PM knows we need more time to be ready for any sort of Leave. She must have officials, politicians and businesspeople telling her this morning, noon, and night.
PM knows she can never be seen to propose an extension for she would be burned alive by her party.
So PM needs to engineer a situation where she is forced to extend despite her apparently seeming to have tried as hard as she could to never go there.
That her party would road her alive for delaying when we are not at all ready just goes to show how bonkers the Tories are now. Yes, many of those proposing an extension without a decision really do just want to remain and are not being honest about that, but everyone knows we don't have time now. Why exactly does it takes weeks of talks to compare ideas with the EU again? I know they love their summits and formal meetings, but they're only talking about one aspect of the WA at most, so really there's no reason for all this delay unless the EU have just been bluffing this whole time.
Fuck you Theresa May. This is unforgivably reckless, and all so you can put off a decision for the ERG.
Abuse aside, why is May going to this meeting? She's made it abundantly clear that she doesn't expect to be having anything to do with the management of the EU after the end of next month, and the meeting to which she is going is between that and the Arab League. Quite frankly, I can well imagine that, Jordan and maybe the Saudi's, perhaps apart, most Arab states regard the UK as untrustworthy and possibly as pro-Israeli, so what can she possibly hope to contribute?
I presume it's merely the most convenient way to try to grab some time with other EU leaders is all.
She should delay just the once more and then getting an A50 extension bill through the Lords in time will be nigh on impossible without government backing. The referendum decision must be implemented.
There's no need for any bill to go through parliament to extend article 50.
There is to force the executive against the express wishes of the PM.
There are other ways to force the PM's hand.
Let’s say the Commons votes to instruct May to request an extension. She refuses. What can they do, short of VONCing her?
Why would May refuse? The Commons voting to extend Article 50 is great for her, she then force the ERG to face a 'Vote for my Deal or risk BINO or revoke' choice
You're certainly right about my bias, but let's put things another way: the most important political issue of out time is undoubtedly Brexit. How many of our current MPs have read and understand the Withdrawal Agreement sufficiently to vote on whether it's in their constituents' interests to accept it or not? At what earnings percentile (roughly) do you think that level of comprehension kicks in? Because I'm pretty sure it's well above the 95th.
I disagree entirely.
I disagree about the connection between intelligence and wealth.
I disagree that the job of MPs is to analyse a document and vote solely on whether it's in their constituents' interests.
Happy to agree to disagree on the first point.
But on the second: the core of your argument is that local people are needed to represent their constituents properly. I fail to see how they can do that of they can't assimilate a tonne of information on a huge range of topics in a short period of time, constantly, and interpret it to understand the impact on the people they represent. That seems to me to a difficult ask for all but a fairly select group of people.
If they're just relying on party lines to tell them how to vote most of the time, in what way is their localness relevant or necessary?
However Endillion it does sort of sound here like you are arguing for governance by technocrat when you say "That seems to me to a difficult ask for all but a fairly select group of people." . While I am sure our mp's are very intelligent people in their fields sadly it is also true to say that outside those fields they are as dense as the rest of us you merely have to look at any of their mutterings about internet governance or encryption to understand that
Interesting indeed - thanks, although I'll pre-empt the inevitable criticisms that IQ is a poor indicator of intelligence by largely agreeing with them.
I'm not arguing for governance by technocrat, in any way. What I would like to see is a Commons disproportionately composed of experienced professionals from a wider range of fields than is currently the case; so probably fewer lawyers, PR people and trade unionists, a similar number of doctors, ex-soldiers and finance people, but more scientists, engineers, tradespeople, etc (at a total guess - I don't have any figures to hand for this).
I have, of course, absolutely no immediate ideas as to how to go about this.
12th March is rather close to 29th March if my maths is correct.
Its already barely a month away - and February only has 28 days.
I think the issue then becomes do we revoke, rescind, withdraw, ask for a temporary extension without an end date or an extension with an end date - some of which require approval of the other 27 member states and some don't (but if we do withdraw article 50 completely we can't just reinvoke again and again as there are legal barriers).
Won't the lawyers (potentially 28 sets of lawyers) need time to agree and sort this out? What if Spain says no or Hungary if its temporary?
I wonder how Jess Philips's nan voted in the referendum - leave?
