Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

[Daruwind]

So the Boris meeting with Merkel was interesting. Merkes gave 30 days to Boris to come with detailed alternative to backstop and Boris is committed to do so. So it is up to UK to come with the plan and Merkel will consider it. However what about the rest of EU? And what new plans might be found in 30 days? It sounded like solution might be in closer future economic relationship between EU/UK but that is exactly opposite that Boris wants, he is for looser relationship right?

However this is for first time that UK has to come with detailed alternatives So I´m quite curious what will Boris find in next 30 days....something that is passable in UK parliament

[Dante Von Hespburg]

It'll be interesting as now the rather wishy-washy concept Boris and the ERG throw around of a 'technical solution' (a phrase that Boris refused to elaborate on what that exactly was at his Parliamentary address when asked) will need to be made concrete and they'll have to spell out what they mean and it will work. This is riddled with a political mine field as the 'back stop' itself of course was Britain's idea in the first place trying to find an 'easy' solution to the issue. If as part of a 'technical solution' there will need to be checks at ports in England and Scotland (as some have said will be part of it) the DUP will as they did with May, turn on Boris as it creates a border down the Irish sea.

Boris also has to keep an eye on the US response, from both Republicans and Democrats. As anything that is deemed to disrupt the Good Friday agreement, but also more generally 'peace' in Northern Ireland will see congress reject any trade deal that Trump makes. A trade deal that is integral to Boris' 'no deal' strategy, and indeed one where the US will take us to the cleaners completely, destroying key UK-based industries and given US statements and past history of trade deals, will fundamentally see Britain as a rule-taker with fundamental changes to things like the NHS- so i'm not too upset if the desperate (on the part of Britain) trade deal is blocked, its something we should not even be talking about at this stage as Britain's economy is not ready for competition and the idiocy of the 'Ultra freemarketeers' behind 'Global Britain' that the markets will adjust as ever ignore the social cost (Its not as if the economic impact of globalization and the race to the bottom wasn't a key factor in many peoples Brexit vote) as well as the fact that they are quite happy to see British-based businesses and agriculture die of death to their counterparts in the US, something that in an age of protectionism is dumb when international relationships are changing.

So aye, i'm hoping fairly soon- ideally before the 31st the current fantasies being churned out by Boris' government for political purposes, but that have very little basis in reality, will be burst so we can actually properly prepare and have a real plan. I suspect though it will take a no-deal brexit and any issues that causes (As again the UK just is not prepared yet) to see the back of this new Tory ideology of 'Thatcher mark .2'. Its the one thing i think we can take comfort in, is whoever is in government and leads Britain into a 'no-deal' will likely not win the next GE as they'll never regain the 'remain' base they need, and the brexit voting base will likely realign on domestic issues now it is done (and lets face it, the domestic has so far been hugely uninspiring, the suggestion by IDS and his think-tank of raising the retirement age to 75 in a post-brexit Britain to save money, despite the ing fact life expectancy has fallen...though maybe that is why, keep everyone in work until they die? As literally that is what this will be- Glasgow for instance has an average life expectancy of 71.. has now been associated with Boris' government despite his attempted distancing, the NHS money proved to be a lie, the Police officers are not enough and also barely make-up for those cut by the Conservatives themselves).

Also i will say too, Merkel has been rather clever here (even if the rest of the EU do not agree with her), as now any 'no deal' will totally be at the fault of Boris' government, it shows how she is giving Britain essentially what it wants, the chance to remove the backstop, but the ball is in our court to do find an alternative solution. It directly destroys the line that the Tories have been trying to trot out that no-deal is due to the EU refusing to negotiate. So well played to her.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Mutti (mother) has sent the boy upstairs to first make his homeworks.^^

[Daruwind]

And Macron cemented it even more. He agreed with 30 days challange but the stress on that the UK new plan must bring visible ideas within 30 days. No chance of changes to Withdrawal Agreement. So I´m quite curious what Boris can come with as now Ger/Fr switch back the blame game. Ball is on Uk´s side...He has 30 days to come with something Uk was unable to do in 2 years.

So either Boris really thinks he can do it (Trump style ) or he is preparing for possible VONC (look guys, i had 30 days but you voted me off, don´t blame me now! ) or just want to waste more time to get closer to 31th October (don´t bother me till September 21th as I have 30 days and working on *new* plan)

But what about UK home politics? His plan must not only be workable for EU but even passable in UK while parliament will be trying to get rid of him / remove no-deal /secure extension...

