You are possessed with this. I respect Ken Clarke but did not hear his comments
The simple fact is A50 can only be revoked through the UK consitutional process
It cannot be used as a ruse and to re-invoke has to be in a manner that would pass an ECJ ruling
Let's say May says time is up and her final act of PM is revoking her Article 50. Parliament authorises it. Would that be valid?
Then let's say we have a leadership election. The winner wins on a platform of fulfilling Brexit with a more specific agenda than Brexit means Brexit. Parliament authorises invoking Article 50 again. Would that be valid?
I used to hate low level letterboxes when delivering newspapers. They were never big enough, chewed up the paper and all too often had a really annoying yappy dog on the other side of it trying to get your fingers. Sign me up for that one.
Anyone who has ever done party leafletting would sign up for that in a flash!
Very true and for similar reasons. They are indeed an evil menace which have been left unregulated for far too long.
While we're at it, can we ban letterboxes at any level with a vicious fucking spring mechanism? Invariably, they are made of razor-sharp brass....
I'm told Kelvin Hopkins will likely vote against the deal, holding the party line for the party he's currently suspended from...... After all, he is bessy mates with Corbyn and was one of his nominators.
Hopkins is a homeopathist, a mate of Corbyn’s, a Leave Means Leaver, and an (alleged) sex pest.
I like the way people are talking like an 80 vote defeat is a victory. What comes next? Redefining black as white? Wet as dry?
A defeat of 80 is still a defeat. And a big one.
If you consider that Sky are forecasting a defeat of around 225 then anything below 150 will very much enable May to continue talks with the EU and return again with an updated deal.
I used to hate low level letterboxes when delivering newspapers. They were never big enough, chewed up the paper and all too often had a really annoying yappy dog on the other side of it trying to get your fingers. Sign me up for that one.
Anyone who has ever done party leafletting would sign up for that in a flash!
Very true and for similar reasons. They are indeed an evil menace which have been left unregulated for far too long.
Yes. But what about the letterboxes?
I'll get my coat
I have to say that I increasingly believe that leafletting is a displacement activity to convince enthusiasts that they are actually taking part. I really can't believe it changes any votes at all unless there is a very, very specific local issue that people feel strongly about.
I'm told Kelvin Hopkins will likely vote against the deal, holding the party line for the party he's currently suspended from...... After all, he is bessy mates with Corbyn and was one of his nominators.
Take the pathway past the steaming bog, left at the abandoned primary school that exudes an air of menace, keep going past the bare-chested old ladies smearing themselves in dung, and then right at Sainsbury's. You can't miss it.
Reality National columnist Ahmed-Sheikh was due to attend a four or five-day hearing of the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal in Perth yesterday after the Law Society of Scotland took out what is technically called a prosecution against her and former business partner Niall Mickel over events prior to her resignation.
The Law Society alleged professional misconduct on the part of both Mickel and Ahmed-Sheikh, mainly on grounds of failing to follow proper accounting procedures in the administration of a Mickel family trust.
The first day of the hearing saw a dramatic turn of events, however, when it was revealed at the outset that the Law Society and legal representatives of the two solicitors had agreed a joint minute clearing both lawyers of any dishonesty or impropriety.
They have accepted that they did not treat the trust as a client which would have involved different accounting procedures, but both solicitors believed they did not have to do so.
Newspaper reports in the run up to her unsuccessful election campaign in Ochil and South Perthshire in the 2017 general election suggested that Ahmed-Sheikh was being investigated for financial impropriety, but the tribunal heard yesterday that there had been none.
Nor was there any dishonesty on the part of Ahmed-Sheikh and Mickel, and nor did either of them gain anything, while the trust fund itself suffered no loss and indeed made money when interest was paid into it.
Furthermore the Law Society’s lawyer at the hearing, Grant Knight, stated that their belief that the trust fund was not a client of the firm was “erroneous but genuinely held.”
Knight told the hearing that significant sums had been loaned by the trust to Hamilton Burns which was struggling to cope in the period under review.
Mickel had set up the trust for his sister Jill in 2012 and part of the problem was that the trust remained known on the firm’s ledger as the Jill Mickel Trust when it should have been named the Alan Niall Macpherson Mickel Trust.
Knight said there was no evidence that the trust had been set up to lend money and that Mickel accepted that he should have taken steps to ensure proper accounting procedures.
Lawyer William Macreath for Mickel argued that the genuine belief that the trust was not a client did not meet the threshold for a finding of professional misconduct. He also said that his client and his family had suffered from the effects of the publicity surrounding the case.
