web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit)

Boris Johnson Has a Brexit Deal. Now He Needs Parliament’s Support.

Westlake Legal Group 17brexit1-sub-facebookJumbo Boris Johnson Has a Brexit Deal. Now He Needs Parliament’s Support. Politics and Government Northern Ireland Johnson, Boris Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain European Union Democratic Unionist Party (Northern Ireland) Brussels (Belgium)

BRUSSELS — Britain and the European Union on Thursday agreed on the draft text of a Brexit deal, setting up a fateful showdown in the British Parliament on Saturday, where it was not clear that Prime Minister Boris Johnson could marshal the votes to nail down his plan after three anguished and politically damaging years of debate.

But Mr. Johnson may already be thinking beyond whether Parliament approves his plan. Even if he loses, analysts say, he may call for a general election, hoping voters will rally behind him and deliver him a strong majority.

However it comes out, it all suggests a recipe for continued political tumult over at least the next weeks and months.

The statement argued that it would hurt Northern Ireland’s economy and undermine the integrity of the Union. The 1998 agreement, also known as the Good Friday Agreement, halted deadly sectarian violence and established a truce with the British government.

The opposition Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, urged members of Parliament to reject the deal, saying, “It seems the prime minister has negotiated an even worse deal than Theresa May’s.”

But Prime Minister Leo Varadkar of Ireland backed the deal, writing on Twitter that the draft agreement was “good” for Ireland and Northern Ireland. “No hard border. All-island and East-West economy can continue thrive. Protects Single Market & our place in it,” he added.

Mr. Johnson was ebullient on Thursday in a news conference alongside Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission president. “This deal represents a very good deal both for the E.U. and for the U.K.,” he said. “And it’s a reasonable fair outcome.”

For his part, Mr. Juncker said: “I’m happy about the deal, but I’m sad about Brexit.”

Mr. Johnson appears to be betting that he can cobble together enough votes from lawmakers who are fed up with the endless wrangling and may view his deal, however imperfect, as better than any alternative.

It is a breathtaking gamble by a buccaneering leader who has already upended Britain’s political establishment in his quest to take Britain out of the European Union — shutting down Parliament for several weeks, purging rebels in his Conservative Party and drawing a rare rebuke from Britain’s Supreme Court.

Mr. Johnson’s agreement also hinges on winning the approval of the leaders of the 27 other European Union members, who gathered in Brussels on Thursday for a two-day summit meeting. That seemed simpler, given the significant concessions that Britain made in days of frantic negotiations, mainly over how to treat Northern Ireland.

“We’ve got a great new deal that takes back control,” Mr. Johnson said earlier Thursday as he prepared to fly to Brussels. He assured European leaders that he would be able to win approval for it in Parliament.

Mr. Juncker praised the draft deal as a “fair and balanced agreement for the E.U. and the U.K.,” and expressed confidence that it would pass muster with the leaders.

Mr. Johnson may also be gambling that the European Union, anxious to wash its hands of Brexit, will refuse to give Britain another extension, confronting Parliament with the difficult choice of embracing this deal or crashing out of Europe on Oct. 31 with no deal at all — a scenario that experts have warned would lead to chaos at the border, economic hardship for many and civil unrest in Northern Ireland and possibly elsewhere.

Alternatively, if he is defeated in a Parliament vote expected on Saturday, Mr. Johnson is likely to renew his call for a general election, arguing that he did everything he could to leave by Oct. 31 and that should the voters back him.

There are other scenarios, including a second referendum on Britain’s European Union membership, which was gaining support this week, and a Conservative election flop that could topple Mr. Johnson and possibly hand control to Mr. Corbyn, the Labour leader.

But nobody really knows how things will pan out. “We have one step forward, in that we’re talking about something substantive,” said Sam Lowe, a senior research fellow at the Center for European Reform, a research group in London. “But we still really have no idea where this is all going to land.”

Under the terms of the agreement, Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, would leave the European Union’s single market and join a separate customs union with Britain. But it would remain closely aligned with a maze of European rules and regulations, which would allow seamless trading to continue with Ireland, a member of the European Union.

The deal that Mr. Johnson struck is not radically different from a proposal Europe first made to Britain in early 2018, although that deal would have kept Northern Ireland legally part of the European customs union. Mr. Johnson’s predecessor, Theresa May, rejected that proposal, saying that it threatened the territorial integrity of the United Kingdom and that “no U.K. prime minister could ever agree to it.”

At the time, Mrs. May was hemmed in by the Democratic Unionists, who propped up her Conservative-led minority government and exerted a strong influence over the hard-line, pro-Brexit faction of the Conservative Party. The party rejected any deal that distinguished Northern Ireland from the rest of the United Kingdom, which it saw as a first step toward Irish unification.

Mr. Johnson, an outspoken proponent of leaving the European Union, somewhat diluted that influence, having earned the trust of hard-liners in his party. Yet, in the process of building that trust, he vowed to leave Europe by Oct. 31, even without a deal. That set off a rebellion in his own party and a vote by Parliament to force him to ask for an extension if he did not produce a deal.

Facing that prospect, Mr. Johnson proved to be an energetic negotiator, willing to make compromises where necessary. Britain moved closer to Europe’s insistence that there be no hard Irish border, offering a flurry of proposals about how to allow near-frictionless trade between two jurisdictions.

But Mr. Johnson insisted that Northern Ireland remain legally part of a British customs union, which he viewed as critical to keeping the support of the D.U.P. As his envoys haggled over terms in Brussels, Mr. Johnson met with a parade of unionists and other skeptics.

Hopes for a deal surged early this week, in part because there was little public dissent from the Democratic Unionists. A hard-line Brexit group in the Conservative Party, the European Research Group, voiced cautious support for Mr. Johnson’s plan. But as the language in the draft text became public, the Democratic Unionists quickly broke with Mr. Johnson.

“As things stand, we could not support what is being suggested on customs and consent issues, and there is a lack of clarity on VAT,” the party’s leaders said on Thursday in a statement, referring to the value-added tax.

It followed that up with another, stronger statement, claiming the draft agreement “drives a coach and horses through the professed sanctity” of the Good Friday peace accord and would hurt the region’s and undermine the integrity of the United Kingdom.

With approval from the European Union reasonably sure, the attention was thus shifting to the British Parliament, which is expected to vote on the deal on Saturday.

Mr. Lowe said that Mr. Johnson faced a difficult, but not impossible, task in getting his plan through, and that he could even gain by losing. “I think he could lose, in which case this will all be about positioning himself for a general election,” Mr. Lowe said. of the prime minister.

Without the support of the Democratic Unionist Party, Mr. Johnson will struggle to secure Parliament’s approval. The last time Mrs. May put her proposal to lawmakers, she lost by 58 votes.

That was a different deal, and many of the hard-line Brexit supporters who rebelled prefer Mr. Johnson’s blueprint. They also trust Mr. Johnson more to steer the next phase of negotiations, focusing on a trade deal, and to secure much looser ties to the bloc.

Mr. Johnson will also try to persuade Labour lawmakers who represent areas that voted in 2016 to leave the European Union to defy their party and support his plan.

But he might still fall short without the D.U.P. Ominously for the prime minister, the leader of the hard-line European Research Group, Steve Baker, said on Thursday that he did not see how it could support the deal if Mr. Johnson failed to secure the backing of the Democratic Unionists.

Mr. Johnson’s situation would be strengthened if European Union leaders made it clear that they would not agree to a further delay if Parliament rejects this plan. That would effectively force lawmakers to choose among the new blueprint, a potentially disastrous rupture without a deal or a complete revocation of Brexit.

But that would be a big step for European leaders, who have so far been anxious to avoid giving any impression that they are pushing the British out of the bloc.

Matina Stevis-Gridneff contributed reporting from Brussels, and Anna Schaverien from London.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Brexit Live Updates: E.U. and U.K. Come to an Agreement

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_162846636_c8087e13-43fa-4607-aca6-709e177763a1-articleLarge Brexit Live Updates: E.U. and U.K. Come to an Agreement Politics and Government Northern Ireland Johnson, Boris International Trade and World Market Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain European Union Democratic Unionist Party (Northern Ireland) British Pound (Currency)
Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain, left, and the European Commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, at a news conference in the European Union’s headquarters in Brussels on Thursday.CreditFrancisco Seco/Associated Press

Britain and the European Union announced on Thursday that an agreement on the draft text of a Brexit deal had been reached, a last-minute breakthrough for Prime Minister Boris Johnson as he works to map out Britain’s departure from the bloc.

Writing on Twitter, Mr. Johnson called the agreement a “great new deal that takes back control,” and said that Parliament would vote on the deal on Saturday.

Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission’s president, confirmed that a deal had been reached and noted that a revised arrangement on Northern Ireland was part of the agreement.

Writing on Twitter, Ireland’s prime minister, Leo Varadkar, called the agreement a “unique solution” for Northern Ireland that respects its “unique history and geography.”

Ireland’s approval has been a key element in securing European agreement on any deal and ensuring that there will not be a hard border between the Republic of Ireland, which is a member of the European Union, and Northern Ireland which is a part of the United Kingdom.

