Britain and Brexit business

[unsafetydancer]

This! They have already sent my Dentist away. He lived here since he was 7

 

ETA: Bozo has replaced Amber Rudd with Therese Coffey, a woman who voted against equal marriage, giving gay couples the right to adopt children, the indoor smoking ban and human rights legislation. Ugh. It's like he's not even trying not to seem like a rabid rightwing dictator now.

Edited September 8, 2019 by unsafetydancer
Adding

[Glasgowghirl]

Boris is doing what Margaret Thatcher done in her later year's as PM, but that eventually lead to people turning against her in the party, weeks into his Premiership. I have never voted Conservative and don't agree with many of their political views but I find Boris's treatment of the likes of Ken Clarke and other senior party members appalling, Ken Clarke worked his way up to Chancellor the last time Conservatives were in power, Boris should be trying to make allies with the experienced MPs in his party not allienating them. 

[fraurosena]

Boris Johnson 'sabotage' letter to EU 'would break law'

Quote

A former supreme court justice has said Boris Johnson would be in contempt of court if he applied for article 50 extension while simultaneously trying to get the EU to reject it.

Reports in the Daily Telegraph suggested that the prime minister has drawn up plans to “sabotage” parliament’s efforts to force through a Brexit extension to prevent the UK leaving the bloc without a deal.

He is said to be considering sending an accompanying letter to the EU alongside the request to extend article 50, which would say the government does not want any delay to Brexit.

Lord Sumption, a former supreme court justice, said it would not be legal for the prime minister to ask for an extension while rubbishing the request at the same time.

He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “The bill or the act as its about to become says that he’s got to apply for an extension. Not only has he got to send the letter, he’s got to apply for an extension. And to send the letter and then try and neutralise it seems to me to be plainly a breach of the act.”

A Downing Street source said: “We intend to sabotage any extension. The ‘surrender bill’ only kicks in if an extension is offered. Once people realise our plans, there is a good chance we won’t be offered a delay. Even if we are, we intend to sabotage that too.”

Sumption said he had read the bill and there was not “the slightest obscurity” about what the government was obliged to do. He said: “You’ve got to realise that the courts are not very fond of loopholes. They’re going to interpret this act in a way that gives effect to its obvious purpose unless there’s something in the act that makes it completely impossible to do so and there isn’t.”

Sumption said Johnson would not only be in contempt of court if he failed to do what the bill states, he risked the resignation of the justice secretary, the attorney general, and other members of his cabinet.

He added there were “plenty of ways” in which this kind of obligation can be enforced. “An application will have to be made to the court for an injunction. The simplest way of enforcing the injunction would be for the court simply to direct an official to sign the letter on behalf of the PM and to declare that his signature was to be treated in every legal respect as equivalent to the prime minister’s,” he explained.

The Conservative MP Nigel Evans said Johnson was more likely to call for a vote of no confidence in his own government or try to force an election via another means than to go to Brussels to ask for an article 50 extension.

The joint executive secretary of the 1922 Committee of backbench Tory MPs told the Today programme: “I cannot see under the current circumstances Boris Johnson going to Brussels and asking for that extension.”

 

[fraurosena]

Order, oooorder!

Commons Speaker John Bercow to stand down

Quote

John Bercow says he will stand down as Commons Speaker and MP at the next election or on 31 October, whichever comes first.

Speaking in Parliament, Mr Bercow said his 10-year "tenure" was nearing its end and it had been the "greatest honour and privilege" to serve.

If there was no early election, he said 31 October would be the "least disruptive and most democratic" date.

The ex-Tory MP succeeded the late Michael Martin as Speaker in 2009.

He has faced fierce criticism from Brexiteers who have questioned his impartiality on the issue of Europe.

In a break from normal convention, Mr Bercow was facing a challenge from the Conservatives in his Buckingham constituency at the next election - whenever it is called.

His wife, Sally, was in the public gallery as he made his announcement.

Mr Bercow said he had decided at the time of the 2017 election that this would his last Parliament as Speaker.

If MPs reject calls for an early election later on Monday, as seems likely, he said it was important an "experienced figure" chaired debates in the final week of October leading up to the UK's possible exit from the EU.

He warned that if the appointment of his successor was left until after the next election, newly-elected MPs might find themselves being "unduly influenced" by party whips in their choice of figure.

