting and main stream UK Politics)

1977 &#55357;&#56833;

 

[sweep_shot]

Scotland's highest court is to consider whether Prime Minister Boris Johnson has fully complied with a law requiring him to ask for a Brexit delay.

He sent an unsigned letter to Brussels asking for an extension along with a signed letter saying he believed a further delay would be a mistake.

The Court of Session will be asked to decide whether this broke a promise not to "frustrate" the so-called Benn Act.

The government maintains it has fulfilled its legal obligations.

The court was originally asked earlier this month to consider using "nobile officium" powers to request a Brexit extension on the prime minister's behalf - but the judges delayed making a ruling until the political situation become clearer.

One of the campaigners bringing the action, SNP MP Joanna Cherry, said the legal action had already been instrumental in forcing Mr Johnson to send the request for an extension late on Saturday.

She said: "Despite his childish trick of not signing the letter and sending a contradictory covering letter, the EU, who are the grown-ups in the room, have accepted the request and are considering it.

"I am quite convinced that Boris Johnson would not have sought the extension had he not been forced by the court action to promise the highest court in Scotland that he would."

Ms Cherry said she and her fellow campaigners would now seek to maintain the pressure on Mr Johnson to keep his word by asking the judges to continue the case until later in the week.

"Our legal team are also instructed to remind the court that, as well as promising to comply with the letter of the Benn Act, the PM also promised not to seek to frustrate the purpose of the legislation," she added.

"It will be for the court to decide whether his actions in failing to sign the letter of request and sending a letter setting out his contrary intentions are in breach of the undertakings he gave them or a contempt of court."

Ms Cherry has been joined in the legal action by businessman Dale Vince and QC Jolyon Maugham.

The Benn Act, passed in September, required Mr Johnson to request a three-month Brexit delay unless he could pass a deal or get MPs to approve a no-deal exit by 19 October.

Fearing he might find a way to circumvent this, campaigners sought to provide a "safety net" by asking Scotland's highest court to use "nobile officium" powers to write a letter on the prime minister's behalf if he failed to do so.

An earlier hearing was told Mr Johnson had given an undertaking to "fully comply" with the law and that he accepted he could not "frustrate" the purpose of the act.

The judges decided that the political debate had still to "play out" and therefore delayed making a decision.

They agreed the court should sit again on 21 October by which time they hoped the circumstances would be "significantly clearer".

At a special sitting of the House of Commons on Saturday, MPs passed passed an amendment, put forward by Sir Oliver Letwin, delaying approval of Boris Johnson's Brexit deal. This meant, by the terms of the Benn Act, he had to write to the EU requesting an extension.

He did send this request, along with the second letter, saying he believed a further Brexit delay was a mistake, late on Saturday.

The Inner House of the Court of Session will consider these latest developments when it reconvenes in Edinburgh at midday.

What is the nobile officium?

The procedure of petitioning the nobile officium is unique to Scots law but is far from being a forgotten backwater of the legal system.

Its name is a Latin term meaning the "noble office".

The procedure offers the opportunity to provide a remedy in a legal dispute where none exists.

In other words, it can plug any gap in the law or offer mitigation if the law, when applied, would be seen to be too strict.

In this case, it could have seen an official of the court sign a letter to the EU requesting a Brexit extension, as set out in the Benn Act, should the prime minister have failed to do so.

On Saturday, in response to a question from Joanna Cherry, Commons Speaker John Bercow indicated he would be prepared to sign a letter to the EU asking for a delay if requested by the courts although he said he did not expect this to be necessary.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50117164.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

And on and on we go.....

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Commons Speaker John Bercow has rejected a Government bid to hold a meaningful vote on Boris Johnson's Brexit deal today</p>— Sky News Breaking (@SkyNewsBreak) <a href="https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1186291134483419136?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 21, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Technics 1210]

This is getting ridiculous and dangerous.

Bercow is getting grilled!

 

[IMMY69]

This is getting ridiculous and dangerous.

Bercow is getting grilled!

This was expected.
I don’t think anyone realistically expected the meaningful vote to take place today including Johnson

 

[MenInG]

The Commons Speaker has refused a government request to hold a "yes" or "no" vote on its Brexit deal.

John Bercow said a motion on the deal had been brought before MPs on Saturday, and it would be "repetitive and disorderly" to debate it again.

Saturday's sitting saw MPs vote to withhold approval of Boris Johnson's deal until it has been passed into law.

The government said it was disappointed, but would go ahead with introducing the necessary legislation.

He added: "The Speaker has yet again denied us a chance to deliver on the will of British people."

The UK is due to leave the EU in 10 days, and while Mr Johnson and fellow EU leaders have agreed a new deal to allow that to happen, it cannot come into force until it is approved by both the UK and European parliaments.

The government wanted to hold a "yes" or "no" vote - or so-called "meaningful vote" - on its deal on Saturday, but MPs instead chose to back an amendment tabled by former Tory Sir Oliver Letwin, which said that could not happen until all necessary Brexit legislation was passed.

That legislation - called the Withdrawal Agreement Bill (WAB) - will be introduced later, but will then have to go through full parliamentary scrutiny in both the Commons and the Lords.

The SNP's Westminster leader, Ian Blackford, called on the government "not to bulldoze" it through Parliament and give time for "full scrutiny".

Brexiteer anger

No 10 was pushing for a second shot at a meaningful vote on Monday, but Mr Bercow told the Commons he would not allow it, and had come to that decision on the basis of a parliamentary convention dating back to 1604.

He cited Parliament's rulebook, Erskine May, which says a motion that is the same "in substance" as a previous one cannot be brought back to the Commons during the course of a single parliamentary session.

The Speaker also said the circumstances around the motion had not changed, so his ruling was "necessary... to ensure the sensible use of the House's time and proper respect for the decisions that it takes".

But Tory MP and Brexiteer Sir Bernard Jenkin appeared to accused Mr Bercow of bias, saying it was "remarkable" how often the Speaker "pleased one lot and not the other".

"It is most unusual for a Speaker so often to prevent the government having a debate on the matters which the government wish put before the House," he added.

Fellow Tory David T C Davies said: "The only consistency one can find in your rulings is that they always seem to favour one side of the argument and never the government."

But Mr Bercow disagreed, adding: "The consistent thread is I try to do what I think is right by the House of Commons."

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50128740

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Trying to make Britain into a Switzerland / Singapore type tax regime will break the fabric of the country.
Lower taxes will result in far higher government borrowing, an even bigger depletion of services with rich getting richer and the poor (ironically many Brexit voters) suffering the most.

You look up any neutral report on the affects of UK’s membership in the EU and you’ll see how much more the UK had prospered from being inside the EU.
God knows where we would be without the immigration.

Today's paper running stories that British farmers are nackered basically. Apple orchards are left unpicked with fruit lying left to rot on the ground because most of the labourers came from Bulgaria and are now going elsewhere because of the exchange rate. Locals aren't interested in working on farms it seems.

 

[MenInG]

The government will abandon its Brexit bill if MPs vote down its three-day timetable to get it through Parliament.

Boris Johnson told MPs if the programme was rejected and the EU confirmed a delay to the 31 October exit, he would instead push for a general election.

The PM said Parliament had been "caught in a deadlock of its own making", and he would "in no way allow months more of this".

But opposition MPs called the threat to pull the bill "childish blackmail".

The Withdrawal Agreement Bill was published on Monday night and MPs are now debating it in the Commons.

They will vote at around 19:00 BST on the proposed timetable.

Boris Johnson agreed his new plan with EU leaders last week, but has repeatedly pledged to leave the EU by the end of October, with or without a deal.

Opening the debate in the Commons, Mr Johnson told MPs that giving the deal - and the programme motion - their backing would "get Brexit done and move our country on".

But he added: "If Parliament refuses to allow Brexit to happen, and instead gets its way and decides to delay everything until January or possibly longer, in no circumstances can the government continue with this."

Mr Johnson did not say what the government would do if the EU offered a shorter extension.

However, he said MPs' constituents would "not be fooled by any further delay" and "would not understand why it was necessary".

The law requires 25 days between an election being triggered in Parliament and polling day - meaning were one to be called this week, the earliest it could take place would be Thursday, 28 November.

