politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Can we end this “snap election” speculation – TMay, like Dave before, simply does not have the power to call one
In the latest PB polling matters podcast we hear that polling has been going on asking the public what they think of the idea of having an early General Election. The responses are interesting but they ignore one pertinent fact:
"4.5 This will be an opportunity to determine the level best placed to take decisions on these issues, ensuring power sits closer to the people of the UK than ever before. It is the expectation of the Government that the outcome of this process will be a significant increase in the decision making power of each devolved administration."
The role of EU derived law and the ECJ under the Great Repeal Bill seems crystal clear to me. It's just like Common Law. Unless or until new legislation changes it, it is the law. If new legislation comes in then that takes precedence.
It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
iirc they would be major difficulties as it would involve reinstating the Queen's powers in some way and this would involve codifying them. Can't remember the details.
It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
iirc they would be major difficulties as it would involve reinstating the Queen's powers in some way and this would involve codifying them. Can't remember the details.
Yeah, but it could be something along the lines of "the monarch will issue the writ for an election by order-in-council". The FTPA did also repeal the Septennial Act, so a new provisions for the maximum term of a parliament would be required.
The role of EU derived law and the ECJ under the Great Repeal Bill seems crystal clear to me. It's just like Common Law. Unless or until new legislation changes it, it is the law. If new legislation comes in then that takes precedence.
What's unclear to people?
"We will, of course, continue to honour our international commitments and follow international law."
Post-Brexit any agreements between the UK and the EU will be international. There will need to be a forum in which disputes and uncertainties relating to those agreements are ruled upon. Maybe it could be called the European Court of Justice ;-)
It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.
Has everyone forgotten how, when Gordon had his coronation, even his enemies were queuing up to sign a declaration of support because no one dared not to have their name on the list?
Then make offers to the SNP, Greens and Unionists and you have a working minority govt until 2020.
It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
iirc they would be major difficulties as it would involve reinstating the Queen's powers in some way and this would involve codifying them. Can't remember the details.
I don't think that would be a problem. You could give the PM statutory powers to replicate the previous situation that existed by Royal prerogative.
It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
Local elections back to matching up with the "Date from last election" in the cycle instead of the effective 20 year metacycle we have now !
"This legislation came about as part of the 2010 coalition deal between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. It was pressed for by the yellow team because they didn’t want to get into a situation where the Tories could just govern for a year or so and then go straight to the country when circumstances appeared most right ditching them."
Which was rather ironic as it turned out....I imagine that if the Tories had cut & run after a year of coalition the Lib Dems would have held substantially more than the miserable 8 seats they got in 2015.
That said I totally agree with the premise of this piece, the only chance of an early election IMO will be if the expenses issue forces multiple convictions and by-elections.
Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.
Would he even be offered it? He can't command the confidence of his own party, let alone the commons.
"This legislation came about as part of the 2010 coalition deal between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. It was pressed for by the yellow team because they didn’t want to get into a situation where the Tories could just govern for a year or so and then go straight to the country when circumstances appeared most right ditching them."
Which was rather ironic as it turned out....I imagine that if the Tories had cut & run after a year of coalition the Lib Dems would have held substantially more than the miserable 8 seats they got in 2015.
That said I totally agree with the premise of this piece, the only chance of an early election IMO will be if the expenses issue forces multiple convictions and by-elections.
Hopefully that will push the price of a 2018 election way down when we get towards the end of the year. (5-2 2018 election say)
Then 2019 "Will exiting the EU force an early election" (hopefully) (3-1 2019 Election hopefully)
So by the looks of it, despite all the spin, you will be able to fit all of Lloyds of London's EU operation in the back of a taxi.
I think it was Inga Beale from Lloyd's on the radio this morning, during her interview she also said that "tens of jobs" might move. It's about having an EU office, not where the work will actually be done.
[In 2020] "The Prime Minister must make arrangements ... for a committee to carry out a review of the operation of this Act and, if appropriate in consequence of its findings, to make recommendations for the repeal or amendment of this Act."
