Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Call me crazy (and I know you will) but I'm thinking that the first item of business for parliament, when it returns from involuntary, unscheduled retreat in the hinterlands, had better not be "scrutiny" of Johnson's "approach to BREXIT".

I'm thinking, it had better be notification for EU Council of the passage of a motion to revise EUWA-2-2019 SCHEDULE FORM LETTER.

The revision shall take into account the "way forward" at page 1 (emended) or page 2 (amended at length) of parliament's imminent process of a tabled resolution to reconsider a "snap election" (previously defeated) stipulating such and such date on or before expiration of the extension of the "A.50(3) period" requested.

Further, its complimentary close had better express the sincerest sense of parliament's commitment to "a way forward" demonstrated by its agreement to dispense with holiday recess.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Thu Sep 19th, 2019 at 04:15:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The problem is the EU is by Treaty an organisation which deals with the Governments of members states and not their Parliaments or other institutions. The House of Commons can write to the EU all they want, (and probably receive polite acknowledgements), but the EU Council can only grant an extension request received from the Government.

So the trick is for the HOC to trigger a change of government (if Boris will not comply with legal requirement to request A.50 extension) without triggering an election which many independent/rebel/small party MPs would likely lose at this stage.

Basically a second referendum has to happen (to take Brexit off the table) before the opposition can allow a general election to take place - an election they might then win because the Conservatives will have failed to "deliver Brexit" and the Leave vote will then be split between the Conservatives and the Brexit party.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Sep 19th, 2019 at 07:55:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Barriers to the EU concluding any treaty are many, but recognition of a "government" representing the state is not one. The EU observes the expansive Artcle 7 VCLT definition if a state representative as does the UN.

Regarding conclusion of A.50, appointment of that agent by the PM of the day, acting instead of HRM, is a constitutional dilemma peculiar to the UK. (Guidance to the work of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) Treaty Section) Parliamentary legislation partly precludes the full powers of the PM but not the monarch. Accordingly and irrespective of whomsoever forms HRM "government" and expresses "government" policy or enters agreements made by HRM and another state laid by it before parliament for approval, without HoC approval the agreement will not enter force.

Parliament has agreed multiple times not to approve the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU.

Parliament has agreed multiple times not to approve a general election or referendum (not binding on parliament by statute in any case). It is to this "anti-democratic" disposition of parliament that my remarks --as well as EU officers--are meant to draw attention of UKNs: The political "majority" of MPs seated express no intention to effect the WA and no "mandate" to enact an alternative to the TEU now or in future. Its purpose is redundant.

There is no "trick" waiting for change of "government" absent change in composition of the HoC willing and able to approve any "government" policy.

"If the UK leaves without a deal, all these questions will not disappear - they are still be there and need to be settled prior to a future relationship with the UK," Barnier told EU lawmakers.
##Democracy is not well understood.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Sep 19th, 2019 at 06:53:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series