How soon could there be a general election?
The decision to curtail the scrutiny of the bill to three days has sparked anger from opposition MPs.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said his party would vote against the timetable, calling it "an abuse of Parliament and a disgraceful attempt to dodge accountability, scrutiny and any kind of proper debate".

He said MPs were being "treated as an inconvenience that can be bypassed by this government".

The Liberal Democrats' spokesman for Brexit, Tom Brake, criticised the threat of pulling the bill if the government lost the vote on the programme motion, saying: "MPs shouldn't be bullied into voting in favour of this ridiculously short timetable."

And the SNP's Westminster leader Ian Blackford said: "In what is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation that is going to effect all of us, our children and our grandchildren for decades to come, we must have proper scrutiny and we must be able to tease out the facts of the matter."

But Tory Brexiteer Iain Duncan Smith said "those that say they don't have enough time because there are so many things to debate" should remember that a white paper that "contains most elements" of the deal was published and debated last year.

"Most things have not changed," he added.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50142367

 

[Markhor]

Boris gets his deal, but not on his timetable.

 

[Markhor]

^^

Just to add a proviso to that - Boris gets his deal in principle.

It's a second reading. The bill will now be scrutinised and amendments will be proposed.

 

[Abdullah719]

MPs reject Brexit bill timetable

Spoiler

MPs have rejected a proposal to examine Boris Johnson's Brexit bill in the Commons in three days.

The Commons supported the Withdrawal Agreement Bill earlier, but have now voted against the short timetable.

Earlier, the PM warned he would seek an election if MPs dismissed the plan and the EU granted an extension to 31 October Brexit deadline.

After the vote, he told the Commons he would "pause" the legislation until the EU had "stated their intentions".

A spokesman from the European Commission said: "[The Commission] takes note of tonight's result and expects the UK government to inform us about the next steps."

Mr Johnson told MPs he was "disappointed" they had "voted for delay", and said the UK "now faced further uncertainty".

But he said his policy remained that Brexit would go ahead at the end of the month, adding: "One way or another, we will leave the EU with this deal to which this House has just given its assent."

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said Mr Johnson was "the author of his own misfortune" - but offered to enter discussions over a "sensible" timetable for his deal to go through Parliament.

But the SNP's leader, Ian Blackford, said it was "another humiliating defeat" for the PM, and MPs had "spoken with a very clear voice to tell the PM he is not on".

And Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson called on Mr Johnson to "end the brinkmanship and replace it with some statesmanship" in order to secure an extension with the EU.

Boris Johnson agreed his new plan with EU leaders last week, but has repeatedly pledged to leave the bloc by the end of October, with or without a deal.

The bill that would turn his plan into law - the Withdrawal Agreement Bill - was published on Monday evening, and he urged MPs to back a three-day timetable to push it through the Commons ahead of the Halloween deadline.

The PM told Parliament if it "decides to delay everything until January or possibly longer", he would seek an election - but he did not say what the government would do if the EU offered a shorter extension.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50146182

 

[Gabbar Singh]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Richard Burgon says Labour will back general election before Christmas if EU grants Brexit delay <a href="https://t.co/ApK0R7hhHP">https://t.co/ApK0R7hhHP</a></p>— PoliticsHome (@politicshome) <a href="https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1186993172351803395?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 23, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[MenInG]

A spokesman for Boris Johnson responded "yes" when asked if the Prime Minister could hold a general election before 25 December

 

[sweep_shot]

Downing Street has dismissed reports of disagreements within Boris Johnson's government over how to move forward with the Brexit process.

No 10 has indicated the PM will seek a snap poll if the EU proposes delaying the Brexit deadline until January.

However, some ministers are understood to want to focus on getting the PM's Withdrawal Agreement Bill through Parliament instead.

No 10 sources insisted there were no splits in the cabinet's strategy.

The question of how to move forward with Brexit follows Tuesday's key Commons votes, where MPs backed the prime minister's deal at its first Parliamentary hurdle but rejected his plans to fast-track the legislation.

That defeat effectively ended any realistic prospect of the UK leaving the bloc by 31 October - something Mr Johnson has repeatedly insisted would happen under his premiership.

In response, the prime minister announced he would pause the progress of his Withdrawal Agreement Bill while he waited to hear from the EU on whether they would grant a delay to Brexit and what length it should be.

However, there have been reports of divisions among ministers and senior No 10 advisers over whether to press for a December poll.

Dominic Cummings, Mr Johnson's chief adviser, is, according to the Sun, leading calls to abandon attempts to get the prime minister's deal through Parliament and go for an election.

But Northern Ireland Secretary Julian Smith is said to be among ministers arguing it is still possible to pass a bill ratifying the agreement.

On Wednesday, Mr Johnson met Jeremy Corbyn to discuss how to break the Brexit impasse.

The Labour leader was keen to discuss a different timetable for the Brexit bill, while the prime minister wanted to know what Mr Corbyn would do if the EU refused to grant an extension.

But nothing was agreed between the pair and no further talks have been planned.

The fact that talks took place between Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson suggests that No 10 may not be totally wedded to the idea of a winter general election. Pressed in the Commons, the PM did not close the door to bringing back his deal.

And there are those in government who are deeply wary of a winter election. Why? Bluntly, because it is so blooming cold.

No-one is going to thank him if they have to tramp off to the polling station in the bleak midwinter.

There's a fear that older voters would be the most likely not to turn up - yet those may be the ones who were keenest to back Brexit.

Then there is the nativity play problem. Many school halls, which are used for polling stations, have been booked up for Christmas activities - and woe betide Mr Johnson if he forces those to be cancelled.

Will a pre-Christmas election happen?

Even if Mr Johnson does decide to press for an early election there is no guarantee he will succeed.

Under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, the prime minister needs to have the backing of two-thirds of MPs to hold a snap poll. This has been rejected twice by MPs.

Jeremy Corbyn has said his party is ready to go to the country once it is sure Mr Johnson cannot "crash out" in a no-deal Brexit in the middle of a campaign.

However, there is widespread opposition among the party's MPs at a time when they are trailing in the polls.

While there are other potential routes to an election, such as Tories voting for a no-confidence motion in their own government - which would only require a simple majority of one - they are also fraught with difficulties.

Another route to an election is a one-line bill, that requires only a simple majority, but any such bill is likely to incur a host of amendments, for example, giving 16 and 17-year-olds the right to vote.

There is also the option of a vote of no confidence in the government, which Mr Johnson could even call himself.

But Parliamentary rules state that if it passes, the Commons has 14 days to form an alternative administration, so he would run the risk of being forced out of Downing Street if opposition parties can unite around a different leader.

If an election were to be triggered this week, the earliest it could take place would be 28 November, as the law requires 25 days between an election being called in Parliament and polling day.

Mr Johnson was forced by law to send a letter to Brussels requesting a three-month extension, which he did on Saturday.

The prime minister's official spokesman said he spoke to European Council President Donald Tusk and German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Wednesday and stressed to both his continued opposition to a delay.

The 27 EU ambassadors have had a first, informal discussion about a Brexit extension.

They all agreed on the need to extend the deadline, to avoid a no-deal outcome - but the duration of this possible extension remains under discussion.

A decision by the EU is not expected until Friday.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50162009.

 

[MenInG]

Boris Johnson has said he will give MPs more time to debate his Brexit deal, but only if they agree to a 12 December general election.

The prime minister told the BBC he expected the EU to grant an extension to his 31 October deadline, even though he "really" did not want one.

He urged Labour to back an election in a vote he plans to hold next week.

EU leaders are expected to give their verdict on delaying Brexit for up to three months, on Friday.

Commons leader Jacob Rees-Mogg told MPs the government would on Monday table a motion calling for a general election.

Under the 2011 Fixed-Term Parliament Act, two-thirds of MPs must vote for a general election before one can be held.

In full: Johnson's election letter to Corbyn
What will happen with Brexit in the next few days?
Government wins vote on Queen's Speech
Shadow leader of the House Valerie Vaz said Labour would back an election "once no-deal is ruled out and if the extension allows".

Labour would offer the PM its support for a "proper timetable" for the Brexit bill to allow MPs to scrutinise and amend it, she added.

In a letter to Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, Mr Johnson says his "preferred option" is a short Brexit postponement "say to 15 or 30 November".

