Home » Posts tagged 'amended Withdrawal Agreement'

Tag Archives: amended Withdrawal Agreement

Categories

Join 19,944 other followers

If the UK Misses Official Brexit Date; UK Industries Could Sue the Government

by John Brian Shannon

March 19, 2019: It’s been 999-days since the June 23, 2016 referendum to leave the European Union and the UK government has failed in all that time to agree a deal with the EU — yet UK Prime Minister Theresa May has steadfastly maintained that Brexit will happen on the promised Brexit date of March 29, 2019 — “Deal or No Deal” — according to the Prime Minister.

And, there is still a 50/50 chance the UK might actually leave the EU on that date.

However, the odds of not leaving on that date were increased due to a series of votes in the UK House of Commons in recent days, and subsequent to those events, Theresa May seems to be backing-off from her usual assertions that “the UK will indeed Leave the European Union on March 29, 2019,” which is having the effect of causing even more uncertainty in the UK economy than had been the case over the previous 999-days.

Whereas the Theresa May government has promised Britons and British industry (hundreds of times over the past 999-days) that “the UK will indeed Leave the EU on March 29, 2019,” and whereas thousands of UK businesses have been incurring extra costs in their preparations over the past 999-days to meet the guesstimated requirements of Brexit, and whereas unconventional costs are likely to be incurred by UK businesses (through no fault of their own) if the UK government misses the official Brexit deadline which has been promised over the past 999-days by the Prime Minister and by other members of her government;

A case may be made that UK businesses can sue the government for the false and ongoing advertising (of the officially presented Brexit date) and for non-performance of its duties (failure to deliver Brexit as promised) and for not warning UK businesses in advance that Brexit may not occur on March 29, 2019 as promised hundreds of times over the past 999-days.

As a majority of Britons voted for Brexit and as UK businesses are subject to democracy just like everyone else, they wouldn’t be entitled to sue the government for acting on the results of the June 2016 referendum.

But what they can sue the government for is promising hundreds of times over the past 999-days to deliver Brexit right up until the official Brexit date — and then not delivering it — with the UK government knowing full well they weren’t able to deliver Brexit, or had changed their minds in recent days or weeks about their ability to deliver Brexit.

Without taking anything away from the previous paragraphs, it could also be argued that UK businesses could sue the UK government for failing to inform them in advance that the official Brexit date (might be) or (will be) missed.

As most businesses in the UK operate on a quarterly schedule, that would mean the UK government should’ve officially informed UK businesses about the possibility of a missed Brexit at any time prior to January 31, 2019 — which is when the October 1 through December 31 quarterly reports are typically due.

If Theresa May and Co. think that they can ‘suspend’ Brexit indefinitely in order to solve the above-described problem, they couldn’t be more wrong.

UK businesses cannot sue the government for the present period of uncertainty.

BUT IF THE OFFICIAL BREXIT DATE IS MISSED DUE TO A FAULT OF THE UK GOVERNMENT, THEREBY RESULTING IN A FAILURE TO DELIVER BREXIT ON TIME AND AS PROMISED; Beginning March 29, 2019 the UK government could be sued by UK businesses for losses resulting from an oft-promised and subsequently missed official Brexit date — especially when no advance warning was given to UK businesses about a potential missed Brexit prior to the end of the 4th-quarter reporting period.

Therefore; For the Theresa May government to avoid having to pay £1 billion per week (or more) in court ordered penalties to UK businesses should the government fail to deliver Brexit by March 29, 2019

I strongly advise the Prime Minister to keep her promise to Britons and to British industry that the UK will exit the European Union on March 29, 2019.

There’s no way out of the looming catastrophe of the UK government being sued by British industry on account of a Brexit ‘own goal’ unless you actually keep your promise that, “the UK will indeed Leave the EU on March 29, 2019.”

And if you don’t keep that promise I hope it costs the UK government billions. Because going forward, that’s how much all the additional uncertainty (from March 30th onward) will amount to and all of it caused by a suddenly missed and no advance notice Brexit.

You were saying to your MP’s recently, “Don’t lose your [Brexit] nerve.”