I used to hate low level letterboxes when delivering newspapers. They were never big enough, chewed up the paper and all too often had a really annoying yappy dog on the other side of it trying to get your fingers. Sign me up for that one.
Anyone who has ever done party leafletting would sign up for that in a flash!
Use a wooden spoon to poke them through. Bit of luck, you'll choke the litte yappy sod too.....
Is that referring to private members bills and the Speaker ?
I'm told Kelvin Hopkins will likely vote against the deal, holding the party line for the party he's currently suspended from...... After all, he is bessy mates with Corbyn and was one of his nominators.
That's what I expect, and I've known him a long time. He is from the "polite but firm left" school of thought as Corbyn. The suspension is a non-political issue and won't have changed that.
Labour has been fined £12,500 for failing to properly report the donations given to it, the Electoral Commission today said. The watchdog said the fine is the highest penalty ever slapped on a political party for such an offence.
I'm told Kelvin Hopkins will likely vote against the deal, holding the party line for the party he's currently suspended from...... After all, he is bessy mates with Corbyn and was one of his nominators.
Hopkins is a homeopathist, a mate of Corbyn’s, a Leave Means Leaver, and an (alleged) sex pest.
The South Midlands really do have the worst MPs.
He's also THE authority on the wines of Burgundy in the House.
It's not a non-story. It's one of several (we will not run out of medicines, there will be enough food after March 29th) the need for which, if only to dismiss the premise, is mind-boggling.
I am professionally involved with one specific area that has been the subject of almost hysterical predictions of doom from remainers.
Everybody I spoke to within the industry was relaxed right from the off about the consequences of Brexit and there was a widespread confidence there would be minimal, if any, actual disruption.
I don't know about other industries but if remainers are as accurate with their predictions elsewhere as with my industry then their claims are little more than project fear.
That bit about "If there is any hope, it lies with the Labour party" sounds strangely familiar...
O'Brien. "...it is all nonsense. The Labour Party will never revolt, not in a thousand years or a million. They cannot. I do not have to tell you the reason: you know it already. If you have ever cherished any dreams of violent insurrection, you must abandon them. There is no way in which the Brexit can be overthrown. The rule of the Brexit is for ever...."
Quite right too. It would be a democratic outrage if due consideration of the proposal to ban low-level letterboxes was jeopardised.
What is the rationale for banning low-level letterboxes? Has Graham Brady's postman been given a bad back?
Not a political activist, I see!
Too right!
The next thing we can ban is describing houses exclusively with names rather than numbers.
Plus making it compulsory to have the "tradesmen" buzzer work always to gain entry to blocks of flats.
Anyone who has leafleted in Torbay would know that you would make it compulsory to have a post box by the front gate - and not up 60, 70, 80, 100 steps to the front door...... I once calulated that in one session I had walked the equivalent of one and a half Empire State Buildings.....
That bit about "If there is any hope, it lies with the Labour party" sounds strangely familiar...
O'Brien. "...it is all nonsense. The Labour Party will never revolt, not in a thousand years or a million. They cannot. I do not have to tell you the reason: you know it already. If you have ever cherished any dreams of violent insurrection, you must abandon them. There is no way in which the Brexit can be overthrown. The rule of the Brexit is for ever...."
"But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Boris."
If this doesn’t end withMay going then I can’t see why the leavers have a problem. I think the EU is leaking and hinting at a better deal and as such is undermining May. She could carry on regardless as is her style but a deal which limits the backstop would go a long way to getting everyone on board. Once we have left then it is unlikely that we will go back in, the deal would be worse, the EU is now likely to unhindered move closer. Could she get a time limited nature for backstop, provide compensation for NI for change in status for limited time? Provide further reassurance on rights for labour leavers?
That bit about "If there is any hope, it lies with the Labour party" sounds strangely familiar...
O'Brien. "...it is all nonsense. The Labour Party will never revolt, not in a thousand years or a million. They cannot. I do not have to tell you the reason: you know it already. If you have ever cherished any dreams of violent insurrection, you must abandon them. There is no way in which the Brexit can be overthrown. The rule of the Brexit is for ever...."
I used to hate low level letterboxes when delivering newspapers. They were never big enough, chewed up the paper and all too often had a really annoying yappy dog on the other side of it trying to get your fingers. Sign me up for that one.
Anyone who has ever done party leafletting would sign up for that in a flash!
Very true and for similar reasons. They are indeed an evil menace which have been left unregulated for far too long.
Yes. But what about the letterboxes?