During a joint news conference with Mr. Johnson in Brussels later in the day, Mr. Juncker said that after much hard work they had reached a “fair, balanced agreement” that “provided certainty where Brexit provide uncertainty.”

Mr. Johnson also had kind words for his European partners, saying that the agreement represented a very good deal for both Britain and the European Union. He did not address questions about how he would gather the needed support from fellow lawmakers at home to get the deal through Parliament.

Mr. Johnson said the agreement would result in “a real Brexit that achieves our objective,” and vowed that “the U.K. leaves whole and entire on Oct. 31.”

With a roomful of reporters eager to ask the two leaders questions, Mr. Juncker silenced them before offering a parting thought: “I am happy about the deal, but I am sad about Brexit.”

Mr. Johnson may have struck a deal with Brussels, but in doing so he appears to have turned his back on a group of 10 lawmakers from Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party, who said on Thursday that they did not support the agreement. The party has been a crucial ally in the British Parliament, helping the Conservatives to remain in government despite not holding a majority.

The question now is whether Mr. Johnson can persuade those lawmakers to support his deal before Saturday — or whether he can get it through a fractious Parliament without them.

Michel Barnier, the European Union’s chief Brexit negotiator, laid out what he saw as the most important elements of the deal in an address to the news media shortly after the announcement.

In the deal, Northern Ireland would remain aligned to a “limited set of E.U. rules, notably related to goods,” he said. As a result, all procedures on goods will take place within the United Kingdom, and not between Ireland and Northern Ireland. The British authorities would be in charge of carrying out the controls.

Mr. Barnier added that to “square the circle” on the question of customs duties, negotiators had decided that the British authorities would apply tariffs “on products coming from third countries, so long as those goods entering Northern Ireland are not at risk” of entering Europe’s single market.

Read the Draft Withdrawal Agreement

The European Commission released a copy of the draft withdrawal agreement shortly after the deal was announced.


/*target embedded interactive markup that we don’t create ourselves*/ section[data-id=”100000006773721″] .interactive-header, /*shared-ui inline*/ section[data-id=”100000006773721″] .interactive-caption, /*oak editor iframe*/ section[data-id=”100000006773721″] header/*no classes*/ /*vi iframe*/ { box-sizing: border-box; display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; width: calc(100% – 220px); } section[data-id=”100000006773721″] .interactive-body, /*shared-ui inline / oak editor iframe*/ section[data-id=”100000006773721″] div[class^=”EmbeddedInline-main”] /*vi iframe*/ { box-sizing: border-box; display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; width: auto; } /*portrait small mobile exceptions*/ @media screen and (max-width: 450px) { section[data-id=”100000006773721″] .interactive-header, /*shared-ui inline*/ section[data-id=”100000006773721″] .interactive-caption, /*oak editor iframe*/ section[data-id=”100000006773721″] header /*vi iframe*/ { width: 60%; padding-right: 10px; } section[data-id=”100000006773721″] .interactive-body /*shared-ui inline / oak editor iframe*/ { width: 38%; } }

Westlake Legal Group thumbnail Brexit Live Updates: E.U. and U.K. Come to an Agreement Politics and Government Northern Ireland Johnson, Boris International Trade and World Market Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain European Union Democratic Unionist Party (Northern Ireland) British Pound (Currency)

For goods traded into the European Union’s single market — including those traded across the border into Ireland, a member of the bloc — Mr. Barnier said that the British authorities would be responsible for imposing European Union tariffs.

Mr. Barnier also said that four years after the protocol begins, Northern Ireland’s legislature — which has been dissolved since January 2017 amid sectarian disagreements — would be able to decide by a simple majority whether to continue applying the rules.

The Northern-Ireland based Democratic Unionist Party presented a stumbling block to Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s deal for Britain’s withdrawal, announcing its opposition just hours before he was set to travel to Brussels for a European Union summit meeting.

In an early-morning statement on Thursday, the party said that it would continue to work with the government toward a “sensible deal,” but that it could not support the current proposal because of the tax arrangements involved.

“As things stand, we could not support what is being suggested on customs and consent issues and there is a lack of clarity on VAT,” a statement from the party said, referring to the value-added tax.

After the announcement of the deal, the D.U.P. said it still did not support the agreement — and said it “drives a coach and horses through the professed sanctity of the Belfast Agreement,” also known as the Good Friday Agreement, which in 1998 laid out the framework for peace in Northern Ireland.

The D.U.P. said the Brexit deal was not in Northern Ireland’s long-term interest, and that it would hurt Northern Ireland’s economy and undermine the integrity of the United Kingdom.

The Conservative Party has relied on the Democratic Unionists to remain in government since it lost its majority in a 2017 election, and their support for a Brexit deal is thought to be crucial for Mr. Johnson to get his deal through Parliament.

D.U.P. lawmakers have long sought a veto on post-Brexit trading rules, seeing that provision as the only way to ensure that the territory does not diverge from the rest of the United Kingdom — but Mr. Johnson’s deal does not provide one.

Opposition from the Northern Irish lawmakers could also spell trouble for Mr. Johnson in winning the support of staunch Brexit supporters who have said that they would support a deal only if the D.U.P. did as well. But some of those Brexit supporters hinted on Thursday that they would be willing to back a deal even without the D.U.P. onboard.

Britain’s opposition Labour Party slammed the proposed deal and said it wanted to put the agreement to a public vote, giving voters a chance to support either leaving the European Union on Mr. Johnson’s terms or abandoning Brexit altogether.

It was among the strongest endorsements yet from Labour of a second Brexit referendum, and a signal that the party would back remaining in the European Union in a public vote on Mr. Johnson’s deal.

Labour said it would attach an amendment to Mr. Johnson’s deal in Parliament that would allow the deal to pass only on the condition that it is backed by a majority of voters in a referendum.

Previous attempts in Parliament to make way for a second public vote on Brexit have failed, and it was not clear that pro-referendum lawmakers would have enough support this time either.

Labour’s leader, Jeremy Corbyn, called Mr. Johnson’s proposal a “sell-out deal” and said it was worse than the deal negotiated by former Prime Minister Theresa May. “The best way to get Brexit sorted is to give the people the final say in a public vote,” he said

First came the tweets: A deal with the European Union had been reached. Within minutes, the pound surged against the dollar — at one point trading at nearly $1.30.

But its value headed downward as word of the Democratic Unionist Party’s opposition to the agreement spread, and by the afternoon the pound’s value had fallen below where it started the day.

The New York Times has looked at why the pound’s value has been a barometer for Brexit talks over the past three years.





#g-gbp-chart-box .g-artboard { margin:0 auto; } #g-gbp-chart-box p { margin:0; } .g-aiAbs { position:absolute; } .g-aiImg { display:block; width:100% !important; } .g-aiSymbol { position: absolute; box-sizing: border-box; } .g-aiPointText p { white-space: nowrap; } #g-gbp-chart-1050 { position:relative; overflow:hidden; } #g-gbp-chart-1050 p { font-family:nyt-franklin,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-weight:300; font-size:14px; line-height:17px; filter:alpha(opacity=100); -ms-filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Alpha(Opacity=100); opacity:1; letter-spacing:0em; text-align:left; color:rgb(0,0,0); text-transform:none; padding-bottom:0; padding-top:0; mix-blend-mode:normal; font-style:normal; height:auto; position:static; } #g-gbp-chart-1050 .g-pstyle0 { font-weight:500; height:17px; text-align:right; color:rgb(51,51,51); top:1.1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-1050 .g-pstyle1 { font-weight:700; font-size:15px; line-height:18px; height:18px; color:rgb(255,153,0); top:1.2px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-1050 .g-pstyle2 { font-weight:700; font-size:15px; line-height:15px; height:15px; text-align:center; top:1.2px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-1050 .g-pstyle3 { font-weight:500; height:17px; color:rgb(51,51,51); top:1.1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-1050 .g-cstyle0 { font-weight:700; } #g-gbp-chart-600 { position:relative; overflow:hidden; } #g-gbp-chart-600 p { font-family:nyt-franklin,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-weight:300; font-size:12px; line-height:14px; filter:alpha(opacity=100); -ms-filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Alpha(Opacity=100); opacity:1; letter-spacing:0em; text-align:left; color:rgb(0,0,0); text-transform:none; padding-bottom:0; padding-top:0; mix-blend-mode:normal; font-style:normal; height:auto; position:static; } #g-gbp-chart-600 .g-pstyle0 { font-weight:500; font-size:14px; line-height:17px; height:17px; text-align:right; color:rgb(51,51,51); top:1.1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-600 .g-pstyle1 { font-weight:700; height:14px; color:rgb(255,153,0); top:1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-600 .g-pstyle2 { font-weight:700; font-size:15px; line-height:15px; height:15px; text-align:center; top:1.2px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-600 .g-pstyle3 { font-weight:500; font-size:14px; line-height:17px; height:17px; color:rgb(51,51,51); top:1.1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-600 .g-cstyle0 { font-weight:700; } #g-gbp-chart-375 { position:relative; overflow:hidden; } #g-gbp-chart-375 p { font-family:nyt-franklin,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-weight:300; font-size:13px; line-height:15px; filter:alpha(opacity=100); -ms-filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Alpha(Opacity=100); opacity:1; letter-spacing:0em; text-align:left; color:rgb(0,0,0); text-transform:none; padding-bottom:0; padding-top:0; mix-blend-mode:normal; font-style:normal; height:auto; position:static; } #g-gbp-chart-375 .g-pstyle0 { font-weight:500; height:15px; text-align:right; color:rgb(51,51,51); top:1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-375 .g-pstyle1 { font-weight:500; line-height:14px; height:14px; color:rgb(51,51,51); top:1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-375 .g-pstyle2 { font-weight:700; font-size:15px; line-height:18px; height:18px; top:1.2px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-375 .g-pstyle3 { font-weight:700; font-size:14px; line-height:16px; height:16px; color:rgb(255,153,0); top:1.1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-375 .g-cstyle0 { font-weight:700; } #g-gbp-chart-300 { position:relative; overflow:hidden; } #g-gbp-chart-300 p { font-family:nyt-franklin,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-weight:300; font-size:13px; line-height:15px; filter:alpha(opacity=100); -ms-filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Alpha(Opacity=100); opacity:1; letter-spacing:0em; text-align:left; color:rgb(0,0,0); text-transform:none; padding-bottom:0; padding-top:0; mix-blend-mode:normal; font-style:normal; height:auto; position:static; } #g-gbp-chart-300 .g-pstyle0 { font-weight:500; font-size:12px; height:15px; text-align:right; color:rgb(51,51,51); top:1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-300 .g-pstyle1 { font-weight:500; font-size:12px; line-height:14px; height:14px; color:rgb(51,51,51); top:1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-300 .g-pstyle2 { font-weight:700; font-size:15px; line-height:18px; height:18px; top:1.2px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-300 .g-pstyle3 { font-weight:700; font-size:14px; line-height:16px; height:16px; color:rgb(255,153,0); top:1.1px; position:relative; } #g-gbp-chart-300 .g-cstyle0 { font-weight:700; }

