Mr. Johnson will face a parliamentary investigation into whether he misled MPs about lockdown-breaking parties at No10.

The Prime Minister, who has been accused of lying about lockdown parties after being fined by the Metropolitan Police, insists he has “nothing to hide”.

MPs were unanimous in their decision on Thursday, agreeing that a committee should look into whether the Prime Minister misled them.

Speaking on LBC’s Tonight with Andrew Marr, Mr. Blackford said: “I suspect as you’ve been talking there that this story’s not going to go away. We’ve got local elections in a couple of weeks, but we know beyond that we’re going to see the judgement on the investigation that they’re still carrying out.

“I don’t believe that Boris Johnson is going to remain the Prime Minister for too much longer.”

He added: “I even wonder, Andrew, whether we’ll actually really get to the meat of any inquiry because I suspect in the cold light of day and Conservative MPs look at the hard facts on what’s going on, they’ll make their own judgements on this.”

When asked by Andrew on his speech to the House of Commons where he called Boris Johnson a “liar”, Mr. Blackford – who took advice from clerks – said: “You have to be careful for very good reasons.”

“I think you know I’ve been fairly dogged the last few months about holding the Prime Minister to account. I’m pleased Parliament acted in the way it did today.”

“I’m pleased that members across the House have responded how they have because I see this as a very serious moment for a Prime Minister that has been charged by the police and had the fixed penalty notice – the lying to Parliament that I’ve talked about, and what I believe is, misleading the House of Commons.”

Read More: Boris Johnson vows to fight on to next election as Tories given free vote on Partygate

It comes after Mr. Blackford made a speech to the House of Commons that repeatedly called Mr. Johnson a “liar.”

Speaking to the House, Mr. Blackford said: “Mr. Speaker, there is one reason why it is so important that this motion is debated and passed today.

“Because, at the very heart of the scandal there is one thing that needs to be said, one thing that needs to be heard and it is the very reason that we all need to act.

“The reason is this that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is a liar.

“I honestly believe that it is right that we are slow to use that word, but I equally believe that it is right that we should never be slow to say it and to call it out when it is so obviously true.”

Mr. Blackford added: “Members across this House know it to be true and the public have long known that.

“And that is why it needs to be said today and why we all need to act.”

The comments were not met with an intervention by Speaker of the House Sir Lindsay Hoyle.

When asked by Andrew how Mr. Blackford could make the comments, he replied: “In the context of that debate, where I was talking about the Prime Minister’s behaviour, then it’s permissible in those circumstances to be able to use that word in a way that you wouldn’t normally do – and for very good reasons.”

Mr. Johnson will be referred to the Parliamentary Privileges committee for the investigation, but the probe won’t start until after the Met has completed its inquiry.

But a Metropolitan Police spokesman said earlier: “Whilst the investigation will continue during the pre-election period, due to the restrictions around communicating before the May local elections, we will not provide further updates until after May 5.”

Source: https://www.lbc.co.uk/politics/boris-johnson-wont-remain-prime-minister-much-longer-ian-blackford/

The post Boris Johnson won’t remain Prime Minister ‘for too much longer’, says Ian Blackford first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson  Getty Images

Wars end when the belligerents give up fighting. The surest way for this to happen, and sometimes the least destructive, is through a decisive battle that leads to unconditional surrender.

The post Why Boris Johnson will not go for a ‘hard’ Brexit, but a slow Brexit first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

–Boris Johnson could soon be removed as prime minister under a plan being pushed by opposition parties.

–Johnson’s opponents fear that he will find a way to force Britain out of the European Union without a deal next month.

–The Scottish National Party now believes the only way to prevent this is to make the Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, a caretaker prime minister.

–Under the plan, Corbyn would become prime minister for a few weeks to delay Brexit and call a general election.

–Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.

Boris Johnson could soon be forced out as prime minister to make way for the Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn. Here’s why.

Johnson is the leader of a minority government, following the defection of one former Conservative MP to the Liberal Democrats and Johnson’s decision to expel 21 members of his own party.

Johnson’s advisers originally believed this would only be temporary and that opposition parties would swiftly vote for a general election, which some polls have suggested he would win.

However, the opposition has other ideas, blocking a general election until Brexit has been delayed beyond its October 31 deadline.

