politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Two years ago some Tories voted for Corbyn to become Labour le

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Two years ago some Tories voted for Corbyn to become Labour leader to destroy the Labour party, you’ll never guess what happened next

Today is the second anniversary of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Labour leader, very few people could have imagined how things have turned out. Back in 2015 many observers, including myself, thought if Jeremy Corbyn led the Labour party at a general election, Labour would play the role of Alderaan to the Tory party’s Death Star. But at 10pm on June 8th 2017 all those perceptions changed.

Read the full story here

RobD

Labour exploited the one weakness of the Death Star, the TM (thermal manifold.... ahem).

not_on_fire

RobD said:

Labour exploited the one weakness of the Death Star, the TM (thermal manifold.... ahem).

Now they plan to build a new, bigger Death Star that will still use the TM until 2022...

CarlottaVance

Third! Like the SNP!

Well, it was hardly going to be "Labour Front Benchers" for Corbyn, was it?

JohnLoony

Ninth!

FF43

The question is, would Corbyn vote for Theresa May as Conservative leader?

FF43

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

Charles

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

RobD

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

Who knows? It could have been written ages ago and given the monarch wide-ranging discretionary powers.

RobD

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Scott_P

@spinthosewheels: Dennis Skinner should be loyal to his elected party leader......

@dizzy_thinks: Dennis Skinner ...... Basically a Tory Melt now I guess?

CarlottaVance

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Well that's simple - we just vote the EU government out....oh, so we have...

philiph

JC has an opportunity to change labour.

Should he create a party in his image it will be a major achievement and a Labour Party that is significantly different to the one he took over.

That may be good or bad for labour.

Casino_Royale

I'm glad I refused to take part in the Tories for Corbyn movement.

Be careful what you wish for.

Scott_P

Have they not suffered enough?

@AllieHBNews: Foreign Secretary @BorisJohnson is travelling to the Caribbean to visit British Overseas Territories devastated by #Irma.

foxinsoxuk

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Casino_Royale

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

Why would surrendering part of our sovereign powers to a foreign body be codified in our constitution?

What you really mean is why aren't the political and legal obstacles to Leaving the EU insurmountable, as you wish they were.

philiph

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

It depends on the changes allowed.

Altering EU to UK or the name of an agency referred to so that it is relevant and a UK body not an EU body is sensible for the volume of changes required.

Changes to to essence, intent, scope or purpose of the Bill is not acceptable.

SquareRoot

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

She never said her powers were infallible. You are making a bad job of pathetic point scoring.

FF43

It's a fundamental constitutional principle that the executive proposes and parliament disposes. A decent Constitution formalises that principle. The UK has an "unwritten" Constitution, which is a euphemism for saying that government and parliament can make it up as it goes all along. Ie it doesn't really have one.

philiph

FF43 said:

It's a fundamental constitutional principle that the executive proposes and parliament disposes. A decent Constitution formalises that principle. The UK has an "unwritten" Constitution, which is a euphemism for saying that government and parliament can make it up as it goes all along. Ie it doesn't really have one.

However it has lasted many years without too many disasters or dictators.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

I agree with the basic sentiment in the thread header, but would add the fundamental problem was entirely different. Labour MPs failed to understand their own electoral system. That's the prime cause of having the far left in charge of the Official Opposition right now.

malcolmg

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

LOL, what bollox

SouthamObserver

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

Pulpstar

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Mortimer

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

But you were happy to give the EU untrammelled powers in various competencies to make our laws for us, without the ability to ever vote out those with whom you disagreed?

IanB2

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

I agree with the basic sentiment in the thread header, but would add the fundamental problem was entirely different. Labour MPs failed to understand their own electoral system. That's the prime cause of having the far left in charge of the Official Opposition right now.

Not so much the system as the attitudes of their members. Most thought a left wing candidate was simply window dressing for the election, and would be roundly rejected as usual.

SouthamObserver

Mortimer said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

But you were happy to give the EU untrammelled powers in various competencies to make our laws for us, without the ability to ever vote out those with whom you disagreed?

Nope.

IanB2

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

SouthamObserver

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Isn't the point that we have decided that we did not like the way that things were done in Brussels and that we want to do them better in the UK? The will of the British people was to take back control for themselves, wasn't it?

malcolmg

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

Charles meant there was a pseudo constitution for squillionaires like him. Him and his elite chums do not need to worry about powers being taken away, they are the ones making it up.