If the FTPA is repealed after 2020 does that mean consequent amendments to prior legislation would automatically be reinstated? For example the Sovereign's power to dissolve Parliament under the Succession to the Crown Act 1707?
[In 2020] "The Prime Minister must make arrangements ... for a committee to carry out a review of the operation of this Act and, if appropriate in consequence of its findings, to make recommendations for the repeal or amendment of this Act."
If the FTPA is repealed after 2020 does that mean consequent amendments to prior legislation would automatically be reinstated? For example the Sovereign's power to dissolve Parliament under the Succession to the Crown Act 1707?
No. Repealing an act that repealed another act does not reverse that repeal.
And HM's power to dissolve was never codified - it was a prerogative power.
To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.
Would he even be offered it? He can't command the confidence of his own party, let alone the commons.
I suspect May will be very reluctant to put HM in the position of deciding whether to allow Corbyn time to seek confidence.
Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.
Would he even be offered it? He can't command the confidence of his own party, let alone the commons.
I suspect May will be very reluctant to put HM in the position of deciding whether to allow Corbyn time to seek confidence.
It wouldn't need to be Corbyn. Putting parliament into limbo would also run the risk that the parties would fracture and a new centrist majority coalition could seize power.
Think you and the tweeter need to read section 4.5 of the Great Repeal Bill.
Bad news for the Scottish Nationalists is that they will have even more powers to waste.
Will it be enshrined in a nice photoshopped vow? Or even better, real vellum!
I realist that the cult of Nicla will be a bit scared of being forced to use powers for subjects other than calling for referendums but it's in the bill - wonder if the SNP will vote for or against more powers ??
To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.
The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
The role of EU derived law and the ECJ under the Great Repeal Bill seems crystal clear to me. It's just like Common Law. Unless or until new legislation changes it, it is the law. If new legislation comes in then that takes precedence.
What's unclear to people?
"We will, of course, continue to honour our international commitments and follow international law."
Post-Brexit any agreements between the UK and the EU will be international. There will need to be a forum in which disputes and uncertainties relating to those agreements are ruled upon. Maybe it could be called the European Court of Justice ;-)
If we form a trade deal with the USA will we get SCOTUS to be the forum for any dispurmtes? Or AN ISDS? Or a third party organisation like the WTO?
Any UK EU deal will need a neutral ISDS or another third party.
Serving A50 means it can't happen until we've left.
There must be an outside possibility of an election in 2019 if Parliament was to vote down Theresa's deal... That would in effect, be a vote of no confidence in the government.
Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.
Would he even be offered it? He can't command the confidence of his own party, let alone the commons.
I suspect May will be very reluctant to put HM in the position of deciding whether to allow Corbyn time to seek confidence.
It wouldn't need to be Corbyn. Putting parliament into limbo would also run the risk that the parties would fracture and a new centrist majority coalition could seize power.
It wouldn't go into limbo it would go into a General Election campaign that is two weeks longer than normal. Parties unite at General Elections they do not fracture at them.
Overheard some interesting comments by the Labour group leader on a local authority recently (Remain-voting area).
They are terrified of the Lib Dems at the May elections - bear in mind that the group leader in question had 10 times the LD candidate's vote in their division in 2013. They have seen how the LDs are hoovering up local by-elections and believe this could potentially be repeated in their area. Turnout is expected to be low and so "anything could happen".
Corbyn and Labour's general supineness towards Brexit could well result in a bloodbath in May. I still reckon Soubry and Osborne jumping ship is unlikely, but if they did, a lot of Labour would follow them.
Think you and the tweeter need to read section 4.5 of the Great Repeal Bill.
Bad news for the Scottish Nationalists is that they will have even more powers to waste.
Will it be enshrined in a nice photoshopped vow? Or even better, real vellum!
I realist that the cult of Nicla will be a bit scared of being forced to use powers for subjects other than calling for referendums but it's in the bill - wonder if the SNP will vote for or against more powers ??
If we only we knew what those magnificent, new superpowers are. Perhaps you could give us some hints?
Anyway, what do you care, you're a migrant. What's the Great Repeal Bill doing for YOUR region?