I've said before that modern middle class life increasingly demands an exploited immigrant serf class for menial service sector activities together with an exploited foreign workforce for agricultural and manufactured produce.
Why just middle class? Do working class daughters tend to stay at home to wipe their elderly fathers’ bottoms?
In my experience they do so rather more.
Probably through a combination of family ties being more important in working class communities, working class families being less geographically dispersed, working class people being more willing to do 'menial' jobs and working class oldies being likely to die a bit earlier.
In my experience women are a lot more likely to work than they used to and elderly parents unable to look after themselves also need looking after during working hours, not just in the evenings and weekends. I am also not sure why Fraser believes the responsibility lies solely with daughters.
There's nothing in the piece that suggests he does.
It is written from an anecdote with a friend who is a female GP.
I was more interested that he thinks Remain is the free-market side. Interesting, bearing in mind fortress Europe.
Having said that, having seen some of his Church Times columns years ago, he is still in the habit of selecting fairly randomly targets for overly-focused attacks.
Fortress Europe is a myth, at least in the modern world. It is not just the Single Market, but also an extensive web of free trade deals, not just with Japan and South Korea, but also most of the LDCs in Africa and Asia.
Brexit makes more sense as a drawing up of the drawbridge rather than an opening of the gates. Indeed as we see, terms of trade will be significantly worse for the forseable future post Brexit.
Hmmm. Non-tariff barriers.
Ask some American farmers where they export meat, or some West African fisherman who takes their fish?
I've said before that modern middle class life increasingly demands an exploited immigrant serf class for menial service sector activities together with an exploited foreign workforce for agricultural and manufactured produce.
Why just middle class? Do working class daughters tend to stay at home to wipe their elderly fathers’ bottoms?
In my experience they do so rather more.
Probably through a combination of family ties being more important in working class communities, working class families being less geographically dispersed, working class people being more willing to do 'menial' jobs and working class oldies being likely to die a bit earlier.
In my experience women are a lot more likely to work than they used to and elderly parents unable to look after themselves also need looking after during working hours, not just in the evenings and weekends. I am also not sure why Fraser believes the responsibility lies solely with daughters.
There's nothing in the piece that suggests he does.
It is written from an anecdote with a friend who is a female GP.
I was more interested that he thinks Remain is the free-market side. Interesting, bearing in mind fortress Europe.
Having said that, having seen some of his Church Times columns years ago, he is still in the habit of selecting fairly randomly targets for overly-focused attacks.
Fortress Europe is a myth, at least in the modern world. It is not just the Single Market, but also an extensive web of free trade deals, not just with Japan and South Korea, but also most of the LDCs in Africa and Asia.
Brexit makes more sense as a drawing up of the drawbridge rather than an opening of the gates. Indeed as we see, terms of trade will be significantly worse for the forseable future post Brexit.
Hmmm. Non-tariff barriers.
Ask some American farmers where they export meat, or some West African fisherman who takes their fish?
Which non-tariff barriers (i.e. sanitary and phytosanitary requirements) on food imports do you suggest we remove?
12th March is rather close to 29th March if my maths is correct.
Its already barely a month away - and February only has 28 days.
I think the issue then becomes do we revoke, rescind, withdraw, ask for a temporary extension without an end date or an extension with an end date - some of which require approval of the other 27 member states and some don't (but if we do withdraw article 50 completely we can't just reinvoke again and again as there are legal barriers).
Won't the lawyers (potentially 28 sets of lawyers) need time to agree and sort this out? What if Spain says no or Hungary if its temporary?
It's why we end up revoking or leaving with No Deal. The only problem we all have is that we haven't got a clue what May will do - I do however suspect we will end falling out of europe with No Deal...
I would think there'll be an update on the 'most defeats for a government' list this week then.
As I said below May should want Cooper Letwin to pass, the more it looks like an extension of Article 50 and BINO or EUref2 v her Deal rather than No Deal v her Deal the better for May as her Deal will only pass if most of the ERG vote for it (and a handful of Labour Leavers) and they will not do that if No Deal looks likely whereas they might if the alternative is BINO or revoke
So is it fair to assume fresh batches of defections this week now?
How could this not provoke more? It's basically a dare to quit. Though whether the ministers have balls or will pretend to buy the 'more time is needed' lie I do not know. We know from leaks that even among her Cabinet they don't believe her on this after all.
