Brexit

1) “We will be leaving on 31 October, deal or no deal.”
(October 3, House of Commons Despatch Box)

2) “We are coming out of the EU on October 31, come what may Conference. Let’s get Brexit done.”
(October 2, speech to Conservative Party conference)

3) “We’re going to deliver Brexit, we’re going to deliver it on October 31.”
(Boris Johnson made the same commitment to the nation on BBC TV September 30, The Andrew Marr Show, BBC1)

4) “We are leaving the European Union by October 31 come what may. This is absolutely crucial in order to renew and restore trust in our precious democracy.”
(September 27, The House magazine)

5) “We will, of course, obey the law and we will come out of the EU on 31 October.”
(September 16, House Of Commons Despatch Box)

6) “I will uphold the constitution, I will obey the law, but we will come out on October 31.”
September 16, BBC TV interview

7) “I’d rather be dead in a ditch.”
(Boris Johnson's trip to West Yorkshire didn't quite go to plan
September 5, West Yorks, when asked if he could guarantee if he would not go back to Brussels and ask for another delay to Brexit.)

8) “We must take some immediate steps. The first is to restore trust in our democracy, and fulfil the repeated promises of Parliament to the people by coming out of the European Union, and by doing so on 31 October.”
(Boris Johnson speaking in the Houses of Parliament for the time as PM. July 25, first statement from House of Commons Despatch Box as Prime Minister)

9) “We are going to fulfil the repeated promises of parliament to the people and come out of the EU on October 31 - no ifs or buts.
(July 24, first statement as Prime Minister outside No10 Downing Street)

10) “We are getting ready to come out on 31 October, come what may. Do or die. Come what may.”
(June 25, interviewed on talk Radio)

11) “We will not be forgiven if we do not deliver Brexit on October 31.”
(June 5, Tory leadership hustings at the One Nation Conservative Caucus in Parliament)

I Suppose he still has 3 days to for fill those promises. Surely he is not the type of person who would break His promises!!!

Didn't Parliament pass a law that he Had to go back and ask for an extension?

So he either breaks the law or breaks his promise.

And I'm sure there's still more to it than just saying "Bye" to leave the EU.

You are quite right on all counts. My comment was entirely sarcastic and intended to be so. I don't know if that breaks any site rules but frankly, by now, I don't care any more.

The Benn Act prevents the UK leaving the EU without a Withdrawal Agreement (WA).

Realising he was hamstrung by the Court, Johnson finally went to the EU and cobbled together something that was almost, but not quite entirely unlike a deal. In truth, it was Theresa May's original WA (now re-named the WAB, Withdrawal Agreement Bill) only worse because it ensured that there would be a border between UK and Northern Ireland down the Irish Sea. This is something that the Conservative Party in General and Boris Johnson in particular said they would never countenance. Well, they have. Another broken Johnson promise.

This revised "deal" is worse than Teresa May's on many counts, but there is pressure on Parliament to pass it just to "Get Brexit Done". Once again, a slogan of the most duplicitous kind is being repeated over and over to galvanise the Brexit movement in an attempt to hustle Brexit over the finishing line to the clear detriment of the nation.

You have to understand that Johnson has lost the confidence of Parliament, to tell the truth about anything, and he is in complete thrall to his advisor Dominic Cummings, a man who would make Machiavelli blush. They are utterly.... utterly untrustworthy.

Behind everything Johnson tries to do, it is suspected that there is some underhand plot. And overwhelmingly so far, there has been. He has attempted every means, both legal and otherwise, both fair and foul to subvert Parliament to get his way. He has even lied to the Queen. Unprecedented behaviour for any Prime Minister. There was a time when his head would have adorned a spike at Traitors Gate for that. Fortunately for him, unlike her volatile, red headed 16th century predecessor, Liz 2 doesn't have that option at her disposal.

Parliament does not trust Boris Johnson and is not going to give him the slightest opportunity to manipulate the machinery of state to get his way without proper scrutiny.