In that case, he writes, he will try to get his deal through Parliament again, with Labour's support.

The prime minister adds that he "assumes" Mr Corbyn "will cooperate with me to get our new Brexit deal ratified, so we leave with a new deal rather than no deal".

If, as widely expected, the EU's Brexit delay is to the end of January, Mr Johnson says he will hold a Commons vote next week on a 12 December election.

If Labour agrees to this, the government says it will try to get its deal through before Parliament is dissolved for the campaign on 6 November.

Where parties stand on election
Conservatives - Boris Johnson has requested an election twice already - but not all of his MPs are on board with the idea, arguing that the focus should be on delivering Brexit first
Labour - Has insisted it wants an election but won't vote for one until a no-deal Brexit has been firmly taken off the table. Some of its MPs from Leave voting areas may take a different view
SNP - The party's leader at Westminster, Ian Blackford, said "we want an election but these terms are not acceptable," adding that the poll should take place earlier than the middle of December
Lib Dems - Would prefer another referendum but have said they would vote for an election if there was a long enough extension. Leader Jo Swinson said she wanted to see what the EU said on Friday before deciding
DUP - Sammy Wilson, the party's Brexit spokesman, has indicated that the unionists could support an election in a bid to secure better terms with the EU
Independent Group for Change - Leader Anna Soubry said an election "wouldn't solve anything" and called again for another referendum
Plaid Cymru - The party's four MPs are likely to vote against an election, with the party arguing for another referendum instead
Green Party - The party's sole MP, Caroline Lucas, looks set to vote against an election, saying in a tweet the UK could still "crash out" with no-deal if MPs can't amend the Withdrawal Agreement
The prime minister told BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg: "I'm afraid it looks as though our EU friends are going to respond to Parliament's request by having an extension, which I really don't want at all.

"So, the way to get this done, the way to get Brexit done, is, I think, to be reasonable with Parliament and say if they genuinely want more time to study this excellent deal, they can have it but they have to agree to a general election on 12 December."

Asked what he would do if Labour refused to vote for an election, he said: "We would campaign day after day for the people of this country to be released from subjection to a Parliament that has outlived its usefulness."

The prime minister has repeatedly insisted the UK will leave the EU on 31 October, with or without a deal.

But he was forced to send a letter to the EU requesting an extension, under legislation passed by MPs last month.

MPs voted on Tuesday to back the first stage of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill, putting the deal the PM agreed with Brussels into law - but rejected Mr Johnson's plan to push it through the Commons in three days.

The BBC's Europe editor Katya Adler says EU leaders are set to decide on Friday whether to grant the UK a three-month Brexit extension.

Most EU nations back it but France "is digging its heels in", she adds.

So there could be an emergency summit in Brussels on Monday to allow leaders to reach agreement face-to-face.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50174402

 

[Gabbar Singh]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">It’s done. Labour has instructed its MPs tonight to block <a href="https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BorisJohnson</a>’s attempt on Monday to have 12 Dec election. So <a href="https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BorisJohnson</a> will shelve the Withdrawal Agreement Bill. He will cancel the budget. There will be no government worth the name. Parliament will become...</p>— Robert Peston (@Peston) <a href="https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1187441191761186816?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 24, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[sweep_shot]

EU ambassadors are to meet to discuss what length of Brexit extension to offer the UK, as MPs consider Boris Johnson's call for an early election.

Most EU states are understood to favour a three-month delay, with an option to end earlier if a deal is ratified sooner than this by Parliament.

But France has argued for a shorter extension to the 31 October deadline.

It comes after the PM said he would give MPs more time to debate his Brexit deal if they backed a 12 December poll.

The government has said it plans to bring forward a Commons vote on an early general election on Monday if the EU offers a delay until January, as is widely expected.

But the chances of enough MPs backing the motion - which under the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act requires the support of two-thirds of MPs - appear uncertain, with Labour not committing to how it plans to vote.

On Thursday night, there were reports the party's official position was to abstain on the vote, ending any chance of it gaining enough support.

But in an interview later, leader Jeremy Corbyn said: "Take no deal off the table, and we absolutely support an election."

The EU's decision on what length of extension to offer - which will be discussed in a closed-door meeting in Brussels on Friday morning - comes after Mr Johnson was compelled by a law passed by MPs to send a letter to the bloc requesting a delay.

Before sending the letter on Saturday, he had repeatedly promised the UK would leave the EU by Halloween.

The letter, which the prime minister was made to send by the so-called Benn Act, calls for Brexit to delayed until 31 January 2020.

On Thursday, Mr Johnson reiterated he did not want a delay but his preferred option if one was granted was for it to be short - "say to 15 or 30 November".

In a letter written to Mr Corbyn calling for an election, Mr Johnson said if a shorter delay was granted he would try to get his deal through Parliament again, with Labour's support.

BBC European correspondent Kevin Connolly said most EU states were prepared to agree an extension until 31 January 2020, with the option for it to end sooner if MPs in the UK ratify a Brexit deal before then.

He said the EU had hoped the decision on the length of delay would be made on Friday, though it was possible it could be moved until early next week to allow events at Westminster to unfold.

A stand-off could emerge, he added, where the EU wants to wait to see how Parliament reacts to the election proposal, while MPs want to first see what sort of extension will be offered.

Our correspondent added that there could be an emergency summit in Brussels on Monday to allow leaders to reach an agreement if no decision was made on Friday.

'Take no-deal off the table'

Responding to Mr Johnson, Mr Corbyn said on Thursday: "Take no-deal off the table and we absolutely support a general election.

"I've been calling for an election ever since the last one because this country needs one to deal with all the social injustice issues - but no-deal must be taken off the table.

"The EU will decide whether there is an extension... and then we can decide."

Should enough MPs back an election, they would have until 6 November to debate Mr Johnson's Brexit deal, the government has said.

Mr Johnson said it would be "morally incredible" if opposition MPs refused to go along with his plan.

It comes after MPs voted on Tuesday to back the first stage of the prime minister's Withdrawal Agreement Bill - putting the deal he agreed with Brussels into law - but rejected his plan to push it through the Commons in three days.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50175914.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn says he will only back Boris Johnson's offer of a general election when a no-deal Brexit is "off the table"</p>— Sky News Breaking (@SkyNewsBreak) <a href="https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1187441623594078210?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 24, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[sweep_shot]

Rebel MPs are exploring ways to seize control of the agenda from Boris Johnson by allowing parliament to debate and vote on Brexit legislation and a second referendum possibly as soon as next week.

Several MPs told the Guardian this was a plan under consideration if Johnson persisted with his insistence that his withdrawal agreement bill was “paused” until MPs agree to an election on 12 December.

Under the plans, which have been worked on since the summer by supporters of a second referendum and soft Brexit, MPs would again try to use procedure under standing order 24 to take control of the timetable in parliament.

They would then attempt to introduce either Johnson’s Brexit deal or Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement, with possible votes on adding a customs union, second referendum and extending transition to prevent departure on World Trade Organization terms.

It is understood some MPs have been discussing the plans with former EU officials to determine whether it could be enough to demonstrate to Brussels that parliament was serious about using an extension to break the Brexit deadlock.

Johnson was still insisting on Friday that he would refuse to bring back his Brexit legislation unless MPs granted him a general election on Monday. He called on Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, to “man up” and vote for one, claiming that parliament would only engage in “pointless Brexitology” if given the chance to debate his legislation without a hard deadline. Sajid Javid, the chancellor, claimed the government would simply lay motions “again and again” until other parties agree to go to the polls.

However, Corbyn made clear he would only vote for an election if Johnson made “absolutely clear” to parliament on Monday that there would be no crash-out on WTO terms, because “his deal includes the possibility of a no-deal exit”.

Johnson is unlikely to remove the threat of a no-deal exit to Corbyn’s satisfaction because the EU will not formally decide the length of the Brexit extension requested by the UK until early next week. During a meeting of EU diplomats, the French ambassador stood alone in arguing that it was not the right time to agree a three-month delay, in a move that will be welcomed in Downing Street.

If the EU ultimately grants a three-month delay and Labour continues to refuse an election, Johnson might not be able to stop the withdrawal agreement being revived by backbenchers. The decision would rest with John Bercow, the Speaker, who could allow it to be “unpaused” by MPs as one of his last acts after a decade in the chair.

