| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:This weekend in parliament & beyond | |
| Posted by: | T P Howell | |
| Date/Time: | 20/10/19 10:53:00 |
| Yes. He sent it. An "ink" signature makes no difference to the legal effect of the letter. Refusing to sign was just childish. However, the second letter was probably unlawful, as designed to frustrate the purpose of the Benn" legislation. We have a crook in number 10, intent on undermining the rule of law. And the second letter directly goes against the undertaking given to the Scottish Court, so Johnson is in contempt of court and theoretically could be committed to prison (although in practice this seems unlikely). Article 50 requires a member state to leave "in accordance with its constitutional requirements". The EU will respect, and not interfere with the process of national law. Johnson have proved that the Letwin amendment was necessary. Johnson cannot be trusted. And we have to remember that this is only the Withdrawal Agreement. Then we have to move on to the new trading agreement with the EU. On past performance this could take a further decade or turmoil and uncertainty. The slogan "get Brexit done" (repeated ad nauseam every time a minister does an interview) is A BIG LIE. |