Brexit, for once some facts.

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,376
16,875
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
But who accepts the extension on behalf of the UK?.
Bojo will.
Failing that, Bercow will.
It's not likely that lorries coming to Dublin from the North are going to be stopped next Thursday.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Yes it does but only to you and more an more often.

You are ranting about fascism above I see.

Its like when you go to the zoo and watch in grim fascination at monkeys flinging poo at each other
Still nothing of value to add to the debate? please make an attempt not to make pointless posts like these, they make you look stupid.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,200
30,603
I am still on this because it still has relevance. The EU has said they are in principle prepared to offer an extension. But who accepts the extension on behalf of the UK?. Post #65513 is relevant.
The UK EU ambassador signs under the instruction of the PM.. presumably. It is an executive function not a legislative one.
You should look back at my posts. I've never spoken of whether we accept an offered extension or not, only that the EU would decide whether it accepted Johnson's request or not. The Scottish court is entirely irrelevant to that since they have no jurisdiction whatsoever over the EU. The EU didn't even need a request, they could have offered an extension at any time whether asked or not.

As Woosh and I have posted, there are others who can accept the extension, Johnson cannot block it now he's requested it and the court cannot on the shaky grounds that they were judging.
.
 

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
Completely OT but thought flecc might be interested. Thought they had given up on this.Say they have got it working reducing soot and indirectly NOx.??!!
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,200
30,603
Completely OT but thought flecc might be interested. Thought they had given up on this.Say they have got it working reducing soot and indirectly NOx.??!!
Thanks Zlatan. The principle appears good but I wonder at the robustness of tubes in the combustion chamber directing micro jets of fuel to combustion points.

They specifically mention very large diesels like those in ships and they certainly have huge potential to be cleaner than their present often filthy performance. It might be much trickier to achieve in small high performance car and light goods vehicles diesel engines.

It could have come too late for that though, since the benefit of high torque at low revs that light diesels have is going to be rapidly replaced by that even greater ability of electric motors.
.
 
Last edited:

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
You should look back at my posts. I've never spoken of whether we accept an offered extension or not, only that the EU would decide whether it accepted Johnson's request or not. The Scottish court is entirely irrelevant to that since they have no jurisdiction whatsoever over the EU. The EU didn't even need a request, they could have offered an extension at any time whether asked or not.

As Woosh and I have posted, there are others who can accept the extension, Johnson cannot block it now he's requested it and the court cannot on the shaky grounds that they were judging.
.
Ok. The EU are nothing if not polite. They would not a acceeded to a request or offered an extension without being asked. It would logically be seen as bullying. They would of course had anticipated this and had their position organised.
The Scottish case is still pending,having been reopened last Monday. The only relevance is that the EU would also not seek to interfere with ongoing judicial actions. I suspect that the EU delayed as long as they could.
Now while both you and Woosh have said things, does not unfortunately make them true. Indeed ,I must confess, even when I say them, they are not universally true either.. difficult as it might be to admit it.
But this is uncharted territory. What would be the response of a court to a challenge by BJ to the usurpation of his PM function..which is Executive, by the Speaker ,who is Legislative,, or by a Judge which is judicial.

The true situation is that by Monday next,there will not be a decision and we are still on course for a Crashout four days later.
 

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Fascinating situation and the likes of Fingers are in danger of finding out what they really voted for!
Monday should be an interesting day.
Apparently Macron is determined on a much shorter time for an extension in the hope of aiding Boris to get his deal passed, or equally could it be perhaps to simply be rid of us regardless of the cost to them?
I wonder why that has happened?
What temptation has been offered perhaps?
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,200
30,603
What would be the response of a court to a challenge by BJ to the usurpation of his PM function.
Sorry Danidl, but you're really tying yourself into knots.

BJ could not issue a legal challenge based on usurping his PM function for the simple reason that the request for an extension was parliament's legal requirement of him. Such a challenge would be thrown out instantly since Johnson would be arguing from a position of his illegality.

Parliament required him in law to request the extension on behalf of the UK and he complied, even confirming in advance when asked that he would comply with that law.

Since that was a legal requirement of parliament on behalf of the UK, if Johnson had refused, apart from any action taken against him, the request would default to either Parliament's Speaker or a court to send it. That is our UK legal position.

This from the 21st inst. is relevant, showing that my position was correct, that the request Johnson sent was valid, regardless of any Scottish court consideration of whether it was or not:

"UK Government lawyers told a hearing on the Benn Act earlier his month that Johnson "cannot frustrate its purpose or the purpose of its provisions" and said there was "no question but that he will comply with the requirements of the law".