[Muizer]

I don't think that was a smart move by Merkel, even if on the face of it it's an empty gesture. Or rather because it's an empty gesture. It gives Boris a pretext to ostensibly work on alternatives for a no deal Brexit. Assuming, as I would, that this 30 day plan is just for show and that Boris is committed/resigned to no-deal, that's a very useful way to waste much of the remaining time: It will help keep conservative MP's who are doubting between party loyalty and wanting to prevent no-deal on the fence until the last moment.

[Ludicus]

So the Boris meeting with Merkel was interesting. Merkes gave 30 days to Boris to come with detailed alternative to backstop So I´m quite curious what will Boris find in next 30 days....

Nothing really. It's a farce.
---
The Republic of Ireland will not be entering into bilateral negotiations with the UK regarding no-deal Brexit planning. The Republic is ready to implement Brexit customs checks and controls.
----
North Ireland, more food for thought,

1. In North Ireland, there is a majority for backstop.
2. Unionists don't feel British in a conventional way. They feel Irish.
3. A hard border means hard UK sovereignty in N. Ireland.
4. Soon or later, this means the end of the Good Friday agreement.

Boris Johnson, in my opinion, doesn't give a about North Ireland. He has already given up on the north; a voice inside his mind says: unionists are a boring pain in the ass. Well, I don't care at all: the boring Irish Isle should join the EU, as East Germany did before. Who cares, I'm a proud English isolationist.

Edward Carson (the creator of the Northern Ireland) said during a 1921 Westminster debate: "What a fool I was. I was only a puppet, and so was Ulster, and so was Ireland, in the political game that was to get the Conservative Party into power"

[Aexodus]

What is North Ireland and when did it become relevant to Brexit.

1. In Northern Ireland, there is a majority for backstop.
2. Unionists don't feel British in a conventional way. They feel Irish.
3. A hard border means hard UK sovereignty in N. Ireland.
4. Soon or later, this means the end of the Good Friday agreement.

1. Yes
2. What is the conventional way? I do but most don’t.
3. What is ‘hard UK sovereignty’. A hard border doesn’t make Northern Ireland any more or any less a British territory.
4. Why? A hard border doesn’t break the GFA.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

I don't think that was a smart move by Merkel, even if on the face of it it's an empty gesture. Or rather because it's an empty gesture. It gives Boris a pretext to ostensibly work on alternatives for a no deal Brexit. Assuming, as I would, that this 30 day plan is just for show and that Boris is committed/resigned to no-deal, that's a very useful way to waste much of the remaining time: It will help keep conservative MP's who are doubting between party loyalty and wanting to prevent no-deal on the fence until the last moment.

I think this is likely indeed, though while its bad for British domestic politics, in the long-run its good for the EU as it shifts the blame decisively in the British narrative (and arguably in Europe) from being a 'poor Britian, look a the nasty EU' to being 'Britain failed in its obligations and refused to take a deal on the table that would have solved all of this'. It will kill Boris government, it just won't help Britain avoid a hard brexit that i would say from the leaks from France, their quite prepared to expect and accept on the EU side of things.

However with a Boris government dead, its likely in short order the UK will come back to the EU, either with Corbyn's 'close alignment' or with a full-second referendum/ rejoining- though i expect that to take a few years. But the fact is a no-deal brexit without proper preparation is the worst strategy for getting an already polarizing policy to 'stick'. Its the brexiteers own worst enemy as any disruption at all will undermine support and galvanize the other side, and brexit can't really afford to lose support politically. The issue of course is that the remain side are equally delusional, that somehow simply getting us to remain or rejoin is the end of it too. It'll be a festering wound in British policy for a long while, as there is endless political capital to be made on it that can for both sides bridge traditional party divides and thus gain access to voters they would otherwise never reach.

