,
9 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Always be wary of those who say that they are putting country before party. It is rarely thus. A quick (almost certainly unpopular...) thread on the opposition's decision to reject Johnson's election gambit. 1/
Labour, and the other opposition parties, have been calling for an election for months. Johnson is prepared to offer a pre-Brexit election on Oct 15. The opposition it seems, is not going to take the bait. 2/
That stance has a lot of support, esp here on twitter. People are saying that today's Bill should be enacted, and an extension to end Jan secured, before there is a GE. The stated aim is to 'take no deal off the table'. 3/
The Bill will, if an extension is agreed with the EU, create a new exit date. But... it will not, and cannot, prevent any new Government, and any new Parliament, from leaving the EU without a deal. 4/
The Bill provides that Parliament can legislate to leave with no deal. In any event, a new Parliament could repeal, or amend it; and the UK could then leave the EU with no deal. (It may be that this is not well understood, I'm not sure...). 5/
It seems to me that the one - not insignificant - reason for refusing the election gambit, is not to take no deal off the table, but to try to ensure that Johnson is forced to break his 31 October 'do or die' promise. 6/
If that's right, then I'm afraid that it is a bit rich for the opposition parties to be claiming to be acting out of national, and not party political, interest. 7/
I worry that it is a move which might backfire, and that many people will find difficult to understand. The opposition should ensure that the election is pre-Brexit, and that Johnson cannot manipulate the choice of date. 8/
But I'm not convinced that they should be trying to keep Johnson in office for a few more weeks... and this Bill is not in any event able to prevent (an albeit slightly delayed) no deal. 9/9