"It will mean a ballot is held when all members have some knowledge of the candidates. This is far preferable to a contest at the start of a Parliament where new MPs will not be similarly informed," he told the Commons.

"We would not anyone want anyone to be whipped senseless, would we?"

In an emotional speech, he said he had been proud to stand up for the interests of MPs and to act as the "backbenchers' backstop".

"Throughout my time as Speaker, I have sought to increase the relative authority of this legislature for which I will make absolutely no apology to anyone, anywhere, at any time."

Mr Bercow received a standing ovation from the Labour benches after announcing his imminent departure, but most Tory MPs stayed in their seats.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn led tributes, saying the Speaker had stood up for and promoted democracy, adding that the "choice and timing" of his exit date was "incomparable".

For the government, Michael Gove said his determination to give MPs increased opportunities to hold the government to account were "in the best tradition of Speakers".

When he was first elected, Mr Bercow said he intended to serve no more than nine years in the job.

The Speaker is elected by all MPs in the House by secret ballot.

By tradition, the role alternates between the two major parties. If this is maintained, the next Speaker will be a Labour MP.

Potential successors to Mr Bercow include Commons deputy Speaker Lindsay Hoyle and Harriet Harman, the former Labour deputy leader and the longest-serving female MP in the House.

 

[unsafetydancer]

While I don't wholly agree with many of the decisions Bercow has made I will admit that he has kept parliament at least nominally in working order despite his own party's determination to wreck it. Hopefully his replacement will be someone who will also stand up to Bojo and his cabinet of arsehats when they flout the rules.

[fraurosena]

21 minutes ago, unsafetydancer said:

While I don't wholly agree with many of the decisions Bercow has made I will admit that he has kept parliament at least nominally in working order despite his own party's determination to wreck it. Hopefully his replacement will be someone who will also stand up to Bojo and his cabinet of arsehats when they flout the rules.

Well, according to tradition the Speaker alternates between Tories and Labour, so the next Speaker will be a Labour one -- or possibly a Lib Dem one (depending on how big they are). At the very least it's going to be interesting to see who it will end up being.

[fraurosena]

Boris does not plan to do what the law tells him he must. Because he da boss, and fuck constitution. 

British PM Johnson tells parliament: You can tie my hands, but I will not delay Brexit

Quote

Prime Minister Boris Johnson said on Tuesday he would not request an extension to Brexit, hours after a law came into force demanding that he delay Britain’s departure from the European Union until 2020 unless he can strike a divorce deal.

For the second time in a week, lawmakers then rejected Johnson’s request to try to break the deadlock through an early national election.

With the future of Brexit mired in uncertainty, parliament was suspended until Oct. 14, sparking tense scenes in the House of Commons where opposition lawmakers held signs reading “silenced” and yelled “shame on you” at Johnson’s ruling Conservatives.

Johnson appeared to have lost control of Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union with the approval of the law, which obliges him to seek a delay unless he can strike a new deal at an EU summit next month.

EU leaders have repeatedly said they have not received specific proposals ahead of an EU summit on Oct. 17 and 18, at which Johnson says he hopes he can secure a deal.

“This government will press on with negotiating a deal, while preparing to leave without one,” Johnson told parliament after the result of the vote on an early election.

“I will go to that crucial summit on October the 17th and no matter how many devices this parliament invents to tie my hands, I will strive to get an agreement in the national interest ... This government will not delay Brexit any further.”

Opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn said the party was eager for an election, but would not support Johnson’s move to hold one until it was certain a delay to Brexit had been secured.

“As keen as we are, we are not prepared to risk inflicting the disaster of no-deal on our communities,” Corbyn said.

Brexit, the United Kingdom’s most significant geopolitical move in decades, remains in question more than three years since the 2016 referendum, with possible outcomes ranging from an exit on Oct. 31 without a withdrawal agreement to smooth the transition, to abandoning the whole endeavor.

The bill seeking to block a no-deal exit, passed into law on Monday when it received assent from Queen Elizabeth, will force Johnson to seek a three-month extension to the Oct. 31 deadline unless parliament has either approved a deal or consented by Oct. 19 to leave without one.

Responding to concerns the government could ignore the legislation, Foreign Minister Dominic Raab earlier told parliament that the government would respect the rule of law but added, “Sometimes it can be more complex because there are conflicting laws or competing legal advice.”