Labour MP Peter Kyle said he was in talks with ex-Tories about their next steps. Bringing the agreement back to parliament was “one of the options on the shelf” and “credible”. Kyle said they had done all the preparatory work for this scenario in the summer and were ready to go with such a parliamentary move if needed, but wanted to see what the government and Corbyn did in the next few days.

He said he did not believe Johnson’s threat that no Brexit legislation would be brought back to the Commons between now and Christmas, so backbenchers might not need to try and bring back the bill themselves but could amend his deal.

Support for a second referendum “ebbs and flows”, Kyle said, but that presently “the tide is coming back on it” among MPs.

Dominic Grieve, the former Tory who has led the battle against no-deal Brexit, said MPs bringing back the withdrawal bill with the aim of attaching a second referendum was “within the field of options”, but any attempt by backbenchers to bring in primary legislation would be full of procedural hurdles. The legislation would need a money resolution moved by the government, though MPs could hope simply to show progress on finding a majority for any one Brexit option.

Grieve said: “Politics is the art of the possible and clearly it’s been my argument for a long time that it would be desirable to have a second referendum and put the options available to the public to resolve the problems we have.”

Others expressed scepticism that such a move would work. Nick Boles, a former Tory minister who voted for Johnson’s deal, tweeted: “There is no such plan. And it wouldn’t work, as taking a bill of this scale into committee requires a money resolution and Queen’s consent, which only the government can provide.”

Last night Johnson was accused of misleading parliament and seeking to tear up provisions for workers’ rights after Brexit.

According to the Financial Times, leaked documents indicated the UK government was willing to countenance divergence from EU standards on such rights, as well as other regulations, despite Brussels insisting that any future relationship be based on a level playing field.

The shadow Brexit minister, Jenny Chapman, said: “These documents confirm our worst fears. Boris Johnson’s Brexit is a blueprint for a deregulated economy, which will see vital rights and protections torn up.

“It is also clear Boris Johnson was misleading parliament earlier this week. You simply can’t trust a word Boris Johnson says. Under his proposals, this Conservative government has no intention of maintaining high standards after we leave the EU.”

Even Conservative supporters of Johnson remained baffled on Friday by the prime minister’s sudden U-turn on his Brexit deal earlier in the week, when he decided to pause it rather than allow more time to debate the legislation.

One minister told the Guardian that the views among colleagues was “No 10 has been churlish”, while a backbench MP said the strategy emerging from Downing Street was “very confused” and “out of control”.

Keith Simpson, Conservative MP for Broadland, described the “floundering in No 10 as worthy of Baldrick in Blackadder”, adding: “The problem is that circumstances beyond [Johnson’s] control and things he has done has made 31 October almost impossible and I think what he’s decided to do – supported by most, but not all of the cabinet – of trying to have a vote on a general election looks as though it’s part of the people versus parliament but I think it’s quite a risky strategy.”

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/politic...s-look-to-thwart-boris-johnsons-brexit-agenda.

 

[James]

Boris is Macron’s new best mate, and it could pay out many political dividends for both.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Boris is Macron’s new best mate, and it could pay out many political dividends for both.

Can't see Macron going against the wishes of other EU leaders. The whole thing is comical, the EU are now in charge of the future of Brexit and Corbyn and his friends are in charge of the near term future of parliament - this whole 'taking back control' thing the Brexiteers were shouting about has worked out real well for them hasn't it.

 

[sweep_shot]

The Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party have joined forces in a bid to trigger a 9 December election.

And they have asked EU Council President Donald Tusk to grant a three-month extension of the date for Brexit.

The parties say they reject Boris Johnson's later election date, which they believe would include time for him to "ram through" his Brexit Bill.

But Mr Johnson has said that MPs "cannot hold the country hostage" over Brexit and it was time to "move on".

The prime minister proposed a slightly later date of 12 December for an election, when he made his offer on Thursday.

He said if MPs support his vote in the Commons to call an election, he will use the remaining time before Parliament is dissolved on 6 November to try to pass the legislation for his Brexit deal.

Labour has rejected his election call unless a no-deal Brexit is taken off the table, while the DUP - key allies of the Conservatives until Mr Johnson announced his Brexit deal - has reserved judgment until Monday.

The Lib Dems and SNP say they support an election to "unlock" Parliament - but only on their timetable.

SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford said he and Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson have also written to Mr Tusk seeking an extension until at least 31 January - a date specified by the UK earlier this month.

He said this necessary in order to "remove the risk of a devastating no-deal Brexit".

Once that has been secured, he said the two parties would work to bring forward an election "on parliament's terms not on the prime minister's".

"Opposition parties will not be bullied by a prime minister who has shown utter contempt for Parliament, and who has attempted to railroad through his damaging deal without a shred of scrutiny or due process," Mr Blackford said.

But Mr Johnson warned MPs could "just waste the next three months" debating Brexit, if the UK was given an extension until the end of January.

The PM said he did not want an election and would rather be "getting on" with governing the country but urged MPs to back his election timetable and "move our country forward".

"Millions of businesses and people cannot plan their futures", he said. "This paralysis is causing real damage and the country must move on in 2020."

Gridlock in Parliament
Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson said her party could not support Mr Johnson forcing through "a bad deal".

She said that Boris Johnson had "missed his 'do-or-die' deadline (for Brexit of 31 October)".

The Lib Dems and the SNP intend to introduce a short amendment to the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, which would specify the polling day for the next election as 9 December.

It is understood the date was chosen as one of the earliest opportunities for an election, given the time needed to pass the amendment and the required five weeks' notice before polling day.

Ms Swinson said: "We need to get Boris Johnson out of office, unlock the gridlock in Parliament and give people the chance to vote to stay in the EU. "

Mr Johnson's plan for an election would require the agreement of two-thirds of MPs, under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act rules for calling an early general election.

The Lib Dem and SNP amendment to the act would only need a simple majority, if they can get the Parliamentary time for it to be debated.

'Move forward'
In their letter to Mr Tusk, Mr Blackford and Ms Swinson urged the EU to grant a longer three-month extension to "give Parliament the assurance that a 'no deal' exit could not take place before that point".

They said they would "work together to facilitate an election giving the people the chance to decide what the UK's next steps should be".

"We believe this is the only way to unlock what has become a deadlocked Parliament and to enable the UK and the EU to move forward - whatever form that takes," they said.

The prime minister has said his preference would be for a short extension until mid- or late-November, but opponents fear this would be used to revive the threat of no-deal to force through his Brexit bill.

What do the Lib Dems and SNP hope to achieve?
Analysis, by BBC political reporter Jessica Parker

The Liberal Democrats and the SNP have a few things in common:

They think they could do well in an early election.
They don't like Brexit.
And they don't want to be seen dancing to Boris Johnson's tune.
So they've composed their own plan for a snap poll on... 9 December.

One source suggested that the ever-so-slightly earlier date could particularly help the Liberal Democrats, because more students would still be in their university towns on the 9th than on 12 December.

But the bigger picture is that these two parties might be worried that if Brussels thinks that Parliament isn't actually going to use a longer extension to do anything meaningful, the EU will grant a shorter one instead... designed to apply pressure on MPs to approve the PM's deal.

So the Lib Dems and the SNP are saying, "give us that longer delay and we will work to break the deadlock".

Their plan, as it stands, hinges on No 10 being interested. Over to Boris Johnson.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50194685.

 

[sweep_shot]

The EU is due to meet on Monday to consider a Brexit extension until 31 January, with an option for the UK to leave earlier if a deal is ratified.

A draft text to be shown to ambassadors from the 27 member countries includes multiple possible dates for Brexit: 30 November, 31 December or 31 January.

There will also be a commitment that the Withdrawal Agreement cannot be renegotiated in future.

Unless the extension is approved, the UK will leave the EU on Thursday.

Under the proposed legal decision to extend the Brexit process, the EU would also retain the right to meet without the UK to consider future business during the extension.

The EU has so far agreed to an extension after Boris Johnson was forced by Parliament to request it, but has not specified the new deadline date.

If EU members approve the request for a three-month extension, Mr Johnson would have to accept it, under the terms of the law passed by MPs to prevent a no-deal Brexit.