Johnson is running out of road

This presents a problem for the prime minister, who insists he will not delay Brexit, despite members of Parliament passing a law instructing him to do so.

This means Johnson may ultimately have little choice but to resign. However, Johnson’s allies are saying he would take a different course and find some way to circumvent the Brexit-delay law.

John Major, a former Conservative prime minister, warned on Thursday that this could be exactly what Johnson is planning.

As a result, the UK’s opposition parties are growing nervous and believe they may have to act first to prevent Johnson from finding some method of forcing Britain out of the European Union next month.

The caretaker prime minister ‘has to be Corbyn’

“It is increasingly clear that we will have to install a new prime minister via a vote of no confidence so that we can request a delay to Brexit and hold an election,” the source said.

“The convention is absolutely clear that it is the leader of the opposition — in this case, Jeremy Corbyn — who should become prime minister in those circumstances.

“Trying to find a compromise candidate, a national unity candidate, is too complicated, especially in the time we have. Whether people like it or not, the temporary prime minister has to be Corbyn.”

Johnson’s opponents see Corbyn as a lesser risk

Winning a vote in the UK Parliament to make Corbyn prime minister, however, looks tricky.

The post Boris Johnson could soon be forced to stand down as prime minister to make way for Jeremy Corbyn first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

UK lawmakers have backed a plan by Prime Minister Theresa May that could result in a delay to the country’s planned exit from the European Union at the end of next month.

More than 500 MPs voted in favor of a motion by Labour Party MP Yvette Cooper on Wednesday that voiced support for the three-step plan, which foresees Parliament voting a second time on a revised version of May’s Brexit deal by March 12.

If the deal is defeated, Parliament would then vote on whether to leave the EU without a deal or delay its departure date.

The vote came a day after May presented her plan to lawmakers.

Read more: Brexit: May offers MPs a choice between a deal, ‘no deal’ or delay

Alternative Labour plan rejected

Cooper’s motion was one of four that lawmakers voted on during a debate on Wednesday:

• The Labour Party’s amendment on an alternative Brexit plan: to negotiate with the EU for changes to the Political Declaration, a nonbinding document that accompanies the legally binding Withdrawal Agreement, to secure a customs union, close alignment with the single market, alignment on rights and protections, participation in agencies and agreement on security arrangements. The amendment lost by 83 votes.
• An amendment from Scottish National Party MP Ian Blackford that the UK should not leave the EU under any circumstances without a deal “regardless of any exit date.” The amendment lost by 36 votes.
• Former Conservative ministerial aid Alberto Costa’s amendment, backed by 141 MPs, to ensure EU citizens’ rights in the UK after Brexit, with or without a deal. This amendment was accepted verbally by the house. There were no voices in opposition.
• Labour MP Yvette Cooper’s motion for supporting May’s three-step plan. The amendment passed by a majority of 502 votes. Several lawmakers abstained and 20 voted against.

Labour backs second referendum

Despite the defeat of his party’s amendment, leader Jeremy Corbyn said Labour would continue to push for other options “including a close economic relationship based on our credible alternative plan or a general election.”

But Corbyn also said a second Brexit referendum would be on the table. “We will back a public vote in order to prevent a damaging Tory Brexit or a disastrous no deal outcome,” he said.

Corbyn’s remarks followed a Labour statement that it would sponsor or support a second vote if the party’s amendment was rejected in Parliament.

Macron, Merkel weigh in

Ahead of Wednesday’s debate, Chancellor Angela Merkel discussed Brexit during a meeting with President Emmanuel Macron in Paris.

At the press conference after their discussions, both leaders made statements about an extension to the process — with a slight difference in tone.

Merkel said Germany and France “agree completely” that the withdrawal agreement already negotiated between the EU and the UK stands.

Read more: Brexit: What Europe wants

However, she added that the EU would not refuse the UK more time if an extension was requested. “If Britain needs a bit more time, we will not refuse that, but we are aiming for an orderly solution — an orderly withdrawal by the British from the European Union,” she said.

Macron said there was a need for a clear objective if any delay was envisaged. “We would agree to an extension only if it is justified by a new choice by the British,” he said. “In no way can we accept an extension without a clear objective.”