Johnson took over as prime minister in July after his predecessor, Theresa May, failed to push the Withdrawal Agreement through parliament.

Parliament returned from its summer break last week, and Johnson has lost all six votes held in the House of Commons since. The suspension of parliament, or prorogation, will last for five weeks.

Under Johnson’s premiership, Britain’s three-year Brexit crisis has stepped up a gear, leaving financial markets and businesses bewildered by an array of political decisions that diplomats compare to the style of U.S. President Donald Trump.

BlackRock, a U.S. investment firm that manages $6.8 trillion of assets, said a no-deal Brexit or a referendum had become more plausible.

The pound trimmed gains against the dollar GBP=D3, to stand slightly higher on Monday at $1.234. It jumped to a six-week high of $1.2385 in London trading after economic data beat forecasts.

HOUSE OF BREXIT

House of Commons Speaker John Bercow, champion of parliament in its move to rein in the prime minister over Brexit, took a veiled swipe at Johnson as he announced on Monday he would stand down from the role, issuing a warning to the government not to “degrade” parliament.

As Bercow tried to suspend parliament on Monday night, well after midnight, a brief scuffle broke out near his chair as opposition lawmakers held up signs and booed.

“This is not a normal prorogation,” Bercow said. “It is not typical, it is not standard. It is one of the longest for decades and it represents not just in the minds of some colleagues but huge numbers of people outside, an act of executive fiat,” he told a raucous chamber.

Johnson, a former journalist who derided the EU and later became the face of the 2016 Vote Leave campaign, has repeatedly promised to deliver Brexit on Oct. 31.

Ireland told Johnson on Monday that he must make specific proposals on the future of the Irish border if there was to be any hope of averting a no-deal departure, saying Dublin could not rely on simple promises.

“In the absence of agreed alternative arrangements, no backstop is no deal for us,” Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, standing beside Johnson, told reporters.

“We are open to alternatives, but they must be realistic ones, legally binding and workable, and we haven’t received such proposals to date.”

Varadkar’s blunt remarks indicate the difficulty of Johnson’s gamble of using the threat of a no-deal exit to convince Germany and France that they must rewrite an exit pact struck last November.

“I want to find a deal, I want to get a deal,” Johnson said in Dublin, adding that there was plenty of time to find one before the October EU summit.

The law that took effect on Monday does allow for one scenario in which a no-deal Brexit could take place on Oct. 31 - if parliament approved a no-deal exit by Oct. 19.

However the current parliament would be unlikely to switch stance and approve a no-deal exit by then.

Lawmakers voted 311 to 302 on Monday to demand the government publish documents over its planning for a no-deal Brexit and private communications from government officials involved in a decision to suspend parliament.

Those calling for the documents to be published say they will show the decision to suspend parliament was politically motivated, as a way to limit discussion on Brexit. The government said the suspension was to give Johnson the chance to set out a new legislative agenda.

To be honest, what are the odds that the EU will even grant them an extension, even if they were asked? Britain has no plan, other than maybe, well, they might, they could try to, well... *whispers* ... have another go at May's proposal, maybe? You know, the one already voted against three times before? Because that would work, right? Right?

[Italiangirl]

What i don't understand of all this caos that is going to be Brexit is what the parliament want to do, I mean they already rejected the May deal 3 times, they don't want an hard Brexit but at the same time they don't offer any solutions, so...even if the EU will concede a delay till January what will happen then? Another caos just like this for what I understand...is what, the third time, the Brithis parliament ask for a delay? 

Frankly I'm pretty sick of all this caos, and can't see the EU granted another delay on no base. What will happen when the Parliament will open again in October? They will start again from here?and then what? They will have something like a week or 10 days before the end date, if no solution is found on the 31 what will happen an Hard Brexit?

[unsafetydancer]

4 hours ago, Italiangirl said:

What i don't understand of all this caos that is going to be Brexit is what the parliament want to do, I mean they already rejected the May deal 3 times, they don't want an hard Brexit but at the same time they don't offer any solutions, so...even if the EU will concede a delay till January what will happen then? Another caos just like this for what I understand...is what, the third time, the Brithis parliament ask for a delay? 

Frankly I'm pretty sick of all this caos, and can't see the EU granted another delay on no base. What will happen when the Parliament will open again in October? They will start again from here?and then what? They will have something like a week or 10 days before the end date, if no solution is found on the 31 what will happen an Hard Brexit?