I'm unclear on how delaying the MV (yet again!) impacts on the other votes, most notably the Kyle amendment and the Cooper-Letwin one. Do they automatically get delayed as well, or are they separate?
You're certainly right about my bias, but let's put things another way: the most important political issue of out time is undoubtedly Brexit. How many of our current MPs have read and understand the Withdrawal Agreement sufficiently to vote on whether it's in their constituents' interests to accept it or not? At what earnings percentile (roughly) do you think that level of comprehension kicks in? Because I'm pretty sure it's well above the 95th.
I disagree entirely.
I disagree about the connection between intelligence and wealth.
I disagree that the job of MPs is to analyse a document and vote solely on whether it's in their constituents' interests.
Happy to agree to disagree on the first point.
But on the second: the core of your argument is that local people are needed to represent their constituents properly. I fail to see how they can do that of they can't assimilate a tonne of information on a huge range of topics in a short period of time, constantly, and interpret it to understand the impact on the people they represent. That seems to me to a difficult ask for all but a fairly select group of people.
If they're just relying on party lines to tell them how to vote most of the time, in what way is their localness relevant or necessary?
However Endillion it does sort of sound here like you are arguing for governance by technocrat when you say "That seems to me to a difficult ask for all but a fairly select group of people." . While I am sure our mp's are very intelligent people in their fields sadly it is also true to say that outside those fields they are as dense as the rest of us you merely have to look at any of their mutterings about internet governance or encryption to understand that
Interesting indeed - thanks, although I'll pre-empt the inevitable criticisms that IQ is a poor indicator of intelligence by largely agreeing with them.
I'm not arguing for governance by technocrat, in any way. What I would like to see is a Commons disproportionately composed of experienced professionals from a wider range of fields than is currently the case; so probably fewer lawyers, PR people and trade unionists, a similar number of doctors, ex-soldiers and finance people, but more scientists, engineers, tradespeople, etc (at a total guess - I don't have any figures to hand for this).
I have, of course, absolutely no immediate ideas as to how to go about this.
House of Technocrats? I think I'd prefer Common sense.
PM knows we need more time to be ready for any sort of Leave. She must have officials, politicians and businesspeople telling her this morning, noon, and night.
PM knows she can never be seen to propose an extension for she would be burned alive by her party.
So PM needs to engineer a situation where she is forced to extend despite her apparently seeming to have tried as hard as she could to never go there.
I agree. And I have no problem with what she is doing. She is taking the path which maximizes the chances of getting the Deal through. If she fails it will be extension and delay since No Deal is not really an option.
So if I were Labour I would whip AGAINST Cooper Boles.
Because, as you correctly note, if this goes through TM gets an alibi for delay to Brexit. She can say it has been forced upon her by the Opposition.
Much better for Labour to keep her on the hook. Vote down the Deal and vote down Cooper Boles.
Then TM is a truly distressing position -
Extend and delay by her own choice ... TOAST.
Allow the unthinkable, a No Deal crash-out ... TOAST.
And she would of course go for the extension. And IMO call an election. Cue Labour offering REF2 and it could well be "Hello Jeremy, meet Downing St!"
PM knows we need more time to be ready for any sort of Leave. She must have officials, politicians and businesspeople telling her this morning, noon, and night.
PM knows she can never be seen to propose an extension for she would be burned alive by her party.
So PM needs to engineer a situation where she is forced to extend despite her apparently seeming to have tried as hard as she could to never go there.
I agree. And I have no problem with what she is doing. She is taking the path which maximizes the chances of getting the Deal through. If it doesn't it will be extension and delay since No Deal is not really an option.
So if I were Labour I would whip AGAINST Cooper Boles.
Because, as you correctly note, if this goes through TM gets an alibi for delay to Brexit. She can say it has been forced upon her by the Opposition.
Much better for Labour to keep her on the hook. Vote down the Deal and vote down Cooper Boles.
Then TM is a truly distressing position -
Extend and delay by her own choice ... TOAST.
Allow the unthinkable, a No Deal crash-out ... TOAST.
And she would of course go for the extension. And IMO call an election. Cue Labour offering REF2 and it could well be "Hello Jeremy, meet Downing St!"
Do you think Jeremy Corbyn currently has a secure command of his MPs such that he can count on their support for apparently pro-no deal Brexit actions?