Despite all Boris Johnson's attempts to railroad the WAB through and get it on the statutes "on the nod", Parliament has ensured it has time to read the 120+ pages of the WAB line-by-line and then debate it's merits and de-merits. If they decide there should be any amendments these will be tabled and voted on. The final, approved Bill will be put to the House for a vote.

That is Parliamentary procedure. That is how things should be done. Nobody is "Killing Democracy". Rather, democracy is being served in the correct and proper way.

It is still possible (but unlikely) that there could be a second referendum (The People's Vote) if no agreement can be found. A general election (GE) is likely before that came into play.

If (as is considered likely at this time) a GE returns another hung Parliament, we would be right back to square one and then a People's Vote would be the only realistic way to break the deadlock.

And who the hell knows which way that would go.

This aint over by a very long chalk.

I thought TFS was a Sarcastic Free Zone?

BJ: Sounds familiar.
Except that 1/2 of our gov't is complicit and defends our liar in chief... along with a fair amount of duped citizens.

Yes, sarcasm comes free with every post.

And on topic it sure sounds like y'all got your own clusterf*** across the pond. It makes for some tough times.

Only I dont. I havent said that "project fear" is the plan. Indeed I have always very clearly stated that the aim is to prevent Brexit from happening and that 'project fear' was just ONE part of their overall PLAN to achieve their end goal. I have not switched btw meanings randomly or otherwise. Just one more thing you have said that is wrong.


Only i have never said nor implied that.


So one of the EU's primary aims in negotiations was, as Barnier stated, to offer a deal that "is so tough on the British that they’d prefer to stay in the EU". No doubt it was also to make sure that other member states werent tempted to follow the UK's example. So they werent simply concerned with seeing that their 'values' werent compromised. That wasn't enough. They wanted to make sure that any deal not only met their 'value' based requirements but that it was also as painful and damaging as possible to the UK. This approach of theirs has attracted a fair amount of criticism from business groups (eg the BDI and AHK) as well as MP's and MEP's on the mainland.


Well among many things you have claimed that the UK have been more selfish than the EU...which I find a bizarre thing to say.


I cant see how you can possibly claim the 'situation' was "entirely the UK's fault". Any WA had to pass four hurdles. The WA had first to be agreed by the negotiators of each party. Then it had to be passed by the UK parliament and finally by the EU parliament. So if both sides wanted an agreement they had to work together to see that any such agreement could pass through all four stages. It was always blatantly obvious that May's deal was never going to pass through the UK's parliament. The EU however wouldnt entertain any changes that might give May a chance of passing a revised deal. So i dont see how they are blameless. Now were the EU duty bound to help May get a WA through the UK parliament? No of course they werent. But their refusal to renegotiate ensured that May's deal couldnt pass. Of course the EU initially also told BJ that May's deal was it. In the end however they did make a few concessions in a renegotiated deal. The result? The WAB was passed in the HoC.

As for the extension. The UK (in theory) didnt have to ask for an extension but neither did the EU have to grant one.


Simple. They rebelled as they don't believe what they professed to (re Brexit) when they were elected in 2017. It has become obvious that many of the former Tories want to stop Brexit altogether whilst others will only grudgingly support a soft Brexit. So all of these former Tories lied to their party and their electorate when they ran under the Conservatives election manifesto that stated that if elected they would honour the result of the people's vote AND that NO deal was preferable to a bad deal.

Interestingly many of these former Tories have now written (once again) to the EU asking for an extension of 6-8 months.


Nope, it was the EU's uncertainty re whether or not BJ really would, and really could, take the UK out on WTO terms that forced them to reopen negotiations.


No 10 leaked parts of the conversation. They had no need to release recordings of said conversation unless the Germans denied the British version...which they didnt.

Anyway, finally there will be a general election so for me at least it's time to move on to what's happening in the present.

Yep. The Benn Surrender Act meant that he couldn't leave on the 31st unless the EU decided not to give the extension that the UK Parliament forced BJ to ask for.