SouthamObserver

Casino_Royale said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

Why would surrendering part of our sovereign powers to a foreign body be codified in our constitution?

What you really mean is why aren't the political and legal obstacles to Leaving the EU insurmountable, as you wish they were.

A surrender is the unwilling act of a defeated party. The UK never surrendered anything.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. B2, that's true, but also as silly as someone agreeing to a foursome and agreeing to let their other half choose the couple, then being upset when they choose an S&M pair and the individual ends up chained to a diagonal cross for six hours.

Don't leave yourself open to a possibility you really, really do not want.

Mr. Observer, debatable. Labour promised a referendum, instead, there was no vote and Brown threw away vetoes to sign Lisbon. Blair threw away half the rebate for nothing. Cameron's renegotiation was an utter failure, compounded by his soon-abandoned claim it was a good deal.

It reminds me a bit of excessive foreign aid. Something popular amongst the political class, less so amongst the electorate.

SouthamObserver

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

Charles

malcolmg said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

LOL, what bollox

Compelling argument from our resident turnip.

Try reading Dicey

Recidivist

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. B2, that's true, but also as silly as someone agreeing to a foursome and agreeing to let their other half choose the couple, then being upset when they choose an S&M pair and the individual ends up chained to a diagonal cross for six hours.

There's an analogy we can all relate to.

Richard_Tyndall

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

Jonathan

The Whitehall/Westminster system is broken.

Recidivist

Jonathan said:

The Whitehall/Westminster system is broken.

Agreed.

Mortimer

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

That's ok then.

The powers are limited and the Govt are accountable.

If you dislike the outcome of the laws, you'll be able to change them if your lot get in.

Unlike the EU laws

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Jonathan, changing it is very difficult though, as every party would seek to profit.

OldKingCole

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

Mr RT, that’s put far better, TBH!

rkrkrk

Corbyn won with all three categories of members handsomely.
Tories4Corbyn made no difference to the overall outcome, but they did manage to contribute to the Labour party's coffers... For that they have my thanks.

SouthamObserver

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

The unwritten British constitution that was being debated down below relies heavily on precedent. The legislation that was put before the Commons last night is constitutionally significant for that reason. It frightens the life out of me.

SouthamObserver

Jonathan said:

The Whitehall/Westminster system is broken.

It sure is. Leaving the EU gives the UK an opportunity to have a constitutional convention and a complete rethink of the way things are organised currently. It won't happen, unfortunately.

Jonathan

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Jonathan, changing it is very difficult though, as every party would seek to profit.

If it wasn't difficult it wouldn't be worth doing.

What we have now is a system with a proven record of producing deeply flawed governments incapable of addressing the political, social and economic challenges we face.

CarlottaVance

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

Don't the powers expire at midnight on Brexit?

GIN1138

I thought Jezza becoming PM was quite an exciting prospect but his betrayal over Brexit has left me shaken...

SouthamObserver

Mortimer said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

That's ok then.

The powers are limited and the Govt are accountable.

If you dislike the outcome of the laws, you'll be able to change them if your lot get in.

Unlike the EU laws

I do not have a lot. The powers being granted to ministers are unprecedented. That is not taking back control.

Blue_rog

If you take the position that all politicians are narcissists/egoists then a lot of what's been going on comes somewhat into focus.

The establishment of the EU gave a larger stage for politicians to strut and pose on thus feeding their egos and satisfying their need for self aggrandisement. Similarly, the larger the aid budget, the more opportunity to bask in foreign praise.

A perfect example of these behaviours is with Blair.

Very little of what politicians do on an international stage is for the direct benefit of their country,only themselves.

Mexicanpete

Hats off to Mrs May and Mr Davis, they garnered a healthy majority to support an appalling Bill.

For anyone who harboured the thought that rather than face 'cliff-edge' Brexit politicians would draw back from the brink, forget it.

Charles

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

So our constitution is highly centralised. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist

Recidivist

Mortimer said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

That's ok then.

The powers are limited and the Govt are accountable.

If you dislike the outcome of the laws, you'll be able to change them if your lot get in.

Unlike the EU laws

EU laws are set and can be amended in much the same way as UK laws. EU laws will continue to affect us after we have left, but we will lose the ability to influence them.

NickPalmer

rkrkrk said:

Corbyn won with all three categories of members handsomely.
Tories4Corbyn made no difference to the overall outcome, but they did manage to contribute to the Labour party's coffers... For that they have my thanks.