Westlake Legal Group gbp-chart-1050 Brexit Live Updates: E.U. and U.K. Come to an Agreement Politics and Government Northern Ireland Johnson, Boris International Trade and World Market Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain European Union Democratic Unionist Party (Northern Ireland) British Pound (Currency)

$1.48 Britain votes to leave the European Union by a narrow margin.

$1.40 E.U. and British negotiators agree on terms for a smooth transition.

$1.45

$1.29 Prime Minister Theresa May says Britain may cut important economic ties with the E.U.

$1.32 A series of resignations rattles Mrs. May’s cabinet.

$1.29 Mrs. May’s party loses loses its majority in Parliament.

1.40

$1.26 Mrs. May postpones the first vote on Brexit deal.

$1.27 Mrs. May says she will step down, reviving fears of a no-deal Brexit.

$1.24 Departure process officially begins, starting a two-year deadline.

1.35

1.30

1.25

$1.25

The British pound in dollars

1.20

Jul ’16

Oct ’16

Jan ’17

Apr ’17

Jul ’17

Oct ’17

Jan ’18

Apr ’18

Jul ’18

Oct ’18

Jan ’19

Apr ’19

Jul ’19

Westlake Legal Group gbp-chart-600 Brexit Live Updates: E.U. and U.K. Come to an Agreement Politics and Government Northern Ireland Johnson, Boris International Trade and World Market Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain European Union Democratic Unionist Party (Northern Ireland) British Pound (Currency)

$1.48 Britain votes to leave the European Union by a narrow margin.

$1.40 E.U. and British negotiators agree on terms for a smooth transiton.

$1.29 Prime Minister Theresa May says Britain may cut important economic ties with the E.U.

$1.32 A series of resignations rattles Mrs. May’s cabinet.

$1.45

$1.26 Mrs. May postpones the first vote on Brexit deal.

1.40

$1.29 Mrs. May’s party loses loses its majority in Parliament.

$1.27 Mrs. May says she will step down, reviving fears of a no-deal Brexit.

1.35

$1.24 Departure process officially begins, starting a two-year deadline.

1.30

1.25

$1.25

The British pound in dollars

1.20

Jul ’16

Jan ’17

Jul ’17

Jan ’18

Jul ’18

Jan ’19

Jul ’19

Westlake Legal Group gbp-chart-375 Brexit Live Updates: E.U. and U.K. Come to an Agreement Politics and Government Northern Ireland Johnson, Boris International Trade and World Market Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain European Union Democratic Unionist Party (Northern Ireland) British Pound (Currency)

1.25

1.40

$1.20

1.30

1.35

1.45

Jul ’16

$1.48 Britain votes to leave the European Union by a narrow margin.

Oct ’16

$1.29 Prime Minister Theresa May says Britain may cut important economic ties with the E.U.

Jan ’17

$1.24 Departure process officially begins, starting a two-year deadline.

Apr ’17

$1.29 Mrs. May’s party loses loses its majority in Parliament.

Jul ’17

Oct ’17

$1.40 E.U. and British negotiators agree on terms for smooth transition.

Jan ’18

The British pound

in dollars

Apr ’18

Jul ’18

$1.32 A series of resignations rattles Mrs. May’s cabinet.

Oct ’18

$1.26 Mrs. May postpones the first vote on Brexit deal.

Jan ’19

Apr ’19

$1.27 Mrs. May says she will step down, reviving fears of a no-deal Brexit.

Jul ’19

$1.25

Westlake Legal Group gbp-chart-300 Brexit Live Updates: E.U. and U.K. Come to an Agreement Politics and Government Northern Ireland Johnson, Boris International Trade and World Market Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain European Union Democratic Unionist Party (Northern Ireland) British Pound (Currency)

1.25

1.40

$1.20

1.30

1.35

1.45

Jul ’16

$1.48 Britain votes to leave the European Union by a narrow margin.

Oct ’16

$1.29 Prime Minister Theresa May says Britain may cut important economic ties with the E.U.

Jan ’17

$1.24 Departure process officially begins, starting a two-year deadline.

Apr ’17

$1.29 Mrs. May’s party loses loses its majority in Parliament.

Jul ’17

Oct ’17

$1.40 E.U. and British negotiators agree on terms for smooth transition.

Jan ’18

The British pound

in dollars

Apr ’18

Jul ’18

$1.32 A series of resignations rattles Mrs. May’s cabinet.

Oct ’18

$1.26 Mrs. May postpones the first vote on Brexit deal.

Jan ’19

Apr ’19

$1.27 Mrs. May says she will step down, reviving fears of a no-deal Brexit.

Jul ’19

$1.25


Source: Refinitiv

By The New York Times

Business groups reacted to the news of a draft deal with a mix of relief that it might prevent Britain from crashing out of the bloc without a plan, and caution over potential long-term consequences.

Many industries, including car manufacturers and aerospace companies, have warned that leaving the European Union without preserving smooth and favorable trade terms would damage their operations in Britain.

For small businesses owners, who have long voiced worries about supply shortages and the loss of markets in Europe, a deal that includes a transition period would at least delay the risk of such dangers.

“Many small businesses will be relieved that there now appears to be a credible pathway toward securing a deal that avoids a chaotic no-deal on 31 October,” Mike Cherry, the national chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses, said in a statement on Thursday.

At the same time, business groups warned against rushing into a poorly thought-through deal that could have damage the economy in the long term.

“If a passable deal is in touching distance, then politicians on all sides should be pragmatic about giving us the time to get there,” Jonathan Geldart, the director general of the Institute of Directors, a British business group, said in a statement.

Reporting was contributed by Mark Landler, Stephen Castle, Ben Mueller, Marc Santora, Matina Stevis-Gridneff, Megan Specia, Ceylan Yeginsu, Stanley Reed and Anna Schaverien.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

What Is the D.U.P., and How Might It Scupper Brexit?

Westlake Legal Group 17dup3-facebookJumbo What Is the D.U.P., and How Might It Scupper Brexit? Sinn Fein Politics and Government Northern Ireland Johnson, Boris ireland Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Foster, Arlene (1970- ) Democratic Unionist Party (Northern Ireland) Conservative Party (Great Britain)

LONDON — After years of debate, false starts and just plain confusion, the news that Britain had reached a deal to leave the European Union seemed like a moment for a weary nation to exhale.

But nearly as soon as Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced news of the deal, there was a problem.

The Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland, a group of lawmakers whose support has long been viewed as essential to win passage of any Brexit deal, said it could not back the draft agreement.

The opposition of the Northern Irish lawmakers raised questions about whether Mr. Johnson thought he had enough votes without them to push the plan through Parliament in a special session scheduled for Saturday.

For those not steeped in every twist and turn of the seemingly endless Brexit drama, it raised a more basic question: How could a party that holds only 10 seats out of 650 in the British Parliament wield such influence over Brexit?

The Democratic Unionist Party was founded in 1971 as a radical, hard-line Protestant political faction during the Troubles, the 30-year sectarian conflict that began in 1968.

The conflict was mainly fought between Catholics who wanted a republic that encompassed all of Ireland and Protestants determined to keep Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom.

At least 3,532 people, most of them civilians, lost their lives to paramilitary killings and terrorist bombings, with the violence at times spilling over into England and the Republic of Ireland.

The D.U.P.’s founder, the Rev. Ian Paisley, was an evangelical preacher whose virulently sectarian speeches, and sometimes violent demonstrations, helped stoke interfaith tensions in the early years of the Troubles.