PM knows we need more time to be ready for any sort of Leave. She must have officials, politicians and businesspeople telling her this morning, noon, and night.
PM knows she can never be seen to propose an extension for she would be burned alive by her party.
So PM needs to engineer a situation where she is forced to extend despite her apparently seeming to have tried as hard as she could to never go there.
I agree. And I have no problem with what she is doing. She is taking the path which maximizes the chances of getting the Deal through. If she fails it will be extension and delay since No Deal is not really an option.
So if I were Labour I would whip AGAINST Cooper Boles.
Because, as you correctly note, if this goes through TM gets an alibi for delay to Brexit. She can say it has been forced upon her by the Opposition.
Much better for Labour to keep her on the hook. Vote down the Deal and vote down Cooper Boles.
Then TM is a truly distressing position -
Extend and delay by her own choice ... TOAST.
Allow the unthinkable, a No Deal crash-out ... TOAST.
And she would of course go for the extension. And IMO call an election. Cue Labour offering REF2 and it could well be "Hello Jeremy, meet Downing St!"
If May wants to get a deal through parliament it has to be a deal on Labour's terms, not the ERG's terms.
She knows that, it's why she told MPs the deal was all there was. It's not him she's playing chicken with.
I thought all that business about backstop amendments was so she could go back to Brussels with the full authority of the Commons behind her and force them to renegotiate? (Difficult to type that with a straight face.)
Expectation management isn't her forte, is it? Does she have a forte?
12th March is rather close to 29th March if my maths is correct.
Its already barely a month away - and February only has 28 days.
I think the issue then becomes do we revoke, rescind, withdraw, ask for a temporary extension without an end date or an extension with an end date - some of which require approval of the other 27 member states and some don't (but if we do withdraw article 50 completely we can't just reinvoke again and again as there are legal barriers).
Won't the lawyers (potentially 28 sets of lawyers) need time to agree and sort this out? What if Spain says no or Hungary if its temporary?
It's why we end up revoking or leaving with No Deal. The only problem we all have is that we haven't got a clue what May will do - I do however suspect we will end falling out of europe with No Deal...
She knows that, it's why she told MPs the deal was all there was. It's not him she's playing chicken with.
I thought all that business about backstop amendments was so she could go back to Brussels with the full authority of the Commons behind her and force them to renegotiate? (Difficult to type that with a straight face.)
Expectation management isn't her forte, is it? Does she have a forte?
Her forte is making Gordon Brown look like a good PM.
She knows that, it's why she told MPs the deal was all there was. It's not him she's playing chicken with.
I thought all that business about backstop amendments was so she could go back to Brussels with the full authority of the Commons behind her and force them to renegotiate? (Difficult to type that with a straight face.)
Expectation management isn't her forte, is it? Does she have a forte?
Kicking cans.
She really will say and promise anything to buy herself a few more weeks, even as it stores up problems down the line.
Interesting indeed - thanks, although I'll pre-empt the inevitable criticisms that IQ is a poor indicator of intelligence by largely agreeing with them.
I'm not arguing for governance by technocrat, in any way. What I would like to see is a Commons disproportionately composed of experienced professionals from a wider range of fields than is currently the case; so probably fewer lawyers, PR people and trade unionists, a similar number of doctors, ex-soldiers and finance people, but more scientists, engineers, tradespeople, etc (at a total guess - I don't have any figures to hand for this).
I have, of course, absolutely no immediate ideas as to how to go about this.
House of Technocrats? I think I'd prefer Common sense.
Even 650 technocrats cannot deal with every issue at the level of today's complexity. Hell, not even 300,000 civil servants can. So if you want to govern on evidence-based rationality alone, you end up with government by lobbyists.
Fortunately, government is not solely about evidence-based rationality. It also involves values/ethics, equity, needs and desires. Efficiency and effectiveness have to be traded off against these other considerations, and technocrats are not better placed to address - indeed, I'd say they are often incapable of addressing - them.
Do you think Jeremy Corbyn currently has a secure command of his MPs such that he can count on their support for apparently pro-no deal Brexit actions?
I would say that he does not. However, I think a fair number would comply and it could be enough.
His biggest problem IMO is that many of his MPs would much rather have REF2 than a general election.
Although in the event that my postulated scenario happens they could get both!