I see that the election to the Conference Arrangements Committee yesterday - which pitted two Momentum people against two incumbents backed by the traditional Labour right - was won by 2-1 by the Momentum team. This is a fairly obscure procedural election (it will help Corbyn's team in deciding what Conference debates) and I suspect turnout wasn't huge, but it's probably a bellwether as both sides canvassed heavily. Essentially Progress and Labour First need to build alliances with the centrists who still dominate the PLP and much of the membership - a straight "fight Momentum" platform is not a winning strategy, any more than "stop Corbyn" worked well for TM. At present, the centrist membership view is that Corbyn has earned another shot and not too many obstacles should be put in his way.

Jonathan

SouthamObserver said:

Jonathan said:

The Whitehall/Westminster system is broken.

It sure is. Leaving the EU gives the UK an opportunity to have a constitutional convention and a complete rethink of the way things are organised currently. It won't happen, unfortunately.

The remain left needs to grab hold of "take back control ' and come up with a radicall programme of reform. If we are out of the EU on the basis of democratic deficit, let's become a real functioning, enterprising and vibrant democracy.

SouthamObserver

CarlottaVance said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

Don't the powers expire at midnight on Brexit?

The Act will create precedent. Future executives now have something to cite when they seek to grab more power and whip their MPs into backing them.

Mortimer

Burgon having a bit of a problem answering questions on strikes on the Today programme.

Ladies and gents, the future of the left. Guffaw.

SquareRoot

GIN1138 said:

I thought Jezza becoming PM was quite an exciting prospect but his betrayal over Brexit has left me shaken...

exiting prospect? jeeez

Jonathan

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

So our constitution is highly centralised. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist

There is very little constitutional constraint on a government with a majority. The idea of the unwritten constitution is romantic twaddle.

SouthamObserver

rkrkrk said:

Corbyn won with all three categories of members handsomely.
Tories4Corbyn made no difference to the overall outcome, but they did manage to contribute to the Labour party's coffers... For that they have my thanks.

Tories4Corbyn was a Toby Young initiative, wasn't it? There's really not much more that needs to be said. It was a silly game, played by silly people, who have ended up making themselves look even sillier.

Recidivist

Jonathan said:

SouthamObserver said:

Jonathan said:

The Whitehall/Westminster system is broken.

It sure is. Leaving the EU gives the UK an opportunity to have a constitutional convention and a complete rethink of the way things are organised currently. It won't happen, unfortunately.

The remain left needs to grab hold of "take back control ' and come up with a radicall programme of reform. If we are out of the EU on the basis of democratic deficit, let's become a real functioning, enterprising and vibrant democracy.

Agreed.

Charles

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

The unwritten British constitution that was being debated down below relies heavily on precedent. The legislation that was put before the Commons last night is constitutionally significant for that reason. It frightens the life out of me.

Absolutely - next time we leave a proto superstate we should be careful

Mortimer

SouthamObserver said:

CarlottaVance said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

Don't the powers expire at midnight on Brexit?

The Act will create precedent. Future executives now have something to cite when they seek to grab more power and whip their MPs into backing them.

Indeed. Next time we're leaving the EU then similar powers might be needed.

Oh, wait.....

Mortimer

Jonathan said:

SouthamObserver said:

Jonathan said:

The Whitehall/Westminster system is broken.

It sure is. Leaving the EU gives the UK an opportunity to have a constitutional convention and a complete rethink of the way things are organised currently. It won't happen, unfortunately.

The remain left needs to grab hold of "take back control ' and come up with a radicall programme of reform. If we are out of the EU on the basis of democratic deficit, let's become a real functioning, enterprising and vibrant democracy.

I'm sure your man Blair will be on it.

And listened to by no-one....

PClipp

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution. It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.
Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Did I hear right - that Labour MPs have voted to give Mrs May unprecedented powers?

The world is indeed upside down.

Jonathan

Charles said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

The unwritten British constitution that was being debated down below relies heavily on precedent. The legislation that was put before the Commons last night is constitutionally significant for that reason. It frightens the life out of me.

Absolutely - next time we leave a proto superstate we should be careful

Your faith in future politicians is touching. Naive. But touching.

SouthamObserver

NickPalmer said:

rkrkrk said:

Corbyn won with all three categories of members handsomely.
Tories4Corbyn made no difference to the overall outcome, but they did manage to contribute to the Labour party's coffers... For that they have my thanks.