Read more: Draft Brexit deal — what you need to know.

Ahead of the parliamentary votes, Prime Minister May repeated that she did not want any postponement. “The government’s policy is to get the legally binding changes so a deal can be brought back to this house…and we can leave on March 29 with a deal,” she said.

Source: https://www.dw.com/en/brexit-uk-parliament-to-decide-between-no-deal-and-delay/a-47714767

The post Brexit: UK Parliament to decide between ‘no deal’ and delay first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The surprise resignation of Mr. Raab on Thursday morning followed a tense, five-hour meeting of the cabinet the previous day, during which ministers reluctantly agreed to sign off on Mrs. May’s draft plans for departure from the European Union, a process commonly known as Brexit.

Mr. Raab’s departure was not only unexpected but also deeply damaging to Mrs. May’s authority, increasing the risk that she might face a leadership challenge from rebel lawmakers inside her own Conservative Party.

Shortly after his announcement, Esther McVey, the work and pensions secretary, resigned, adding to the turmoil.

After sliding in the minutes before Mrs. May started her speech, the currency rose to $1.2786 as she talked.

The crisis is a grave one for Mrs. May, who knew even before the resignations that she would struggle to win Parliamentary approval for her draft agreement. She addressed the House of Commons on Thursday morning to sell her deal and for nearly three hours took questions on the deal, nearly all of them ranging from skeptical to outright hostile.

“What we agreed yesterday was not the final deal,” she said. “It is a draft treaty that means that we will leave the E.U. in a smooth and orderly way on the 29th of March, 2019, and which sets the framework for a future relationship that delivers in our national interest.”

An investment manager watching Mrs. May speak to the House of Commons. The pound dropped as much as 1.5 percent against the dollar on Thursday.  Credit Simon Dawson/Reuters

She added that the deal “delivers in ways that many said could simply not be done.” It would put in place a transitional relationship with the European Union through the end of 2020, while a permanent arrangement is negotiated, but the transition period could be extended.

Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party leader, called Mrs. May’s agreement “a leap in the dark, an ill-defined deal by a never-defined date.” The continued uncertainty about Britain’s relationship with Europe, lasting at least another two years and possibly much longer, will accelerate the exodus of businesses and investment that is already underway, he said.

“Parliament cannot, and I believe will not,” accept the arrangement, he added.

That view was echoed by Ian Blackford, a lawmaker from the Scottish National Party, who said the prime minister was “trying to sell us a deal that is already dead in the water.”

Reflecting the cool response to Mrs. May’s plan and the talk of a leadership challenge, Laura Kuenssberg, the political editor of the BBC, asked at the prime minister’s news conference, “Is it not the case now that you are in office, but you’re not really in power?” Mrs. May did not answer directly, sticking firmly to her talking points about the deal and declining to dwell on the politics around it.

The lack of support for the agreement from lawmakers in both major parties had kept the pound down. “What we need to see is ministers who have not resigned come out and back the deal,” said Jordan Rochester, a foreign exchange strategist at Nomura Securities. “It’s not the P.R. campaign we’ve expected.”

Still, the lack of clarity kept the pound from collapsing, Mr. Rochester said, though calls for a vote of no confidence in Mrs. May did not help. Despite a series of negative headlines through the day, he noted, the pound did not continue to fall.

“There is a buyer out there,” he said. “It’s guys thinking, ‘It’s bad now, but it increases the chance of remain.’ ”

European Union officials lay low on Thursday, declining to comment on the drama across the English Channel, or to speculate about what would happen if Mrs. May were ousted or if Parliament rejected the deal. But speaking on the condition of anonymity, they said the union had gone a long way to satisfy the prime minister’s demands that there be no hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, and that Britain continue to have frictionless trade with the bloc.

Negotiators “think it is the best we can do collectively with the constraints that we have on both sides,” one official said.

Mrs. May made much the same point: “Nobody has any alternative proposal that both delivers on the referendum and ensures there is no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland.”

Dominic Raab’s resignation increases the risk that Mrs. May might face a leadership challenge.CreditAndy Rain/EPA, via Shutterstock

Although a hard-line supporter of Brexit, Mr. Raab had been a core member of the cabinet, and his presence had reassured other hard-line lawmakers. He served as Brexit secretary for barely four months, succeeding David Davis, who also resigned, because he felt that Mrs. May was not taking a hard enough line in negotiations.

