- Joined
- Sep 20, 2018
- Messages
- 24,225
- SLU Posts
- 18459
Sure, but since the loophole is there (and especially now he's publicised it), it underlines the fact that Parliament must, to be sure of averting a no-deal Brexit, refuse to agree to anything -- a GE or a Withdrawal Agreement -- until an extension has already been requested.Its interesting but it depends on a couple of preconditions
Firstly, Johnson has to come back with a deal agreed by the EU. The only deal likely to be approved between now and 19th October would appear to be the one deal that has already been agreed: May's deal.
It then requires that Parliament approves that deal. Given the ERG have stated they will vote against ANY deal and no one else is really daft enough to vote for May's deal on what would effectively be it's 4th outing that seems pretty unlikely.
So the difference between approving the deal and actually going through all the legal hoops to make it happen is only relevant if Johnson can, on his first try, pull off what May failed to do three times. I just can't see him doing that.
I agree it may look unlikely that Parliament would agree any sort of deal anyway, but it looked unlikely that the PM would lie to the Queen in order to shut down Parliament until he did. It also looked very unlikely that the Supreme Court decided unanimously against him, too, until they did.
So, come mid-October, if nothing's moved, and then suddenly he tries to get the WA through (perhaps with the ERG abstaining rather than voting against), then panicking (former)Conservative rebels and Labour MPs from strongly Leave constituencies need to be aware of what may be up his sleeve.