4. Why? A hard border doesn’t break the GFA.

In terms of the politics, it doesn't really matter so long as its perceived to threaten it and can be spun as justification. Though the treaty was suitably vague enough on the issue that both sides can base their argument on legal text (does security infrastructure break demilitarization- precedent implies the dismantling of Britain's heavy fortifications to be it does, though also this can be seen as special circumstances- Also you have the whole speel about the GFA providing an integrated economy, social cohesion etc- which again a hard border could disrupt). What is more important though is that Britain (May), the EU and The Republic of Ireland have all decided a hard-border would be contradictory to the Good Friday agreement (also bear in minds its not just that, but would a hard border, see a return to violence? Judging by the bomb scares and incidents it appears it might)

The democrats for instance will vote down any no-deal British trade deal on this line (Not just breaking the Good Friday Agreement, but more broadly anything that might be 'seen' to antagonize the situation, which they deem a hard border would- note violence doesn't have to happen- a lot of political wiggle room for them here), party to appease the Irish lobby, partly to say a big you to Trump going into elections. I get the complaints people have that the Irish border was 'made' an impediment to brexit (By May no less), but this alone doesn't carry much weight when all interested parties are now concentrating on it for their own gain. We have real issues pending Gibraltar too over this, as well as British ex-pats in the case of a no-deal, these problems do not have to be difficult in reality (pending an ideal world ), but they will be as there is political capital to be made. Britain's issue is that we simply have not prepared for this because the entire Brexit timetable was unrealistic and that's the trap Boris is walking into by his commitment to the 31st because its stupid to aim for that, and under current circumstances endangers British lives potentially simply because the Conservatives rushed the process by activating article 50, not just prematurely, but about 8 years too early for their own political gain.

[mongrel]

Food for thought, literally.


The UK can only produce 60% of its food needs. Due to geography the vast majority of the remainder comes from the EU.


This study by from Imperial College London found that if the current average paperwork clearance of two minutes at Dover was increased to just four, there would be a 20-mile tailback within 24 hours on the UK side. This would increase as the days wear on.


If the system breaks down, and that is likely Downing Street could decide to unilaterally give up all border tests and procedures for goods coming into the UK as it would not be bound by EU law under no deal. Indeed Defra minister George Eustice told a Lords committee his department would implement a 'mutual recognition' regime, which ultimately amounts to assuming food from the EU was safe to eat and hoping they did the same.

The upshot is that there would be no protections whatsoever for UK consumers on the food they eat. Opening the border without checks provide an open invitation for fraudsters and dumping. They could send anything to the UK they like - any food product, any drink, with any ingredient - knowing there would be no checks. Remember the horsemeat scandal? There would be nothing to stop a repeat of that. The UK food industry would be ripped apart.


Tariffs under a deal would be be kept at zero, but without one they'll average 22%. This would devastate UK agricultural exports, whose main market is Europe.

Britain could decide to unilaterally bring tariffs down to zero. But you can't discriminate between countries under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules, so it would then have to do this for the rest of the world as well. That would bring in a flood of cheaper agricultural products from countries with lower standards and protections than the UK/EU

I can't see how no-deal can take place without bringing the Government down. Unless Boris actually beleives his bluff how would he justify putting the whole nation's food production to the sword?.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

So Boris is suspending Parliament from mid-September to October 14. It may now release a hell storm that will see a constitutional crisis (again). Especially as only a small number of Government ministers were kept in the loop about this, Thus expect a huge row among the Tory Party, let alone across Parliament.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49493632

Interestingly though it appears this might not be just to try and avoid the Parliament preventing no-deal.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...oncessions-eu/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9080361.html

It appears also that he hopes to avoid the Brexiteers, as Boris has stated officially he's only now seeking changes to the backstop- nothing else about May's deal, which has caused uproar among the ERG who have threatened to vote down any deal that doesn't make major changes (or in some cases that isn't no-deal).

Essentially Boris has a fully hostile Parliament now from all sides. The question is if he'll actually succeed in being able shut Parliament down prior given the opposition arrayed against it.

I mean just for one obvious issue- by essentially preventing a 'legislative' solution to prevent no-deal, Boris has forced the Lib-dems to make a choice- either support Corbyn's VoNC, or risk no-deal. You may thus see in the week prior (and week after) the suspension, a successful VoNC as the opposition are forced to simply follow it as the 'lesser' of two evils. With Boris majority of 1, but in reality actually being a minority government (even with the DUP), given their are at least 6 committed Tory rebels and a load of them who are rebels 'within reason', Boris would not likely survive a VoNC, and the planned 'unity' government would be ready to sweep in, thus preventing any 'count-down' attempt (Also the EU are prepared to offer a retroactive extension as found out last week).

So its now high stakes for all.