You and me both to the bolded!

Here in Scotland we are asking these same questions and being told that it's not our business to be involved! I think the reason Boris has suspended parliament is that he wants no deal. He stands to make a lot of money out of it and avoid the new Tax Haven legislation that will come into force (I think this happens in November). Boris is hoping that he can give the opposing MPs no time to find a way to stop him and hopefully the fact that there has been a law passed to prevent no deal will mean he can be stopped. 

Again, this comes down to the UK having really no formal constitution and parliament being run on a series of "gentlemen's agreements", which is frankly absurd in the 21st century!

Meanwhile the SNP MPs in London staged a sit in. I don't know if they are still there but they were refusing to budge from the benches and singing a Scottish folk song in protest. I think I now understand why half of our traditional music is made up of angry songs.

I also received a letter yesterday from my MP, who is also an SNP MP, stating that he will be opposing Brexit entirely and asking for the opinions of his constituents for how he should proceed. I'm not really sure what to tell him to be honest. The disturbing backdrop to some of this is the so-called power grab where Westminster will regain control of several previously devolved powers from Holyrood for seven years. I don't expect they will be too quick to give them back to us.

The fact is that they need the income from Scotland more than ever. We are also the only one out of the three countries and one region that makes up the UK that grows enough food to feed our population. We send more money down than we receive back, something they have tried to obfuscate by creative accounting; one example of this is declaring the oil extracted off the east coast to have "no origin" which means that it is not included in Scotland's income and taxation figures. To be honest, for all they belittle us, most politicians from the English parties understand that they need Scotland's money, food and increasingly water supply to meet the needs of the population.

I think the only thing we can hope for is that this will be the cause of the break up of the last of the British Empire. There is a lot of anger up here in Scotland over Brexit and the removal of powers from our parliament. There wasn't much of a following for Welsh independence until about a year or so ago and now my Facebook and Twitter is being flooded with images of Welsh Nationalists doing various things. There's even quite a bit of talk about Ireland becoming united again. This is something that very few people would have imagined to be a possibility before Brexit and the utter disrespect shown to Ireland by Conservative MPs.

I think that there has long been a kind of English Exceptionalism that has dominated UK politics. In everything from the Iraq/Afghanistan wars to the complete refusal to accept the disastrous levels of poverty that have resurfaced in the UK you can see an attitude that "our country isn't like that, we're a great country." You probably notice this more if you don't live in the mega-rich bubble of the South. In the North, Wales and Scotland our industries have been ignored in favour of the financial services industry in London so I think we notice more of the ways that we are not so great. There's a very noticeable difference in how people see the UK in the context of the rest of the world and the South is starting to resemble the worst aspects of American politics with their attitude to how we should deal with other countries politically. It's incredibly infuriating! Here in Scotland we are more interested in negotiating and collaborating with our neighbours and yet there are many people in the far South who show outright contempt to the people they see as "foreigners".

I think it's also interesting that when travelling in other countries people seem to react differently to Scottish or Irish people. Once people realise you are Scottish they have a ton of questions for you about Brexit, independence and Scottish politics. I guess I would like to know, how DO other countries view the different nations of the UK. I like to hope that people are at least aware that we are as horrified by all of this as you are and equally as baffled by Westminster's refusal to accept reality.

[fraurosena]

6 minutes ago, unsafetydancer said:

I think it's also interesting that when travelling in other countries people seem to react differently to Scottish or Irish people. Once people realise you are Scottish they have a ton of questions for you about Brexit, independence and Scottish politics. I guess I would like to know, how DO other countries view the different nations of the UK. I like to hope that people are at least aware that we are as horrified by all of this as you are and equally as baffled by Westminster's refusal to accept reality.

Look, I'm not going to pretend that I know how all the people in my country feel about Brexit and the different countries in the UK. But I can tell you that the people that I do speak to about Brexit, all feel rather sorry for the Scots and the Irish (Wales isn't talked about as much, most people don't really know it's actually a country and not a county). The main sentiment I hear -- and share -- is that you guys voted against Brexit and now it's getting rammed through your throats regardless. Everybody's rooting for you to gain independence and for Ireland to be reunited. (Nice sentiments, perhaps, though not as easily attainable, alas.)