Any extension to the Article 50 process is technically flexible, meaning that it can come to an end as soon as a deal is approved by both parties.

But by writing this flexibility into the legal decision to delay Brexit, EU leaders aim to underline their neutrality from the political debate in the UK.

A short delay could be seen as risking a no-deal Brexit by those who support remaining in the EU, while a long delay could be seen by Brexit supporters as attempting to prevent the UK from leaving.

As part of the extension, the EU is expected to say the UK has "an obligation to suggest a candidate" to represent it on the EU Commission.

Mr Johnson has previously said "under no circumstances" will he nominate anyone to take over from Julian King when the new commission takes office on 1 November, arguing that officials need to focus on the UK's future outside the EU.

'Look at all options'
The decision from Brussels is set to come as the UK debates how to use any potential extension to break the Parliamentary deadlock.

The prime minister will put forward a motion calling for a 12 December election on Monday, which needs the support of two-thirds of MPs to succeed.

But the Liberal Democrats and Scottish National Party want to see a bill introduced that enshrines a 9 December election in law, as long as the Brexit deadline is extended to 31 January.

Conservative MP James Cleverly dismissed this plan as a "gimmick" and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn called the move a "stunt".

But a Downing Street source said the government would "look at all options" if its own election motion failed.

Unlike the government plan, the Lib Dem-SNP bill would only require a simple majority to pass.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50202067.

 

[Abdullah719]

EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January

Spoiler

The EU has agreed to extend Brexit until 31 January 2020, according to a tweet from the European Council president.

Donald Tusk said the bloc would allow for a so-called "flextension" - meaning the UK could leave before the deadline if a deal was approved by Parliament.

It comes as MPs prepare to vote on proposals by Boris Johnson for an early general election on 12 December.

The SNP and Lib Dems have also proposed an election on 9 December.

The draft text of an agreement for the 27 EU ambassadors - seen by the BBC - also includes a commitment that the Withdrawal Agreement on the UK's exit from the EU cannot be renegotiated in future.

The UK was due to leave the EU on Thursday, but Mr Johnson was required to request an extension from the bloc after Parliament failed to agree a Brexit deal.

The PM had repeatedly said the UK would leave on 31 October deadline "do or die", but the law - known as the Benn act - also requires him to accept the offer.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50205603

 

[MenInG]

Labour has "run out of excuses" for opposing an early general election, Boris Johnson has said, as he made a fresh push for a poll in December.

He said "nobody relished" going to the polls in winter - but this Parliament had "run its course" and was "incapable" of delivering Brexit.

The PM has formally accepted the EU's offer of a Brexit extension until 31 January 2020 agreed earlier on Monday.

In a letter to EU officials, he said it was an "unwanted prolongation".

Urging the EU to rule out any further extension, he said there was time to ratify his Brexit deal but he feared the current Parliament would never do so "as long as it has the option of further delay".

The PM's acceptance means that the UK will not leave the EU on Thursday - despite a "do or die" promise he repeatedly made during this summer's Tory leadership campaign and since taking office in July.

It comes as MPs prepare to vote on the PM's proposals for an early general election on 12 December. The SNP and Lib Dems have also proposed an election - on 9 December. The vote is expected after 1900 GMT.

'Run and hide'
Speaking in the Commons, Mr Johnson said Labour was the only main opposition party scared of an election, telling Mr Corbyn that he "can run but he cannot hide" from the electorate.

But in response, Mr Corbyn said he did not trust Mr Johnson and he would not agree to a poll until the prospect of a no-deal exit had been definitively ruled out.

"Today he wants an election and his bill - not with our endorsement. How can we trust him that he will stick to that date?"

He said there had not been a December election since 1923 and holding it then risked "disenfranchising" students, many of whom would have left for the Christmas holidays.

A No 10 source said the government would introduce a bill "almost identical" to the Lib Dem/SNP option on Tuesday if Labour voted their plan down later, and "we will have a pre-Christmas election anyway".

The SNP's Westminster leader Ian Blackford said it would only support a poll "on its terms" and suggested this could depend on 16 and 17-year olds and EU nationals being given the vote.

The UK was due to leave the EU on Thursday, but Mr Johnson was required to request an extension after Parliament failed to agree a Brexit deal.

The prime minister had repeatedly said the UK would leave on 31 October deadline with or without a deal, but the law - known as the Benn Act - requires him to accept the EU's extension offer.

The Lib Dem/SNP plan does not include a new timetable for his legislation - the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.

They want the 9 December because it would not leave enough time for the bill to become law before Parliament is dissolved - which must happen a minimum of 25 working days before an election.

The BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, said she understands the government has offered to fix the election date on 12 December, but a Lib Dem source told her they were holding firm to their date, adding: "If we are doing this, we are not doing it on the government's terms."

Labour MPs are expected to abstain in the Commons vote on a 12 December election.

It comes as government figures showed a surge in voter registrations, with nearly two million registering in the past eight weeks.

Over half of the applications - 58% - were from voters aged 34 or under, compared to just 7% for those over 65.

The swell coincided with Mr Johnson's first proposal, in early September, for a snap election.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50205603

 

[sweep_shot]

Boris Johnson is to try again for a 12 December general election on Tuesday - despite MPs rejecting his plan.

The prime minister will publish a bill that would only need a simple majority to succeed - not two thirds as required in previous attempts.

But he would still need support from Lib Dems and the SNP for it to pass.

Mr Johnson told MPs Parliament was "dysfunctional" and could "no longer keep this country hostage" but Labour said the PM could not be trusted.

The Commons backed the government's election motion by 299 to 70 - well short of the two-thirds majority needed under the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act.

All Conservative MPs backed the motion - but the vast majority of Labour MPs abstained, along with the SNP and DUP. All but one Lib Dem MPs voted against it.

The vote came after the PM officially accepted the EU's offer of an extension to the Brexit process to 31 January.

In a letter to EU officials, Mr Johnson said the further three-month delay - which he insists was forced upon him by Parliament - was "unwanted".

This means the UK will not now leave the EU on Thursday - 31 October - a promise Mr Johnson had repeatedly made since he became prime minister.

Mr Johnson said he would persist with his efforts to get an early election, telling MPs that "one way or another" the current deadlock had to be broken.

Commons leader Jacob Rees-Mogg said the government wants the House of Commons to debate all stages of a bill for a 12 December election on Tuesday.

Usually a bill is debated over the course of several days, but Mr Rees-Mogg said the legislation would be "extremely short, simple, and limited in scope".

The bill would also have to pass through the House of Lords at a later date if it is to come into effect.

He added that the government would not be bringing back its Withdrawal Agreement Bill, required to put Mr Johnson's Brexit deal into law.

The legislation for an election the PM is proposing for Tuesday would require a lower threshold for approval and, crucially, the Liberal Democrats and the SNP have indicated they might be prepared to support it.

The DUP, which opposes Mr Johnson's Brexit agreement and which abstained in Monday's vote, could also potentially come on board.

However, there are arguments over the date of an election.

Ahead of the vote on Tuesday, BBC political correspondent Nick Eardley indicated that opposition parties had yet to commit to backing the bill.

Skip Twitter post by @nickeardleybbcEnd of Twitter post by @nickeardleybbc
The Lib Dems and SNP want Monday, 9 December, which they say will prevent any chance of the prime minister's Brexit deal being approved before Parliament is dissolved.

Parliament has to be dissolved a minimum of 25 working days before the date of an election to allow sufficient preparations to take place.

The government's pledge not to bring back its Brexit deal bill before Parliament is dissolved for an election is designed to assuage the concerns of the SNP and Lib Dems - who want to fight the election on a platform of stopping Brexit entirely.

'Very similar'
But No 10 is currently holding firm on its preferred election date of 12 December.

It maintains it would be very difficult for an election bill to pass through both the Commons and the Lords, and receive Royal Assent by 00:01 on Friday in order to meet a 9 December deadline.

A No 10 source said the government's bill would be "very similar" to that proposed by the Lib Dems and the SNP - but with the 12 December election date enshrined in law, to reassure those who worry that Mr Johnson could change his mind.

'Bewildered'
Negotiations between the two sides over a compromise are reportedly taking place in Westminster, although Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson has said, as it stands, she will not agree to the 12 December date.