I see that the election to the Conference Arrangements Committee yesterday - which pitted two Momentum people against two incumbents backed by the traditional Labour right - was won by 2-1 by the Momentum team. This is a fairly obscure procedural election (it will help Corbyn's team in deciding what Conference debates) and I suspect turnout wasn't huge, but it's probably a bellwether as both sides canvassed heavily. Essentially Progress and Labour First need to build alliances with the centrists who still dominate the PLP and much of the membership - a straight "fight Momentum" platform is not a winning strategy, any more than "stop Corbyn" worked well for TM. At present, the centrist membership view is that Corbyn has earned another shot and not too many obstacles should be put in his way.

For me the big takeaway of the CAC vote is that there remains a substantial anti-Corbyn rump in the Labour party - around 30% to 35% - that still needs to be purged.

CarlottaVance

SouthamObserver said:

CarlottaVance said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

Don't the powers expire at midnight on Brexit?

The Act will create precedent. Future executives now have something to cite when they seek to grab more power and whip their MPs into backing them.

Precedent for when we leave the EU again and have to domesticate a lot of laws?

Given they're called 'Henry VIII powers' don't you think they might have a bit of 'precedent' already?

Jonathan

Mortimer said:

Jonathan said:

SouthamObserver said:

Jonathan said:

The Whitehall/Westminster system is broken.

It sure is. Leaving the EU gives the UK an opportunity to have a constitutional convention and a complete rethink of the way things are organised currently. It won't happen, unfortunately.

The remain left needs to grab hold of "take back control ' and come up with a radicall programme of reform. If we are out of the EU on the basis of democratic deficit, let's become a real functioning, enterprising and vibrant democracy.

I'm sure your man Blair will be on it.

And listened to by no-one....

Blair can't lead it. But he might be the catalyst. Many people listen to him.

Theuniondivvie

I wonder if Tories for Corbyn has left its mark on certain centrist SLabbers? They appear to think Nats are going to spend £12 to usher in the Corbynite candidate as SLab leader. They are of course ignoring the fact that most of us want their established duffer to take over the reins.

Charles

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

So our constitution is highly centralised. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist

There is very little constitutional constraint on a government with a majority. The idea of the unwritten constitution is romantic twaddle.

I guess I can throw my degree in Constitutional Government in the bin then?

(Hailsham's Dimbleby Lecture is worth reading if you haven't already)

Jonathan

CarlottaVance said:

SouthamObserver said:

CarlottaVance said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

Don't the powers expire at midnight on Brexit?

The Act will create precedent. Future executives now have something to cite when they seek to grab more power and whip their MPs into backing them.

Precedent for when we leave the EU again and have to domesticate a lot of laws?

Given they're called 'Henry VIII powers' don't you think they might have a bit of 'precedent' already?

Income tax was a temporary measure to pay for a war. Who knows what crises might emerge later where this bill might be abused.

SouthamObserver

CarlottaVance said:

SouthamObserver said:

CarlottaVance said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

Don't the powers expire at midnight on Brexit?

The Act will create precedent. Future executives now have something to cite when they seek to grab more power and whip their MPs into backing them.

Precedent for when we leave the EU again and have to domesticate a lot of laws?

Given they're called 'Henry VIII powers' don't you think they might have a bit of 'precedent' already?

Nope - precedent for a government being able to decide that a situation is such that the messy process of having Parliament scrutinise its activities essentially needs to be suspended.

Charles

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

The unwritten British constitution that was being debated down below relies heavily on precedent. The legislation that was put before the Commons last night is constitutionally significant for that reason. It frightens the life out of me.

Absolutely - next time we leave a proto superstate we should be careful

Your faith in future politicians is touching. Naive. But touching.

Outcomes matter not process. Politicians are process

Slackbladder

SouthamObserver said:

NickPalmer said:

rkrkrk said:

Corbyn won with all three categories of members handsomely.
Tories4Corbyn made no difference to the overall outcome, but they did manage to contribute to the Labour party's coffers... For that they have my thanks.