What a joke Labour are. Almost from the moment the results of the 2017 election were in they were demanding another election. BJ becomes PM and they demand an election. He offers them one and they say no. He again offers them the chance of an election and again they say no. Though JC does say Labour will support a general election once the Benn Surrender Act receives Royal assent. It does so. BJ offers another election and again Labour refuse. Now they say they will only agree to a general election if the EU grants an extension. They do. BJ offers them another general election and...yep, they refuse. This time they say they wont offer their support for a general election unless no deal is 'off the table'. Last night Labour MP's were saying that they would not support a bill for a new election set to be introduced the following day. However, once it appeared that the bill would receive the simple majority that it required Labour suddenly agreed to a new election claiming that now their demand that no deal be 'taken off the table' had been met. Only nothing had changed btw yesterday when they opposed a general election under the FTPA and today..except that today they couldn't stop it.

The rebel alliance did however show how much they care about the integrity of the voting process by trying to get amendments attached to the 2019 GEB by seeking to allow not only 16-17 year olds to vote but also EU nationals!

Fun and games with the 'People's Vote'. All just one happy family.

Sounds like they are taking queues from our Grand Obstructionist Party over here.

Errrrrr.... the Aussie may or may not have noticed, but a General Election has been called. It's been on the news since early yesterday, long before he wrote his (usual) ill-informed diatribe.

Perhaps the news hasn't reached Bunyip Bend in the Outback yet. The runner from Wagga-Wagga didn't quite make it in time.

It will take place on Thursday 12 December and is OK now that a no deal Brexit has been taken off the table.

We've got the extension to 31 January and a lot can happen between now and then. I'll make no predictions. Watch this space.

The problem is with trust in Boris Johnson in Parliament. Simply put, there is none. The man is a liar, a charlatan and had to be threatened with criminal proceedings in order to obey the law.

All of these are characteristics that the Aussie thinks acceptable in a democracy. No wonder we sent all our criminals there.

And so the election will run its course. I'm glad to see that Facebook and Twitter have banned political advertising. At least that's one area of criminality that Brexit won't be able to expolit in the future (and another area of crime that the Aussie supports).

There are ways around that of course, but if it makes their lies and disinformation a little less effective then that's something to start with.


In the meantime, and almost going under the radar at the moment is the fact that John Bercow will stand down as Speaker of the House of Commons tomorrow. That will be a shame.

He's been an excellent speaker and has done his job fairly and without bias, much to the chagrin of Brexiters who had hoped that having a Tory MP in the speakers chair meant he would come down on their side.

He's stood up to the Tory bullies who tried to force his hand on a number of issues. They tried to bribe him (allegedly), they appealed to his loyalty to the party. They tried to remove him.

But he stood firm and did right by Parliamentary procedure. He was true to democracy (while being accused of being anti-democratic..... another standard Tory tactic. Just look how many times the Aussie uses that slur)

There is a standard pattern to the rhetoric of the Tory Party / The Aussie:

Do what the Tories / Aussie wants: You are democratic

Obey the law / follow Parliamentary procedure / act without bias: You are against democracy.

The early front runner for Speaker is Chris Bryant (Labour: Rhonnda)

But lets wait for the vote.

Today is 31 October.

Britain will leave the European Union at 2300 tonight...... Oh, wait......

Just Twitter.

Facebook will still take the money regardless of facts.

It was being reported here this morning that Facebook had also banned political advertising but that's now been changed to "Twitter ban puts pressure on Facebook to follow suit."

Facebook will come under pressure because of the the theft of millions of Britons personal data to use for criminal acts by the Brexit Leave campaign during the referendum.

If you'd been here in 2016 you too would have been swamped with disinformation and propaganda all over Facebook.

With Dominic Cummings around, it's likely he'll try to pull the same stunt again. I'm sure Facebook will be aware of this. How will they deal with it..? Will they deal with it at all.. ..?

Or will they, as you say, take the money...?

We'll have to wait and see.