In his letter of resignation, Mr. Raab said that he could not “reconcile the terms of the proposed deal with the promises we made.”

View image on Twitter

Dominic Raab@DominicRaab

Today, I have resigned as Brexit Secretary. I cannot in good conscience support the terms proposed for our deal with the EU. Here is my letter to the PM explaining my reasons, and my enduring respect for her.

Ms. McVey’s departure, though damaging, was less of a surprise.

Esther McVey@EstherMcVey1

Earlier this morning I informed the Prime Minister I was resigning from her Cabinet

Another cabinet minister, Penny Mordaunt, the international development secretary, was also reportedly reconsidering her position after a cabinet debate on Wednesday that Mrs. May described, diplomatically, as “impassioned.” As many as 10 cabinet ministers were reported to have voiced reservations.

Iain Duncan Smith, a leading Conservative supporter of Brexit and former party leader, told the BBC that the effect of Mr. Raab’s resignation would be “devastating,” because it suggested that the Brexit secretary’s concerns had been ignored, despite his pivotal position in government and in withdrawal negotiations.

Such is the unhappiness from around the party at Mrs. May’s draft deal that the calculation of those who want to oust her might change.

It would take written requests from 48 Conservative lawmakers to secure a vote of no confidence in Mrs. May. Though the hard-line pro-Brexit faction has that number, it has held back so far because it does not believe that it has enough support to topple her.

To oust her as prime minister would require a majority of Conservative lawmakers — at least 158 — voting to force her out.

On the floor of Parliament on Thursday, Mrs. May faced a torrent of criticism, much of it from members of her own party. One Conservative lawmaker, Julian Lewis, described her deal with Europe as “a ‘Hotel California’ Brexit deal which ensures that we can never truly leave the E.U.”

Mr. Rees-Mogg, the Conservative Brexit hard-liner, said that the prime minister’s promises and actions “no longer match,” and asked why he should not join those demanding a vote of no confidence. He later confirmed that he had done just that.

Britons voted to quit the European Union in a 2016 referendum, but since then the Conservatives have been split between those who want to keep some close economic ties to the bloc, to protect the economy, and others who want a cleaner break.

An abandoned customs post on the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland. The border is probably the toughest challenge in Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union.CreditAndrew Testa for The New York Times

Worryingly for Mrs. May, many of her enemies, on both the right and the left, are converging around the view that the compromise she has carefully forged is the worst of both worlds, leaving Britain without a voice in the European Union but still subject to many of its trade rules. Several leading Brexit supporters have characterized the draft deal as worse than membership in the bloc they find so objectionable.

The focus of the discord has been around plans to ensure that, whatever happens in future trade talks, there should be no physical checks at the border between Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, and Ireland, which is a member of the European Union.

Under the so-called backstop plan that is part of the draft deal, the whole of the United Kingdom would remain in a customs union with the European Union until future trade plans that negate the need for border checks are worked out.

But Northern Ireland would be subject to more of the European Union’s regulatory processes than the rest of the country, a fact that Mr. Raab said “presents a very real threat to the integrity of the United Kingdom.”

He also objected to the fact that Britain could not unilaterally leave the backstop, a move that would clear a path to exit a customs union and pursue trade deals with other countries.

One of Mr. Raab’s under secretaries for Brexit, Suella Braverman, also stepped down on Thursday. Their departure had been preceded on Thursday morning by the resignation of Shailesh Vara, a junior Northern Ireland minister.

Shailesh Vara MP@ShaileshVara

With much sadness and regret I have submitted my letter of resignation as a Northern Ireland Minister to the Prime Minister. A copy of my letter is attached.
It has been a joy and privilege to serve in the Northern Ireland Office and I will always cherish the fondest memories.

Speaking at a news conference in Brussels shortly before Mr. Raab’s announcement, Michel Barnier, the top European Union negotiator, and Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, said they would call a summit meeting for Nov. 25, where leaders of the bloc’s member states could endorse the deal.

Mr. Tusk said that the accord approved by the British cabinet meets two crucial objectives: It limits the damage Brexit would cause, and it protects the vital interests of the 27 remaining members states and the European Union as a whole.