I see that the election to the Conference Arrangements Committee yesterday - which pitted two Momentum people against two incumbents backed by the traditional Labour right - was won by 2-1 by the Momentum team. This is a fairly obscure procedural election (it will help Corbyn's team in deciding what Conference debates) and I suspect turnout wasn't huge, but it's probably a bellwether as both sides canvassed heavily. Essentially Progress and Labour First need to build alliances with the centrists who still dominate the PLP and much of the membership - a straight "fight Momentum" platform is not a winning strategy, any more than "stop Corbyn" worked well for TM. At present, the centrist membership view is that Corbyn has earned another shot and not too many obstacles should be put in his way.

For me the big takeaway of the CAC vote is that there remains a substantial anti-Corbyn rump in the Labour party - around 30% to 35% - that still needs to be purged.

Don't worry Momentum will be on that soon enough.

SouthamObserver

Charles said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

The unwritten British constitution that was being debated down below relies heavily on precedent. The legislation that was put before the Commons last night is constitutionally significant for that reason. It frightens the life out of me.

Absolutely - next time we leave a proto superstate we should be careful

Why does it have to involve leaving a proto superstate?

HYUFD

Had Burnham won the Labour leadership in 2015 he may even have won in 2017 or at least won most seats unlike Corbyn.

Corbyn was good at consolidating the centre left behind him squeezing the LDs, the Greens and the SNP in Labour's favour and even winning some left-wing Eurosceptic who had voted for UKIP.

However he also United the right and much of the centre against him and the Tories got 42% of the vote as a result, their highest voteshare for 25 years despite a hapless Tory vote. Burnham may have won a few more Tory votes, after all in Mau he even won Trafford in his Greater Manchester Mayoral bid and Trafford still has a Tory council and in 2015 he polled far better with Tory voters as to who they wanted to succeed Ed Miliband than Corbyn while also polling well with Labour voters (as opposed to Labour members who made him a distant second after Corbyn, though it would have been closer had preferences been included).

Jonathan

Charles said:

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

So our constitution is highly centralised. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist

There is very little constitutional constraint on a government with a majority. The idea of the unwritten constitution is romantic twaddle.

I guess I can throw my degree in Constitutional Government in the bin then?

(Hailsham's Dimbleby Lecture is worth reading if you haven't already)

Read it years ago, but well worth a reread. Yes stick it in the bin. Let's come up with something better than this failed settlement.

Jonathan

Charles said:

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

The unwritten British constitution that was being debated down below relies heavily on precedent. The legislation that was put before the Commons last night is constitutionally significant for that reason. It frightens the life out of me.

Absolutely - next time we leave a proto superstate we should be careful

Your faith in future politicians is touching. Naive. But touching.

Outcomes matter not process. Politicians are process

The ends justify the means?

HYUFD

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

The Scottish Parliament, Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies can also be abolished pretty swiftly because of parliamentary sovereignty although in reality they won't.

The principle that Parliamentis sovereign and no Parliament can bind its successors means constitutions have less effect in the UK

Slackbladder

HYUFD said:

Had Burnham won the Labour leadership in 2015 he may even have won in 2017 or at least won most seats unlike Corbyn.

If Burnham had won we probably would have had Brexit, and Cameron would still have been PM, who knows what would have happened.

SouthamObserver

Charles said:

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

The unwritten British constitution that was being debated down below relies heavily on precedent. The legislation that was put before the Commons last night is constitutionally significant for that reason. It frightens the life out of me.

Absolutely - next time we leave a proto superstate we should be careful

Your faith in future politicians is touching. Naive. But touching.

Outcomes matter not process. Politicians are process

It was OK for Mussolini to kill and lock up political opponents because he made the trains runs on time.

Jonathan

NickPalmer said:

rkrkrk said:

Corbyn won with all three categories of members handsomely.
Tories4Corbyn made no difference to the overall outcome, but they did manage to contribute to the Labour party's coffers... For that they have my thanks.

I see that the election to the Conference Arrangements Committee yesterday - which pitted two Momentum people against two incumbents backed by the traditional Labour right - was won by 2-1 by the Momentum team. This is a fairly obscure procedural election (it will help Corbyn's team in deciding what Conference debates) and I suspect turnout wasn't huge, but it's probably a bellwether as both sides canvassed heavily. Essentially Progress and Labour First need to build alliances with the centrists who still dominate the PLP and much of the membership - a straight "fight Momentum" platform is not a winning strategy, any more than "stop Corbyn" worked well for TM. At present, the centrist membership view is that Corbyn has earned another shot and not too many obstacles should be put in his way.

Slates fuel party division and should be banned. Why should members have to pick a side?