Do you think Jeremy Corbyn currently has a secure command of his MPs such that he can count on their support for apparently pro-no deal Brexit actions?
I would say that he does not. However, I think a fair number would comply and it could be enough.
His biggest problem IMO is that many of his MPs would much rather have REF2 than a general election.
Although in the event that my postulated scenario happens they could get both!
Additionally a fair number of the non-compliant MPs might decamp. Quite a lot seem on the brink already. That would also seem suboptimal.
Those are some fair points, but, and it's quite a big but, too a lot of people it doesn't feel like that. For example, why are food banks 'prospering'..... obviously need inverted commas for that....... if unemployment is down and wages are rising?
I'm a 'bit' chary of citing Ian Duncan Smith as an authority.
The figure is from the main organisation, Tafel, that runs food banks in Germany.
"All of them are nonprofit organizations. The Tafel support more than 1.5 million people in need of food throughout the country – nearly one third of them are children and youth." https://www.tafel.de/english-information/
If IDS had got that wrong, it would have been very publicly debunked very quickly and thrown at him via Twitter, and interminably ever after.
Their system of working with grocers and retailers to use excess & otherwise wasted food seems (admirably) as much of a principle as feeding the needy.
That seems pretty much the same as the system here. Presumably, that is also admirable.
Oh? I thought the UK supermarkets' transition from prosecuting people for taking food from their skips to tokenistic recycling of excess was relatively recent. Looking it up it seems just under 8k tonnes of leftover supermarket food is 'repurposed' per year which I'm pretty sure is a drop in the oceans of need and total wasted.
Afaics the main drive is to have food collection points at supermarkets where you can contribute to food banks with food you've bought at said supermarket, all very virtue signally but not quite what I'd describe as admirable.
I am not clear what "repurposed" means, or where that number comes from, but according t Trussell they had just under 13k tonnes of food donated by 'the public' to Trussell foodbanks, and they constitute 2/3 of the distribution network in the UK. https://www.trusselltrust.org/news-and-blog/latest-stats/end-year-stats/
So 8k tonnes is a substantial amount in the context, however you count it.
I don't understand this type of attempted critique. An extensive coordinated network of food banks did not exist in the UK until 2011, and the supermarkets were giving substantial support from at the latest 2012. The stuff about "tokenism" and "drops in buckets" does not stand up imo.
Labour's 2017 manifesto said that they sought “a close new relationship with the EU, … to protect workers’ rights and environmental standards, ... and to provide certainty to EU nationals”. It also said—in recognition perhaps of how democracy should work in our system—“Parliament would be given a meaningful role throughout negotiations”. How could anyone think that this manifesto provides Labour MPs with an obligation to vote for May’s withdrawal agreement [whatever it might prove to be] along with its open-ended political declaration?
May has had done as much as any of her colleagues(?) in the ERG to promote The MYTH of The Mandate That Must Be Obeyed. It ought to have been possible for MPs of any Party, and especially of Labour, to dislodge the myth. To explain its mythical character is not to advocate Remain. But such is the grip of the Myth that any challenge to it is said to come from anti-democratic Remoaners.
PM knows we need more time to be ready for any sort of Leave. She must have officials, politicians and businesspeople telling her this morning, noon, and night.
PM knows she can never be seen to propose an extension for she would be burned alive by her party.
So PM needs to engineer a situation where she is forced to extend despite her apparently seeming to have tried as hard as she could to never go there.
I agree. And I have no problem with what she is doing. She is taking the path which maximizes the chances of getting the Deal through. If she fails it will be extension and delay since No Deal is not really an option.
So if I were Labour I would whip AGAINST Cooper Boles.
Because, as you correctly note, if this goes through TM gets an alibi for delay to Brexit. She can say it has been forced upon her by the Opposition.
Much better for Labour to keep her on the hook. Vote down the Deal and vote down Cooper Boles.
Then TM is a truly distressing position -
Extend and delay by her own choice ... TOAST.
Allow the unthinkable, a No Deal crash-out ... TOAST.
And she would of course go for the extension. And IMO call an election. Cue Labour offering REF2 and it could well be "Hello Jeremy, meet Downing St!"
Labour are going to vote for an extension, they even whipped for that before, an extension is required for EUref2 or Customs Union BINO now, rejected that and they risk a surge of Remainers to TIG
If May wants to get a deal through parliament it has to be a deal on Labour's terms, not the ERG's terms.