"He's (Boris Johnson) going for a different plan," she told MPs. "This just raises a suspicion... and this is not a man who you can trust."

Mr Johnson told MPs voters would be "absolutely bewildered" by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn's apparent resistance to an election.

Mr Corbyn said he would study the details of the legislation but would only support an election once a no-deal Brexit had been taken off the table.

He also wants assurances that students will not be "disenfranchised" if the vote is held outside term time.

Many Labour MPs remain adamantly opposed to an election in any circumstances, amid concerns about the party's poor poll ratings and confusion over the party's Brexit policy of negotiating a new deal and holding another referendum.

Meanwhile, the BBC understands the government has "stood down" its Operation Yellowhammer contingency planning for a no-deal exit, while it has also paused its £100m Get Ready for Brexit on 31 October campaign.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50213548.

 

[sweep_shot]

The government says it has paused its campaign urging the public and businesses to Get Ready for Brexit on 31 October.

It comes after Prime Minister Boris Johnson accepted the EU's offer to extend the Brexit deadline to 31 January.

The Brexit advertising blitz across social media, billboards and TV is reported to have cost £100m.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn called it "£100m of misspent public money".

"How many nurses could have been hired, how many parcels could have been funded at food banks, how many social care packages could have been funded for our elderly?," Mr Corbyn asked MPs.

"[Boris Johnson] has failed because he has chosen to fail and he now seeks to blame Parliament."

Meanwhile, the BBC understands that Operation Yellowhammer, the government's contingency plan for a no-deal Brexit, has been stood down.

Last week, the National Audit Office said in a report that the government's advertising campaign had had "limited impact" because it was launched in early September, which was too close to 31 October.

The wording on the home page of the Get Ready for Brexit website was changed on 18 October - the day Mr Johnson agreed his deal with the EU - to suggest a no-deal exit on the 31 October was less likely.

Before 18 October, it said: "The UK is due to leave on 31 October."

The website then said: "We could still leave with no deal on 31 October."

Shortly after Boris Johnson announced that he had accepted the EU's extension, it was changed to remove any reference to 31 October.

The BBC's digital reporter Joey D'Urso said there were still a lot of active ads on Facebook on Monday afternoon containing the 31 October date, according to the social media giant's ad library.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50181485.

 

[sweep_shot]

The UK is set to go to the polls on 12 December after MPs backed Boris Johnson's call for an election following months of Brexit deadlock.

By a margin of 438 votes to 20, the House of Commons approved legislation paving the way for the first December election since 1923.

The bill is still to be approved by the Lords but could become law by the end of the week.

If that happens, there will be a five-week campaign up to polling day.

The prime minister has said the public must be "given a choice" over the future of Brexit and the country.

Mr Johnson hopes the election will give him a fresh mandate for his Brexit deal and break the current Parliamentary deadlock, which has led to the UK's exit being further delayed to 31 January.

The PM said it was time for the country to "come together to get Brexit done", as he left a meeting of the 1922 Committee of backbench Conservatives held minutes after the vote.

He has readmitted 10 of the 21 Conservative MPs he threw out of the party for rebelling over Brexit, allowing them to stand as Conservative candidates.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said: "This election is a once-in-a-generation chance to transform our country and take on the vested interests holding people back."

He said his party would "now launch the most ambitious and radical campaign for real change that our country has ever seen".

Shadow Cabinet minister Andrew Gwynne said voters faced a choice between "five more years of Boris Johnson's slash and burn politics" and a Labour government genuinely on the side of working people.

But some Labour MPs have expressed misgivings over the timing of the election, believing only another referendum can settle the Brexit question for good.

More than 100 Labour MPs did not take part or abstained in Tuesday's crucial vote, while 11 voted against an election. A total of 127 Labour MPs, including Mr Corbyn, supported the election.

The Liberal Democrats and the SNP signalled their support for an election earlier this week, arguing it was now the best way of stopping Brexit.

Mr Corbyn announced earlier on Monday that he now backed the idea because the EU's decision to delay Brexit for three months had taken a no-deal departure off the table.

Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson said neither Mr Johnson nor Mr Corbyn "was fit to be prime minister" and it was not inconceivable that her party could form the next government.

"I am standing as a candidate to be the next prime minister and in these volatile political times that is absolutely possible," she told Sky News.

The SNP's Kirsty Blackman said her party was determined to do everything to stop Scotland being taken out of the EU against its will, while also campaigning aggressively for a decisive break with a "decade of austerity".

Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage welcomed the election, tweeting that the deadlock had been broken and "Brexit now has a chance to succeed".

Boris Johnson had tried and failed three times to get Parliament's backing for an early election. But on this occasion, MPs approved the necessary legislation after just six hours of debate.

There was last-minute wrangling over the date amid Labour concerns that students could be "disenfranchised" if it was held outside term time.

But their call for the poll to be held on Monday, 9 December - at a time when they believed more students would be at their term-time addresses - was rejected by 315 votes to 295.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50229318.

 

[sweep_shot]

Boris Johnson's Brexit deal will leave the UK £70bn worse off a year than if it had remained in the EU, a study by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) has found.

It concluded that growth would be 3.5% lower in 10 years' time under the deal.

The independent forecaster's outlook is one of the first assessments of how the economy will fare under the new deal.

But the Treasury said it is plans on a 'more ambitious' agreement with the EU than 'NIESR is basing its findings on'.

A spokesman said: "We are aiming to negotiate a comprehensive free trade agreement with the European Union, which is more ambitious than the standard free trade deal that NIESR has based its findings on."

NIESR said approval of the Prime Minister's deal "would reduce the risk of a disorderly outcome, but eliminate the possibility of a closer trading relationship with the EU".

Despite the agreement between the EU and the UK removing uncertainty, customs and regulatory barriers would "hinder goods and services trade with the continent leaving all regions of the United Kingdom worse off than they would be if the UK stayed in the EU," NIESR said.

"We estimate that, in the long run, the economy would be 3.5% smaller with the deal compared to continued EU membership," it added.

The report also found the proposed free trade deal with the EU was slightly worse for the economy than Theresa May's deal of last year.

Founded in 1938, NIESR has no party political ties and is the UK's oldest independent economic research institute.

Earlier this month, Bank of England governor Mark Carney welcomed the new Brexit deal, saying it was a "net economic positive".

However, the governor said that the "different" future relationship negotiated with the EU meant it "remains to be seen" if overall the deal would be as positive for the UK economy as the deal put forward by Mr Johnson's predecessor Mrs May.

Chancellor Sajid Javid has refused to recalculate Treasury assessments on the impact of the government's Brexit deal, saying it is "self-evidently in our economic interest".

Slowing demand
NIESR's study modelled different Brexit scenarios against a baseline of the UK staying in the EU.

In the case of a no-deal Brexit, it said, the economy would shrink by 5.6%.

The government would dearly love to compare its agreement to the prospect of no deal.

On that basis, Boris Johnson's renegotiation looks better - on standard economic models such as those deployed by the respected National Institute of Economic and Social Research.

"New deal versus no deal" was the argument put to MPs when the Prime Minister was still trying to pass his deal. It was the position of the Chancellor, when he refused to publish his own version of such an analysis saying it was "self-evidently" better.

But we are now in a different situation.

The Prime Minister's deal is being put to the electorate versus a remain option or a different, far softer form of Brexit.

Crucially, NIESR calculates that the Johnson renegotiation leads to a slightly worse economic outcome than Theresa May's deal which it replaces, as the Bank of England Governor hinted to me earlier this month.

What is driving these results? The new deal creates more distance from the European Union economy, with more regulatory barriers to trade. Unlike May's deal, there could be checks on the origin of parts in the car industry, for example.

The overall impact of these extra barriers outweighs the benefit from extra certainty of "getting Brexit done". Individual businesses may well disagree. But the Treasury itself has chosen not to issue its own version of analysis such as this, even though it has the capacity to do so.

If the terms of trade with the EU remained unchanged, but "chronic uncertainty" persisted, GDP would be 2% lower.

"The economic outlook is clouded by significant economic and political uncertainty and depends critically on the United Kingdom's trading relationships after Brexit," NIESR said.

"Domestic economic weakness is further amplified by slowing global demand."

According to NIESR, the effects of Brexit on the UK economy are already being felt.