Most talk, however, is:

What the fuck are they doing on the other side of the Canal? Can't they see they're bringing about the ruin of the whole of Britain? Why can't they just call it a day, let go of those stupid non-binding referendum results and concede that there is no good way to leave the EU because everybody is better off being part of it? 

[unsafetydancer]

29 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

(Wales isn't talked about as much, most people don't really know it's actually a country and not a county)

This is why I feel sorry for Wales. They may have done a better job of hanging onto their language but their culture took the same beating ours did. We're just better at being disgruntled I guess.

30 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

What the fuck are they doing on the other side of the Canal? Can't they see they're bringing about the ruin of the whole of Britain? Why can't they just call it a day, let go of those stupid non-binding referendum results and concede that there is no good way to leave the EU because everybody is better off being part of it?

I think a lot of people here agree with that. There is a baffling group of supposed "left wing Brexiters" who view the EU as evil incarnate but other than those guys most people who aren't either filthy rich or rabid xenophobes can get behind this statement.

[Italiangirl]

@unsafetydancer how can Brexit being "none of your buisness" ??? Your life will be impacted by Brexit that you agreed or not. The part about your music make me laugh, because is so true! I know that at least in Italy many people are watching the update on Brexit like a good trainwreck when you are safe at home and plus a little bit of revenge maybe? Like "ah! glad is happening to you, that for years look at us from the upside down". I totally agree that if there going to be an Hard Brexit it will be the end of the Great Britain (it will be time that everybody go for their roads). We have had an Irish family as guest just at the end of August and one of the many things we chat about was Brexit obviously, they was baffled and a little lost, because even they who are leaving through this chaos didn't know what to expect. Now I'm waiting for October 31 as if my favorite telenovelas or stupid drama TV show should start again after the big summer break and they left me with a huge cliffhanger at the end of the previous season ??

[unsafetydancer]

@Italiangirl the attitude of Westminster is that Scotland is a province that they have the right to do what they please with. Their view is that because we narrowly lost the independence referendum due to some dodgy promises from a David Cameron then they own us. 

It’s not so funny if you are the one living with it. A few days ago a large healthcare organisation published a list of drugs they are in danger of being unable to obtain; drugs for diabetes, heart conditions, mental illnesses and cancer. People are in very real danger of dying because we don’t have the medication necessary to keep them alive.

The government refuse to publish the details of Operation Yellowhammer, their contingency plan for no deal, because they have admitted it will cause public anger. There is no accountability and no one seems bothered that we might run out of food.

It’s not a soap opera, it’s the large scale destruction and murder by wilful negligence of thousands of people. 

My sister may need to seek medical asylum in Canada if they run out of human insulin. 

[Ozlsn]

13 hours ago, fraurosena said:

What the fuck are they doing on the other side of the Canal? Can't they see they're bringing about the ruin of the whole of Britain? Why can't they just call it a day, let go of those stupid non-binding referendum results and concede that there is no good way to leave the EU because everybody is better off being part of it?

That is pretty much the middle to left view here. The hard right are all "the will of the people must be obeyed! You can't just have another vote because you didn't like the results!!" To which I usually say "you mean like the re-voting on the 1975 referendum to stay in the Common Market?" ("Oh but that's different..." "How?")

I can't guess what the results would be if they held another vote today. I think there is a lot more information about the effects and possible consequences, but I also think there are a lot of people who have dug themselves into position and who won't change their vote. 

In my field we have been seeing changes for about 2 years - groups that were getting EU funding are finding they aren't, collaborative groups are starting to exclude the UK collaborators. People are leaving to head to the EU, people from here are going to the EU countries preferentially (mostly because the funding is more secure.) We're getting a higher number of enquiries from UK people wanting to come and work here than previously. It's scary talking with friends who are finding the whole situation very insecure.

[unsafetydancer]

@Ozlsn i’m going to guess you are a scientist.

It’s pretty tragic that some of my friends involved in medical research have found funding suddenly unavailable for their work.

One has now moved to America because there was simply no funding for her field available in the UK.

