“I’ve got you this time, Brer Rabbit,” said Brer Fox, jumping up and shaking off the dust. “You’ve sassed me for the very last time. Now I wonder what I should do with you?”
Brer Rabbit’s eyes got very large. “Oh please Brer Fox, whatever you do, please don’t throw me into the briar patch.”
“The briar patch, eh?” said Brer Fox. “What a wonderful idea! You’ll be torn into little pieces!”
– Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby, A Georgia Folktale, retold by S.E. Schlosser
*
Brexit: Brussels gets tough with ‘disruptive child’ UK, writes Andrew Byrne in the Sunday Times:
The EU’s latest thinking is contained in a document circulated among ambassadors on Friday night. It confirms legal advice that the UK must hold European parliament elections in May if it wishes to remain beyond that point. It also contains the starkest warning yet of the threat to the EU’s legal order if this requirement isn’t met.
In essence, the paper identifies a July 1 tripwire that would automatically terminate the UK’s membership and trigger a no-deal expulsion. Unless the UK had taken part in Euro elections or approved May’s deal by that time, both sides would be powerless to prevent it.
That sharpens a three-way choice for MPs: back May’s deal this month and seek a short two-month extension, opt for a long-term extension and organise European elections in May or face a no-deal exit.
This analysis piles yet more pressure on both Eurosceptic and pro-EU MPs to back May’s deal this month. That outcome is favoured by Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator. He fears that anything longer than a couple of months risks unravelling the 585-page withdrawal agreement his team spent two years working on.
Hardline Brexiteer MPs will be pressed to approve the deal to avoid Euro elections and stop Brexit slipping from their grasp. Other MPs will come under pressure to back the deal early to avoid the tripwire. EU officials hope a parliamentary majority can be cobbled together – perhaps through a series of indicative votes – by late May.
While some European leaders still toy with the idea of reversing Brexit in a second referendum, the risks of a rogue UK remaining in the EU after June and disrupting its agenda alarms others. The latest advice argues that the EU cannot impose restrictions on UK involvement in EU decision-making if it extends article 50.
Officials also fear a prolonged UK membership could see dozens of British Eurosceptic MEPs descend on the European parliament. That has added to a broader exasperation among officials who want the UK to leave quickly.
Oh noes! Please not a July 1st tripwire no-deal expulsion thingy!
That would be (gulp) awful!
@Natalie, thank you so much for warning us of this horrendous possibility.
Is there not a contradiction here? While they want to leave earlier, why would they compromise to avoid an election if they would win it, thus being both vindicated and ensuring hasty EU ejection?
I find the Times rather apt to this kind of confusion when discussing Brexit: trying to think like a Brexiteer – to argue why said opponents should do what the Times wishes – but repeatedly lapsing into thinking like a Remoaner. An ‘insight’ article in last Thursday’s Times explained that, while the author (sadly) took it for granted that the Tories’ next leader would be a Brexiteer, said leader would face an insoluble long-term strategic problem because, amongst other things, the “right to be protected from chlorinated chicken” (I quote from memory) would “soon be seen as part of the modern British way of life”, and would conflict with the need to strike trade deals.
I need hardly add that this “right to be protected from chlorinated chicken” did not mean the right to walk into a supermarket and see a shelf of chickens proudly declaring themselves virginally innocent of all chlorination, while the chickens on another shelf shamefacedly admitted (either openly or by their embarrassed silence) that they had known the vile gas in their dissolute past. On the contrary, it meant we were to be protected from any temptation to make the wrong choice in the matter.
“I need hardly add that this “right to be protected from chlorinated chicken” did not mean the right to walk into a supermarket and see a shelf of chickens proudly declaring themselves virginally innocent of all chlorination,…”
I think there are more people worried about walking into McDonalds with the screaming little ones and having to tell them they can’t have chlorinated McNuggets…
I can just imagine exactly what the MEPS elected in such an 11th hour European Parliament election would look like, pretty much Brexiteers to a man*
The officials are right to be a bit frightened. In fact, they should be A LOT frightened. Surely it’s better to just pull the plug on the UK, refuse an extension and get rid of “perfidious Albion” once and for all.