“We have always said Brexit is a lose-lose situation and these negotiations were always about damage control,” he said.

Mr. Barnier said that the coming days, when the focus will be on finalizing a political declaration outlining the future relationship between Britain and the European Union, would be “intense,” adding that “we have no time to lose.” Brexit is scheduled to take effect on March 29.

However, European Union officials have made it clear that they were scheduling the summit meeting on the assumption that turbulence in Mrs. May’s party would not paralyze or overwhelm her government.

Follow Stephen Castle on Twitter: @_StephenCastle.

Reporting was contributed by Michael Wolgelenter, Amie Tsang and Richard Pérez-Peña from London, and Steven Erlanger from Brussels.

---

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/world/europe/uk-brexit-theresa-may.html

[Disclaimer]

The post Brexit Deal in Crisis After 2 U.K. Cabinet Ministers Quit first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

In Europe’s capitals there has been an echoing silence. Most heads of government – who feel quite able to respond to the slightest turn of the Brexit saga – appear to have lost their tongues.

The Belgian prime minister, Charles Michel, said that “violence can never be the answer”. The Slovenian prime minister, Miro Cerar, said he was “concerned”. But these two seemed to be the exceptions that proved the rule.

One could explain this collective omertà on the usual diplomatic niceties about EU countries not intervening in each others’ domestic politics.

But there is so much more to it than that.

First, many EU nations fear that if Catalonia won its independence, then that would encourage other separatist movements in their own countries. Many of Europe’s nations are relatively young conglomerations of ethnicities and languages and territories.

The last thing they would want is the integrity of their own states being threatened. Think northern Italy, Corsica, Flanders and the south Tyrol.

Second, there is a question of consistency. How could an EU that opposed independence for, say, the Kurds or Crimea suddenly decide to welcome it for the Catalans? The EU would find it hard to back a vote for self-determination that had been so clearly ruled illegal by a country’s constitutional court.

But third, and most importantly, the EU is fundamentally opposed to separatist movements in principle. They are seen as a threat to what is still a club of sovereign nations. Suddenly having one member divide in two would create huge problems for officials in Brussels.

Should an independent Catalonia join the EU? Should it join the euro? What would happen if Spain blocked Catalonia’s membership? What would happen to Spain’s economy shorn of the Catalonian powerhouse that produces 20% of the country’s wealth. What would happen to Spain’s sovereign debts?

And what of Britain? Opposition politicians called on the government to intervene and speak out. The Lib Dem leader Vince Cable called for the Spanish ambassador to be summoned. But the Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, merely tweeted that the referendum was a matter for Spain, its constitution should be respected, and the country was a close ally and good friend. He did admit to Reuters that he was “worried” about the violence but there was no actual condemnation.

Image copyrightEPA

Now this is hardly surprising. The British government, of course, has had to deal with its own independence referendum in recent years and may be unwilling to do anything to encourage or provoke the Scottish National Party that has been on the back foot of late.

But also, as the Brexit negotiations progress, the UK has no desire to provoke a European ally unnecessarily. There is no national interest in upsetting Madrid whose support Theresa May will need in the months and years ahead.

And yet there is a paradox in all this. We are told constantly that the problems of today are global, that economic crisis, climate change, terrorism and migration can be tackled only by supranational action.

Yet here we have, once again, people and politicians turning instead to the nation state as the answer to their problems. The Catalonian separatists believe their interests will be best served by forming their own country independent of Spain.

The government in Madrid sees Catalan independence as a fundamental threat to the constitutional Spanish state that emerged from dictatorship in the 1970s. And a European Union that gives daily lip service to the idea of breaking down the boundaries between its members looks silently away as one of its number uses state violence to protect the integrity of its borders.

Four centuries ago, the Treaty of Westphalia established the principle that the sovereign state should be the building block of world affairs, the best way of promoting the interests of the peoples within their borders.

And four centuries on, this is the one principle on which the politicians in Catalonia and Madrid have common ground. Both sides are nationalist in their own way. Their disagreement is merely one of geography.

The crisis in Spain has shown that, like Mark Twain, reports about the death of the nation state have been much exaggerated.

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41464712

The post EU looks away as Catalan crisis unfolds first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.