I'll get my coat
I have to say that I increasingly believe that leafletting is a displacement activity to convince enthusiasts that they are actually taking part. I really can't believe it changes any votes at all unless there is a very, very specific local issue that people feel strongly about.
I think for the locals it helps.
I just love delivering bar chart infested Focus team leaflets in my sandals, with socks obviously!
Quite right too. It would be a democratic outrage if due consideration of the proposal to ban low-level letterboxes was jeopardised.
What is the rationale for banning low-level letterboxes? Has Graham Brady's postman been given a bad back?
Not a political activist, I see!
Too right!
The next thing we can ban is describing houses exclusively with names rather than numbers.
Plus making it compulsory to have the "tradesmen" buzzer work always to gain entry to blocks of flats.
Anyone who has leafleted in Torbay would know that you would make it compulsory to have a post box by the front gate - and not up 60, 70, 80, 100 steps to the front door...... I once calulated that in one session I had walked the equivalent of one and a half Empire State Buildings.....
That falls down as a unit of measurement given that most people have never walked up the side of a skyscraper.
Take the pathway past the steaming bog, left at the abandoned primary school that exudes an air of menace, keep going past the bare-chested old ladies smearing themselves in dung, and then right at Sainsbury's. You can't miss it.
That bit about "If there is any hope, it lies with the Labour party" sounds strangely familiar...
O'Brien. "f...it is all nonsense. The Labour Party will never revolt, not in a thousand years or a million. They cannot. I do not have to tell you the reason: you know it already. If you have ever cherished any dreams of violent insurrection, you must abandon them. There is no way in which the Brexit can be overthrown. The rule of the Brexit is for ever...."
It's not a non-story. It's one of several (we will not run out of medicines, there will be enough food after March 29th) the need for which, if only to dismiss the premise, is mind-boggling.
I am professionally involved with one specific area that has been the subject of almost hysterical predictions of doom from remainers.
Everybody I spoke to within the industry was relaxed right from the off about the consequences of Brexit and there was a widespread confidence there would be minimal, if any, actual disruption.
I don't know about other industries but if remainers are as accurate with their predictions elsewhere as with my industry then their claims are little more than project fear.
It doesn't seem to have been noticed yet but it looks likely that more than half of all Conservative backbenchers are going to rebel tonight. That would look like a tipping point for Theresa May to me.
This kind of post is the problem I have with peoples vote. You see hardly anyone calling for peoples vote who wants to leave. And drumming up a crowd in London to support Remain is like shooting fish in a barrel. Try doing in Stoke then you can say it’s the will of the people
It's not a non-story. It's one of several (we will not run out of medicines, there will be enough food after March 29th) the need for which, if only to dismiss the premise, is mind-boggling.
I am professionally involved with one specific area that has been the subject of almost hysterical predictions of doom from remainers.
Everybody I spoke to within the industry was relaxed right from the off about the consequences of Brexit and there was a widespread confidence there would be minimal, if any, actual disruption.
I don't know about other industries but if remainers are as accurate with their predictions elsewhere as with my industry then their claims are little more than project fear.
It doesn't seem to have been noticed yet but it looks likely that more than half of all Conservative backbenchers are going to rebel tonight. That would look like a tipping point for Theresa May to me.
Davis considers Suez was a British success ??????????????????????????????
Come to think of it, what about "Appeasement before the Second World War"? Bizarre.
Elsewhere in the same interview:
DER SPIEGEL: Was it wise to resign in the middle of the greatest chaos?
Davis: Yes, oh yes. When I realized that the prime minister is about to hand away the control of our own future, our independent nationhood, I couldn't go on.
DER SPIEGEL: Is Theresa May the right person to reconcile the party and the country?
Davis: Yeah, yeah. Since I stood down, I have always said change the policy not the person. I think she's a good prime minister.
If this doesn’t end withMay going then I can’t see why the leavers have a problem. I think the EU is leaking and hinting at a better deal and as such is undermining May. She could carry on regardless as is her style but a deal which limits the backstop would go a long way to getting everyone on board. Once we have left then it is unlikely that we will go back in, the deal would be worse, the EU is now likely to unhindered move closer. Could she get a time limited nature for backstop, provide compensation for NI for change in status for limited time? Provide further reassurance on rights for labour leavers?
I was looking at it from the ERG's point of view. They are clear that they don't trust May to negotiate the trade agreement which, given her record to date, is entirely understandable. If the price of their support was her prompt departure she might just pay it. If she loses by 200+ tonight she surely has to go in any event.
Davis considers Suez was a British success ??????????????????????????????