The other factor that OGH omits is that Mrs May has said it won't happen......
Irrelevant, if she could do it simply and it later appealed to her to do so. As it is, the appeal might be there but it is much harder to make happen. And with A50, while a big majority might be nice, it is not the time for an election now.
To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
Interestingly, the reason Brussels and Luxembourg made the shortlist (and Ireland didn't) was because these jurisdictions offered the greatest regulatory flexibility - there's already competitive arbitrage between EU states to pick up marginal business. Almost a race to the bottom, one might say...
It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
I cannot say I see why four year parliaments, though more common, would intrinsically be superior to 5 year ones, as some seem to think. Running out of business isn't a reason, since that's a cultural problem.
Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.
Would he even be offered it? He can't command the confidence of his own party, let alone the commons.
He would have to be, if only for forms sake. He "leads" the next biggest grouping and in theory could form a minority govt
To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
Interestingly, the reason Brussels and Luxembourg made the shortlist (and Ireland didn't) was because these jurisdictions offered the greatest regulatory flexibility - there's already competitive arbitrage between EU states to pick up marginal business. Almost a race to the bottom, one might say...
A bit like Delaware, lots of businesses, not so many jobs.
It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
I cannot say I see why four year parliaments, though more common, would intrinsically be superior to 5 year ones, as some seem to think. Running out of business isn't a reason, since that's a cultural problem.
Perhaps it is something that the EU should legislate for? Unified parliamentary terms across the federation.
To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.
The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
I still reckon Soubry and Osborne jumping ship is unlikely, but if they did, a lot of Labour would follow them.
Soubry, probably, but not Osborne. The lefties have spent too long vilifying him and it has probaby soaked into their DNA and caused mutations resulting in an allergic reaction to Osbournic pathogens....
To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
Interestingly, the reason Brussels and Luxembourg made the shortlist (and Ireland didn't) was because these jurisdictions offered the greatest regulatory flexibility - there's already competitive arbitrage between EU states to pick up marginal business. Almost a race to the bottom, one might say...
To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.
The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
What business has moved here because of Brexit?
I linked to the Alsico related move from Italy to the UK yesterday. BigG was doing similar this morning.
To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.
The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
What business has moved here because of Brexit?
The business of proper politics and true democracy.
"We will, of course, continue to honour our international commitments and follow international law."
Once we have left the EU, any agreements between the UK and the EU will be subject to international law. But in cases of dispute or uncertainty those agreements will need to be interpreted. I wonder who will do that."
The agreement will be in the former of either a treaty or a trade agreement and will be adjudicated in just the same way as the thousands of other treaties and FTAs in existence.
"A reason why Labour MPs might not back a Commons motion calling for an early election is that it is so much better for them if they force the government to go through the vote of confidence process."
This is another good point actually - Labour would be fools to support a motion, they can simply say "if you have no confidence in your own government, feel free to vote it down, we will of course also be doing that, but we won't support this motion". Tories voting down their own government either comes across as a lack of confidence or as a engineering an election for political gains / playing politics - neither will go down well in the country at large.
To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.
The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
What business has moved here because of Brexit?
Also, in time, a fair proportion of the tens of thousands of lobbyists, now in Brussels, will move to London. The UK is 20% of EU GDP; when the UK is making 95% of its own laws, rather than 50%, these lobbyists will need to attend, much more closely, to the large British market.
This is what Brexit means. Power flows back to the UK. London becomes MORE important, politically (likewise Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast), even as we lose influence over Brussels.
Where power resides, business clusters.
"Power flows back to the UK."
Yes - currently 2 GW through the French interconnector and 1 GW through the Dutch interconnector.
It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
The Royal Pejorative? Your republican roots are showing....
If we form a trade deal with the USA will we get SCOTUS to be the forum for any dispurmtes? Or AN ISDS? Or a third party organisation like the WTO?
Any UK EU deal will need a neutral ISDS or another third party.
If trade is run at its smoothest, the law has to be the same and it has to be applied in the same way. It doesn't matter where the court is or who is donning the gowns. But it means signing up, not just to current EU law but to future EU law, and also to ECJ case law. Otherwise we won't get equivalence, which we may decide is OK, but it will impact trade.