Years later, the party was a main beneficiary of the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, which ended the Troubles. The deal stipulated that the largest Protestant and Catholic parties should share power in Northern Ireland. But it soon became apparent that this was pushing voters from both sides to the political extremes.

By 2017, voters had largely abandoned moderate parties and the Democratic Unionists took the last Westminster seats held by the rival Ulster Unionists. At the same time, Sinn Fein, the political wing of the disbanded Irish Republican Army, eclipsed more moderate nationalist parties.

Sinn Fein, which does not consider itself British and has formally renounced any involvement in Westminster politics, refuses to vote in the House of Commons, so has not played a role in the Brexit fight.

When Boris Johnson’s predecessor as prime minister, Theresa May, was riding high in the opinion polls in 2017, she decided to call an election to try to cement a strong majority to get her Brexit plan through Parliament. As it happened, she fared poorly, actually lost ground and became dependent on the D.U.P.’s 10 votes to stay in power.

That gave the unionist party an outsize role in the Brexit negotiations, which it used to enforce its bedrock position rejecting any plan that would divide Northern Ireland from the rest of Britain.

“The red line is blood red,” Arlene Foster, the party leader, said last fall as discussion swirled about a possible compromise.

“There cannot be a border down the Irish Sea, a differential between Northern Ireland and the rest of the U.K.,” she told the BBC at the time.

So it was not a surprise that the party put out a statement Thursday morning warning that “as things stand, we could not support what is being suggested on customs and consent issues.”

In addition to providing the Conservative government with critical votes in Parliament, the D.U.P. also acts as a guidepost for many hard-line supporters of Brexit, who have said that they will never vote for a deal that does not also have the Northern Irish party’s support.

In the statement early Thursday, before a deal had been reached, the D.U.P. seemed to leave a door open for concessions, saying it would continue to work with the government to find a solution.

But as the day wore on, they denounced the deal in even more strident terms.

“We have been consistent that we will only ever consider supporting arrangements that are in Northern Ireland’s long-term economic and constitutional interests and protect the integrity of the union,” the party said, referring to Northern Ireland’s ties to rest of the United Kingdom.

“These proposals are not, in our view, beneficial to the economic well-being of Northern Ireland and they undermine the integrity of the union,” the party added.

It was far from clear how Mr. Johnson would convince them to change their minds.

He has until Saturday.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

A Scotch Maker’s Challenge: First Brexit. Now Tariffs.

Westlake Legal Group 17whiskytariffs-1-facebookJumbo A Scotch Maker’s Challenge: First Brexit. Now Tariffs. World Trade Organization Trump, Donald J Scotch (Whiskey) Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) GLASGOW, Scotland European Union Europe Customs (Tariff) Boeing Company

ISLAY, Scotland — Britain’s departure from the European Union has turned distiller Anthony Wills’s workdays into a marathon of logistics.

For months, he communicated with importers to ensure that his single malt, whisky distilled from barley harvested from his farm on the windswept isle of Islay, could be shipped to the Continent and the United States in time for the holidays.

Then, with the Oct. 31 deadline for Brexit fast approaching, the Trump administration imposed 25 percent tariffs on a menu of goods including French wine, Italian cheese and — in a move that could drive a Scotsman to drink — single malt whisky.

“It’s a blow,” said Mr. Wills, the owner of Kilchoman Distillery, who has built a formidable boutique business in the western Scotland countryside. “It doesn’t matter how you try and alleviate the issue, it’s still a big blow.”

The United States was allowed to apply the tariffs, expected to go into force on Friday, after a World Trade Organization ruling settled a yearslong dispute over subsidies for the aviation company Airbus. They create a double whammy for Scotland.

Whisky underpins the economy of Islay (pronounced EYE-la) and much of Scotland. Kilchoman and eight rival Scotch whisky distilleries have flourished here in the past decade. Tourists from the United States, Europe and Japan come to wonder at Islay’s coastal beauty, take pictures of hillsides filled with sheep and hairy Highland cattle that look as if they’ve had vigorous blow dries, and soak up the pricey local spirits.

Annual exports of Scotch whisky are worth 4.7 billion pounds, or about $5.9 billion, accounting for 70 percent of Scotland’s food and drink exports and 21 percent of Britain’s.

More than £1 billion worth of the strong stuff goes to the United States. Almost £1.4 billion is sold in the European Union.

As enthusiasm for single malt has grown, whisky tourism has rocketed. About two million visitors toured this year, double the number about a decade ago, according to the Scotch Whisky Association, a trade group. Most hail from Germany and the United States, and distillers like Mr. Wills have readily wrung profit from their thirst. Connoisseurs can be seen sipping whisky on tours of Kilchoman, the huge gleaming copper stills in action nearby.

And there is some romance to finding the right tipple. Tourists drive past peat bogs and deep blue lochs on their way to the distilleries. Water from the lochs is rendered into a fine fiery spirit. The peat and salty air flavor what they drink. Even a deep breath near a distillery offers a back-of-the-throat alcoholic tinge.

Mr. Wills has spent nearly half his career distilling this experience into something that newcomers can quaff. His single malt has become a popular export, and he can’t believe the predicament his distillery faces. He frets aloud about the cost of absorbing the 25 percent tariffs. He exports 80 percent of all that he makes, and sells about 40,000 bottles a year in the United States. Sales in America have helped spur growth for the past nine years.

Brexit has been a sort of self-imposed pain in the United Kingdom, he said. The Trump tariffs add salt to the wound. “We’re a growing business, and you need all the support you can get,” he added in exasperation.

Karen Betts, the chief executive of the Scotch Whisky Association, said the Trump administration’s decision to apply tariffs only to single malts was likely to hit smaller producers harder.

“The combination of tariffs in our most valuable market and mitigating the potential impact of Brexit is tough,” she said.

Distillers like Mr. Wills cannot lure their American customers to alternative, blended whiskies because they do not produce them, and single malt has been marketed as distinctive, focused on provenance.

Liam Hughes, chief executive of a small distiller in Glasgow, said his company had just sealed a deal to sell whisky to the United States when the tariffs were announced.

“We were all celebrating, and we wake up the next morning and find a 25 percent tariff overnight has been injected into the equation,” Mr. Hughes said in a telephone interview before flying to Japan to introduce Glasgow Distillery products there.

His distillery spent more than £100,000 and prepared for 18 months to begin exporting to the United States. The company installed two new stills to double production to 1.2 million bottles a year. He hired six more people. The staff has been rushing to prepare molds and design new labels for the larger bottles required in the United States.

Mr. Hughes had been planning to release a special whisky with a barrel maker in Kentucky. “Now the cost of that release will increase by 25 percent, which could be prohibitive,” he said.

He likened the last few days in Scotland to being a small boat in stormy seas “being buffeted left, right and center.” “It obviously makes us extremely nervous,” Mr. Hughes said, being “caught up in a trade dispute that has nothing to do with us.”

Even consumers — or least a few happy tourists taking a dram this week on Islay — found the tariffs a rebuke to global ambitions and business.

“Some of our most important allies in the world” have been “betrayed by this administration because they can’t see the value in free trade and fair trade,” said Jeremy Henderson, 34, from Portland, Ore.

“I would drink Scotch sort of in defiance of that.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

U.K. and E.U. Agree on Brexit Draft Deal, but Hurdles Remain

Westlake Legal Group 17brexit-sub-facebookJumbo U.K. and E.U. Agree on Brexit Draft Deal, but Hurdles Remain Politics and Government Northern Ireland Johnson, Boris Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain European Union Democratic Unionist Party (Northern Ireland) Brussels (Belgium)

BRUSSELS — Britain and the European Union agreed on the draft text of a Brexit deal on Thursday, an 11th-hour breakthrough in Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s effort to settle his country’s anguished, yearslong debate over Brexit and pave the way for its departure from the bloc.

The deal, details of which were published shortly after the announcement, must still clear several hurdles, including approval from Europe’s leaders and, most crucially, passage in the British Parliament. Mr. Johnson’s predecessor, Theresa May, had also struck a deal with Brussels but suffered three thunderous defeats in Parliament.

Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party, seen as vital to the passage of the agreement in Parliament, said it did not support the agreement. And the opposition Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, called on members of Parliament to reject it, saying, “It seems the prime minister has negotiated an even worse deal than Theresa May’s.”

Mr. Johnson announced the agreement on Twitter, saying that the parties had reached a “great new deal that takes back control” and that Parliament would now be clear to vote on the agreement on Saturday.

Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission’s president, confirmed that a deal had been struck and noted that a revised arrangement on Northern Ireland had been reached.

He wrote on Twitter: “Where there is a will, there is a #deal — we have one! It’s a fair and balanced agreement for the EU and the UK.”

Britain’s frantic efforts to negotiate a Brexit agreement with the European Union had appeared to hit a last-minute snag after the D.U.P. said in a statement on Thursday morning that it could not support the deal “as things stand.

The statement, hours before Mr. Johnson was to present the deal to European leaders at a summit meeting in Brussels, suggested that domestic politics once again threatened to torpedo the complex negotiations.