No. He's saying that decisions taken on gut instinct are correct even if the outcomes are catastrophic,: you take the best decision you can on the evidence available. It's not a bad thought but it should be counterweighted by the point that if you frequently make poor decisions then there might be something wrong with you.
Davis considers Suez was a British success ??????????????????????????????
Come to think of it, what about "Appeasement before the Second World War"? Bizarre.
Elsewhere in the same interview:
DER SPIEGEL: Was it wise to resign in the middle of the greatest chaos?
Davis: Yes, oh yes. When I realized that the prime minister is about to hand away the control of our own future, our independent nationhood, I couldn't go on.
DER SPIEGEL: Is Theresa May the right person to reconcile the party and the country?
Davis: Yeah, yeah. Since I stood down, I have always said change the policy not the person. I think she's a good prime minister.
This kind of post is the problem I have with peoples vote. You see hardly anyone calling for peoples vote who wants to leave. And drumming up a crowd in London to support Remain is like shooting fish in a barrel. Try doing in Stoke then you can say it’s the will of the people
Davis considers Suez was a British success ??????????????????????????????
Come to think of it, what about "Appeasement before the Second World War"? Bizarre.
Elsewhere in the same interview:
DER SPIEGEL: Was it wise to resign in the middle of the greatest chaos?
Davis: Yes, oh yes. When I realized that the prime minister is about to hand away the control of our own future, our independent nationhood, I couldn't go on.
DER SPIEGEL: Is Theresa May the right person to reconcile the party and the country?
Davis: Yeah, yeah. Since I stood down, I have always said change the policy not the person. I think she's a good prime minister.
If this doesn’t end withMay going then I can’t see why the leavers have a problem. I think the EU is leaking and hinting at a better deal and as such is undermining May. She could carry on regardless as is her style but a deal which limits the backstop would go a long way to getting everyone on board. Once we have left then it is unlikely that we will go back in, the deal would be worse, the EU is now likely to unhindered move closer. Could she get a time limited nature for backstop, provide compensation for NI for change in status for limited time? Provide further reassurance on rights for labour leavers?
I was looking at it from the ERG's point of view. They are clear that they don't trust May to negotiate the trade agreement which, given her record to date, is entirely understandable. If the price of their support was her prompt departure she might just pay it. If she loses by 200+ tonight she surely has to go in any event.
You keep saying this, but I think you’re wrong. She won the vote of confidence just a month ago. She isn’t going to leave because Bill Cash and the other 100 miscreants think she should. It would be totally out of character.
She will be in the cockpit when we hit the water/enter hyperspace/land in enemy territory.
It doesn't seem to have been noticed yet but it looks likely that more than half of all Conservative backbenchers are going to rebel tonight. That would look like a tipping point for Theresa May to me.
A tipping point for what? Do numbers even matter anymore?
You are possessed with this. I respect Ken Clarke but did not hear his comments
The simple fact is A50 can only be revoked through the UK consitutional process
It cannot be used as a ruse and to re-invoke has to be in a manner that would pass an ECJ ruling
Let's say May says time is up and her final act of PM is revoking her Article 50. Parliament authorises it. Would that be valid?
Then let's say we have a leadership election. The winner wins on a platform of fulfilling Brexit with a more specific agenda than Brexit means Brexit. Parliament authorises invoking Article 50 again. Would that be valid?
She cannot revoke it on her own initiative. If parliament does authorise revoke that is valid
However, if circumstances change and Parliament decides to invoke A50 that would be fine but may be subject to an ECJ ruling from remainers or the 27 nations
If this doesn’t end withMay going then I can’t see why the leavers have a problem. I think the EU is leaking and hinting at a better deal and as such is undermining May. She could carry on regardless as is her style but a deal which limits the backstop would go a long way to getting everyone on board. Once we have left then it is unlikely that we will go back in, the deal would be worse, the EU is now likely to unhindered move closer. Could she get a time limited nature for backstop, provide compensation for NI for change in status for limited time? Provide further reassurance on rights for labour leavers?
I was looking at it from the ERG's point of view. They are clear that they don't trust May to negotiate the trade agreement which, given her record to date, is entirely understandable. If the price of their support was her prompt departure she might just pay it. If she loses by 200+ tonight she surely has to go in any event.
You keep saying this, but I think you’re wrong. She won the vote of confidence just a month ago. She isn’t going to leave because Bill Cash and the other 100 miscreants think she should. It would be totally out of character.
She will be in the cockpit when we hit the water/enter hyperspace/land in enemy territory.
Davis considers Suez was a British success ??????????????????????????????