This is a big bone of contention with the Swiss bilaterals.
To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.
The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
What business has moved here because of Brexit?
Also, in time, a fair proportion of the tens of thousands of lobbyists, now in Brussels, will move to London. The UK is 20% of EU GDP; when the UK is making 95% of its own laws, rather than 50%, these lobbyists will need to attend, much more closely, to the large British market.
This is what Brexit means. Power flows back to the UK. London becomes MORE important, politically (likewise Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast), even as we lose influence over Brussels.
Where power resides, business clusters.
"Power flows back to the UK."
Yes - currently 2 GW through the French interconnector and 1 GW through the Dutch interconnector.
Semantics - there are words like "Prime Minister" or "PM" which would apply. The Mail often uses the word "Premier" which betrays the Latin notion of "primus inter pares" but will suffice.
Why have I just wasted my time on this ?
A thought on leaving/joining parties - I've been in the same Party, albeit under different names, for nearly 40 years. I've invested as much personal, financial and emotional capital as anyone supporting a middling League Two team but that isn't the point.
I still think a Lib Dem majority Government would be the best thing for this country but I'm quite well aware 92% or so disagree. Doesn't make them right and me wrong.
To switch to another party would be a total repudiation of that investment and that belief and I can't do that and I'm surprised so many can though a lot of defections in local Government seem based on personality clashes within factions or de-selections.
I could imagine myself leaving the Party and joining the vast majority of the non-aligned and being able to think for myself (though I'm sure I do that now) and have flirted with the idea two or three times (had Clegg formed a Coalition with Brown's Labour Party in 2010 I'm pretty sure I'd have quit) but it would still be a big wrench.
This is another good point actually - Labour would be fools to support a motion, they can simply say "if you have no confidence in your own government, feel free to vote it down, we will of course also be doing that, but we won't support this motion". Tories voting down their own government either comes across as a lack of confidence or as a engineering an election for political gains / playing politics - neither will go down well in the country at large.
As I've pointed out before when we've discussed this, the Tories wouldn't need to vote against themselves. They could simply abstain, and justify the abstention with some flim-flam about 'it's time to let voters decide'.
Comments
Like LEAVE and NO...
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604516/Great_repeal_bill_white_paper_accessible.pdf
The SNP might be disappointed to win fewer seats than Corbyn-led Labour
Should that not be Nouveau Fil(lon)?
The possibility of an early election has passed with the serving of A50.
Can imagine the voters are absolutely sick of voting and want a break.
"4.5 This will be an opportunity to determine the level best placed to take decisions on
these issues, ensuring power sits closer to the people of the UK than ever before. It is the
expectation of the Government that the outcome of this process will be a significant increase
in the decision making power of each devolved administration."
What's unclear to people?
Post-Brexit any agreements between the UK and the EU will be international. There will need to be a forum in which disputes and uncertainties relating to those agreements are ruled upon. Maybe it could be called the European Court of Justice ;-)
So by the looks of it, despite all the spin, you will be able to fit all of Lloyds of London's EU operation in the back of a taxi.
It's a matter of Geography, apparently. Israeli Jews are fair game. London N16, not so.
Has everyone forgotten how, when Gordon had his coronation, even his enemies were queuing up to sign a declaration of support because no one dared not to have their name on the list?
Then make offers to the SNP, Greens and Unionists and you have a working minority govt until 2020.
Ken Livingstone embroiled in new Hitler row after saying Zionists collaborated with Nazis
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/30/ken-livingstone-faces-expulsion-labour-party-appears-misconduct/
"This legislation came about as part of the 2010 coalition deal between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. It was pressed for by the yellow team because they didn’t want to get into a situation where the Tories could just govern for a year or so and then go straight to the country when circumstances appeared most right ditching them."
Which was rather ironic as it turned out....I imagine that if the Tories had cut & run after a year of coalition the Lib Dems would have held substantially more than the miserable 8 seats they got in 2015.