It was unclear whether the deal had been altered before the agreement with European leaders was reached. It was also unclear whether the Northern Irish party simply wanted to make a show of holding out for its position before ultimately acquiescing — or whether Mr. Johnson faced a serious rebellion from the skeptics in his ranks.

Mr. Johnson may have an advantage over his predecessor in securing parliamentary approval for the deal, because he has assiduously cultivated the most skeptical elements of his party.

For days, Mr. Johnson had worked frantically to bridge a gap over the thorny question of how to treat Northern Ireland in a post-Brexit Europe — a fiendishly complex issue that helped torpedo Mrs. May’s agreement and could still fracture Mr. Johnson’s Conservative-led coalition in Parliament.

People briefed on the talks said Mr. Johnson had given significant ground on the structure of a customs unions that would allow Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, to continue to trade seamlessly with Ireland and other members of the European Union.

It was a dramatic culmination to down-to-the-wire talks that began on Tuesday morning, with some European officials predicting that the two sides would not be able to close the gap on customs issues in time to finalize a draft deal before the critical summit meeting of European leaders on Thursday and Friday.

The value of the British pound soared on the news of a deal to a five-month high, trading at $1.29 to the dollar. The rise reversed a slump earlier in the day, when the Democratic Unionist Party signaled that it would not back Mr. Johnson’s draft deal.

The Democratic Unionists, who have proved to be a pivotal blocking force in previous attempts to negotiate a Brexit agreement, said they were troubled by elements of the deal on how to handle Northern Ireland in a post-Brexit world.

“As things stand, we could not support what is being suggested on a customs and consent issues, and there is a lack of clarity on VAT,” the party said in a statement issued earlier on Thursday, referring to the value-added tax.

The party said it would continue working with the government on an acceptable agreement.

Mr. Johnson has consulted closely the Democratic Unionists and other skeptical elements of his Conservative Party-led coalition as a deal has taken shape. On Wednesday, optimism had grown amid signs in Brussels that the deadlock over Britain’s planned departure from the bloc could be on the verge of breaking.

Brussels has pushed Mr. Johnson so far that it “makes sense they are unhappy,” Mujtaba Rahman, an analyst with the Eurasia Group, a political risk consultancy, said of the Democratic Unionists. But he said it was unclear how serious the setback was, because “the D.U.P. does have to be seen fighting.”

The intervention from the Democratic Unionists underscored the problems that Mr. Johnson faces in trying to get any deal through Parliament, where he does not have a majority. Without the support of the D.U.P., Mr. Johnson has little hope of getting any agreement ratified by Parliament.

It is also a reminder that he faces many of the problems confronted by Mrs. May. In December 2017, the Democratic Unionists derailed her efforts to reach a deal to allow her to proceed to another phase in the Brexit negotiations.

That happened while she was holding a working lunch with Mr. Juncker. She was forced to pause discussions with the European Commission president, and keep diplomats waiting, to take a call from Arlene Foster, the Democratic Unionist Party’s leader.

Mrs. May then returned with a revised plan several days later, at which point Ms. Foster said that the new version ensured that there would be no border between Britain and Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom.

Essentially, Mr. Johnson’s proposed agreement would leave Northern Ireland aligned with European Union laws and regulations on most trade issues, even as it moved out of the European single market and into a customs union with Britain.

Under the proposed terms, there would be customs checks on goods flowing from Britain to Northern Ireland to ensure that they meet the rules if those goods were ultimately destined for the European Union.

There would be a complex series of rules on tariffs and value-added tax payments to compensate for differences in tariff rates between the European and British customs unions, though negotiators had struggled on Tuesday to resolve the issue of how to rebate value-added tax payments.

The arrangement would also be subject to consent by the Northern Ireland Assembly, but in a way that would prevent the Democratic Unionists, who have opposed previous such proposals, from simply vetoing it at the first possible opportunity.

The Democratic Unionists are crucial to Mr. Johnson’s effort to win a majority for the deal in Parliament. Their opposition to similar previous versions of a Brexit agreement forced Mrs. May to overhaul that agreement to place all of Britain in the European customs union for a period of time.

Mrs. May’s deal was, nevertheless, soundly defeated in Parliament three times.

Mr. Johnson was seen as having a better chance of cobbling together a majority, in part because he was a vocal supporter of Brexit before the 2016 referendum and thus has greater credibility with euroskeptic elements of the Conservative coalition.

The Democratic Unionist Party campaigned for Brexit in the 2016 referendum campaign, and Mr. Johnson has presented his plan as the last chance to deliver on that mandate from voters. In Northern Ireland as a whole, however, 56 percent of voters in the referendum favored remaining in the European Union.

Yet, for the party, which is strongly committed to maintaining Northern Ireland’s status as a part of the United Kingdom, the issues being negotiated by Mr. Johnson are existential. That is because if they bind Northern Ireland much more closely to Ireland, its southern neighbor, some fear that it would inevitably lead to a united Ireland.

If the Democratic Unionists have collectively decided that the proposals are unacceptable, they will have to change to secure support.

Mr. Johnson has vowed to withdraw Britain from the European Union, with or without a deal, by Oct. 31, and his negotiators have labored to seal an agreement by this week so that he is not forced to ask Brussels for an extension, as would be required under a measure that Parliament passed last month.

Anna Schaverien contributed reporting from London.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Who Succeeds Mark Carney? Brexit Brings Uncertainty to the Bank of England

The British government is hiring.

Requirements: A candidate who can keep markets calm, put up with criticism from politicians and deftly respond to an unprecedented economic event as Britain tears itself away from the European Union, while the rest of the world economy stutters.

Send applications to: Unknown.

The person who succeeds Mark Carney as leader of the Bank of England will have to brace for a challenge. When Britain voted to leave the European Union, Mr. Carney was quick to reassure the public that the central bank would support the economy as the country worked to sever the relationship. Then came three tortuous years of negotiations between London and Brussels over the terms of departure.

Mr. Carney, who was due to leave the job in 2018, agreed twice to extend his term as the Brexit process ground on, working toward monetary and financial stability as the rupture with Europe threatened the very economy he was aiming to keep steady.

But now, as Mr. Carney’s Jan. 31 departure approaches, the appointment of the bank’s next governor is entangled in the most political of issues: Who will be running the British government in a few months and managing Brexit?

Under former Prime Minister Theresa May, Britain’s government started the search for a successor earlier this year. But there was no decision before Mrs. May lost her way in the Brexit battle and was succeeded by the current prime minister, Boris Johnson.

The Treasury put a call out for applicants in April and maintains that it expects to make an appointment in the fall. That choice would require the prime minister’s blessing and then a review by a parliamentary committee. But Parliament continues to be torn by Brexit, leaving little opportunity for any significant committee work before the departure date of Oct. 31.

Mr. Johnson’s tactics to push on with Brexit — even expelling members of his own party who disagreed in the last few weeks — has roiled all the political parties, with some members of Parliament calling for a new election. This has added more uncertainty to the selection of the bank chief and raised the question of whether the current government will even be in charge.

The parliamentary committee responsible for scrutinizing the appointment wrote to the chancellor of the Exchequer on Sept. 18 seeking confirmation of whether the appointment would be going ahead as planned. No response has been posted on the committee’s website.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_160507425_b2a721b6-99a1-441b-8f6f-77dcba8e9847-articleLarge Who Succeeds Mark Carney? Brexit Brings Uncertainty to the Bank of England King, Mervyn A Johnson, Boris Inflation (Economics) Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Carney, Mark J British Pound (Currency) Blanchflower, David G Bank of England

A rally earlier this month in London by people who want Britain to remain in the European Union. CreditAndrew Testa for The New York Times

“It’s part of a political mess that the U.K.’s managed to get itself into,” said Charles Goodhart, a professor at the London School of Economics, who has sat on the bank’s monetary policy committee. This mess, Professor Goodhart added, had made the appointment “much more complicated than it normally is.”

Whoever takes on the role will be tasked with targeting inflation, regulating banks and responding to whatever fallout Brexit may bring.

“We’re asking our governor to be an expert in monetary policy and politics and communications, but also financial regulation and managing financial risk,” said Ed Balls, a former member of Parliament who was chief economic adviser to the Treasury in the late 1990s when the government made the bank independent and gave it control over monetary policy. “It takes an almost superhuman person to be able to play all these different roles.”

The next governor will have little, if any, time to warm up to the job. Mr. Carney has insisted he is leaving on Jan. 31.

During his tenure, Mr. Carney, who had previously run Canada’s central bank, has been a steadfast counterpoint to the politicians proclaiming the upsides to Brexit.

Mr. Carney told a parliamentary committee in early September that the bank expected the economy to shrink 5.5 percent in the worst-case scenario for Brexit. Last November, the bank estimated a more severe contraction of 8 percent, but the extension of the Brexit deadline ameliorated that.

At the same time, his warnings about a disorderly Brexit have also attracted accusations of scaremongering. Mr. Carney’s predecessor, Mervyn King, who declined to comment for this article, has said the bank was too dire in its predictions.

“Before the referendum, official economic projections intended to scare the country into voting Remain didn’t succeed,” Mr. King wrote in a Bloomberg opinion column last year. “It saddens me to see the Bank of England unnecessarily drawn into this project.”