No. He's saying that decisions taken on gut instinct are correct even if the outcomes are catastrophic,: you take the best decision you can on the evidence available. It's not a bad thought but it should be counterweighted by the point that if you frequently make poor decisions then there might be something wrong with you.
Most people need an interpreter when speaking in a foreign language. Not Davis, obviously as he could also be offering balance (unlikely, I know).
Davis considers Suez was a British success ??????????????????????????????
Come to think of it, what about "Appeasement before the Second World War"? Bizarre.
Elsewhere in the same interview:
DER SPIEGEL: Was it wise to resign in the middle of the greatest chaos?
Davis: Yes, oh yes. When I realized that the prime minister is about to hand away the control of our own future, our independent nationhood, I couldn't go on.
DER SPIEGEL: Is Theresa May the right person to reconcile the party and the country?
Davis: Yeah, yeah. Since I stood down, I have always said change the policy not the person. I think she's a good prime minister.
If this doesn’t end withMay going then I can’t see why the leavers have a problem. I think the EU is leaking and hinting at a better deal and as such is undermining May. She could carry on regardless as is her style but a deal which limits the backstop would go a long way to getting everyone on board. Once we have left then it is unlikely that we will go back in, the deal would be worse, the EU is now likely to unhindered move closer. Could she get a time limited nature for backstop, provide compensation for NI for change in status for limited time? Provide further reassurance on rights for labour leavers?
I was looking at it from the ERG's point of view. They are clear that they don't trust May to negotiate the trade agreement which, given her record to date, is entirely understandable. If the price of their support was her prompt departure she might just pay it. If she loses by 200+ tonight she surely has to go in any event.
You keep saying this, but I think you’re wrong. She won the vote of confidence just a month ago. She isn’t going to leave because Bill Cash and the other 100 miscreants think she should. It would be totally out of character.
She will be in the cockpit when we hit the water/enter hyperspace/land in enemy territory.
I only ever see the occasional clip of the House on social media.
I think there would be an audience for a weekly round up, well-edited, but free of commentary and voiceover, featuring the most interesting contributions in the Commons, the Lords, and in public speeches. Not in a satirical or trivial way but genuinely aiming to create an ongoing narrative of our political scene.
There used to be such a programme on Saturday (BBC2 I think, in the early evening), fronted by Vincent Hanna and Andrew Rawnsley: "A Week in Politics" and it had what you describe, as well as other interesting stuff.
If something like that were revived, I'd join you in the audience.
Davis considers Suez was a British success ??????????????????????????????
Come to think of it, what about "Appeasement before the Second World War"? Bizarre.
Elsewhere in the same interview:
DER SPIEGEL: Was it wise to resign in the middle of the greatest chaos?
Davis: Yes, oh yes. When I realized that the prime minister is about to hand away the control of our own future, our independent nationhood, I couldn't go on.
DER SPIEGEL: Is Theresa May the right person to reconcile the party and the country?
Davis: Yeah, yeah. Since I stood down, I have always said change the policy not the person. I think she's a good prime minister.
Davis considers Suez was a British success ??????????????????????????????
Come to think of it, what about "Appeasement before the Second World War"? Bizarre.
Elsewhere in the same interview:
DER SPIEGEL: Was it wise to resign in the middle of the greatest chaos?
Davis: Yes, oh yes. When I realized that the prime minister is about to hand away the control of our own future, our independent nationhood, I couldn't go on.
DER SPIEGEL: Is Theresa May the right person to reconcile the party and the country?
Davis: Yeah, yeah. Since I stood down, I have always said change the policy not the person. I think she's a good prime minister.
Davis considers Suez was a British success ??????????????????????????????
No. He's saying that decisions taken on gut instinct are correct even if the outcomes are catastrophic,: you take the best decision you can on the evidence available. It's not a bad thought but it should be counterweighted by the point that if you frequently make poor decisions then there might be something wrong with you.
Hmm. Maybe that's what he was trying to say.
But I don't think appeasement before WWII is a very good example of "big changes demand that you don't run away in fear from a decision." Wasn't appeasement essentially a way of avoiding a hard decision?
If this doesn’t end withMay going then I can’t see why the leavers have a problem. I think the EU is leaking and hinting at a better deal and as such is undermining May. She could carry on regardless as is her style but a deal which limits the backstop would go a long way to getting everyone on board. Once we have left then it is unlikely that we will go back in, the deal would be worse, the EU is now likely to unhindered move closer. Could she get a time limited nature for backstop, provide compensation for NI for change in status for limited time? Provide further reassurance on rights for labour leavers?