Cherry said: "Despite his childish trick of not signing the letter and sending a contradictory covering letter, the EU, who are the grown-ups in the room, have accepted the request and are considering it."
.
 

oyster

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 7, 2017
10,422
14,609
West West Wales
The Telegraph's version of Project Fear:

Homeowners could have to convert garages and conservatories into polling stations to ensure a Christmas election can go ahead

Bloomin' ridiculous. Makes it sound as if every one of us who has a garage will have to make it a polling station. (I bet anyone who does will get paid - though how much, I have no idea.)

Anyway, if there isn't space for inns to become polling stations, don't we all know they would be welcome in the stables.

Delay it another two weeks and we could have Ballot Boxing Day. :)
 
Last edited:

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
Sorry Danidl, but you're really tying yourself into knots.

BJ could not issue a legal challenge based on usurping his PM function for the simple reason that the request for an extension was parliament's legal requirement of him. Such a challenge would be thrown out instantly since Johnson would be arguing from a position of his illegality.

Parliament required him in law to request the extension on behalf of the UK and he complied, even confirming in advance when asked that he would comply with that law.

Since that was a legal requirement of parliament on behalf of the UK, if Johnson had refused, apart from any action taken against him, the request would default to either Parliament's Speaker or a court to send it. That is our UK legal position.

This from the 21st inst. is relevant, showing that my position was correct, that the request Johnson sent was valid, regardless of any Scottish court consideration of whether it was or not:

"UK Government lawyers told a hearing on the Benn Act earlier his month that Johnson "cannot frustrate its purpose or the purpose of its provisions" and said there was "no question but that he will comply with the requirements of the law".

Cherry said: "Despite his childish trick of not signing the letter and sending a contradictory covering letter, the EU, who are the grown-ups in the room, have accepted the request and are considering it."
.
oF course I am being speculative, What precedents are there for the Speaker usurping the PM?. If he were to challenge it, how long would that take?. Who is going to sign on new extension? And When?. Then who is going to move the vote in the HoC on accepting the extension.? A lot of moving parts ,very little time , a couple of fluffed deadlines and then crashout. The EU Parliament has not yet approved the deal either so , even were HoC to capitulate, it could run out of time. Then your Mr Cash and others will have achieved their goal.
I am looking towards next week , you are reviewing history. Had the EU been bloody minded, they could easily have ignored the surly request.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: flecc and oyster

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
oF course I am being speculative, What precedents are there for the Speaker usurping the PM?. If he were to challenge it, how long would that take?. Who is going to sign on new extension? And When?. Then who is going to move the vote in the HoC on accepting the extension.? A lot of moving parts ,very little time , a couple of fluffed deadlines and then crashout. Then your Mr Cash and others will have achieved their goal.
I am looking towards next week , you are reviewing history. Had the EU been bloody minded, they could easily have ignored the surly request.
The haven't agreed to what if anything it should be yet, have they?
 
  • Like
Reactions: oyster

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,200
30,603
oF course I am being speculative, What precedents are there for the Speaker usurping the PM?. If he were to challenge it, how long would that take?. Who is going to sign on new extension? And When?. Then who is going to move the vote in the HoC on accepting the extension.? A lot of moving parts ,very little time , a couple of fluffed deadlines and then crashout. The EU Parliament has not yet approved the deal either so , even were HoC to capitulate, it could run out of time. Then your Mr Cash and others will have achieved their goal.
I am looking towards next week , you are reviewing history. Had the EU been bloody minded, they could easily have ignored the surly request.
I wasn't being speculative of course, I merely stated what I was sure was the legal position of the request made, and that the EU would definitely accept it. Thus it proved to be.

And as I've just said, BJ could not challenge the Speaker. Since he would only be challenging from a position of breaking the law, no court would accept such an attempt.

It might seem obvious, but years ago it was not obvious in UK law that someone could not benefit in any way from breaking the law. Therefore the high court made a ruling that this was fundamental and since then other laws have been based upon this.

On this alone BJ could not challenge the Speaker or any court from upholding the law he had broken.
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oyster

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Just watched Channel 4 news interviewing voters in Barnsley, leave is still the general feeiing.
Hard to explain why , but it does show it is a waste of time trying to reach "The winners" of the referendum, and any efforts must be aimed at those voters that are undecided.
And we have apparently an extension of undefined length agreed with the EU
 
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,200
30,603
The newspapers really are nuts. Given the likely temperatures in December, how could unheated garages without toilet facilities become polling stations from 7am to 10 pm? Householders would graphically tell the authorities what to do with such a suggestion.

No doubt the schools and other facilities normally used would be in use as usual for the one day.
.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: daveboy and oyster

Fingers

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 9, 2016
3,373
1,552
46
The newspapers really are nuts. Given the likely temperatures in December, how could unheated garages without toilet facilities become polling stations from 7am to 10 pm? Householders would graphically tell the authorities what to do with such a suggestion.

No doubt the schools and other facilities normally used would be in use as usual for the one day.
.
of course.

Its just hysteria.
 

Advertisers