Revised withdrawal agreement straw poll, are you in favour?

Download the revised withdrawal agreement below;

revised_withdrawal_agreement_including_protocol_on_ireland_and_nothern_ireland.pdf (938.4 KB)

Are you in favour?

  • YES
  • NO

0 voters

I need a fuctifino button, got lost reading the 1st page, then realised there was another 63…


Please make it stop


It won’t go through parliament as labour said they would vote against before the documents were even released. Just because they want to be in no 10

Reminds me a bit of the halcyon days of English TV - Take your Pick with Michael Miles…

Do you take the money or open the box (which might just be empty)
Well - do you feel lucky?
1 Like

I think this has some relevance still…

Did I read somewhere that it was no less a personage than the Right (dis)Honourable Jacob Grease Knob who introduced/supported an amendment creating this mess - hoist by his own petard or what…

Jo Maugham seems to be on a mission to hold Johnson to the law, even if it is an inconvenient one that the ERG itself passed.

I think the legislation in question made if illegal for NI to form part of a separate customes territory from the rest of the UK - However I’m fairly sure that the revised WA does not do this - albeit by legal and technical sleight of hand.

1 Like

It seems very strange, but I have not heard any mention of this on the news at all.

1 Like

Listen to LBC
or the Boris Broadcasting Corporation :wink:

To be fair this was only arranged a few days ago and in reality has little chance of succeeding, there are several Brexit court actions currently ongoing so you can’t expect the national media to report on every single one.

Decision of the outer house is expected about 5pm today Jane…

“Libby Brooks (Guardian)

The court of session has finished hearing submissions on the latest legal challenge by anti-Brexit campaigner Jolyon Maugham QC, and Lord Pentland has said that he will give his decision by the end of the day.

Scotland’s highest court heard that Boris Johnson’s new withdrawal agreement to leave the European Union involves a “clear and unequivocal breach” of national law.

The basis of the challenge is that the newly agreed deal with the EU contravenes legislation – originally amended by hardline Brexiters to stymie the backstop arrangement – that prevents Northern Ireland forming part of a separate customs territory.

Sitting before Pentland, the court of session in Edinburgh heard from Aidan O’Neill QC that the provisions of the new withdrawal agreement make it plain that Northern Ireland would also form part of a separate customs territory, that of the European Union, and that this breaches section 55 of the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Act 2018, which states that it is “unlawful for Her Majesty’s government to enter into arrangements under which Northern Ireland forms part of a separate customs territory to Great Britain”.

Noting that section 55 – the result of an amendment sponsored by the hardline European Research Group - “intended to tie the government’s hands”, O’Neill added that whether Northern Ireland forms part of a separate customs territory after Brexit is a question of objective law” and that it “can’t be plainer” that the UK government has acted unlawfully.

But Gerry Moynihan QC for the UK government argued that the petition was beyond the competency of the court, saying it was inviting the court to “inhibit” consideration of the agreement. “This is a manifest attempt to interfere with proceedings in parliament,” he told Pentland. He added that a substantial part of Northern Ireland’s trade would remain part of the UK’s customs territory and therefore section 55 would be complied with.

Moynihan also presented a letter from the Speaker’s counsel which warned that Maugham’s petition was asking for action that would “inevitably involve interference on proceedings in parliament and as a breach of the separation of powers”.

The hearing, which concluded just before 1pm, involved testy exchanges between Pentland and O’Neill, as the judge attempted to clarify whether the court was in effect being asked to prevent parliament debating the deal on Saturday.

O’Neill said that he was asking the court to clarify the law for parliament, and that it would be parliament’s decision whether to then repeal section 55 in order to retrospectively validate the agreement.”

This says it all…

If it is such a good deal for Ireland, then why can’t the whole UK benefit?
The easiest way to achieve this is for the UK to remain.


This is a great deal IMO. It is the original NI only backstop deal that the DUP scuppered but with the backstop actually implemented, probably permanently. Because it is unlikely there will ever be a Unionist majority in Stormont again to revoke it, plus sensible unionists already voted remain. The DUP are currently under the number 159 Routemaster and Bojo has his finger in the bell. Corbyn has proved himself to be a dithering, untrustworthy idiot, so no hope there. Another referendum could just as easily endorse as scrap Leave so Libdems useless too. Farrage just hovering to push no deal in an election.
Much as I dislike liar Bojo and the hateful ERG this deal gives a basis for future negotiations. That’s where worker’s rights, animal rights, food standards and environmental standards etc. etc. will be thrashed out. AND don’t forget, all the cards are still in the EU’s hands.


Ducked again.

Who will guarantee our freedoms from politicians who put up two fingers against the law.

That sums it up nicely for me John, well said.

but why were they removed from this deal and isn’t the threat of a “no deal” exit still in play - if only 1 year down the line?

1 Like

It probably is Graham but then any future government could theoretically propose to change terms at any time after Brexit ?

I just don’t trust BloJo and his dishonest band of cretins.
Seems that the British are becoming well known for their disrespect for treaties whilst they expect everyone else in the world to respect them…


I believe Bojo more than Corbyn which doesn’t say much for UK politicians.