I was looking at it from the ERG's point of view. They are clear that they don't trust May to negotiate the trade agreement which, given her record to date, is entirely understandable. If the price of their support was her prompt departure she might just pay it. If she loses by 200+ tonight she surely has to go in any event.
You keep saying this, but I think you’re wrong. She won the vote of confidence just a month ago. She isn’t going to leave because Bill Cash and the other 100 miscreants think she should. It would be totally out of character.
She will be in the cockpit when we hit the water/enter hyperspace/land in enemy territory.
Pancake into the landscape ?
I believe the current phrase is "controlled flight into terrain"...
Apols for the language, but he does have a point.*snip*
Wealthy old man thinks having sex with a woman young enough to be his daughter after a history of relationship failures is something to be proud of
It's just awful all the way through, from the appalling smugness to "my Belgian private equity friend" to "the Cracker from Caracas". What a copper bottomed, gold plated, leather bound tosser.
Miss Cyclefree, on that note, it irks me when political journalists tell us what politicians say instead of playing the footage directly.
It's akin to 'filtering' in writing, whereby the writer, by mistake or error, ends up saying X saw Y, instead of just describing Y. It creates unnecessary distance between the reader (or viewer, in the previous example) and the subject.
Anyway, I am off for the evening. Do have a calm and civil evening, everyone.
Davis considers Suez was a British success ??????????????????????????????
No. He's saying that decisions taken on gut instinct are correct even if the outcomes are catastrophic,: you take the best decision you can on the evidence available. It's not a bad thought but it should be counterweighted by the point that if you frequently make poor decisions then there might be something wrong with you.
Hmm. Maybe that's what he was trying to say.
But I don't think appeasement before WWII is a very good example of "big changes demand that you don't run away in fear from a decision." Wasn't appeasement essentially a way of avoiding a hard decision?
It might well be. But I don't think that's what he thinks.
Just had a walk through the crowd outside Parliament. People walking around banging drums and waving flags in your face. Bit of a weird experience. I thought about trying to get in the public gallery but the queue was pretty long.
Apols for the language, but he does have a point.*snip*
Wealthy old man thinks having sex with a woman young enough to be his daughter after a history of relationship failures is something to be proud of
It's just awful all the way through, from the appalling smugness to "my Belgian private equity friend" to "the Cracker from Caracas". What a copper bottomed, gold plated, leather bound tosser.
If this doesn’t end withMay going then I can’t see why the leavers have a problem. I think the EU is leaking and hinting at a better deal and as such is undermining May. She could carry on regardless as is her style but a deal which limits the backstop would go a long way to getting everyone on board. Once we have left then it is unlikely that we will go back in, the deal would be worse, the EU is now likely to unhindered move closer. Could she get a time limited nature for backstop, provide compensation for NI for change in status for limited time? Provide further reassurance on rights for labour leavers?
I was looking at it from the ERG's point of view. They are clear that they don't trust May to negotiate the trade agreement which, given her record to date, is entirely understandable. If the price of their support was her prompt departure she might just pay it. If she loses by 200+ tonight she surely has to go in any event.
You keep saying this, but I think you’re wrong. She won the vote of confidence just a month ago. She isn’t going to leave because Bill Cash and the other 100 miscreants think she should. It would be totally out of character.
She will be in the cockpit when we hit the water/enter hyperspace/land in enemy territory.
Agree in part. I don't think she's going to shift; however, as long as Theresa May stonewalls Parliament and refuses to budge on her Deal then it's to the advantage of the Leave wing to let her carry on, because the clock continues to run down whilst the various groups of Remainers cluck and flap and agonise over the best course of action.
Things only begin to get more sticky if Mr Speaker changes the rules to remove Government control of Commons business, allowing the Tory Hard Remainers to attempt to alter the course of Brexit, or if May herself decides to throw her Withdrawal Agreement in the dustbin and start from scratch. Both outcomes are possible, although why she would burn the Deal is beyond me. She insists that the referendum result must be honoured and that her negotiation has produced the best available way of doing this. It also constitutes more or less the sum total of her achievement as Prime Minister.
I used to hate low level letterboxes when delivering newspapers. They were never big enough, chewed up the paper and all too often had a really annoying yappy dog on the other side of it trying to get your fingers. Sign me up for that one.
Anyone who has ever done party leafletting would sign up for that in a flash!
Can we not just ban all political junk mail? Mine go straight into the recycling. Does anyone actually read this dismal propaganda?
