Johnson’s plan is ‘understandable in current context’, Brexit-weary Brits may support him

Boris Johnson will enjoy “quite a bit of public support” if he proceeds with a plan to end parliament and schedule a Queen’s Speech for October 14 because people simply want Brexit to be over and done with, analysts told RT.

Opposition MPs accused Johnson of an “attempted coup” over the plan on Wednesday, saying that it would dramatically curtail the time they have to prevent a no-deal Brexit. Speaker of the House John Bercow called the move a “constitutional outrage,” while Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said he was “appalled” by the PM’s decision.

Brits just want it over with

Johnson’s ploy, however, is “understandable in the context” of Brexit negotiations having dragged on for so long already, journalist Neil Clark told RT. “The mood of the country is just to get [Brexit] done, it’s gone on too long — whether Remainer or Brexiter, something’s got to happen,” Clark said.

The timing of Johnson’s decision was interesting, Clark added, coming a day after Labour and other opposition MPs came together to agree a program to attempt to stop a no-deal Brexit.

“I think that’s probably what triggered Johnson this morning,” he said.

Opposition MPs don’t want a deal, they want no Brexit

While many MPs are “rightly” warning that a no-deal Brexit in October could be bad for Britain, the issue is that “most of them don’t want Brexit at all” and parliament has been very “pro-Remain or pro-very-very soft Brexit.”

Despite their complaints, however, the opposition will still have “ample time” to debate Johnson's Brexit plans and introduce legislation aimed at stopping a no-deal exit, journalist and historian Adel Darwish told RT, noting that there will be seven sitting days between the Queen’s Speech and October 31. Johnson and the opposition are simply “using the tools in their legal and constitutional toolkit.”

In Darwish’s view, while opposition MPs claim to want to avoid no-deal, “what they actually want is to stop Brexit altogether.”

Parliament v direct democracy

Those views were echoed by Alan Sked, Professor Emeritus of International History at the London School of Economics, who founded the UK Independence Party. The opposition, Sked said, is “trying to bring down the government and overthrow the result of the 2016 referendum and stop Brexit.” 

“It’s not as if [Johnson’s] government is preventing [the opposition] from passing a vote of no confidence, so I don’t see why it’s a constitutional outrage," Sked said, though he added that Johnson had “outmaneuvered” the opposition for now. 

Sked noted that the current parliament is dominated by pro-remain MPs — and even they voted against the deal agreed with Brussels by former PM Theresa May.

“If parliament has voted three times against the only deal the EU will accept, it’s difficult to blame [Johnson], because the EU will not renegotiate and parliament has turned down the only deal it will accept,” he said.

Clark said the crux of the issue is a clash between direct democracy (referenda) or indirect democracy (parliament).

“Where you stand depends on whether you believe direct democracy is more valid or overrides indirect democracy,” he said. “If you believe referenda are the purest form of democracy, then we must leave the EU and parliament must enact that.”

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!