[Italiangirl]

@unsafetydancer i know i'm sorry if my words come off as insensitive, is just that is all so surreal from here, it really seems like a big stupid joke. I think that many people unfortunately have dig a hole so big that they seems to be unable to realize what will happen and somehow is already happening. Not only outside London and the finance city, as I understood reading various info many changes are already happening because the big company don't want to invest anymore in the GB since is all so up in the hair. I really can't imagine what will happen on the 1st of Nov. Just a few hours ago I was reading the story of an italian women that have lived in the UK for 55 years, she moved there with her family when she was just 2, she is married to an English men and she has two children with him, but apparently for the internal minister that isn't enough to granted her the citizenship, it dosen't matter all the paper she send them, is not enough and she don't know what else to do since many place like her schools, and a couple of place where she worked as teen and young girl are gone. I still have friends in London and a cousin that for her luck is ok since her mother is British and she already has the citizenship, but my friends don't know what to do, if is better to go away or ask for the temporary citizenship. 

[fraurosena]

2 hours ago, Italiangirl said:

Just a few hours ago I was reading the story of an italian women that have lived in the UK for 55 years, she moved there with her family when she was just 2, she is married to an English men and she has two children with him, but apparently for the internal minister that isn't enough to granted her the citizenship, it dosen't matter all the paper she send them, is not enough and she don't know what else to do since many place like her schools, and a couple of place where she worked as teen and young girl are gone.

I read about her too. The most idiotic part of the story is that her brother was granted citizenship... 

 

[Glasgowghirl]

The High Court in Edinburgh has ruled that Boris unlawfully shut down Parliament and mislead the Queen when he asked to shut Parliament early.

[fraurosena]

More info on the court ruling. 

Johnson's advice to Queen on suspending UK Parliament was unlawful, court rules

Quote

The UK government's decision to shut down Parliament in the run-up to Brexit was illegal, Scotland's highest civil court has ruled, in a serious blow to embattled Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

In a devastating ruling, a panel of three senior judges unanimously declared that Johnson's advice to the Queen to suspend Parliament for five weeks was "unlawful."

Johnson has always insisted that his decision was a routine device that allowed the government to start a new parliamentary session with a fresh legislative agenda. But the Scottish judges disagreed, saying it was motivated by the "improper purpose of stymying Parliament."

"This was an egregious case of a clear failure to comply with generally accepted standards of behaviour of public authorities," ruled one of the judges, Lord Brodie, according to a summary of the decision posted online.

The court did not immediately issue an order to lift the suspension -- also known as prorogation -- noting that the High Court in London had come to a different conclusion and that the UK Supreme Court would need to resolve the issue. The government confirmed that it would appeal the Scottish court's decision to the Supreme Court.

Joanna Cherry, a member of Parliament for the Scottish National Party, who was the lead petitioner in the cross-party group of politicians which brought the action, said the decision was a "historic ruling."

Dominic Grieve, who was attorney general in the government of former Prime Minister Theresa May, said if it was established that Johnson had misled the Queen, he would have to resign."If that were to to be the case that this had happened, Boris Johnson would find himself in an untenable position in Parliament," he told the BBC.

Advice to the Queen ruled unlawful

In their unexpected ruling on Wednesday, the Scottish judges overturned an earlier decision that the courts did not have the power to interfere in the Prime Minister's political decision to prorogue parliament.

They found that the real reason for suspending Parliament -- to frustrate its role in holding the government to account -- was so significant that it justified a legal ruling.

In the summary of their ruling -- the full text of which will be published on Friday -- the judges were sharply critical of the government.

"It was to be inferred that the principal reasons for the prorogation were to prevent or impede Parliament holding the executive to account and legislating with regard to Brexit, and to allow the executive to pursue a policy of a no deal Brexit without further Parliamentary interference," Lord Brodie said.

The ruling concluded that the Prime Minister had acted illegally when he advised the Queen to suspend Parliament. "The Court will accordingly make an order declaring that the Prime Minister's advice to HM the Queen and the prorogation which followed thereon was unlawful and is thus null and of no effect," the summary concluded.

Lawyer Jolyon Maugham, part of the group which funded the Scottish legal action, said the ruling had a clear meaning: "We believe that the effect of the decision is that Parliament is no longer prorogued," he tweeted.

The UK government's reaction

In its response to the ruling, Downing Street confirmed it would appeal. "We are disappointed by today's decision, and will appeal to the UK Supreme Court," a spokesman said.

"The UK government needs to bring forward a strong domestic legislative agenda," it added. "Proroguing Parliament is the legal and necessary way of delivering this."

