A General Election On October 14 Won’T Change The Law

[ichkeria]

What am I missing?

[jim360]

Think it's better to describe what's going on now as "discussions". The EU has repeated its position that the Backstop is indispensable, *but* if the UK can come up with a viable alternative then it's prepared to listen. So it's up to the UK, and specifically Johnson's government, to do that.

[gulliver1]

21.32 Boris will just do as he is Told told to do ,by his three Puppet Masters. DC , JRM and IDS.

[Old_Geezer]

It's prepared to listen before rejecting. As they have before. Valueless.

In any case it's a darned cheek asking the UK to come up with more solutions to solve the problem that the EU is causing. Talk about shifting responsibility. All it needs is for the EU to keep an eye on what's coming in and get the police to chase smuggling and law breaking. It's what police are there for.

[Old_Geezer]

"Aren’t they desperate to avoid a No Deal? Even more desperate than us"

The member states should be. The elites in the Commission and their lackies don't give a darn for anything but their own powerbase.

[Ken4155]

I was always of the belief that it took months to plan and execute a general election. Not weeks!

[ichkeria]

Interesting options are discussed on the BBC website if MPs don't back a general election:
One is Johnson simply witholds Royal Assent to the Bill if passed - probably resulting in a successful legal challenge
Another is one I mentioned in jest earlier: calling a vote of no confidence in himself and possibly losing!
And then, after that, going to the EU summit, asking for a delay as required, and then vetoing his own request! Because all 28 nations have to agree, not just the other 27....

... And now for something completely different, as Monty Python used to say ...

[Old_Geezer]

Now I like that last suggestion (not the MP one).

[ichkeria]

The backstop is a concession from the EU that the UK actually asked for to prevent a customs border in the Irish sea in the event of no trade deal being struck, while preserving the integrity of the EU's single market on one side and avoiding customs posts in Ireland. It is a very unpopular solution with some EU countries as they think it gives the UK unfair access to the EU's single market.
It just shows how diametrically opposed are the vies on the different sides of the channel.

[ichkeria]

Could he actually call a vote of confidence, rather than no confidence:
That would be (slightly) less Dali or M Hulot-like
"This House firmly believes that Bunter Jolly is a spiffo bloke who has the interests of our Great country at heart - and if he loses this vote he would feel obliged to call an election."
Obliging Labour MPs to "Stand up if you love Boris". I guess that wouldn't work, hilarious tho it sounds.

[jim360]

"...solve the problem that the EU is causing."

How is the EU causing this? They didn't vote for Brexit. They didn't ask to leave the Customs Union. They didn't trigger a snap election in 2017 leaving themselves in thrall to Hard Brexiteers. And they didn't reject a Withdrawal Agreement three times despite having no viable alternative.

[Jackdaw33]

Boris cannot withhold the Royal Assent. Only the Queen can do that and the Queen cannot be challenged in the courts.

[jim360]

The Queen does as she's told. So if the Queen withheld Royal Assent then it would be because that was what she has been advised to do. And the *advice* can be challenged in court, even if the decision itself cannot.

[Jackdaw33]

That is sheer, unadulderated rubbish. Advice cannot be challenged, only executive decisions.

[dannyk13]

Jim //The Queen does as she's told//
Absolute rubbish, who do you know that has told the Queen what to do?

[davebro]

Well Tony Blair told her to get her posterior to London after Diana died.

[jim360]

Jackdaw, there are currently three legal cases against the decision to prorogue Parliament. The very fact that they are being heard in court at all shows that advice given to the Queen can be challenged, if it is found to be illegal.

As to danny's post, the last time a monarch refused Royal Assent to any decision at all was in 1708. The last time a monarch refused RA of their own volition was 1678. Since then it's convention that the Monarch's decision to give Royal Assent is more or less mandatory, and certainly not down to them. The decision to prorogue Parliament was Boris Johnson's; the Queen assented because she must.

[jim360]

In that sense, "the Queen does as she's told" is clearly correct, although a better way of phrasing it might have been that the Queen's role in government affairs is a purely ceremonial one.

[dannyk13]

Dave. What rubbish, Blair wouldn't have dared to order the Queen to do anything.

[Jackdaw33]

//Jackdaw, there are currently three legal cases against the decision to prorogue Parliament.\\ None of which have a cat's chance in Hell of succeeding.

[jim360]

Probably they do not. But the question of whether or not something can be challenged is different from the question of whether the challenge will be successful. Judicial Reviews can be applied for in matters of legal advice, including advice given to the Queen.