"The economy is estimated to be 2.5% smaller now than it would otherwise have been as a result of the 2016 Brexit vote," it said.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50219036.

 

[sweep_shot]

UK car production fell by 3.8% in September, due to political uncertainty at home and weaker overseas demand, according to the industry's trade body.

Fears over a possible no-deal Brexit dampened demand in the UK, while exports fell 3.4%, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said.

Overall car output for the year-to-date plunged 15.6%, making it the weakest three quarters since 2011.

SMMT added that British car makers had spent £300m on no-deal Brexit measures.

"Another bitterly disappointing month reflects domestic and international market contraction," said SMMT's chief executive Mike Hawes.

"Most worrying of all though is the continued threat of a 'no deal' Brexit, something which has caused international investment to stall and cost UK operations hundreds of millions of pounds, money that would have better been spent in meeting the technological challenges facing the global industry."

The trade body said that the latest car production figures, which compare output with the same month a year earlier, capped a 15-month period of decline for the sector.

In addition to dealing with escalating international trade tensions and technological challenges, British car makers also had to "divert huge resources" to prepare for the possibility of a no-deal Brexit, the SMMT said.

The UK's automotive industry is closely integrated with European suppliers and markets. Many models rely on a stream of components imported from the EU. And eight out of ten cars built in the UK are exported.

The SMMT has previously suggested that leaving the EU with no transition deal in place would cause "permanent devastation" to the industry.

The agreement to push back the UK's departure date until January 2020 has meant the immediate prospect of a no-deal Brexit has been avoided.

The government has said it hopes to have a free trade deal with the EU in place by the end of the Brexit transition period in December 2020.

However a general election to be held on 12 December will determine future Brexit policy.

Mr Hawes added: "A general election may ultimately provide some certainty, but does not yet remove the spectre of no-deal which will continue to inhibit the UK industry's prospects unless we can agree and implement a new, ambitious and permanent relationship that safeguards free and frictionless trade."

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50240771.

 

[from_da_lost_dim3nsion]

Longest Circus ever

 

[sweep_shot]

Donald Trump has criticised Boris Johnson's Brexit deal with the EU, saying it restricts the US's ability to do future trade with the UK.

Speaking to LBC, he said that, without the deal, the two countries could "do many times the numbers" than now.

The US president also took a swipe at Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, saying he would be "so bad" as prime minister.

Mr Corbyn accused him of "trying to interfere" in the UK general election to boost "his friend Boris Johnson".

The UK is officially going to the polls on 12 December after the early election bill became law when it was given royal assent on Thursday.

It follows a further delay to the UK's departure from the EU, to 31 January 2020.

In August, Mr Trump promised a "very big trade deal" with the UK and predicted that leaving the EU would be like losing "an anchor round the ankle".

But speaking to friend and supporter Nigel Farage on LBC, Mr Trump was critical of the withdrawal agreement Mr Johnson recently reached with EU leaders.

Mr Trump told LBC: "We want to do trade with UK and they want to do trade with us.

"To be honest with you... this deal... under certain aspects of the (Brexit) deal... you can't do it, you can't do it, you can't trade.

"We can't make a trade deal with the UK because I think we can do many times the numbers that we're doing right now and certainly much bigger numbers than you are doing under the European Union."

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50252285.

 

[sweep_shot]

The Bank of England has warned that weak global growth and trade barriers created by the government's Brexit deal will hit the UK economy.

It came as two Bank policymakers called for an immediate interest rate cut to support growth.

The Bank voted 7-2 to keep interest rates on hold at 0.75%.

The Bank said the new EU withdrawal agreement struck by Prime Minister Boris Johnson had reduced the likelihood of a no-deal Brexit.

The Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) that sets interest rates said this would end some of the uncertainty facing businesses and households.

However, policymakers added that the transition to a new trade deal would introduce new customs checks and regulatory barriers.

The MPC said its assumption of a Canada-style "deep free-trade agreement" between the UK and EU would "raise administrative costs for firms" doing business with the continent.

What's the outlook for growth?
Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England, said the Brexit deal had created "the prospects for a pick-up in UK growth".

The Bank expects the annual pace of growth to rise from around 1% at the end of this year to more than 2% by the end of 2022.

Mr Carney said this would be helped by "a world that has stopped weakening and picks up a little bit".

He added: "three-quarters of that rise in growth is driven by domestic factors - the most important of which is a reduction in uncertainty driven by an orderly transition to a new Brexit arrangement."

However, the Bank's Monetary Policy Report said a weaker global economy and its new assumptions about Brexit would knock 1% off UK growth over the next three years compared with its forecast in August.

Policymakers believe the UK economy grew 0.4% in the three months to September this year, double their estimate in August, amid a recovery in the UK's dominant services sector.

However, growth in the final quarter of the year is expected to fall back to 0.2%.

How big is the UK's economy?
Spending pledges by the government are expected to boost growth in the coming years.

The Bank also cited research that showed the current level of business investment is about 11% lower because of Brexit uncertainty.

What else did the Bank say about Brexit?
For the first time, Bank policymakers changed their assumption about the UK's future trading relationship with the EU.

They had previously assumed an average of a range of Brexit outcomes that filter through to the economy over 15 years.

It now assumes the government will strike a free-trade agreement with Brussels that will keep goods tariffs at zero but introduce customs checks at the border.

With the transition period currently due to expire at the end of 2020, the drag on growth from new regulatory barriers will now be more immediate.

Policymakers said: "As a result, trade flows are likely to fall and some companies might exit the market."

Diverging regulations are also expected to hit a wide variety of sectors across the EU, from law to banking.

The Bank also suggested that trade deals with new partners would be years away, reflecting the fact that "it typically takes several years for new trade deals to be negotiated and implemented".

What's the outlook for interest rates?
Michael Saunders and Jonathan Haskel, two of the Bank's external rate-setters, voted to cut interest rates to 0.5%, from the current rate of 0.75%.

They said inflation, which currently stands at 1.7%, suggested that there was little risk that the economy would overheat in the medium term if interest rates were cut.

The MPC expects inflation, as measured by the consumer prices index (CPI), to fall to about 1.2% by next spring as the impact of the government's energy price cap kicks in.

This is well below the Bank's 2% target.

While the unemployment rate remains below 4%, which is its lowest since the 1970s, Mr Saunders and Mr Haskel said they believed recent data suggested the "labour market was turning".

They also said there was a risk that world growth could be weaker and Brexit uncertainties could persist for longer than the MPC's assumptions.

Financial markets believe interest rates will be cut to 0.5% in the coming year, and Mr Carney said the MPC would respond to developments in the economy accordingly.

Lower interest rates are good news for borrowers and bad news for savers, as commercial banks use the Bank of England as a reference point for the rates they offer on mortgages and savings accounts.

Will Mark Carney delay his departure from the Bank?
Bank governor Mark Carney is due to stand down from his role on 31 January next year. However, at the Bank's news conference, he opened the door to staying on beyond that date.

He said that he had already agreed to extend his term twice, in order to ensure the financial system was prepared for Brexit and also to ensure a proper handover to his successor.

Mr Carney said it was understandable that a decision on the new governor had not been made, "given the priority" that the Brexit negotiations have taken.

He committed to making sure that the transition to the new governor was "smooth".

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50333167.

 

[sweep_shot]

The UK's credit rating could be downgraded, according to ratings agency Moody's, which says Brexit has caused "paralysis in policy-making".

It has changed the outlook on the UK's current rating - which is a marker of how likely it is to pay back its debts - from "stable" to "negative".

Moody's also criticised the general election promises to raise spending with "no clear plan" to finance it.

The UK is currently rated Aa2 - the third highest grade.

Credit ratings agencies grade countries and institutions by their credit-worthiness. That in turn can affect the amount that it costs countries to borrow money.

Moody's stripped Britain of its top-notch AAA rating in 2013, before downgrading it again in 2017.

'High risk'
All the major political parties have committed to ramping up borrowing as part of their general election campaigning.

They have said this is to take advantage of low interest rates. Moody's change in outlook suggests this could alter in the future.

Jane Sydenham, from Rathbone Investment Management, said: "The vast spending plans announced this week make the UK look a higher risk prospect from an international debt investors point of view."