Mr. Carney has defended the forecasts, maintaining that there are “lots of things to worry about in the event of a no-deal Brexit,” in which the country leaves the union without any agreement over the terms of its separation or its relationship with the European Union.

But Brexit-related criticism will make the job less attractive, said David Blanchflower, a professor of economics at Dartmouth College who has served on the bank’s monetary policy committee. “Who would take it and take all that flak that’s inevitably coming? Think of all the flak headed at Jay Powell.”

Mr. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair who was nominated by President Trump, has quickly become a target of Mr. Trump’s ire, most recently, for not cutting interest rates enough.

The next Bank of England governor may also face pressure from the government to help shore up the economy post-Brexit. “There will be a lot of pressure, political demands made,” said Adam S. Posen, the president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics and a former member of the monetary policy committee at the bank.

Whoever succeeds Mr. Carney will face an economy where investment has sunk, held back by the uncertainty surrounding Brexit, and growth that is still positive, but has weakened.

The Bank of England’s inflation target is 2 percent and Britain is at 1.7 percent. Inflation could soar if the pound, which has tumbled against the dollar amid Brexit uncertainty, hurtles lower after a no-deal departure. At the same time, the economy could take a hit from the shock of Brexit.

“That is the rock and a hard place” for a central banker, said Richard Portes, a professor at London Business School. “It’s not a pretty picture to any reasonable economist.”

The next governor will also be limited in his or her ability to respond to conniptions in the economy when global growth is slowing.

“There’s not going to be any good news,” said Mr. Posen at the Peterson Institute. “All the major central banks, all the major western economies are reaching a point where the next recession is going to be more than monetary policy alone can offset.”

The Bank of England’s benchmark interest rate is already low. It moved from 0.5 percent before the Brexit referendum in 2016 to 0.25 percent afterward. It has since risen to 0.75 percent. The Bank of England declined to comment, but Mr. Carney in recent weeks has pointed out the limits to what central banks can do.

“In the end, monetary policy can only help smooth the adjustment to the major real shock that an abrupt no-deal Brexit would entail,” Mr. Carney said in a speech at a meeting of central bankers at the end of August.

Against this backdrop, whoever takes on the job would have to be a great communicator, said Zsolt Darvas, a researcher at Bruegel, a think tank.

“It’s important how clearly the message goes through, how financial markets understand communications from the central bank,” Mr. Darvas said. “In an uncertain financial environment, it’s more important than in an ordinary economic downturn.”

The daunting prospect of this political caldron has already put some candidates off, according to Mr. Portes, who counts Mr. Carney as a friend. “Some people I know did not apply,” Mr. Portes said. “They thought, ‘Jesus, what do we want to get into that for?’ ”

Indeed, Mr. Carney, often described as a steely personality, told Sky News in April that the job had proved “stressful.”

Whoever takes on the challenge would have to be “deeply committed to the U.K’s well-being” or “have an unbelievable desire for a challenge,” Mr. Posen said. “This is not as attractive a job as when they offered it to Carney six or seven years ago. Anybody who’s already been governor of a central bank probably doesn’t want the headache.”

Brexit and the Bank of England
Chance of No-Deal Brexit Hampers Bank of England’s Powers of Prediction

Aug. 1, 2019

Westlake Legal Group merlin_157420638_4999c41a-48b0-4ec4-b251-5a5ba52e8be0-threeByTwoSmallAt2X Who Succeeds Mark Carney? Brexit Brings Uncertainty to the Bank of England King, Mervyn A Johnson, Boris Inflation (Economics) Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Carney, Mark J British Pound (Currency) Blanchflower, David G Bank of England
Mark Carney, Bank of England Governor, Will Stay in Charge Until 2020

Sept. 11, 2018

Westlake Legal Group merlin_143586117_a3531f2a-ff8c-4c9d-b81a-9bc10ddb98fd-threeByTwoSmallAt2X Who Succeeds Mark Carney? Brexit Brings Uncertainty to the Bank of England King, Mervyn A Johnson, Boris Inflation (Economics) Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Carney, Mark J British Pound (Currency) Blanchflower, David G Bank of England
In Raising Interest Rates, Bank of England Issues ‘Brexit’ Warning

Nov. 2, 2017

Westlake Legal Group 03UK-ECON-3-videoLarge Who Succeeds Mark Carney? Brexit Brings Uncertainty to the Bank of England King, Mervyn A Johnson, Boris Inflation (Economics) Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Carney, Mark J British Pound (Currency) Blanchflower, David G Bank of England
Brexit Highlights From a Momentous Day: Parliament Rejects New Election

Sept. 9, 2019

Westlake Legal Group 09brexit-briefing1-promo-threeByTwoSmallAt2X-v5 Who Succeeds Mark Carney? Brexit Brings Uncertainty to the Bank of England King, Mervyn A Johnson, Boris Inflation (Economics) Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Carney, Mark J British Pound (Currency) Blanchflower, David G Bank of England

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Thomas Cook’s Failure Might Roil Its Founder in His Grave

The demise of Thomas Cook, Britain’s most venerated travel agency, is shaping up as one of the country’s greatest corporate fiascos.

When the agency went out of business on Monday, it left some 150,000 vacationers stranded on foreign soil. It put about 21,000 jobs at risk. It prompted calls for an investigation of its management and clawback of executive pay.

So what would Thomas Cook, the man, think of what has became of Thomas Cook, the company?

“He would be shocked and appalled,” said Piers Brendon, author of “Thomas Cook: 150 Years of Popular Tourism.” “Greed and incompetence have wrecked a fine company which has a name that resonated for nearly 200 years.”

Not surprisingly, the company has different theories for its collapse. In May, it reported a gargantuan loss of 1.5 billion pounds, about $1.9 billion, for the first half of the year. The heat wave of 2018 had “reduced customer demand for winter sun.” More important, its chief executive, Peter Fankhauser, cited uncertainties surrounding Brexit.

“There is now little doubt that the Brexit process,” Mr. Fankhauser wrote in the report, “has led many U.K. customers to delay their holiday plans for this summer.”

Some observers are, in fact, calling Thomas Cook the first major Brexit casualty. The contemporaneous decline in the pound, widely considered a Brexit side effect, has also made holidays more financially daunting.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_161344764_fabd3f21-ce93-4011-be38-fa256ef5a86d-articleLarge Thomas Cook’s Failure Might Roil Its Founder in His Grave Travel and Vacations Travel Agencies and Agents Thomas Cook Group PLC Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Fankhauser, Peter E-Commerce Cook, Thomas (1808-92) Brendon, Piers Bankruptcies

Thomas Cook check-in desks at Gatwick Airport in Sussex, England, on Monday.CreditVickie Flores/EPA, via Shutterstock

But others maintain that the company’s fate was sealed long before the referendum was even put up for a vote. For years, Thomas Cook played a somewhat frantic and fantastically expensive game of catch-up as it tried to pivot into the digital age. In the end, Thomas Cook was groaning under $2.1 billion of debt, according to the company, most of it accumulated in pricey, ill-timed investments made years ago.

The most problematic was a 2007 merger with MyTravel, a major British competitor. The idea was to create a juggernaut, but combining the two companies proved a hugely expensive misstep. By 2010, debt at the newly christened Thomas Cook Group had more than doubled, to the equivalent of $1 billion. As recently as this year, the deal’s aftershocks were still being felt. Most of that £1.5 billion loss announced in May was attributed by the company to the MyTravel merger.

In 2010, Thomas Cook pulled off another deal, this time with the Co-operative Travel, which operated 400 stores located in areas of prime shopping real estate, or what is known in Britain as high streets. Added to Thomas Cook’s 800 shops, the company became the king of brick-and-mortar travel retail just as much of the clientele was headed online.

“The company had a large number of high street locations, and that’s historically where people would book holidays,” said Julie Palmer, a regional managing partner at Begbies Traynor, a corporate restructuring firm. “They’d go in, have a chat, look over some brochures for a couple hours to get some advice. Then they’d come back the next day and book their trip through a travel agent. I can’t remember the last time I booked a holiday like that.”

A cash crunch was underway by 2011, when Thomas Cook asked lenders for an injection worth about $125 million. And in 2012, the folly of the company’s high street strategy was laid bare when the company announced a turnaround plan that included the closing of 200 shops.

All of this would not merely exceed the imagination of Mr. Cook, a one-time cabinet maker and lay Baptist preacher, born in 1808. It would have been contrary to his nature, said his biographer, Mr. Brendon. The origins of his company could hardly have been more humble. It started with a kind of anti-booze cruise.

Mr. Cook considered alcohol a singularly malign force in the Victorian era, and at the age of 32, he organized a group of 500 like-minded citizens to go by train to a temperance meeting 12 miles away.

For the next three summers, Mr. Cook’s efforts were break-even civic acts inspired by a zeal for social reform, not profits. He considered travel the best alternative to the demon drink. By 1845, he started making money, first with a trip to Liverpool, then Wales, Scotland and Ireland, and later beyond the United Kingdom — to the United States, Europe and the Middle East.

At Reus Airport near Tarragona, Spain, Thomas Cook customers lined up for flights.CreditAlbert Gea/Reuters

With railroads transforming travel, his timing was impeccable. The company was soon targeting the wealthiest demographics.

