Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

Scottish judges have delayed a final ruling on whether Boris Johnson is in contempt of court to ensure he agrees to an extension to Brexit.

Lord Carloway, the country’s most senior judge, said they needed to be sure the prime minister did not try to block or sabotage the application he was forced to make on Saturday night for an extension to Brexit until 31 January.

The court’s decision, issued after a short hearing at the court of session in Edinburgh, means Johnson faces being held in contempt if judges rule he has failed to honour pledges made to court not to frustrate the extension process.

... is it known when the EU will repond to the 'request' for an extension?

LONDON (Reuters) - Prime Minister Boris Johnson faces a potentially perilous ratification of his Brexit divorce deal in the British parliament after the speaker refused to allow a vote on it on Monday.

With just 10 days left until the United Kingdom is due to leave the European Union on Oct. 31, the divorce is again in disarray as Britain’s politicians argue over whether to leave with a deal, exit without a deal or hold another referendum.

The government is trying to force through the legislation needed for Britain to leave the bloc in the shortest time possible, drawing cries from opposition lawmakers that Johnson was trying to bully and rush lawmakers into passing the bill.

Earlier, House of Commons speaker John Bercow said a vote should not be allowed on Monday as the same issue had been discussed on Saturday when opponents turned Johnson’s big Brexit day into a humiliation.

“In summary, today’s motion is in substance the same as Saturday’s motion and the House (of Commons) has decided the matter. Today’s circumstances are in substance the same as Saturday’s circumstances,” Bercow told parliament.

“My ruling is therefore that the motion will not be debated today as it would be repetitive and disorderly to do so,” Bercow said, provoking the ire of Brexit supporting lawmakers who said they had been refused a chance to vote on Johnson’s deal.

Bercow said the government could still secure ratification for the Brexit deal by Oct. 31 if it had the numbers in parliament. Johnson was disappointed by the decision, a spokesman said.

But the speaker’s decision means that the government will have to try to push on with the legislation needed for ratification, a process opponents are plotting to wreck with amendments that would destroy Johnson’s deal.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leader of the House of Commons, said the government wanted the lower house of parliament to finish voting on the bill on Thursday, before it heads to the upper house, which also has to approve it before the Brexit deadline.

“Trying to ram through legislation of this complexity, significance and long lasting consequences in just 3 days is an abomination of scrutiny and democracy,” said Nicola Sturgeon, the leader of the Scottish National Party.
... ... ...

Delivering a statement to MPs on the government’s preparations for a no-deal Brexit, the minister responsible – Michael Gove – has said:

Parliament had the opportunity on Saturday to support a meaningful vote which would have allowed us to proceed smoothly to ratification of our deal and exit on 31 October. But the House instead voted in such a way as to put an orderly exit on that day in doubt.

With no clear agreement yet in this House to ratify our withdrawal agreement and no certainty that an extension will be granted by 31 October, I must I fear take the appropriate steps now to prepare for the increased possibility that the legal default position will follow, and we will leave on 31 October without a deal.

The clear advice to me now from officials is that we must now intensify contingency arrangements.

We will now accelerate our efforts to help businesses and individuals mitigate any dislocation and disruption that may ensue.

Hundreds of public servants across the UK will have to be redeployed, they will transfer to work in operation centres ready to identify challenges, work together to resolve problems quickly, and implement contingency plans.

And, of course, we must maintain our public information campaign, from tomorrow this will reflect the renewed urgency of preparation.”

Continuing his statement, Gove said:

It remains the case that Northern Ireland will face unique challenges in a no-deal Brexit and we will need to take steps to ensure effective governance and to give direction to the Northern Ireland civil service.

This arrangement settlement has been sustainable to date, but leaving without a deal would represent a formidable challenge to the current position.

In that case, we would have to start formal engagement with the Irish government about further arrangements for providing strengthened decision-making, and that would include the real possibility of restoring a form of direct rule.

We will, of course, do everything to ensure that the interests of all communities across Ireland were safeguarded in any arrangements.

We all must recognise that this would be a gravestone, from which experience shows us it would be hard to return, particularly in the context of leaving without a deal.

Madame deputy speaker, even as we prepare for the challenges of no-deal, we will make the case at every forum that we can for leaving with a good deal.

The withdrawal agreement bill includes a provision to enable the prime minister’s Brexit deal to be ratified in time for the UK to leave with an agreement on 31 October.

Under the provisions of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act (CRAG), an international treaty – such as the Brexit deal – must be laid before Parliament for at least 21 sitting days before ratification to take place.

However, in order for the government’s timetable to be met, there is a provision in the WAB which “disapplies” the relevant section of the CRAG.

The government has been accused of trying to ram through its Brexit deal this evening.

The EU withdrawal agreement bill has just been introduced for its first reading and MPs will be debating it tomorrow. After the bill’s introduction, the Independent Group for Change MP, Chris Leslie, told MPs:

We know, for example, that Commons committee stage of the Treaty of Rome was not three days, or two days, it was 22 days. For the Maastricht Treaty, 23 days in committee stage. The Treaty of Lisbon: 11 days. Treaty of Amsterdam: five days. Then the Single European Act four days and then the smallest of them all the Treaty of Nice three days at committee. So, in total, five days of Commons consideration for the Treaty of Nice to be reformed.

So, this is an unprecedentedly short period of time to dedicate to a massive and momentous piece of legislation. And, personally Mr Speaker, I am very worried that this motion that we are now debating, (is) the first in a series of attempts by the government to stage what is essentially the ramming through of a piece of legislation, in I regard a disorderly way.