I used to hate low level letterboxes when delivering newspapers. They were never big enough, chewed up the paper and all too often had a really annoying yappy dog on the other side of it trying to get your fingers. Sign me up for that one.
Anyone who has ever done party leafletting would sign up for that in a flash!
Can we not just ban all political junk mail? Mine go straight into the recycling. Does anyone actually read this dismal propaganda?
As I explained the other day if we end up with a no deal Brexit and no toilet rolls it will be an important resource.
If this doesn’t end withMay going then I can’t see why the leavers have a problem. I think the EU is leaking and hinting at a better deal and as such is undermining May. She could carry on regardless as is her style but a deal which limits the backstop would go a long way to getting everyone on board. Once we have left then it is unlikely that we will go back in, the deal would be worse, the EU is now likely to unhindered move closer. Could she get a time limited nature for backstop, provide compensation for NI for change in status for limited time? Provide further reassurance on rights for labour leavers?
I was looking at it from the ERG's point of view. They are clear that they don't trust May to negotiate the trade agreement which, given her record to date, is entirely understandable. If the price of their support was her prompt departure she might just pay it. If she loses by 200+ tonight she surely has to go in any event.
You keep saying this, but I think you’re wrong. She won the vote of confidence just a month ago. She isn’t going to leave because Bill Cash and the other 100 miscreants think she should. It would be totally out of character.
She will be in the cockpit when we hit the water/enter hyperspace/land in enemy territory.
Pancake into the landscape ?
I believe the current phrase is "controlled flight into terrain"...
I imagine it to be like when the saucer section lands on Veridian III. Survivable, but unpleasant.
I used to hate low level letterboxes when delivering newspapers. They were never big enough, chewed up the paper and all too often had a really annoying yappy dog on the other side of it trying to get your fingers. Sign me up for that one.
Anyone who has ever done party leafletting would sign up for that in a flash!
Can we not just ban all political junk mail? Mine go straight into the recycling. Does anyone actually read this dismal propaganda?
Yes. Voters get annoyed if nobody tells them what their options are. I know from experience
This kind of post is the problem I have with peoples vote. You see hardly anyone calling for peoples vote who wants to leave. And drumming up a crowd in London to support Remain is like shooting fish in a barrel. Try doing in Stoke then you can say it’s the will of the people
Well there's always an angle that enables you to dismiss people you disagree with. Who cares what muesli eating Londoners think? Who cares what the old and uneducated think?
But the fact is that it is looking like the whole Brexit process is going to be played out while parliament is surrounded by crowds highly motivated to oppose it. The last time crowds took that much interest was the Great Reform Act.
I used to hate low level letterboxes when delivering newspapers. They were never big enough, chewed up the paper and all too often had a really annoying yappy dog on the other side of it trying to get your fingers. Sign me up for that one.
Anyone who has ever done party leafletting would sign up for that in a flash!
Can we not just ban all political junk mail? Mine go straight into the recycling. Does anyone actually read this dismal propaganda?
It is not junk mail. It is political literature, fundamental to any healthy democracy.
Whether people read it or not depends on the area. Prosperous retireds? Oh yes. Working 30 or 40 somethings? Almost never.
Have bought 229. No idea where the extra votes will come from but something has to happen and the alternative is just bonkers. Although I also accept that it might take a couple of goes to pass.
Comments
Then let's say we have a leadership election. The winner wins on a platform of fulfilling Brexit with a more specific agenda than Brexit means Brexit. Parliament authorises invoking Article 50 again. Would that be valid?
The South Midlands really do have the worst MPs.
Woodcock is anti Corbyn but also anti Brexit*. He will vote against Corbyn and Brexit, the tricky bit might be if those things crossover.
IMO and based on probability, nothing certain of course.
Edit: *Not sure to what extent
Tom Gordon @HTScotPol
Former SNP MP Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh found guilty of professional misconduct https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17359087.former-snp-mp-tasmina-ahmed-sheikh-found-guilty-of-professional-misconduct/?ref=twtrec …
16
Usual misreading of the actual result by the almost bankrupt unionist mouthpiece , The floundering Herald
Both cleared of any impropriety or dishonesty.
Reality
National columnist Ahmed-Sheikh was due to attend a four or five-day hearing of the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal in Perth yesterday after the Law Society of Scotland took out what is technically called a prosecution against her and former business partner Niall Mickel over events prior to her resignation.
The Law Society alleged professional misconduct on the part of both Mickel and Ahmed-Sheikh, mainly on grounds of failing to follow proper accounting procedures in the administration of a Mickel family trust.