[QuintusSertorius]

Will no one think of the British banana farmers! Oh yeah, there aren't any. You don't need to "discriminate between countries" when you can set tariffs by product. There are lots of things we import, but don't export. There is a lot of re-jigging of supply lines that could be done relatively easily - such as switching from Irish to northern Irish dairy farms. Nor is the EU the only place we can source food, never mind anything else. The person with the power in a buying relationship, when there are alternative vendors, isn't the seller, it's the buyer.

On the topic of the "deal", Johnson stated removing the backstop as a pre-condition of a new deal, not the sole concession to be sought. He said quite clearly in a statement only a couple of days ago that the Withdrawal Agreement in its current form has to go as well. He's not stupid enough to believe ramming through May's terrible surrender treaty minus the backstop would be considered "success" with the Brexit party waiting in the wings.

How ironic that all those people confidently stating prorogation was closed as an avenue were wrong.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Will no one think of the British banana farmers! Oh yeah, there aren't any. You don't need to "discriminate between countries" when you can set tariffs by product. There are lots of things we import, but don't export. There is a lot of re-jigging of supply lines that could be done relatively easily - such as switching from Irish to northern Irish dairy farms. Nor is the EU the only place we can source food, never mind anything else. The person with the power in a buying relationship, when there are alternative vendors, isn't the seller, it's the buyer.

On the topic of the "deal", Johnson stated removing the backstop as a pre-condition of a new deal, not the sole concession to be sought. He said quite clearly in a statement only a couple of days ago that the Withdrawal Agreement in its current form has to go as well. He's not stupid enough to believe ramming through May's terrible surrender treaty minus the backstop would be considered "success" with the Brexit party waiting in the wings.

How ironic that all those people confidently stating prorogation was closed as an avenue were wrong.

I'm afraid you are wrong here. Just yesterday the official line is now the Government are ONLY seeking the removal of the back-stop. I'm sure any other changes will be welcome. But essentially this is May's deal Boris is looking to keep almost entirely intact

No10 said the prime minister was only asking the EU to remove the controversial Northern Ireland backstop, which would keep the UK in a customs union with the EU if no other way is found to keep the Northern Ireland border open after Brexit.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9080361.html

Boris Johnson is braced for a backlash from hardline Eurosceptics by signing up to Theresa May’s Brexit deal if it is stripped of the controversial ‘backstop’ for Northern Ireland.
In a sign that the prime minister is ready to defy some of his own MPs, he told EU leaders in recent days that he is prepared to accept most of the Withdrawal Agreement as long as the issue of a border in Ireland was solved.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b0d2fa2db12be6

Threatening a Brexiteer backlash, Downing Street said the “changes we are seeking” to the EU Withdrawal Agreement related only to the Irish border insurance plan.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/980972...esa-mays-deal/

Its all over the press. It did happen just yesterday, so with things moving so fast its easy for us to fall behind. But things have moved on for Boris. Maybe he is stupid, but its now the negotiating policy. I suspect this is due to even with the brexit party at 'peak' it being unable to turn its vote share into actual seats (as i showed a few posts back- FPTP really does suck for representative democracy), at the same time though (again due to FPTP) It could mean the Tories actually lose very little, even with the Brexit party polling 23% again, or in the 'best case' the Tories lose nothing at all. At the same time Labour due to their super-majorities, while being hugely resilient, an increase in their voting share might not necessarily lead to a Labour Government. So really a GE with Boris is all to play for, though admittedly it does make it far harder for the Tories to remain in power.

[QuintusSertorius]

I saw a direct quote, from the G7, which was quite particular in its wording, saying the WA was gone as well. Sorry, but I don't give the Indy any more credence than I do the Daily Mail, both are little better than clickbait.

In any case, as we've already seen from this government, they're quite capable of saying something while planning something else. Everyone assumed prorogation was out of the window, yet here we are. The EU won't shift on the backstop, which means it'll be no deal by default, since there's no other "deal" and Johnson won't ask for an extension.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

I saw a direct quote, from the G7, which was quite particular in its wording, saying the WA was gone as well. Sorry, but I don't give the Indy any more credence than I do the Daily Mail, both are little better than clickbait.

In any case, as we've already seen from this government, they're quite capable of saying something while planning something else. Everyone assumed prorogation was out of the window, yet here we are. The EU won't shift on the backstop, which means it'll be no deal by default, since there's no other "deal" and Johnson won't ask for an extension.

You'll have to provide that and be sure that its within the last 20 hours, otherwise its clearly changed. We're not talking about the papers, its literally the quote from No.10.