That penny still hasn't dropped.
And never will drop - since no Tory PM will execute Labour policy on the biggest, the only, issue of our time.
Labour have TM utterly cornered.
All they need to do is close off all escape routes.
Vote down Cooper Boles - so she herself must choose to ask the EU for an extension.
Do NOT offer REF2 at this stage - force TM herself to choose that if she prefers it to GE.
Offer REF2 only in the event of a GE. Force Remainers to swallow JC as PM if they want to Remain.
Sounds about right. I don't join in the routine Corbyn bashing on here, but you have to say that since he became party leader he has had a lot more luck than he deserves. When he took over there was little prospect of Labour winning anything for at least ten years and possibly longer. It didn't seem impossible that he'd actually finish it off as a serious political project. And yet here he is with a plausible route to no 10. He's played his hand reasonably well, though not with much panache. But boy has he been lucky in his choice of opponents.
12th March is rather close to 29th March if my maths is correct.
I really wish at this point I could do a Paxman "yeeeess" in print...
The longer the delay goes on, I think the more likely my bet will win, on "railway timetable" grounds if nothing else. I don't know whether to be happy or sad...
Additionally a fair number of the non-compliant MPs might decamp. Quite a lot seem on the brink already. That would also seem suboptimal.
The signs certainly are that they will probably go against my advice on both counts - they will support Cooper Boles and also offer REF2. Perhaps they see a route to a GE that way. To me, it would be putting the national interest first but it risks letting TM and the Tories off the hook.
And if Labour do not get an early GE out of this - well national interest or no national interest, that is a massive failure as far as I'm concerned.
I first voted Tory when thatcher was in power but this is the first time I am ashamed to have voted Tory. This omnishambles is killing our party. I am waiting to see what Ruth Davidson will say but at the moment would not only voté tig but be happy to send it some money
Davidson is a London sockpuppet she will follow Westminster like the lapdog she is, or lie and then go back on it as she does.
Labour are going to vote for an extension, they even whipped for that before, an extension is required for EUref2 or Customs Union BINO now, rejected that and they risk a surge of Remainers to TIG
I agree. They are probably going to go that route. A mistake IMO (albeit clearly in the national interest) but perhaps forced upon them by lack of party discipline.
I first voted Tory when thatcher was in power but this is the first time I am ashamed to have voted Tory. This omnishambles is killing our party. I am waiting to see what Ruth Davidson will say but at the moment would not only voté tig but be happy to send it some money
Canvassing and delivering again yesterday. Support is (remarkably) solid. The Javid decision has gone down very well.
Sounds about right. I don't join in the routine Corbyn bashing on here, but you have to say that since he became party leader he has had a lot more luck than he deserves. When he took over there was little prospect of Labour winning anything for at least ten years and possibly longer. It didn't seem impossible that he'd actually finish it off as a serious political project. And yet here he is with a plausible route to no 10. He's played his hand reasonably well, though not with much panache. But boy has he been lucky in his choice of opponents.
Little love for Jez on here, that's for sure! Yes, I agree, he has been lucky.
I'm not captain keen on him but he will almost certainly be getting my vote if and when the time comes.
I first voted Tory when thatcher was in power but this is the first time I am ashamed to have voted Tory. This omnishambles is killing our party. I am waiting to see what Ruth Davidson will say but at the moment would not only voté tig but be happy to send it some money
Canvassing and delivering again yesterday. Support is (remarkably) solid. The Javid decision has gone down very well.
I think the likely vulnerability of conservative support is perhaps best illustrated when you see the polling in the last few days comparing current figures vs. without Corbyn as Labour leader.
They suddenly fall behind by 3 points - and that's before a potential no deal happening / in the mix as well. A lot of conservative support is definitely anti Corbyn / hard left and not a positive statement....
What I would like to see is a Commons disproportionately composed of experienced professionals from a wider range of fields than is currently the case; so probably fewer lawyers, PR people and trade unionists, a similar number of doctors, ex-soldiers and finance people, but more scientists, engineers, tradespeople, etc (at a total guess - I don't have any figures to hand for this).
I have, of course, absolutely no immediate ideas as to how to go about this.