HYUFD

Slackbladder said:

HYUFD said:

Had Burnham won the Labour leadership in 2015 he may even have won in 2017 or at least won most seats unlike Corbyn.

If Burnham had won we probably would have had Brexit, and Cameron would still have been PM, who knows what would have happened.

If we had had Brexit Cameron would still have resigned so it would still likely have been Burnham v May

Alanbrooke

Islington worst place in the UK for women to live

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worst-place-in-the-uk-for-women-to-live-revealed-by-study/ar-AArJPCq?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartanntp

Scott_P

@ExcelPope: Brexit: The belief that my kids can convert my car into a Ferrari.
The Repeal Bill: The angle-grinder they said they needed.

Mortimer

SouthamObserver said:

Charles said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

The unwritten British constitution that was being debated down below relies heavily on precedent. The legislation that was put before the Commons last night is constitutionally significant for that reason. It frightens the life out of me.

Absolutely - next time we leave a proto superstate we should be careful

Why does it have to involve leaving a proto superstate?

Because that is how precedent works.

Slackbladder

HYUFD said:

Slackbladder said:

HYUFD said:

Had Burnham won the Labour leadership in 2015 he may even have won in 2017 or at least won most seats unlike Corbyn.

If Burnham had won we probably would have had Brexit, and Cameron would still have been PM, who knows what would have happened.

If we had had Brexit Cameron would still have resigned so it would still likely have been Burnham v May

Sorry, I meant probably wouldn't have had Brexit I mean. Burnham would have actually campagined to stay in.

Alanbrooke

Macron strike day - unions hit the streets in France

http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2017/09/12/20002-20170912LIVWWW00051-reforme-code-travail-emmanuel-macron-syndicats-salaries-patronat-cgt-indemnites-licenciements-negociations.php

HYUFD

Slackbladder said:

HYUFD said:

Slackbladder said:

HYUFD said:

Had Burnham won the Labour leadership in 2015 he may even have won in 2017 or at least won most seats unlike Corbyn.

If Burnham had won we probably would have had Brexit, and Cameron would still have been PM, who knows what would have happened.

If we had had Brexit Cameron would still have resigned so it would still likely have been Burnham v May

Sorry, I meant probably wouldn't have had Brexit I mean. Burnham would have actually campagined to stay in.

Even Burnham was talking about immigration concerns and even Corbyn backed Remain, Labour Leave voters in the North and Midlands would still have voted Leave I expect because they were sending a message on immigration

OldKingCole

Slackbladder said:

HYUFD said:

Had Burnham won the Labour leadership in 2015 he may even have won in 2017 or at least won most seats unlike Corbyn.

If Burnham had won we probably would have had Brexit, and Cameron would still have been PM, who knows what would have happened.

The big difference surely would have been that half (at least) of the Labour Front Bench wouldn’t have resigned every month.

Pong

Scott_P said:

@ExcelPope: Brexit: The belief that my kids can convert my car into a Ferrari.
The Repeal Bill: The angle-grinder they said they needed.

lol

Top quality ScottnPasting there.

rottenborough

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

So our constitution is highly centralised. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist

There is very little constitutional constraint on a government with a majority. The idea of the unwritten constitution is romantic twaddle.

I guess I can throw my degree in Constitutional Government in the bin then?

(Hailsham's Dimbleby Lecture is worth reading if you haven't already)

Read it years ago, but well worth a reread. Yes stick it in the bin. Let's come up with something better than this failed settlement.

Am I alone in thinking the Lords will block this Bill and its Henry VIII power-grab stuff?

PClipp

Mortimer said:

SouthamObserver said:

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

That's ok then.
The powers are limited and the Govt are accountable.
If you dislike the outcome of the laws, you'll be able to change them if your lot get in. .....

But isn`t the point that the government has suddenly become UNaccountble?

SouthamObserver

Alanbrooke said:

Macron strike day - unions hit the streets in France

http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2017/09/12/20002-20170912LIVWWW00051-reforme-code-travail-emmanuel-macron-syndicats-salaries-patronat-cgt-indemnites-licenciements-negociations.php

One union, isn't it?

Mortimer

rottenborough said:

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

So our constitution is highly centralised. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist

There is very little constitutional constraint on a government with a majority. The idea of the unwritten constitution is romantic twaddle.

I guess I can throw my degree in Constitutional Government in the bin then?