But asked directly whether the Prime Minister was seeking any other changes to the Withdrawal Agreement, a spokeswoman for the Prime Minister said: "We have been clear that the changes we are seeking relate to the backstop.”

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk...bels-over-plan

I mean even the Express is making it clear Boris is only seeking changes to the Withdrawal Agreement- hence the ERG response
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/11...juncker-merkel

Also i don't think people assumd prorogation was out of the window, just that as we're seeing it'll cause a hell of a storm to pursue it. The reason partly though for this suspension is because Boris cannot be sure now of even the support of the ERG. Also this prorogation remember still leaves parliament time for a VoNC, it does make a legislative solution far more difficult, so it'll be interesting to see if the VoNC now is forced forward by the opposition parties as the main solution (if they can agree on who is to lead Corbyn or Clarke!) Likewise, though parliament could still potentially attach legislation onto the still needed passing brexit legislation (which iiirc is coming back to Parliament shortly after the 14 October now) that legally bind the government to seek an extension (Though with Proroging it has far less time, though there is again very recent precedent regarding the quick forcing of amendments).

Maybe the EU won't offer an extension, maybe we do crash out on the 31st...however as has been shown before (and the EU have been willing too) a retroactive extension is possible if Boris is toppled even after the 31st, providing a plan was in place prior to this to remove him. This is what i've been saying earlier- A lot of politicians and fanatics on either side have become so blinkered over the short-term that they are literally ignoring the bigger political picture, the 31st is not a magic date by any means, because whatever happens after needs to be politically sustainable. Something no side currently has.

EDIT: More stuff for Boris only seeking changes to the backstop, from a plethora of Orthodox and unorthodox sources:

A Downing Street Spokeswoman has indicated that Boris Johnson would back May’s worst deal in history if it was tweaked, saying: “We have been clear that the changes we are seeking relate to the backstop.”

https://www.westmonster.com/boris-go...ays-eu-treaty/

BORIS Johnson could revive Theresa May’s Brexit deal – as long as the Northern Irish backstop is removed.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit...op-is-removed/

My fav- the FT:

Boris Johnson is to face down hardline Conservative Eurosceptics by rejecting their demands for a big Brexit renegotiation, telling EU leaders his only concern is to scrap the Irish border backstop.

https://www.ft.com/content/baadddf2-...4-3669401ba76f

[QuintusSertorius]

Johnson is calling Corbyn's bluff - of course there'll be a VONC. Which Johnson will probably lose; he won't resign, and at the end of the 14 days will choose an election date after Halloween.

There won't be a "unity" government, because Corbyn won't support one that he doesn't lead, and none of the other parties want to support him as "caretaker". It's a non-starter. Similarly, legislative moves aren't going anywhere, Johnson doesn't have to ask for Royal assent to anything they propose, nor can they compel him to ask the EU for an extension (May was happy to consent because she didn't want to leave anyway).

But again, proposing to remove the backstop is a ploy, the EU won't budge. They can't afford to re-open the divisions in the 27 to find a new consensus, and still hope Parliament will find a way to stop Johnson.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Johnson is calling Corbyn's bluff - of course there'll be a VONC. Which Johnson will probably lose; he won't resign, and at the end of the 14 days will choose an election date after Halloween.

There won't be a "unity" government, because Corbyn won't support one that he doesn't lead, and none of the other parties want to support him as "caretaker". It's a non-starter. Similarly, legislative moves aren't going anywhere, Johnson doesn't have to ask for Royal assent to anything they propose, nor can they compel him to ask the EU for an extension (May was happy to consent because she didn't want to leave anyway).

But again, proposing to remove the backstop is a ploy, the EU won't budge. They can't afford to re-open the divisions in the 27 to find a new consensus, and still hope Parliament will find a way to stop Johnson.

Perhaps indeed, though this is reliant on a unity government not being a 'thing', which it might not be. Though setting an election date after the 31st is a minefield again legally and politically as was pointed out a few pages back. Likewise though that scenario fits in with the point i raised earlier too that a retroactive extension is legally a 'thing' and the EU are apparently willing to consider it, as if Boris loses an election after the 31st, it might still be applied (or indeed a lib-dem coalition might see us simply rejoin, or with Labour go into an immediate customs union- again the issue with no-deal, is that if there is any disruption it undermines its own premise, the difficulty here is that by all accounts the UK is still not ready to prevent any said disruption, an election taking place after that is a heck of a handicap).