Moody's said its concern was that the UK's debt level could rise as a result. "In the current political climate, Moody's sees no meaningful pressure for debt-reducing fiscal policies," it said.

Jane Foley, from Rabobank, said to borrow more - without increasing debt levels - you need to see economic growth which is "a big ask when global growth is slowing and when UK investment has been chased away by political uncertainty".

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50361025.

 

[sweep_shot]

LONDON: Britain missed its chance to host the first European factory of US electric vehicle pioneer Tesla because of Brexit, Chief Executive Elon Musk said in remarks reported on Wednesday.

The company had earlier said it chose a location near Berlin for a new design centre and plant to make batteries, powertrains and vehicles, offering a major boost to the German capital.

Berlin’s minister in charge of economic affairs, Ramona Pop, said the move could create 6,000 to 7,000 jobs in production alone, with hundreds or even thousands more in areas such as design, software or research.

“Brexit (uncertainty) made it too risky to put a Gigafactory in the UK,” Musk told industry website Auto Express.

No one from Tesla was immediately available to comment.

Britain’s vote to leave the European Union has hurt foreign investment because the country’s future trading relationship with the EU is still not clear, more than three years after the referendum.

Britain holds a parliamentary election in December in a bid to break the impasse. Conservative Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said high levels of inward investment would return once terms of the withdrawal agreement have been settled.

Major carmakers such as Nissan have said a disorderly departure from the bloc, where companies face tariffs after leaving the EU without a transition deal, would be unsustainable and jeopardise its entire business model.

Britain’s business minister Andrea Leadsom said the government was aware that the uncertainty over Brexit is causing investment to be put hold and that is why the upcoming election is needed.

“We need a Conservative government to get Brexit done with a deal and end the uncertainty,” she said.

But the opposition Liberal Democrats said the decision shows Johnson’s “deluded plans are already costing the country vital investment and making us all poorer”.

Source: https://www.dawn.com/news/1516590/brexit-drove-tesla-to-pick-berlin-over-britain-for-new-factory.

 

[msaaim89]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] Have you already confirmed 100% who you are voting for?

 

[msaaim89]

Source: https://www.dawn.com/news/1516590/brexit-drove-tesla-to-pick-berlin-over-britain-for-new-factory.

Brexit is always used as the excuse. They were going to Germany regardless. It's not surprising given the German prowess in automotive engineering.

 

[sweep_shot]

Countries including Australia have asked for trade compensation from the UK and the EU over Brexit disruption.

Fifteen countries, including the US, India and New Zealand, have been setting out Brexit concerns at a World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting in Geneva.

Australian officials said their beef and lamb exporters had already been hit after several Brexit delays.

Brazil said Brexit plans for Northern Ireland could breach WTO rules.

The main issue for the fifteen countries is a system which allows them easier access to the EU's large market for limited quantities of some of their goods, mainly farm produce.

It's a system known as "tariff rate quotas".

World Trade Organization members generally apply tariffs - taxes on imports - to many of the goods they buy from abroad.

For some products they have made commitments to allow specified amounts to be imported with tariffs that are lower than what they usually apply. In some cases the reduced tariff is zero.

It makes it more profitable for Australian farmers to sell beef to Europe, for example.

Brexit complicates this.

The current quotas are for the whole of the EU, the UK included.

Brexit means the UK and the EU have to decide how to divide them up.

Some countries say that could lead to them having less of the favourable access than they currently have to what is a large and wealthy market.

Australia said that the UK and EU had proposed different ways of allocating the quotas that would add up to less access than Australian exporters currently have.

The US argued that it could end up with no access at reduced tariffs for pizza cheese to the UK or grape juice to the EU.

Another concern is that the UK and EU might themselves end up using part or even all of the other's quota.

The US argued that could severely hit its sales of pork and wine.

Some countries are demanding compensation from the UK and EU. In the WTO that would usually mean reducing tariffs on other goods.

Brexit delays
Australia also argued that it has already been affected by Brexit.

A paper prepared for the meeting said that when Brexit was still scheduled for 31 October, many Australian businesses ceased exports of valuable beef and sheep meat ahead of Christmas because of uncertainty about whether they would be able to make use of these quotas.

The document said similar decisions were taken ahead of a previous possible Brexit dates and will have to be taken again before 31 January.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50419130.

 

[Abdullah719]

Brexit bill to block further delay to transition

Spoiler

The government is to add a new clause to the Brexit bill to make it illegal for Parliament to extend the process beyond the end of next year.

The post-Brexit transition period - due to conclude in December 2020 - can currently be extended by mutual agreement for up to two years.

But an amended Withdrawal Agreement Bill the Commons is set to vote on this week would rule out any extension.

Critics say this raises the chance of leaving the EU without a trade deal.

But senior Cabinet Minister Michael Gove insisted both the UK and the EU had "committed themselves to making sure that we have a deal" by the end of 2020.

He also promised Parliament would be able to scrutinise the Withdrawal Agreement Bill "in depth".

Shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer said the move was "reckless and irresponsible" and he argued that Prime Minister Boris Johnson was "prepared to put people's jobs at risk".

Downing Street has said the government plans to ask the new Parliament to have its first debate and vote on the withdrawal agreement - the legislation needed to ratify Brexit - on Friday.

With a majority of 80 following Thursday's general election, Mr Johnson is expected to get the bill into law with few changes in time for the UK to end its EU membership on 31 January.

The government will then have until the end of the transition period on 31 December to negotiate a free trade agreement with Brussels before the trade relationship defaults to World Trade Organization (WTO) terms.

Senior EU figures, including the bloc's chief negotiator Michel Barnier, are sceptical that a deal can be agreed within that time.

Currently, if trade talks are progressing more slowly the UK and EU could agree - by July - to extend the post-Brexit transition period by one or two years.

But on Friday, the prime minister intends to expunge this clause from his Withdrawal Agreement Bill, and instead explicitly rule out any extension.

This is designed to underline to those Leave voters who have backed his party for the first time that he is determined to deliver Brexit - and he wants to quash speculation that he would be prepared to go for a deal that keeps the UK in close step with Brussels.

Government sources say that having a hard deadline will also focus the minds of both sets of negotiators on achieving a deal.

With Labour losing swathes of seats in their heartlands, Boris Johnson will claim that the opposition haven't learned any lessons if they vote against his Brexit legislation.

The prime minister promised during the general election campaign that he would not seek an extension to the transition period - persuading Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage to stand down candidates in Tory seats.

As well as ruling out an extension, the Independent reports that the amended withdrawal agreement may omit previous "provisions to ensure that workers' rights were not weakened after Brexit".

Sam Lowe, from the Centre for European Reform think tank, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that Mr Johnson's move was "slightly performative" and its effect would be "largely domestic".

"It is a firmer deadline but of course there is still some flexibility," he said.

Mr Lowe said a December 2020 deadline could help the PM manage his own party when it comes to making concessions to the EU.

"The prospect of a no-deal is still there," Mr Lowe said. "The question is whether Boris Johnson wants a no-deal but the evidence of recent time suggests no he doesn't."

The amendments to the withdrawal agreement come after Mr Johnson carried out a limited reshuffle of his government on Monday.

Simon Hart has been named as Welsh secretary, replacing Alun Cairns, who quit at the start of the election.

And Nicky Morgan stays as culture secretary, despite standing down as an MP. She is taking a peerage and will sit as a cabinet minister in the Lords.

Opposition parties said she had been "rewarded for political sycophancy".

But Ms Morgan, who will be in charge of broadband and media policy, suggested she might only be in the role for a few weeks - pending what are expected to be far-reaching changes to the PM's top team after the UK has left the EU on 31 January.

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50818134

 

[Robert]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] Have you already confirmed 100% who you are voting for?

Yes.

Loking forward, it depends on whom Labour elect as Leader. I might change party. In any event I look to an alliance of progressives, where Labour, LDs, Greens and Plaid support each other with nonaggression pacts and stand-down agreements.

 

[Technics 1210]

Yes.

Loking forward, it depends on whom Labour elect as Leader. I might change party. In any event I look to an alliance of progressives, where Labour, LDs, Greens and Plaid support each other with nonaggression pacts and stand-down agreements.

From what I have read recently, your views of Brown, Blair, and the future of Labour, I have to ask, why on earth were you supporting LDs? Was it purely because of Brexit?