Lord Adonis, that Labour arch-Remainer peer, is calling on Scottish Labour and the SNP to join forces to stop Brexit and keep the UK in the European Union.
PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW
Lord Andrew Adonis is urging the SNP to get together with the Scottish Labour Party to try and force Theresa May into a second EU referendum.
Talking on the BBC Sunday Politics Sunday programme he said:
"What I want to see is a popular front. The whole future of Scotland is at stake.
"Whatever happens, constitutionally, to Scotland in the future – there is no future for Scotland which is better off outside the European Union. For my party, it’s the right thing to do, it’s the right thing to do for the Scottish Government and they should work together on this."
Now the last 'popular front' I remember, concerns a certain 'Citizen Smith' trying to mould a handful of ragtag mates and his girlfriend into the 'Tooting Popular Front', with cries of 'power to the people' and 'freedom for Tooting'.
Lord adonis is already adorned with a furry coat, all he needs now is the black beret with a red star badge on it!
Oh no sorry, a blue beret with a gold star on it!
More seriously though, by pitching Scotland against the rest of the UK, does it not prove that he thinks more of the European Union than he does of the United Kingdom?
Now! it seems that the French are not happy bunnies!
Why? Because we've secured a deal with the US to sell 34 F35 military jets to Belgium. And the UK has a stake in that deal.
The US Lockheed Martin F35 was chosen by the Belgian Prime Minister over the Eurofighter Typhoon because of cost and that's what's annoying Macron.
Now the UK has a greater stake per aircraft in the Eurofighter Typhoon than in the F35 at 35% compared to 15%, but it concentrates the mind to find out that only 623 Eurofighter Typhoons have been ordered compared to 3,500 F35s and the cost of the Lockheed offer is falling.
The UK itself has already ordered 48 of the vertical take off version of the F35 for carrier work and has plans to buy 90 of the cheaper, normal take off variant in the pipeline.
The French President, Emanuel Macron was left fuming saying it was 'against European interests'.
Moving on, I still remember George Osborne (cue hisses and boos from Brexiteers) claiming that we'd need an emergency budget within a month of a vote to leave the EU back in 2016. Which we didn't.
So, when you hear the same sort of thing from the current Chancellor of the Exchequer, there's bound to be some eyeball rolling and mutters of 'here we go again – more scare-mongering'.
Talking to Sky News, Hammond said that if Theresa May's deal was not accepted by the EU, the government would have to look afresh at the future of the UK economy.
"If we were to leave the European Union without any deal – and I think that's an extremely unlikely situation but of course we have to prepare and plan for all eventualities, as any prudent government would – if we were to find ourselves in that situation then we would need to take a different approach to the future of Britain's economy." He said.
I'm in the Jacob Rees-Mogg camp on this one, the Treasury is 'the last bastion of Remoanerism' and the Chancellor is talking of a form of 'punishment budget' if we don't just roll over and accept the Chequers Brexit In Name Only deal.
So I'll just roll my eyes, sigh and say – more fear-mongering!
Now, according to an Exclusive report in the Independent today, our Westminster MPs have no way of legally vetoing a no-deal WTO exit from the EU.
It turns out that the House of Commons Library has given written advice to an MP which says that parliament on its own cannot prevent a no-deal Brexit and that any vote they take on what should happen in the face of no-deal would have no statutory significance.
What this means is that parliament cannot force Theresa May back to the negotiating table if they reject her Chequers deal. Nor could they force her to hold another EU referendum.
By rejecting her Chequers based Brexit In Name Only deal, they would, themselves, be forcing a no-deal Brexit scenario.
Unless, that is, they are able to then engineer a vote of no confidence in the government, which should constitutionally lead to the government resigning and a general election.
So, where does that leave us?
If the PM can scare sufficient numbers in the house that
a. her deal is better than no-deal
b. that Corbyn in number ten would be disastrous
Then she will get her Chequers Brexit In Name Only (BRINO) deal. This will please big business and, secretly, many Remainers who recognise that this will keep us fully aligned to the EU for years to come and so can then be used at the appropriate juncture to get us back in again.
If she can't do that then we start mobilising for a no-deal, but the opposition and many on the government side will set the machinery in motion for a no confidence vote.
And with this would come strident calls for an extension to Article 50 etc.
Should the house end up voting that they have confidence in the government, then it's full speed ahead for a WTO Brexit.
But, if the government loses the motion – then we're facing an election and demands in the House for a vote on approaching the EU for an Article 50 extension, whatever the political and financial costs to the country – which are likely to be extremely heavy.
And that extension would not be a short one.
The first question is, will the PM win with Chequers? Looking at the maths on her own side alone it doesn't look good. She would be relying on MPs on the opposition benches voting with her.
Then, if she loses her Chequers deal, the question becomes would her government lose a vote of no confidence?
Remember, as well as a confidence vote this would also effectively be a vote between a full WTO Brexit and staving it off to fight for Remain another day.
So, just about everyone on the Labour, Lib Dem or SNP benches will vote unanimously against the government but, more importantly, so will the hard Remainers on the Tory benches.
After all, how can they possibly vote to keep a government in place that would drive forward with a hard WTO Brexit after fighting against it for so long?
The best outcome in my eyes would be for Parliament to 'chuck Chequers', but then vote for the government to stay in place so forcing a hard Brexit – but that would probably be a tall order.
There are too many imponderables along the way to make a prediction on this one, other than to say that what Theresa May offers is destruction of the UK via Brexit In Name Only and what Corbyn offers is nothing but national destruction via collapsing of the economy.
Strange isn't it, that the only way that the country can actually progress with a proper Full Withdrawal of the UK from the EU, or FWUKEU, is for the government to lose a Brexit vote to keep us all but in the EU, and then for the opposition to lose what is in effect a Brexit vote to try and keep us in! Both sides have to lose in order for the UK voter instructions to be followed.
And that is mainly because the majority of those in Parliament want Brexit to fail and will work to ensure it does fail – against the wishes of the people!
So, please let us all know what you think by leaving a comment below.
Thank you for watching.
WATCH | @Jacob_Rees_Mogg blasts Treasury as "the bastion of Remoanerism". "They said there'd be 800,000 job losses just on voting to leave! The Treasury has egg on its face for getting its Brexit-related forecasts so wrong so far. It is still grumpy about Brexit & that's a pity." pic.twitter.com/JiFXNiay6E
— Leave.EU (@LeaveEUOfficial) October 28, 2018