Its not even clear that Boris yet will be able to carry out his plan to suspend Parliament given the legal challenges that were discussed previously as well as the constitutional issue, and again in terms of legislative solutions, time-scale is now short, but its not impossible. The 'shadow government' highlighted (stupidly for the health of the Westminister system i might add) that its possible for the Government to quickly lose control, this is one idea i know the Lib-dems were eager for, its more difficult, but not impossible. So i can see your plan playing out, but there are equally opportunities for disruption- and again the end result post-31st that well all need to bear in mind- whatever happens, may not stick (Remember we still have our WTO schedule blocked, thus disruption that cannot be prevented is likely, and nearly every plan moving forward lacks sustainable support for either side, no-deal i suspect will be just the same as 'remain' or leaving with a deal, it's a shakey policy that needs shoring up properly, but there simply is no scope for that yet).

[Daruwind]

If anything, this move will signal EU that Boris is not having control over parliament, no backing at all. His plans are now even more empty air ballon than May´s were...with this kind of chaos, nothing will happen around 31 October, EU will simply wait a week two till everything settles down and new PM emerges.. There is no reason to trust Boris plans as they will go as soon as he will...

[Dante Von Hespburg]

That indeed is a possibility, especially if sympathetic EU leaders can once again calm down the hardliners like Macron down and a retroactive extension is offered (though again this is by no means certain as being offered). The big question essentially is that any election called, will be dicey for Boris. Some commentators have said (though a few weeks ago, so context changes) that he might actually support a VoNC against his own government to get a GE- though with the Brexit party and Corbyn it'll be all to play for.

Likewise though a GE if he manages to pull it off (difficult) and set the date after the 31st, will still be dicey as if we're in no-deal and suffering any kind of disruption that's a heck of a handicap, and the brexit party may not disband as the chances of Boris losing and the lib-dems or Labour getting in and reversing 'no-deal' would be tangible (Indeed post-31st Boris may also lose some support as leave voters assume 'brexit is done' and concentrate on other issues- its a hell of a political move to try and paint an election as a struggle for the soul of brexit, when the ultimate option has been taken). This is why i will keep boring people by ramming home that the 31st is not special, the brexit saga is a long one yet with a lot of twists and turns. Even if a no-deal is sustained and legitimized, then we have the fight for what a post-brexit Britain is- The Tories vision of 'global Britian' is dicey when the very tenants that underpin it are currently disappearing, we're in a multipolar, protectionist landscape now, it'll have to be updated. Likewise though i pity the British government, be it Lab, Con, Lib or whatever who has to deal with Scotland and the US trade deal fallout (British agriculture will collapse and the CBI have stated that businesses fear being out-competed by their US counterparts- not great for political points or sustainability, particularly when the liberal 'free trade' premise these are based on us under such scrutiny currently, it'll just be points for any party that offers a 'British first' approach).

So aye, a lot still to come (which is both annoying as someone living through this crap, but also great...for someone living through this crap but who gets to have a lot of material for their work )

EDIT: @QuintusSertorius- On the care-taker government 'unity', and this is why we need to be careful about making broad assumptions- It seems that a Corbyn-led Caretaker government is now acceptable to at least three Tory rebels, Guto Bebb (Who i posted last week indeed about), Phillip Lee and Dominic Grieve:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/0...eucdojxvqWP_FU

Likewise, the SNP, Plaid Cymru would support the idea of one if it was needed
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...s-caretaker-pm

The only group opposed to it is the Lib-dems, the question now is if the Lib-dems will change in light of Parliament attempting to be suspended, or will they take the political hit of being seen as 'backing Boris', which might see remainers switch to Labour or the Greens. It is noticeable that Swinson has actually previously reversed her opposition and stated she'd be open to a Corbyn led temporary government, though Clarke is the preferred candidate.
The Unit government thus is not the write-off in light of the suspension of Parliament, that it otherwise might have been.

[TheLeft]

Brexiteers in 2016: We need Brexit because Parliament has to be sovereign.
Brexiteers in 2019: Parliament wants to debate Brexit. OMG! Shut it down immediately!!!

[Cope]

What a carry on. I don't know what the PM thinks he's going to achieve with this nonsense other than encouraging spiritual militancy within the ranks of the arch-remain contingent.