“The company quickly moved upmarket, into the aristocracy, and became known as the travel agents to the British Empire,” Mr. Brendon said. “It was almost like part of the civil service. It was the company that transported all of the most important people to Queen Victoria’s Diamond Jubilee.”

In 1928, the Cook family sold out to a Belgian company, Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits. When Germany occupied Belgium in World War II, the British government nationalized Thomas Cook. Government management was criticized as slow-footed, but the 1950s and ‘60s were boom years for overseas travel.

“There was a huge desire to get away from the gray, from the austerity and rationing of postwar Britain,” said Roger Bray, a writer for Silver Travel Advisor, billed as a website for mature travelers. “People had more money, and they wanted to spend it.”

Thomas Cook went private again in 1972. The business changed radically with the advent of the internet, making a la carte vacations easier to book at home. But packaged holidays — those all-in deals on flights and hotels, which have been the core of Thomas Cook’s business in recent decades — are still popular. The number of United Kingdom travelers who took this kind of holiday stood at 18 million in 2018, up four million from eight years earlier, according to ABTA, an association of travel agents and tour operators.

“If you go back 25, 30 years ago, it’s true that about 90 percent of holidays were packaged tours,” said Sean Tipton, a spokesman for the association. “It’s less than half now, but record numbers of people are taking vacations. So it’s still a strong business.”

The British government is spending £100 million, roughly $125 million, to fly stranded Thomas Cook customers home in what is being called the largest peacetime repatriation in the country’s history. The price tag could go up, but Grant Shapps, the secretary of state for transport, said it was far cheaper than a full bailout of the company.

For those who sank money into Thomas Cook, all that’s left is investor’s remorse.

Neset Kockar, a Turkish businessman, recently took an 8 percent stake in the company, seeking a role in its rescue. After its collapse, he told the website turizmguncel.com, “I didn’t know it was this badly run. You can’t make so many mistakes, one after another.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Thomas Cook’s Failure Might Roil Its Founder in His Grave

The demise of Thomas Cook, Britain’s most venerated travel agency, is shaping up as one of the country’s greatest corporate fiascos.

When the agency went out of business on Monday, it left some 150,000 vacationers stranded on foreign soil. It put about 21,000 jobs at risk. It prompted calls for an investigation of its management and clawback of executive pay.

So what would Thomas Cook, the man, think of what has became of Thomas Cook, the company?

“He would be shocked and appalled,” said Piers Brendon, author of “Thomas Cook: 150 Years of Popular Tourism.” “Greed and incompetence have wrecked a fine company which has a name that resonated for nearly 200 years.”

Not surprisingly, the company has different theories for its collapse. In May, it reported a gargantuan loss of 1.5 billion pounds, about $1.9 billion, for the first half of the year. The heat wave of 2018 had “reduced customer demand for winter sun.” More important, its chief executive, Peter Fankhauser, cited uncertainties surrounding Brexit.

“There is now little doubt that the Brexit process,” Mr. Fankhauser wrote in the report, “has led many U.K. customers to delay their holiday plans for this summer.”

Some observers are, in fact, calling Thomas Cook the first major Brexit casualty. The contemporaneous decline in the pound, widely considered a Brexit side effect, has also made holidays more financially daunting.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_161344764_fabd3f21-ce93-4011-be38-fa256ef5a86d-articleLarge Thomas Cook’s Failure Might Roil Its Founder in His Grave Travel and Vacations Travel Agencies and Agents Thomas Cook Group PLC Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Fankhauser, Peter E-Commerce Cook, Thomas (1808-92) Brendon, Piers Bankruptcies

Thomas Cook check-in desks at Gatwick Airport in Sussex, England, on Monday.CreditVickie Flores/EPA, via Shutterstock

But others maintain that the company’s fate was sealed long before the referendum was even put up for a vote. For years, Thomas Cook played a somewhat frantic and fantastically expensive game of catch-up as it tried to pivot into the digital age. In the end, Thomas Cook was groaning under $2.1 billion of debt, according to the company, most of it accumulated in pricey, ill-timed investments made years ago.

The most problematic was a 2007 merger with MyTravel, a major British competitor. The idea was to create a juggernaut, but combining the two companies proved a hugely expensive misstep. By 2010, debt at the newly christened Thomas Cook Group had more than doubled, to the equivalent of $1 billion. As recently as this year, the deal’s aftershocks were still being felt. Most of that £1.5 billion loss announced in May was attributed by the company to the MyTravel merger.

In 2010, Thomas Cook pulled off another deal, this time with the Co-operative Travel, which operated 400 stores located in areas of prime shopping real estate, or what is known in Britain as high streets. Added to Thomas Cook’s 800 shops, the company became the king of brick-and-mortar travel retail just as much of the clientele was headed online.

“The company had a large number of high street locations, and that’s historically where people would book holidays,” said Julie Palmer, a regional managing partner at Begbies Traynor, a corporate restructuring firm. “They’d go in, have a chat, look over some brochures for a couple hours to get some advice. Then they’d come back the next day and book their trip through a travel agent. I can’t remember the last time I booked a holiday like that.”

A cash crunch was underway by 2011, when Thomas Cook asked lenders for an injection worth about $125 million. And in 2012, the folly of the company’s high street strategy was laid bare when the company announced a turnaround plan that included the closing of 200 shops.

All of this would not merely exceed the imagination of Mr. Cook, a one-time cabinet maker and lay Baptist preacher, born in 1808. It would have been contrary to his nature, said his biographer, Mr. Brendon. The origins of his company could hardly have been more humble. It started with a kind of anti-booze cruise.

Mr. Cook considered alcohol a singularly malign force in the Victorian era, and at the age of 32, he organized a group of 500 like-minded citizens to go by train to a temperance meeting 12 miles away.

For the next three summers, Mr. Cook’s efforts were break-even civic acts inspired by a zeal for social reform, not profits. He considered travel the best alternative to the demon drink. By 1845, he started making money, first with a trip to Liverpool, then Wales, Scotland and Ireland, and later beyond the United Kingdom — to the United States, Europe and the Middle East.

At Reus Airport near Tarragona, Spain, Thomas Cook customers lined up for flights.CreditAlbert Gea/Reuters

With railroads transforming travel, his timing was impeccable. The company was soon targeting the wealthiest demographics.

“The company quickly moved upmarket, into the aristocracy, and became known as the travel agents to the British Empire,” Mr. Brendon said. “It was almost like part of the civil service. It was the company that transported all of the most important people to Queen Victoria’s Diamond Jubilee.”

In 1928, the Cook family sold out to a Belgian company, Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits. When Germany occupied Belgium in World War II, the British government nationalized Thomas Cook. Government management was criticized as slow-footed, but the 1950s and ‘60s were boom years for overseas travel.

“There was a huge desire to get away from the gray, from the austerity and rationing of postwar Britain,” said Roger Bray, a writer for Silver Travel Advisor, billed as a website for mature travelers. “People had more money, and they wanted to spend it.”

Thomas Cook went private again in 1972. The business changed radically with the advent of the internet, making a la carte vacations easier to book at home. But packaged holidays — those all-in deals on flights and hotels, which have been the core of Thomas Cook’s business in recent decades — are still popular. The number of United Kingdom travelers who took this kind of holiday stood at 18 million in 2018, up four million from eight years earlier, according to ABTA, an association of travel agents and tour operators.

“If you go back 25, 30 years ago, it’s true that about 90 percent of holidays were packaged tours,” said Sean Tipton, a spokesman for the association. “It’s less than half now, but record numbers of people are taking vacations. So it’s still a strong business.”

The British government is spending £100 million, roughly $125 million, to fly stranded Thomas Cook customers home in what is being called the largest peacetime repatriation in the country’s history. The price tag could go up, but Grant Shapps, the secretary of state for transport, said it was far cheaper than a full bailout of the company.

For those who sank money into Thomas Cook, all that’s left is investor’s remorse.

Neset Kockar, a Turkish businessman, recently took an 8 percent stake in the company, seeking a role in its rescue. After its collapse, he told the website turizmguncel.com, “I didn’t know it was this badly run. You can’t make so many mistakes, one after another.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Thomas Cook Would Be ‘Shocked,’ Biographer Says, to See His Travel Agency’s Fall

The demise of Thomas Cook, Britain’s most venerated travel agency, is shaping up as one of the country’s greatest corporate fiascos.

When the agency went out of business on Monday, it left some 150,000 vacationers stranded on foreign soil. It put about 21,000 jobs at risk. It prompted calls for an investigation of its management and clawback of executive pay.

So what would Thomas Cook, the man, think of what has became of Thomas Cook, the company?

“He would be shocked and appalled,” said Piers Brendon, author of “Thomas Cook: 150 Years of Popular Tourism.” “Greed and incompetence have wrecked a fine company which has a name that resonated for nearly 200 years.”

Not surprisingly, the company has different theories for its collapse. In May, it reported a gargantuan loss of 1.5 billion pounds, about $1.9 billion, for the first half of the year. The heat wave of 2018 had “reduced customer demand for winter sun.” More important, its chief executive, Peter Fankhauser, cited uncertainties surrounding Brexit.

“There is now little doubt that the Brexit process,” Mr. Fankhauser wrote in the report, “has led many U.K. customers to delay their holiday plans for this summer.”

