Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

The opposition parties are going to meet again on Monday to consider “all parliamentary mechanisms to stop a no-deal [Brexit]”, the Labour party has said. In a statement about this afternoon’s talks, Labour said the parties agreed that stopping a no-deal Brexit was a priority and that the language used by the PM was unacceptable.

The parties agreed that “any election without a lock preventing no deal would not get through parliament”. And Labour made it clear that “it wants an election as soon there’s a lock against no deal.”

The meeting was attended by Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell, Valerie Vaz and Shami Chakrabarti from Labour, Ian Blackford from the SNP, Jo Swinson from the Lib Dems, Anna Soubry from the Independent Group for Change, Caroline Lucas from the Green and Leanne Wood from Plaid Cymru.

Boris Johnson may be planning to bypass a law blocking no-deal Brexit by issuing an order to suspend it until after the scheduled date of Britain’s EU withdrawal on 31 October, former prime minister Sir John Major has warned.

The order could be passed by ministers acting in the Privy Council without the involvement of parliament or the Queen, said Sir John, who denounced the tactic as “a piece of political chicanery that no-one should ever forgive or forget”.
[...]
Both the PM and his ministers repeatedly state that Mr Johnson will not break the law, but so far no-one has explained how he can avoid this without breaching his “do or die” Brexit promise by going to Brussels to ask for an extension to the Article 50 process.

Sir John said: “My fear is that the Government will seek to bypass statute law, by passing an Order of Council to suspend the Act until after 31 October.

“It is important to note that an Order of Council can be passed by privy councillors – that is government ministers – without involving Her Majesty The Queen.

“I should warn the Prime Minister that – if this route is taken – it will be in flagrant defiance of Parliament and utterly disrespectful to the Supreme Court.

Lunchtime summary

• The former cabinet minister, Amber Rudd, has said Boris Johnson’s language “does incite violence”. Rudd who quit the cabinet and party earlier this month said she was stunned by his comments about Jo Cox and compared his rhetoric to that of Donald Trump.
• Johnson, speaking in Essex, defended his description of legislation designed to prevent a no-deal Brexit as “surrender”. He argued that barring such language would have the effect of “impoverishing debate”.

• A cross-party initiative has been launched to attempt to counter inflammatory language in parliament by issuing “civility in politics” awards.

• The former justice minister, David Gauke has dismissed fears, raised by John Major, that the government could bypass a law to force the government to delay Brexit beyond 31 October if no deal is agreed. Gauke, one of 21 Tory rebels fired from the party for supporting the Benn Act said it was “watertight”. Legal commentators concurred with Gauke’s comments.

• Responding to Major, the PM’s spokesman said the former prime minister’s suggestion that the government could bypass the Benn Act via the privy council was “not something that we recognise”. A No 10 source described it as “total cobblers”.

• The court of appeal in Belfast has dismissed an application that the British government’s Brexit policy will damage the Northern Ireland peace process. Three applicants failed in their appeal against a Belfast high court judgment that rejected their challenge against the government’s handling of the Brexit process.

• Ministers do not know whether there are sufficient medicines, medical supplies or freight capacity to support the NHS if the UK leaves the EU without a deal next month, the National Audit Office has found.

The Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has backed the idea of Jeremy Corbyn becoming a caretaker prime minister, in a bid to secure an extension to the Brexit deadline. She said she agrees with installing the Labour leader as PM through a vote of no confidence in Boris Johnson. The Scottish Lib Dems said Corbyn was too divisive to lead a caretaker government.

The UK’s most senior civil servant is under pressure to investigate Boris Johnson’s financial backers following cross-party claims that unnamed individuals stand to benefit from the prime minister’s willingness to pursue a no-deal Brexit.

John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, has written to the cabinet secretary, Sir Mark Sedwill, asking if there may be a conflict of interest in Johnson’s acceptance of support from hedge funds that could gain from an economic shock.

Earlier on Saturday, Philip Hammond, the former chancellor, suggested Johnson was pursuing the interests of financial backers set to gain from a no-deal Brexit, in a major escalation of tensions in the prime minister’s own party.

Hammond said he was repeating a comment made last week by Rachel Johnson, the prime minister’s sister.

The former chancellor was accused by senior Tories of attempting a “smear” without evidence. However, Hammond was supported on Saturday by a series of MPs from across the Commons.

“Johnson is backed by speculators who have bet billions on a hard Brexit – and there is only one option that works for them: a crash-out no-deal that sends the currency tumbling and inflation soaring,” Hammond wrote in the Times.

Downing Street has refused to comment on the claim.

Guto Bebb, a former Tory minister who was thrown out of the party for opposing a no-deal Brexit, said: “The dubious financiers who supported the ‘leave’ campaign and the prime minister’s leadership campaign are betting against Britain. The PM should put the interests of the country first rather than facilitating a financial bonanza for a few.”

Anna Soubry, the leader of Change UK, said: “This week’s events are damning evidence that Boris Johnson has no moral compass. It gives me no pleasure to believe that Johnson is in hock to all manner of people and in particular those who don’t give a toss about the livelihoods of our constituents but simply get even more rich gambling on our children’s future.”