Pretty please? We could make it worth your while… 😆
* – In the genderless form
Put not your trust in laws, especially EU laws. They tend to be ignored when found inconvenient.
It’s the genderless form of MPs that have got us into this mess.
Nice quote a few days ago from Nigel Farage:
“Guy Verhofstadt said earlier that I would ‘hijack’ the European elections, if they took place.
What I think he meant is I would ‘obtain a lot of votes’.”
https://thebrexitparty.org/social/
That has added to a broader exasperation among officials who want the UK to leave quickly…….Oh puleeeeeeeeeeeeeze. The EU is wetting itself about the forthcoming UK exit from their cabal, least of all, who’s going to be footing future bills ???
It should be noted that the type and geography of the EU electoral process in the UK favors Farage. Except in Northern Ireland, which returns three MEPs, the system is a single vote for a party list in multi-member regions and the regions are drawn so that mainland europhile support is concentrated in just two regions: Scotland and Greater London. The other eight regions all had majorities for Leave and there is little reason for those voters not to vote maximally. Simplistically, that would yield a resurrected UKIP half the seats in 8 out of 11 regions.
Perhaps that could be part of the explanation for the apparent contradiction Niall identifies at #2 – it may be a question of whether Breixteer Tories are Brexiteer first and Tory second or vice versa.
‘Hardline Brexiteer MPs will be pressed to approve the deal to avoid Euro elections and stop Brexit slipping from their grasp. ’
How?
The default situation is the UK leaves on 29 March as specified by Act of Parliament.
None of the shenanigans in Parliament have any binding power on the Government or change the provisions of the 2018 EU Withdrawal Act.
The only ‘danger’ to Brexit is if the Govenment introduces an amendment to the Withdrawal Act which is passed through both Houses, to delay Brexit. (is there enough time for that?)
And what would that delay achieve other than the chaos of the Euro elections and still no deal?
The ‘deal’ is largely about whether the EU allows imports from the UK free of teriffs and non-tariffs. That really is not important to the 66 million consumers in the UK, it only serves the interest of Govenment cronies in some businesses.
The choice of the Brexiteers sit tight and vote down the ‘deal’ yet again. Better yet, introduce a motion of no confidence, or threaten it, in the Govenment, vote with the Labour and SNP rabble, bring the Govenment down, Parliament dissolved, Brexit happens.
This Parliament has no reputation and no credibility anyway.
Just a thought
What is the EUs actual objective?
It seems to be widely assumed that they want us to remain, and doubtless many do.
But what if they’ve given up on us and are merely trying to get the most out of us they can.
In that second possibility they want the withdrawal agreement to go through, but will drag out negotiations for a free trade deal endlessly. And we will be out in any case.
So it is important that this withdrawal deal doesn’t pass, and no free trade deal is actually possible, notwithstanding their promise to negotiate one.
The other corollary would be that the remainers are being played, as the EU can surely find an excuse in its complicated rule book for expelling us, assured as they are of ECJ support.
And should it be correct that this government has failed after 2 years and 8 months to prepare for departure on its own timetable a vote of no confidence and a general election becomes necessary, barring the remote possibility that it has the decency to resign.
What is the EUs actual objective?
To punish the UK as much as possible, in order to send a message to any other country thinking of leaving.
Remember that the Brussels Class doesn’t care whether the terms on which the UK leaves the EU hurt the people, only whether the terms hurt the Brussels Class.
Does anyone remember Tony Blair popping up to tell us that we should trust the politicians to run things for us because they do it for a living and know what they are doing?
Hahahahahaha.
Tony Blair calls for an EU army.
https://www.newsweek.com/tony-blair-lets-stay-together-415525
That might upset Nick Clegg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zQtiu1Yf8Q
But he works for FaeceBorg now, doesn’t he?