Keir Starmer, the opposition Labour Party's Brexit spokesman, tweeted that he welcomed the court's decision: "No one in their right mind believed Boris Johnson's reason for shutting down Parliament."

"I urge the Prime Minister to immediately recall Parliament so we can debate this judgment and decide what happens next," he added.

Suspending Parliament in order to restart the political calendar is usually a routine annual event, but the timing and length of this five-week prorogation was criticized because it limited opportunities for lawmakers to legislate against a potential no-deal Brexit, ahead of the October 31 deadline for the UK to leave the European Union.

Johnson's predecessor Theresa May had allowed the current parliamentary session to run far longer than normal because of the protracted nature of Brexit.

Johnson therefore argued that a suspension was needed to make way for a new Queen's Speech, setting out the government's legislative agenda.

The Prime Minister claimed that the prorogation had nothing to do with Brexit and that it was "nonsense" to suggest he was attempting to undermine democracy, while Jacob Rees-Mogg, Leader of the House of Commons, said the suspension was "completely constitutional and proper."

But Johnson's opponents claimed he was shutting down Parliament to stifle debate, and to allow the clock to run down on Brexit.

Challenges to Johnson's decision were filed in separate courts by a cross-party group of lawmakers and peers and the prominent anti-Brexit campaigner Gina Miller.

Lawmakers are not scheduled to return to parliament until October 14, just days before the UK is due to leave the EU.

 

[fraurosena]

Sadly true.

 

Edited September 11, 2019 by fraurosena

[unsafetydancer]

I have seen the story of the Italian lady too and I think it’s disgraceful! She’s not the only one, I know of two people who have already left and more who expect to be sent away.

It’s appalling but given what happened to the Windrush people it was depressingly likely!

[unsafetydancer]

This happened yesterday. 

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-scotland-49661855

 

There’s an interesting twitter debate going on just now about how the outcome of this will go down as the famous meeting with the Queen happened on Scottish soil. If this is upheld then Boris has committed a very serious crime in my country.

[fraurosena]

They finally caved and released the Yellowhammer papers. As predicted, it's terrible. And predictably, they're attempting to downplay it.

 

 

Yellowhammer: no-deal chaos fears as secret Brexit papers published

Quote

A no-deal Brexit could result in rising food and fuel prices, disruption to medicine supplies and public disorder on Britain’s streets, according to secret documents the government was forced by MPs to publish on Wednesday.

A five-page document spelling out the government’s “planning assumptions” under Operation Yellowhammer – the government’s no-deal plan – was disclosed in response to a “humble address” motion.

The content of the document was strikingly similar to the plan leaked to the Sunday Times in August, which the government dismissed at the time as out of date.

That document was described as a “base case”; but the new document claims to be a “worst-case scenario”.

Led by former attorney general Dominic Grieve, and passed by the House of Commons on Monday night as Boris Johnson prepared to suspend parliament, the motion demanded the publication of the documents, large sections of which had been leaked in August.

At the time, Downing Street claimed the document had been superseded, and government sources suggested it had been leaked by disaffected former ministers. Former chancellor Philip Hammond later demanded an apology from Johnson, when it emerged the date on the document was August, after the PM took power.

The document, which says it outlines “reasonable worst case planning assumptions” for no deal Brexit, highlights the risk of border delays, given an estimate that up to 85% of lorries crossing the Channel might not be ready for a new French customs regime.

“The lack of trader readiness combined with limited space in French ports to hold ‘unready’ HGVs could reduce the flow rate to 40%-60% of current levels within one day as unready HGVs will fill the ports and block flow,” it warns.

This situation could last for up to three months, and disruption might last “significantly longer”, it adds, with lorries facing waits of between 1.5 days and 2.5 days to cross the border.

The reliance of medical supplies on cross-Channel routes “make them particularly vulnerable to severe extended delays”, the report says, with some medicines having such short shelf lives they cannot be stockpiled. A lack of veterinary medicines could increase the risk of disease outbreaks, it adds.

On food supplies, supplies of “certain types of fresh food” would be reduced, the document warns, as well as other items such as packaging.

It says: “In combination, these two factors will not cause an overall shortage of food in the UK but will reduce availability and choice of products and will increase price, which could impact vulnerable groups.”

Later, it adds: “Low income groups will be disproportionately affected by any price rises in food and fuel.”