Well, maybe this blog post/circular will help MP’s to keep their nerve and to deliver Brexit as has been promised by the UK government almost every day for the past 999-days.

Image courtesy of PoliticsHome.com

MP’s Back Brexit Delay: A Vote for Mediocrity!

by John Brian Shannon

London, March 14, 2019: British MP’s vote on a number of indicative votes in the House of Commons to help the government gain some understanding of where Parliament sits on each potential pathway forward through the final days of the Brexit process.

At least, that’s what we were led to believe.

What actually happened was that Theresa May loaded a Trojan Horse into the day’s festivities and thereby received permission from Parliamentarians for an Article 50 extension.

Which was her only goal methinks, the rest of it was for show.


One Good Thing…

One good thing that came about in the voting was the complete lack of enthusiasm for a so-called ‘People’s Vote’ (a 2nd referendum on leaving the EU) which was soundly defeated 334 votes to 85 — a margin of 249 votes.

So the 2nd referendum proposal dies in Parliament allowing MP’s to get on with sifting through the dozens of other indicative proposals in a process that will push the more popular propositions to the top of the government’s priority list. (Let’s hope)


And One Bad Thing…

But not everything went well as MP’s backed the government’s motion (413 votes to 202) to extend Article 50 beyond the promised March 29, 2019 deadline.

It’s the worst thing Parliament has done since Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain (1937-1940) decided to appease, rather than confront, the mounting threat in Europe. Which (policy) didn’t end well.

Nor will this end well, a vote that rewards Prime Minister Theresa May’s lack of accomplishment towards a viable Withdrawal Agreement (which UK voters didn’t vote for on the referendum ballot) but which Theresa May tells us is of the utmost importance (it isn’t) and which has worked to lower peoples’ perceptions of the quality of government and timeliness of government they receive from their elected officials.

I fully expect at the next General Election there will be a thorough housecleaning as voters won’t forget what they were promised ad nauseam since July 2016, and what The Government writ large has massively failed to deliver.

Let’s remember some of these oft-repeated Theresa May statements that the country was led to believe framed her will on Brexit:

  • “Brexit Means Brexit”
  • “Brexit Delayed is Brexit Denied.”
  • “No Deal is Better Than a Bad Deal”
  • “The UK Will Regain Control of its Money”
  • “The UK Will Become The Great Meritocracy”
  • “Nothing is Agreed Until Everything is Agreed.”
  • “The UK Will No Longer be Subject to a Foreign Court”
  • “The UK Will Regain the Right to Write its Own Trade Deals”
  • “The UK Will Regain Control of its Borders and Immigration”
  • “The UK Will be Leaving the European Union on March 29, 2019.”

Rewarding Theresa May and her government for failing to deliver on every promise made about Brexit over the past 3-years by giving her even more time to fail is outrageous.

MP’s should hang their heads in shame and walk humbly among The People wearing only sackcloth and ashes for the next 10-years to atone for their inability to hold the Prime Minister to account and for lowering the threshold of good government, generally.

A well-known truism states that “Every day, we teach others how to treat us,” and members of the House of Commons have just taught Theresa May that incompetence, false promises, and weak government, will be rewarded with more time to accomplish more of the same (which, on the Brexit file, is piss-all thus far) and it’s shameful what MP’s have done.

No government in history has accomplished less in 994-days on their main policy platform than the Theresa May government.

Let me be clear! If Brexit doesn’t occur on March 29, 2019 as promised by the government Theresa May should be fired for non-performance. If you can’t get the job done in 1009-days (June 23, 2016 – March 29, 2019) then you don’t deserve the job!

Is that really so hard for the snowflake generation to understand?


On Top of All That: The EU is Under No Obligation to Grant an Article 50 Extension

It should be noted that the EU is under no obligation to extend the Article 50 deadline and that many senior EU and EC officials have said that the UK government would need to provide a good reason to extend the deadline. Apparently, the EU won’t simply extend the deadline just because British politicians ask for it.

Which seems completely appropriate and I will support the EU if it won’t agree to an Article 50 extension. There’s already been too much economic uncertainty, and for too long.