However, the business minister Nadhim Zahawi said Hammond was peddling a conspiracy. “Philip you let yourself down by claiming speculators on ‘no deal’ are interfering in us leaving the EU,” he tweeted. “This is an ugly smear that is completely untrue. If you know anything about finance or the City then you will know that.”

Hammond and his team have not named any individual donors. However, hedge fund managers have backed Johnson. One of those is Crispin Odey, a fund manager who has also previously backed Vote Leave and Ukip. Over the summer, it was reported that his fund had made a £300m bet against British businesses and stood to profit from an economic slump in the UK. However, the fund also backed other British companies. Odey did not respond to a request for comment.

Brussels fears prime minister has ‘lost control’ of events and warns that hopes of an agreement are now ‘very low’

Michel Barnier has told the British government that he fears Boris Johnson’s polarising behaviour has effectively blown any chance of finding a majority for a Brexit deal in the Commons.

In private discussions with the Brexit secretary, Stephen Barclay, the EU’s chief negotiator said that developments in Westminster had damaged the already slim hope of winning MPs over.

According to a leaked note of the meeting, Barnier spoke of the “limited chance of approval of a deal in the current parliament” given recent events, an assertion with which Barclay disagreed, insisting a majority could be found.

Barnier concluded, however, in a briefing to EU diplomats for the 27 member states, that the “current polarisation in the UK has further reduced the chances of agreement”, according to minutes seen by the Observer.

The EU is now concerned that any concession it could make would be wasted on such an unstable government, which has burned any political goodwill by deploying the language of betrayal and surrender when talking of those who oppose a no-deal Brexit.

On Saturday, a senior SNP MP, Stewart Hosie, claimed that opposition parties could stage a vote of no confidence in the government as early as this week in an effort to thwart leaving the EU without a deal.

It is unlikely the Liberal Democrats and the 21 Tory rebels would agree to Jeremy Corbyn, as leader of the opposition, leading such a government. But the machinations further confirmed to Brussels that Johnson has “lost control of events”, senior EU sources said.

The behaviour of the prime minister last week in the Commons, where he described fears of Labour MPs about their safety as “humbug”, surprised EU officials and diplomats who had hoped the UK was serious about striking a deal.

There is now concern that the government is seeking simply to ramp up a “blame game”, sources said, with the chances of an agreement now seen as being “very low”.

“If he was going to compromise himself to find a deal with us, you would not be talking up the word ‘surrender’ all the time”, said one EU diplomat.

“Just when you think that it could not be less stable – something else happens. This isn’t very diplomatic language – it is mad,” said a second EU source.

Barclay told Barnier that the UK would table concrete proposals on Thursday, after the prime minister has made his speech at the Conservative party conference.

The UK insists that the status quo cannot continue on the island of Ireland in a post-Brexit scenario but that the extra checks and controls can be done away from the border.

Barnier told diplomats for the EU27 last week that the UK had “given up on the concept of preventing a border in Northern Ireland as well as the necessity of preserving the all-island economy”.

He told the diplomats: “You can’t base peace on promises – it will turn the border into a bargaining chip.”

The EU’s capitals, in response, have expressed their “alarm” to Barnier at the prime minister’s “cavalier” attitude towards the Northern Ireland peace process.

Johnson’s discussions in New York with Donald Tusk, the European Council president, have led the member states to conclude that there is a “deliberate choice in London to bring back a border”, which would “imperil stability”, sources said.

Barnier also rejected Barclay’s attempts last Friday to open up talks about contingency plans in the event of a no-deal Brexit., to the British government’s notable frustration, sources said.

The Brexit secretary had insisted that on his visits to EU capitals, a desire had been voiced for bilateral talks on how to manage the risks of leaving the EU without a deal.

The EU negotiator told the member states that the UK was looking to deliver the same benefits of the withdrawal agreement “but by different means”.

In a letter exchange with Barclay, published last Friday evening, Barnier told the Brexit secretary: “We will not enter into any negotiations with the United Kingdom on these matters.” He said the only offer he could make to the UK was to answer any specific questions it had over the EU’s unilateral plans to protect itself from the chaos.

What happens if the deadline comes and goes without any deal, if Boris Johnson refuses to ask for an extension?

Q: How would you get round the Benn Act. By using EU law?

Johnson says he will not discuss hypotheticals.

Q: What about using civil contingency powers? Or getting someone else to request the extension?

Johnson will not say.

Q: Have you asked another EU leader to veto an extension?

Johnson says he will not discuss his conversations with other EU leader.

Does anyone have the authority to enforce this law? If so, how would it be enforced?

So strange I have not seen one mention of it in the British media. Maybe it was mentioned but it certainly isn't get the publicity it warrants.

MANCHESTER, England (Reuters) - The leader of Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) Arlene Foster said on Sunday that she supported British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, but could not accept leaving the EU on different terms to the rest of the country.

The support of Foster’s party, who are allied with the ruling Conservatives, is seen as key to getting any Brexit deal through the British parliament.