(Hailsham's Dimbleby Lecture is worth reading if you haven't already)

Read it years ago, but well worth a reread. Yes stick it in the bin. Let's come up with something better than this failed settlement.

Am I alone in thinking the Lords will block this Bill and its Henry VIII power-grab stuff?

The next great Remain hope? The previous ones all came good, right?

Charles

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

So our constitution is highly centralised. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist

There is very little constitutional constraint on a government with a majority. The idea of the unwritten constitution is romantic twaddle.

I guess I can throw my degree in Constitutional Government in the bin then?

(Hailsham's Dimbleby Lecture is worth reading if you haven't already)

Read it years ago, but well worth a reread. Yes stick it in the bin. Let's come up with something better than this failed settlement.

I don't disagree - personally I favour a federal system plus carving the executive out if Parliament

SouthamObserver

Mortimer said:

SouthamObserver said:

Charles said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

SouthamObserver said:

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobD said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

I'm greatly amused that there was zero fuss when the EU was exercising these powers. Heaven forbid the UK government wields them.

Its not the powers as such, it is the ability to amend them without democratic scrutiny.

Trust me says Theresa, after all, my judgement is infallible.

Yep - trust Theresa, the PM who promised no general election before calling one; and trust David, the cabinet minister who thought the UK could do an FTA with Germany; or trust Boris, sacked by the Times for lying; then there's Liam, who has been known to move in mysterious ways with his chum Mr Werrity; not to mention Michael, who warned us Turkey was on the verge of joining the EU.

I cannot see the problem with giving these and other ministers virtually unlimited power to legislate as they wish with no Parliamentary scrutiny. We can trust them. Can't we.

I think so.

Fair enough. My view of taking back control is that it does not involve giving unlimited, unaccountable power to serial liars and fantasists who were not able to win a majority at the last general election.

I think the argument that has more power is that you and I would not even like to see these powers given to people we wholeheartedly agreed with. There are basic principles that go beyond party politics and this is definitely one of them.

A fair point. But I wonder how many on here would be relaxed about Corbyn, McDonnell etc having the unregulated power that the current government is proposing for itself.

The unwritten British constitution that was being debated down below relies heavily on precedent. The legislation that was put before the Commons last night is constitutionally significant for that reason. It frightens the life out of me.

Absolutely - next time we leave a proto superstate we should be careful

Why does it have to involve leaving a proto superstate?

Because that is how precedent works.

No, it isn't. Henry VIII did not take the powers he did in order to leave the EU.

Charles

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

So our constitution is highly centralised. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist

There is very little constitutional constraint on a government with a majority. The idea of the unwritten constitution is romantic twaddle.

I guess I can throw my degree in Constitutional Government in the bin then?

(Hailsham's Dimbleby Lecture is worth reading if you haven't already)

Read it years ago, but well worth a reread. Yes stick it in the bin. Let's come up with something better than this failed settlement.

I don't disagree - personally I favour a federal system plus carving the executive out of the legislature

On your other point, no the ends don't justify the means. But politicians are largely irrelevant to outcomes. My mentor served in government for 40 years (and at cabinet rank for 30) and said that in that time there were only 3 important decisions made - in one there was no choice, in one the best course was obvious and on one he had no influence.

rottenborough

Mortimer said:

rottenborough said:

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

Jonathan said:

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Charles said:

FF43 said:

I presume if the UK had a proper Constitution, like most respectable countries, that the EU Withdrawal Bill would be unconstitutional.

We do have a proper Constitution.

It's just not codified.

That's just nonsense. To take just one example, in most democracies local government has established rights and powers granted to it by the constitution. In the UK it has none; local councils can be reorganised or abolished and their powers taken away or fettered by central government according to its whim.

So our constitution is highly centralised. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist

There is very little constitutional constraint on a government with a majority. The idea of the unwritten constitution is romantic twaddle.

I guess I can throw my degree in Constitutional Government in the bin then?

(Hailsham's Dimbleby Lecture is worth reading if you haven't already)

Read it years ago, but well worth a reread. Yes stick it in the bin. Let's come up with something better than this failed settlement.

Am I alone in thinking the Lords will block this Bill and its Henry VIII power-grab stuff?

The next great Remain hope? The previous ones all came good, right?

Actually I was referring more to the way its being done i.e. use of Henry power. They may force some kind of amendment on this side of it.

dr_spyn

Corbyn, young Cardinals vote for old dopes. Who is going to succeed the old fool?