The first day of the hearing saw a dramatic turn of events, however, when it was revealed at the outset that the Law Society and legal representatives of the two solicitors had agreed a joint minute clearing both lawyers of any dishonesty or impropriety.
They have accepted that they did not treat the trust as a client which would have involved different accounting procedures, but both solicitors believed they did not have to do so.
Newspaper reports in the run up to her unsuccessful election campaign in Ochil and South Perthshire in the 2017 general election suggested that Ahmed-Sheikh was being investigated for financial impropriety, but the tribunal heard yesterday that there had been none.
Nor was there any dishonesty on the part of Ahmed-Sheikh and Mickel, and nor did either of them gain anything, while the trust fund itself suffered no loss and indeed made money when interest was paid into it.
Furthermore the Law Society’s lawyer at the hearing, Grant Knight, stated that their belief that the trust fund was not a client of the firm was “erroneous but genuinely held.”
Knight told the hearing that significant sums had been loaned by the trust to Hamilton Burns which was struggling to cope in the period under review.
Mickel had set up the trust for his sister Jill in 2012 and part of the problem was that the trust remained known on the firm’s ledger as the Jill Mickel Trust when it should have been named the Alan Niall Macpherson Mickel Trust.
Knight said there was no evidence that the trust had been set up to lend money and that Mickel accepted that he should have taken steps to ensure proper accounting procedures.
Lawyer William Macreath for Mickel argued that the genuine belief that the trust was not a client did not meet the threshold for a finding of professional misconduct. He also said that his client and his family had suffered from the effects of the publicity surrounding the case.
Tories and Lib Dem's fined £200.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6594805/Labour-fined-12-500-failing-properly-report-donations.html
Not exactly much of a punishment.
Everybody I spoke to within the industry was relaxed right from the off about the consequences of Brexit and there was a widespread confidence there would be minimal, if any, actual disruption.
I don't know about other industries but if remainers are as accurate with their predictions elsewhere as with my industry then their claims are little more than project fear.
https://twitter.com/WinstonsBack/status/1085227083666780167
I just love delivering bar chart infested Focus team leaflets in my sandals, with socks obviously!
Then again, I'm not there, so I'm clearly not a person, and wouldn't know.
DER SPIEGEL: Was it wise to resign in the middle of the greatest chaos?
Davis: Yes, oh yes. When I realized that the prime minister is about to hand away the control of our own future, our independent nationhood, I couldn't go on.
DER SPIEGEL: Is Theresa May the right person to reconcile the party and the country?
Davis: Yeah, yeah. Since I stood down, I have always said change the policy not the person. I think she's a good prime minister.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/former-brexit-minister-david-davis-we-should-not-be-afraid-of-no-deal-a-1247602.html
She will be in the cockpit when we hit the water/enter hyperspace/land in enemy territory.
Do numbers even matter anymore?
However, if circumstances change and Parliament decides to invoke A50 that would be fine but may be subject to an ECJ ruling from remainers or the 27 nations
If something like that were revived, I'd join you in the audience.
https://twitter.com/Baddiel/status/1085178345397145601
sub-optimal.
But I don't think appeasement before WWII is a very good example of "big changes demand that you don't run away in fear from a decision." Wasn't appeasement essentially a way of avoiding a hard decision?
It's akin to 'filtering' in writing, whereby the writer, by mistake or error, ends up saying X saw Y, instead of just describing Y. It creates unnecessary distance between the reader (or viewer, in the previous example) and the subject.
Anyway, I am off for the evening. Do have a calm and civil evening, everyone.
Things only begin to get more sticky if Mr Speaker changes the rules to remove Government control of Commons business, allowing the Tory Hard Remainers to attempt to alter the course of Brexit, or if May herself decides to throw her Withdrawal Agreement in the dustbin and start from scratch. Both outcomes are possible, although why she would burn the Deal is beyond me. She insists that the referendum result must be honoured and that her negotiation has produced the best available way of doing this. It also constitutes more or less the sum total of her achievement as Prime Minister.
Seems like they are trying to undermine May. This fake news reminds me of something
Voters get annoyed if nobody tells them what their options are. I know from experience
But the fact is that it is looking like the whole Brexit process is going to be played out while parliament is surrounded by crowds highly motivated to oppose it. The last time crowds took that much interest was the Great Reform Act.
Ergo, he doesn’t believe the myth of a bloke turning water into wine but does believe in blokes turning water into medicine.
An odd combo!
Whether people read it or not depends on the area. Prosperous retireds? Oh yes. Working 30 or 40 somethings? Almost never.