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/oct/19/facebook-hires-nick-clegg-as-head-of-global-affairs
Director of Fake News?
And Poland seems to like being in NATO.
https://www.politico.eu/article/nato-poland-offers-us-up-to-2-billion-for-permanent-american-military-base/
Stony, I think that both Sir Arnold and Sir Humphrey have said pretty much the same thing as Mr Blair.
John B : The only ‘danger’ to Brexit is if the Govenment introduces an amendment to the Withdrawal Act which is passed through both Houses, to delay Brexit. (is there enough time for that?)
I may be wrong, but I don’t think this is quite right. I think the government can change “29 March 2019” in the legislation to a different date by statutory instrument, provided the SI is approved by both HoC and HoL. So not as hard as doing a whole amending Bill. And it could be done in an afternoon. I have a vague feeling that they dont have a guillotine in the HoL, so theoretically if they waited till 28 March to introduce the SI, it could be filibustered in HoL. But not gonna happen.
Also not gonna happen is some friendly EU nation kindly stepping in and saying “you weasels – respect the referendum. No change to the departure date.”
So Brexit will be delayed, and in order to achieve this delay, Mrs May will promise to slip the EU another 39 billion.
There are some signs – admittedly small – of the only thing that will make the Tory Remainers think twice about frustrating Brexit. Tory slippage in the polls.
There are, in some districts, local council elections in May. No direct influence on Brexit but as an opinion poll on the Conservative party could be interesting…
In 1940 the British position appeared hopeless – National Socialist Germany had forced France to surrender and had driven the British army from the mainland of Western Europe, all that now needed to be done was to take Gibraltar, thus cutting off the Mediterranean Sea and the British position in North Africa and the Middle East would have collapsed – with Britain then forced to make a Mrs May style “deal” (a Lord Halifax organised de facto SURRENDER). Trying to supply all men and all supplies via sailing all the way round Africa (and up the Suez canal) would not have been practical – and trying to run the short channel between Gibraltar and North Africa (with Axis guns on both sides) would not have been practical either. I have been to Gibraltar – the channel is very narrow indeed (North Africa is clearly visible), it would have been a classic “Choke Point” a KILL ZONE.
However, the expected attack (by either Spanish or German forces) NEVER CAME. British intelligence and the head of GERMAN military intelligence, Admiral Canaris, managed to convince the Franco government NOT to allow an attack on Gibraltar.
On paper the German position in 1940 was secure – Britain “must” be defeated, but Admiral Canaris (the head of GERMAN military intelligence) managed to defeat National Socialist Germany, by preventing the attack on Gibraltar which would have led to the collapse of the British position in North Africa and the Middle East.
The United Kingdom today has all the key cards in its hand – but that hand is being played by Prime Minister Theresa May, a dedicated opponent of this country.
Admiral Canaris was actually a German patriot – it was the Hitler National Socialist regime (NOT Germany) that he hated. With Mrs May it is not this or that person that she hates – it is the United Kingdom (British independence) itself that she hates, and her hatred of British independence is typical of the establishment elite in Britain today.
So it does not really matter what the legal position is – as long as Mrs May (and the rest of the enemies of British independence) hold power.
Although it is possible that some European government (for example the government of Hungary) might (might) save the United Kingdom – by “refusing to extend Article 50”.
As for Mrs May – the difference between her and the BBC-Guardian “liberal” elite, is that they are open in their hatred of British independence, whereas Mrs May carefully conceals her hatred (hiding behind a false mask of patriotism). The BBC and the rest of the “liberal” media (such as Channel Four) are filled with a fanatical hatred of Britain – but it is an OPEN hatred, few people are fooled by them.
A concealed enemy is often much more dangerous than an open enemy. Think how much harm “Kim” Philby and his associates did – and they were in fairly junior positions. With the office of PRIME MINISTER in enemy hands, our position is indeed terrible.