That said I totally agree with the premise of this piece, the only chance of an early election IMO will be if the expenses issue forces multiple convictions and by-elections.
https://twitter.com/AngrySalmond/status/847416471814676482
Then 2019 "Will exiting the EU force an early election" (hopefully) (3-1 2019 Election hopefully)
Small trading opportunities abound :>
[In 2020] "The Prime Minister must make arrangements ... for a committee to carry out a review of the operation of this Act and, if appropriate in consequence of its findings, to make recommendations for the repeal or amendment of this Act."
If the FTPA is repealed after 2020 does that mean consequent amendments to prior legislation would automatically be reinstated? For example the Sovereign's power to dissolve Parliament under the Succession to the Crown Act 1707?
And HM's power to dissolve was never codified - it was a prerogative power.
Bad news for the Scottish Nationalists is that they will have even more powers to waste.
https://order-order.com/2017/03/30/soubry-backs-new-centrist-party/
The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
Any UK EU deal will need a neutral ISDS or another third party.
Serving A50 means it can't happen until we've left.
There must be an outside possibility of an election in 2019 if Parliament was to vote down Theresa's deal... That would in effect, be a vote of no confidence in the government.
However, it does look like it'll be 2020.
Oh well, at least they could get a bridge built on time....
They are terrified of the Lib Dems at the May elections - bear in mind that the group leader in question had 10 times the LD candidate's vote in their division in 2013. They have seen how the LDs are hoovering up local by-elections and believe this could potentially be repeated in their area. Turnout is expected to be low and so "anything could happen".
Corbyn and Labour's general supineness towards Brexit could well result in a bloodbath in May. I still reckon Soubry and Osborne jumping ship is unlikely, but if they did, a lot of Labour would follow them.
Anyway, what do you care, you're a migrant. What's the Great Repeal Bill doing for YOUR region?
http://digiday.com/media/inside-guardians-flailing-u-s-expansion/
Perhaps people aren't interested in live blogging the faux outrage over Legs-It-Gate...
SouthamObserver said
"We will, of course, continue to honour our international commitments and follow international law."
Once we have left the EU, any agreements between the UK and the EU will be subject to international law. But in cases of dispute or uncertainty those agreements will need to be interpreted. I wonder who will do that."
The agreement will be in the former of either a treaty or a trade agreement and will be adjudicated in just the same way as the thousands of other treaties and FTAs in existence.
This is another good point actually - Labour would be fools to support a motion, they can simply say "if you have no confidence in your own government, feel free to vote it down, we will of course also be doing that, but we won't support this motion". Tories voting down their own government either comes across as a lack of confidence or as a engineering an election for political gains / playing politics - neither will go down well in the country at large.
Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.
So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
Yes - currently 2 GW through the French interconnector and 1 GW through the Dutch interconnector.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
Let's hope the buggers don't shut it off to spite us.
Her comparing of Maidenhead to Scotland is the platinum level grade trolling I wish I could do to the Scot Nats.
Sorted.
This is a big bone of contention with the Swiss bilaterals.
But he thought that was my Pro-Theresa bias showing.
I shall use Mrs May in any situation where confusion might arise.
Cheers.
Semantics - there are words like "Prime Minister" or "PM" which would apply. The Mail often uses the word "Premier" which betrays the Latin notion of "primus inter pares" but will suffice.
Why have I just wasted my time on this ?
A thought on leaving/joining parties - I've been in the same Party, albeit under different names, for nearly 40 years. I've invested as much personal, financial and emotional capital as anyone supporting a middling League Two team but that isn't the point.
I still think a Lib Dem majority Government would be the best thing for this country but I'm quite well aware 92% or so disagree. Doesn't make them right and me wrong.
To switch to another party would be a total repudiation of that investment and that belief and I can't do that and I'm surprised so many can though a lot of defections in local Government seem based on personality clashes within factions or de-selections.
I could imagine myself leaving the Party and joining the vast majority of the non-aligned and being able to think for myself (though I'm sure I do that now) and have flirted with the idea two or three times (had Clegg formed a Coalition with Brown's Labour Party in 2010 I'm pretty sure I'd have quit) but it would still be a big wrench.