Brexit

Jean-Claude Juncker in an interview today said after the written submission of the leaving plan from Boris and his team to replace the backstop that he was optimistic that it would form the basis of a deal to leave the EU,
So despite vitriolic comment from other parties that he was doing nothing and wanted a no deal exit from the EU he has done in a matter of weeks what May could not do in nearly 3 years and the remainers said could never be done.

 

The majority of MPs don't want him to bring a saleable deal back so they don't have to vote for it, we already know the likes of the Lib/Dems, Greens, Change ETC won't vote for it, so it will be interesting if Labour have the balls to vote leave.
I just hope they have not reworded the back stop to read differently but mean the same.
I'm apprehensive that nothing will accommodate Labour's idea of leaving the EU, and I do believe Farage is right when he says Boris will tie us to the EU in one way or another, fingers crossed he's not right.

 

I'm not sure Corbyn or should I say his legal people will be happy with a similar deal with new context, he turned the last deal down because of May's red lines.
I'm not as confident as you mate and to be honest if we are still trapped in the back stop (irrelevant of it's new title) it's a no for me, we have to be in charge of our own destiny, and even with a new title were still locked in until the EU say different.

 

They won’t. There’s almost no chance they’ll veto an extension.

 

Hmm. I disagree that they’ll get a deal across the line.

Bear in mind that the way Johnson has set up this prorogation, combined with the extension legislation, there’s very, very little time for MPs to have any scrutiny of a deal (that would have to come directly from the EU summit). Parliament reconvenes and then there will be a compulsory 2 day debate on the Queen’s speech. Following that, the Prime Minister will attend the EU summit. Parliament doesn’t sit on a Friday, and even if it did, there would need to be reasonable scrutiny of any deal. I can almost see the argument now in sections of the media that parliament should vote through a deal almost completely blind, which would be totally unacceptable.

Short of parliament sitting on a Saturday, it seems unlikely that it even CAN come to the floor. The extension legislation stipulates that if no specific deal has been ratified in parliament by the Saturday, then the PM is mandated to seek an extension.

 

And how foolish would that look. BJ agrees a deal and then a few days later goes back and says I need to ask for an extension as it hasn’t been ratified. At that point I think the EU will turn down his request which would give Parliament three options, agree his deal, no deal or cancel Article 50

 

Surely our dedicated MPs would put themselves out to try and get a deal through by putting the odd Saturday in

 

If needed they will sit 7 days a week and 24 hours a day to agree the needed legislation, It is rumoured that part of the Boris deal is that the EU make it clear that if the deal on offer is refused then they will offer no extension on 31st Oct and a no deal will then be enacted, It seems both Boris and the EU need closure on Brexit

 

Well, no. There’s not the time in the 24 hours a day to properly scrutinise something as important as that.

I mentioned in the initial post that there would be unreasonable kickback on that. There’s just not enough time, it won’t be MPs simply ‘not doing their job’.

 

I just don’t see why the EU would contemplate refusing an extension with a general election imminent that could materially change the direction of negotiations in their favour.

Next time an extension rolls around, sure.

 

The EU does private polling and I suspect the results are showing a small win for the Conservatives and the possibility of a then no deal from the strengthened ERG wing of the party, Sometimes its better the devil you know, The disruption the brexit is causing the EU is also something they want over and done with,

 

Something pretty massive is in the offing in the Labour camp. And we’re not talking just about Brexit positioning.

Abolishing the deputy leadership position is a frankly astonishing move from the NEC.

 

Doubt they could even agree on what day it is..........!!

 

Yawn.

No, the Labour NEC require a supermajority to make any binding, important, decisions like this. Do you know what one of them is?

 

No, but it probably involves several meetings, rally's and protest marches with banners of course......

 

The NEC require a two thirds majority and as the vote was 10-17 it failed, It was then proposed as a vote at conference which only requires a 50% to carry, It will now be discussed and voted on at the Labour party conference,

Just to be clear that this move to remove a position voted on by the Party in a vote by members is proposed by a Party Momentum that is not a part of Labour, Not affiliated to Labour but has increasing power over a major party by getting its members in positions of power, They hold separate party meetings to decide how to vote and influence the Labour party and control both its members and it policies,
The last time this happened when the Marxist group Militant Tendency tried to take control of the Labour party they were banned from membership and the same should happen here, Momentum is a party within a party and this should be banned

 

The ironic thing is @Dionysus when Corbyn spoke yesterday of what the party are wanting to do I agreed with a lot of it, but I cant accept the way the party have behaved during this referendum campian.
Jon Lansman and his group will tear the Labour party I know apart, the latest episode abolishing the deputy leaders position.

 

Now been dropped as a motion, incredibly.

Just to correct you though, Momentum are no more a ‘party within a party’ than the Fabian Society or Prospect. Prospect and Tribune particularly have always sought to organise themselves within groups. This is how the Labour Party works. I don’t agree with them politically, but that’s not to question their validity.

 

Not sure that is correct, Tribune are a group of MPs who are already party members and are following a more left agenda of the Labour party and adhere to the rules of the Labour party attempting to sway colleagues from within by argument and ideas but with not seeking any control of the party and NEC, The Fabian Society and such as the Cooperative movement are officially affiliated to the Party, The hold no power or seek it, They subsidise the election of MPs with donations but do not seek power within the party and are open in there dealings with democratic rules within and a conviction to support rather than control,
Momentum is a completely separate party with its own officers and management structure and policies and not affiliated to the Labour party and has its own structure and its own policy which by infiltrating the Labour party they seek to control it, The similarities with the Militant Tendency in the way it seeks to control Labour are many