Brexit: Theresa May’s Job-For-Life

Theresa the Remainer has said all the right things since she accepted the job of UK Prime Minister in July 2016, yet here we are 994-days later, and now she wants an extension to get the job done that she should’ve accomplished within months of the EU referendum vote.

It seems that if you let her, Theresa May will turn the job of securing a Brexit into a job for life — a job that never completes — so that we always need her at the helm to steer it through. (That appears to be the strategy for her to remain as Prime Minister forever)

Micheal Gove could’ve gotten the job done in 1-year although he might have ruffled a few feathers in Brussels. Jacob Rees-Mogg, for another example, could’ve gotten the job done in 2-years and it would’ve been a very gentlemanly Brexit indeed, however, he wouldn’t have understood the Eurocrat mindset which might’ve caused him consternation. And Boris Johnson would’ve made a titanic success of Brexit but may have caused hard feelings between the UK and EU governments.

Still, the job of Brexit would’ve been done and dusted long ago, minus gazillions of tons of uncertainty over the past 994-days were any of those three in the PM’s chair since July 2016. Theresa May certainly isn’t indispensable as regards Brexit.

So why keep her?

As Theresa May herself has said many times, “Brexit delayed is Brexit denied,” and sending an Article 50 extension request to the EU now would kick the Brexit can down the road. Significantly.

People are beginning to tire of all this Brexit talk, it’s already dying of overexposure in the media spotlight at Day 994. Imagine how Britons will feel at Day 1374! (994 + 15 more days until March 29, 2019 + a 365 day Article 50 extension)

As I said at the outset, Theresa May loaded a Trojan Horse into today’s House of Commons proceedings and in the excitement not one person recognized how profoundly she’s changed the Brexit story.

Now she imagines she has a job for life — and for the next 12-months she’ll only fan the flames of Brexit whenever she needs support to stay in power.

Eventually, she knows that Brexit will die of overexposure in the public domain. But not to worry, she’ll have found something else by then to keep her in power, thanks to those MP’s who choose to reward mediocre Prime Ministers.


“Brexit Delayed is Brexit Denied”

Theresa the Remainer was right! Brexit delayed, is indeed, Brexit denied.

I’m beginning to think that Theresa the Remainer decided long ago that the best way to keep her job for the longest amount of time and to stop Brexit was to delay Brexit for as long as possible.

“Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” — Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

And her enablers are those MP’s who reward Prime Ministers who can’t (or don’t want to) succeed at their primary (and oft-stated) goal.


Just in Case You’re Interested in What Britons Think About Delaying Brexit…

But it’s likely you aren’t interested in what Britons think if you’re one of the 413 UK politicians who voted for an Article 50 extension in today’s House of Commons vote, but some 43% of Britons don’t want any further Brexit delay, they just want it over and done so as to end the present period of economic uncertainty — while 38% of Britons want to delay Brexit in hopes that Brexit will simply fade away.

Brexit delay vote held March 14, 2019

A majority of the UK people don’t want an Article 50 extension. They want Parliament to get on with the job of Brexit and end the present period of economic uncertainty. So Parliament votes against a ‘People’s Vote’ — but votes for an Article 50 extension. Facepalm! Image courtesy of YouGov.com

Theresa May: How Hard Can it Be to Follow Voters Instructions?

by John Brian Shannon

London, UK: Prime Minister Theresa May’s Conservative government loses a historic vote in the UK House of Commons on her cherished (and reworked) Withdrawal Agreement by a vote of 391-242, a margin of 149 votes.


History: On January 23, 2016 an historic vote was held where 52% of those Britons who cared to show up at the polls, voted to Leave the European Union. They didn’t vote for a complicated Withdrawal Agreement, nor did they vote for a high-sounding, but non-legally binding Political Declaration.

Britons voted to Leave the EU. Nothing more, nothing less. They didn’t vote for a Withdrawal Agreement, nor did they vote for a Political Declaration.

Subsequent to the EU referendum, the UK held a General Election in June of 2017 where all UK political parties as part of their party platform supported Brexit. Not one party ran on an anti-Brexit platform. And no surprise there, as each party was simply mirroring the will of The People since the June 2016 EU referendum.