On law and order it warns: “Protests and counter-protests will take place across the UK and may absorb significant amounts of police resource. There may also be a rise in public disorder and community tensions.”

The documents also outline a potential impact on cross-border financial services and law enforcement information sharing.

It says Gibraltar could face significant delays on its border with Spain, with four-hour waits likely “for at least a few months”.

The document also concedes that there will be a return to some sort of hard Irish border despite a UK insistence it will not impose checks: “This model is likely to prove unsustainable due to significant economic, legal and biosecurity risks and no effective unilateral mitigations to address this will be available.”

The expectation, it adds, is that some businesses will move to avoid tariffs, and others will face higher costs.

The government claimed on Wednesday night that the leaked document was “never a base or central case”.

“Some iterations of the Yellowhammer assumptions have used the phrase ‘base scenario’ to describe some baseline parameters – such as the UK will leave on a particular date and trade on WTO terms – upon which the worst case assumptions are then built. This has never meant that Yellowhammer is a base or central scenario and to suggest otherwise is a gross misrepresentation,” said a government source.

The government refused to comply with the second part of MPs’ request, which demanded the release of messages relating to the suspension of parliament sent by Johnson’s senior adviser, Dominic Cummings and various other aides on WhatsApp, Facebook, other social media and both their personal and professional phones.

In a letter to Grieve, Michael Gove, the chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, said the request was “inappropriate in principle and in practice, would on its own terms purport to require the government to contravene the law, and is singularly unfair to the named individuals”.

Grieve told MPs on Monday he had information from public officials that the correspondence contained a “scandal”.

The House of Commons voted, by 311 to 302, for the government to publish the information, giving the prime minister a deadline of 11pm on Wednesday to comply.

Following publication of the document, Grieve said: “As a One Nation Conservative I am deeply fearful of the long-term damage a reckless approach – which knowingly risks prosperity, increases poverty and even threatens medical supplies – will do to both the people and our party. This must be stopped.”

Gove has been given the task of ramping up no-deal preparations across government. The chancellor, Sajid Javid, set aside an extra £2bn at last week’s spending review for the task, taking the total now allocated to no-deal planning to £8bn.

Johnson has lost every vote in parliament since he became prime minister in July, including on his two attempts to trigger a snap general election for next month.

The prime minister sparked a fierce backlash inside the Tory party last week by removing the whip from 21 rebels who supported backbench-led legislation to force him to request a Brexit delay if he fails to pass a new deal through parliament by mid-October.

Those expelled include former justice secretary David Gauke, Hammond, and Winston Churchill’s grandson, Nicholas Soames.

Chief whip Mark Spencer has now written to some of them, confirming that they are entitled to appeal the decision – and hinting that future loyalty to the government could boost their cause.

One of the 21 MPs said: “It was one of the most self-unaware letters I’ve received in some time. From people who are serially disloyal and decimated their own minority government. I don’t want it back ...

“All it did in my local community was confirm that the Conservative party is now led by a narrow sect who wouldn’t be out of place in the Muppet version of the Handmaiden’s tale. It’s like being asked by its captain if you want to get back on the Titanic.”

Senior Conservatives expect the whips to be less accommodating to those MPs who have been fiercely critical of the government’s stance.

Sam Gyimah has received a letter but is not intending to seek to have the whip restored, the Guardian understands; while Hammond is hoping to challenge the original suspension in a bid to have it overturned.

 

[unsafetydancer]

Now we have this monumental walloper! If I see one more upper class twatwaffle trying to invoke "blitz spirit" or "the glory of empire" then I swear that even though I do not believe in ghosts I will hire a ouija board to try and summon the spirit of my grandfather to explain, in painful detail, exactly what was NOT glorious about hardship, food shortages and poverty!

[Ozlsn]

5 hours ago, unsafetydancer said:

Now we have this monumental walloper! If I see one more upper class twatwaffle trying to invoke "blitz spirit" or "the glory of empire" then I swear that even though I do not believe in ghosts I will hire a ouija board to try and summon the spirit of my grandfather to explain, in painful detail, exactly what was NOT glorious about hardship, food shortages and poverty!

"The British Public". Including himself in that then is he? Thought not.

If this goes ahead I feel MPs should be last in the queue for food, medicines etc. They want rationing, they can have it.