Some observers are, in fact, calling Thomas Cook the first major Brexit casualty. The contemporaneous decline in the pound, widely considered a Brexit side effect, has also made holidays more financially daunting.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_161344764_fabd3f21-ce93-4011-be38-fa256ef5a86d-articleLarge Thomas Cook Would Be ‘Shocked,’ Biographer Says, to See His Travel Agency’s Fall Travel and Vacations Travel Agencies and Agents Thomas Cook Group PLC Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Fankhauser, Peter E-Commerce Cook, Thomas Brendon, Piers Bankruptcies

Thomas Cook check-in desks at Gatwick Airport in Sussex, England, on Monday.CreditVickie Flores/EPA, via Shutterstock

But others maintain that the company’s fate was sealed long before the referendum was even put up for a vote. For years, Thomas Cook played a somewhat frantic and fantastically expensive game of catch-up as it tried to pivot into the digital age. In the end, Thomas Cook was groaning under $2.1 billion of debt, according to the company, most of it accumulated in pricey, ill-timed investments made years ago.

The most problematic was a 2007 merger with MyTravel, a major British competitor. The idea was to create a juggernaut, but combining the two companies proved a hugely expensive misstep. By 2010, debt at the newly christened Thomas Cook Group had more than doubled, to the equivalent of $1 billion. As recently as this year, the deal’s aftershocks were still being felt. Most of that £1.5 billion loss announced in May was attributed by the company to the MyTravel merger.

In 2010, Thomas Cook pulled off another deal, this time with the Co-operative Travel, which operated 400 stores located in areas of prime shopping real estate, or what is known in Britain as high streets. Added to Thomas Cook’s 800 shops, the company became the king of brick-and-mortar travel retail just as much of the clientele was headed online.

“The company had a large number of high street locations, and that’s historically where people would book holidays,” said Julie Palmer, a regional managing partner at Begbies Traynor, a corporate restructuring firm. “They’d go in, have a chat, look over some brochures for a couple hours to get some advice. Then they’d come back the next day and book their trip through a travel agent. I can’t remember the last time I booked a holiday like that.”

A cash crunch was underway by 2011, when Thomas Cook asked lenders for an injection worth about $125 million. And in 2012, the folly of the company’s high street strategy was laid bare when the company announced a turnaround plan that included the closing of 200 shops.

All of this would not merely exceed the imagination of Mr. Cook, a one-time cabinet maker and lay Baptist preacher, born in 1808. It would have been contrary to his nature, said his biographer, Mr. Brendon. The origins of his company could hardly have been more humble. It started with a kind of anti-booze cruise.

Mr. Cook considered alcohol a singularly malign force in the Victorian era, and at the age of 32, he organized a group of 500 like-minded citizens to go by train to a temperance meeting 12 miles away.

For the next three summers, Mr. Cook’s efforts were break-even civic acts inspired by a zeal for social reform, not profits. He considered travel the best alternative to the demon drink. By 1845, he started making money, first with a trip to Liverpool, then Wales, Scotland and Ireland, and later beyond the United Kingdom — to the United States, Europe and the Middle East.

At Reus Airport near Tarragona, Spain, Thomas Cook customers lined up for flights.CreditAlbert Gea/Reuters

With railroads transforming travel, his timing was impeccable. The company was soon targeting the wealthiest demographics.

“The company quickly moved upmarket, into the aristocracy, and became known as the travel agents to the British Empire,” Mr. Brendon said. “It was almost like part of the civil service. It was the company that transported all of the most important people to Queen Victoria’s Diamond Jubilee.”

In 1928, the Cook family sold out to a Belgian company, Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits. When Germany occupied Belgium in World War II, the British government nationalized Thomas Cook. Government management was criticized as slow-footed, but the 1950s and ‘60s were boom years for overseas travel.

“There was a huge desire to get away from the gray, from the austerity and rationing of postwar Britain,” said Roger Bray, a writer for Silver Travel Advisor, billed as a website for mature travelers. “People had more money, and they wanted to spend it.”

Thomas Cook went private again in 1972. The business changed radically with the advent of the internet, making a la carte vacations easier to book at home. But packaged holidays — those all-in deals on flights and hotels, which have been the core of Thomas Cook’s business in recent decades — are still popular. The number of United Kingdom travelers who took this kind of holiday stood at 18 million in 2018, up four million from eight years earlier, according to ABTA, an association of travel agents and tour operators.

“If you go back 25, 30 years ago, it’s true that about 90 percent of holidays were packaged tours,” said Sean Tipton, a spokesman for the association. “It’s less than half now, but record numbers of people are taking vacations. So it’s still a strong business.”

The British government is spending £100 million, roughly $125 million, to fly stranded Thomas Cook customers home in what is being called the largest peacetime repatriation in the country’s history. The price tag could go up, but Grant Shapps, the secretary of state for transport, said it was far cheaper than a full bailout of the company.

For those who sank money into Thomas Cook, all that’s left is investor’s remorse.

Neset Kockar, a Turkish businessman, recently took an 8 percent stake in the company, seeking a role in its rescue. After its collapse, he told the website turizmguncel.com, “I didn’t know it was this badly run. You can’t make so many mistakes, one after another.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Boris Johnson’s Suspension of Parliament Was Unlawful, U.K. Supreme Court Rules

LONDON — The British Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that Prime Minister Boris Johnson illegally suspended Parliament, dealing him another heavy blow and thrusting the nation’s politics into even deeper turmoil, barely a month before it is scheduled to leave the European Union.

The unanimous decision, which upheld a ruling from Scotland’s highest civil court, said that the suspension of Parliament until Oct. 14 is void — meaning that the lawmakers are still in session and can continue the debate over Brexit that was short-circuited when Mr. Johnson asked the queen to suspend, or prorogue, Parliament for five weeks.

“The decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification,” said Baroness Brenda Hale, the president of the court, speaking for the 11-judge panel that heard the case.

“The prime minister’s advice to Her Majesty was unlawful, void and of no effect,” she said. “Parliament has not been prorogued.”

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_160177920_f3aa81cf-ea64-4480-b5ef-8be60195affd-articleLarge Boris Johnson’s Suspension of Parliament Was Unlawful, U.K. Supreme Court Rules Supreme Court (U.K.) Johnson, Boris House of Commons (Great Britain) Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Elizabeth II, Queen of Great Britain Conservative Party (Great Britain)

The court ruled unanimously that Parliament is still in session and can resume its Brexit debate before the Oct. 14 date set by Mr. Johnson.CreditAndrew Testa for The New York Times

Though it has historically avoided politics, the court made a landmark decision to intervene in a fierce clash between Mr. Johnson and Parliament over when and how to exit the European Union.

The court essentially endorsed the judgment of the Scottish court that Mr. Johnson’s suspension was an effort to stymie debate before an Oct. 31 withdrawal deadline, which he had pledged to meet even if Britain and Brussels did not reach an agreement on the terms.

The Supreme Court judges “have vindicated the right and duty of Parliament to meet at this crucial time to scrutinize the executive and hold ministers to account,” said John Bercow, speaker of the House of Commons, who presides over debate. “As the embodiment of our parliamentary democracy, the House of Commons must convene without delay. To this end, I will now consult the party leaders as a matter of urgency.”

As a practical matter, it was not clear how much the decision would change the government’s immediate approach to Brexit. In the days before they were dispersed, members of the House of Commons pushed through a law — over the prime minister’s fierce opposition — that would prohibit Mr. Johnson from pursuing a “no-deal Brexit.”

But in symbolic terms, the court ruling was a stinging rebuke for the prime minister. It raised the question of whether he had misled Queen Elizabeth II in asking her to prorogue the Parliament. And it added to the perception that his Conservative government was running roughshod over Britain’s most hallowed political conventions in its zeal to extract the country from Europe.

Mr. Johnson has suffered repeated legal and political defeats since becoming prime minister in July. This month, after the Conservative Party lost its majority in the House of Commons, he called for early elections. But he failed to win the two-thirds majority he needed.

A rally outside Downing Street in London last month to protest Mr. Johnson’s decision to prorogue Parliament.CreditAndrew Testa for The New York Times

The Labour Party balked at supporting an election out of fear that Mr. Johnson would schedule it before Oct. 31, in the hopes of using a victory at the polls to push through a no-deal Brexit.

The unanimous decision by a panel of 11 justices, which came after three days of televised oral arguments before a panel of 11 Supreme Court judges, had been eagerly anticipated in Britain because of its political and legal ramifications.

“We’re in uncharted territory,” said James Grant, a senior lecturer in law at King’s College London.

Dr. Grant said he believed that it would be dangerous for the Supreme Court to side with the English court. The suspension, he argued, clearly deprived the House of Commons of its responsibility to scrutinize the government’s policy on Brexit, an issue of critical national importance.

But other legal experts worry that upholding the Scottish ruling would set a troubling precedent. It would open the door, they said, to a form of judicial review that is widely accepted in the United States, which has a codified Constitution and a Supreme Court that actively interprets it.

Britain, by contrast, relies on an unwritten set of traditions and conventions that have treated a sovereign Parliament as the supreme law of the land. Once the courts venture into the political sphere and begin passing judgment on Parliament’s actions, legal analysts say, there is no going back.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com