Since that time, Prime Minister Theresa May and EU negotiators have been attempting to agree a deal for the UK to leave the European Union over-and-above the simple wishes of the UK electorate and that proposed deal has become known as the EU Withdrawal Agreement.

That’s the deal that was voted down in the House of Commons in January 2019 by a historic margin of 230 votes. Never in British history had a bill been so resoundingly defeated.

Now that same bill with minor changes has been voted down by British MP’s by a healthy 149 votes.

I suspect that much of the failure of this latest iteration of the bill was because MP’s had only a few hours to study the reworked (and incredibly complex) Withdrawal Agreement, as Theresa May presented the new version less than one day before it was up for a Parliamentary vote. Très gauche, Theresa!


Near-Term Parliamentary Process: Tomorrow (March 13, 2019) MP’s will vote on the so-called ‘No Deal’ scenario and on March 14th they will vote on whether the UK should go to the EU (cap in hand) to ask for an Article 50 extension — to give more time to UK and EU negotiators to come up with a deal — notwithstanding that 2.5 years hasn’t been long enough and notwithstanding that not one single issue will have changed in the meantime, and the EU is under no obligation whatsoever to accept an Article 50 extension.

Let me repeat that statement; If an Article 50 extension is requested by the UK, the EU is under no obligation to accede to that request, nor will any issue have changed (nor the opinions behind them) in the meantime. Therefore, what exactly would be the point of the UK applying for, or the EU accepting, an Article 50 extension?

See? There’s no logical reason to extend the Article 50 deadline.

And from the point of view of UK voters, an Article 50 extension would reward mediocrity — the kind of mediocrity that is represented by 2.5 years of limp-wristed and on-again-off-again negotiating that doesn’t deserve another chance.


What Would Margaret Thatcher Do?

Anyone who saw how Margaret Thatcher operated would know that she wouldn’t have done the EU dance, allowing them to call the tune every step of the way.

For tomorrow’s vote, Maggie would’ve simply whipped her MP’s to vote for a ‘No Deal’ Brexit — and that would be the end of the present 2.5 year-long period of economic uncertainty — and it by far would be the best thing for the UK economy and for Britons wondering where all this unguided or lightly guided Brexit will end-up.


Sometimes, You Have to Do the Smartest Thing – Which Can Sometimes be the (Temporarily) Unpopular Thing

And that’s what Theresa May hasn’t yet learned.

Margaret Thatcher, on the other hand, learned over her long career that no matter what promises have been made, no matter how uncomfortable the short-term might be, no matter the (short-term) howls of protest, senior politicians must stand up and do what’s best for the country, and do it with a sense of urgency and purpose.

And what’s best for the UK at this moment in history is for Theresa May to ‘whip’ her MP’s tomorrow to support an automatic ‘No Deal’ Brexit and just get Brexit done and dusted — thereby putting a definite and permanent end to the present economic uncertainty.

Her detractors will say, ‘Yes, but Theresa May is no Margaret Thatcher!’ and whatever else anyone ever said about her, Maggie commanded a high degree of respect from her political friends and enemies due to her having the courage to always and without fail do ‘the right thing’ as she saw it — no matter the obstacles.

If Prime Minister Theresa May can summon her inner Margaret Thatcher tonight and direct her Parliamentary whips to force every Conservative MP to vote FOR a ‘No Deal’ Brexit tomorrow, all the uncertainty building in the UK economy would dissipate within a matter of days. And Britons and UK stakeholders could get on with the job of making Brexit Britain an astonishing success story and the EU could concentrate on its internal problems. Phew!

It would be the defining moment of Theresa May’s premiership.

The entire world would thank the Prime Minister and breathe a sigh of relief. Yes, even in Brussels!

Small numbers of Remainers might complain for a few days, but on the whole, being decisive now would solve more problems than continuing along the present course.


Can Theresa May (BPE) the Bureaucrat Par-Excellence make the switch to Theresa May (PPE) Politician Par-Excellence and be the politician that’s so desperately needed at this crucial moment in Britain’s history?

We’ll soon know.