There was such an opportunity, but it was upfucked. During the attempts to reform the Lords during the 2010-2015 Coalition, the possibility of the Lords becoming a House of Guilds or a House of Cities/Regions/Guilds/Religions was floated. It would be appointed, advisory, representative but not elected and so not a threat to the Commons legitimacy. Philip Blond (remember him?) had been working on something similar[1]. But Clegg went for his elected Senate and it died...
What I would like to see is a Commons disproportionately composed of experienced professionals from a wider range of fields than is currently the case; so probably fewer lawyers, PR people and trade unionists, a similar number of doctors, ex-soldiers and finance people, but more scientists, engineers, tradespeople, etc (at a total guess - I don't have any figures to hand for this).
I have, of course, absolutely no immediate ideas as to how to go about this.
There was such an opportunity, but it was upfucked. During the attempts to reform the Lords during the 2010-2015 Coalition, the possibility of the Lords becoming a House of Guilds or a House of Cities/Regions/Guilds/Religions was floated. It would be appointed, advisory, representative but not elected and so not a threat to the Commons legitimacy. Philip Blond (remember him?) had been working on something similar[1]. But Clegg went for his elected Senate and it died...
As opposed to the Remainer dream of the 50s - the Deep South of the 1850s.
That's obviously factually inaccurate.
The mentality has similarities.
As I said earlier modern middle class life is dependent upon a lot of exploitation.
You made assumptions regarding Remainer motives (like Leavers, they were multivariate), then did a reductio ad absurdum on those motives, ending with a comparison that was wildly inaccurate. You could have made your point without doing so.
As opposed to the Remainer dream of the 50s - the Deep South of the 1850s.
That's obviously factually inaccurate.
The mentality has similarities.
As I said earlier modern middle class life is dependent upon a lot of exploitation.
You made assumptions regarding Remainer motives (like Leavers, they were multivariate), then did a reductio ad absurdum on those motives, ending with a comparison that was wildly inaccurate. You could have made your point without doing so.
My comment was a response to Foxy's:
' Barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. A Brexiteers dream of Empire days... '
Perhaps you'd like to address your response to that as well.
Whilst I was pointing out that modern middle class life (and I don't deny I partake of it myself) is dependent upon a lot of exploitation of others, about which many people are in uneasy denial of.
Britain’s fine weather is the calm before the storm, the Met Office has warned, with the run-up to Brexit likely to be preceded by strong winds and torrential rain
Comments
I'm not arguing for governance by technocrat, in any way. What I would like to see is a Commons disproportionately composed of experienced professionals from a wider range of fields than is currently the case; so probably fewer lawyers, PR people and trade unionists, a similar number of doctors, ex-soldiers and finance people, but more scientists, engineers, tradespeople, etc (at a total guess - I don't have any figures to hand for this).
I have, of course, absolutely no immediate ideas as to how to go about this.
I think the issue then becomes do we revoke, rescind, withdraw, ask for a temporary extension without an end date or an extension with an end date - some of which require approval of the other 27 member states and some don't (but if we do withdraw article 50 completely we can't just reinvoke again and again as there are legal barriers).
Won't the lawyers (potentially 28 sets of lawyers) need time to agree and sort this out? What if Spain says no or Hungary if its temporary?
I wonder how Jess Philips's nan voted in the referendum - leave?
Ask some American farmers where they export meat, or some West African fisherman who takes their fish?
Et tu Hammond?
So if I were Labour I would whip AGAINST Cooper Boles.
Because, as you correctly note, if this goes through TM gets an alibi for delay to Brexit. She can say it has been forced upon her by the Opposition.
Much better for Labour to keep her on the hook. Vote down the Deal and vote down Cooper Boles.
Then TM is a truly distressing position -
Extend and delay by her own choice ... TOAST.
Allow the unthinkable, a No Deal crash-out ... TOAST.
And she would of course go for the extension. And IMO call an election. Cue Labour offering REF2 and it could well be "Hello Jeremy, meet Downing St!"
That penny still hasn't dropped.
Expectation management isn't her forte, is it? Does she have a forte?
She really will say and promise anything to buy herself a few more weeks, even as it stores up problems down the line.
Fortunately, government is not solely about evidence-based rationality. It also involves values/ethics, equity, needs and desires. Efficiency and effectiveness have to be traded off against these other considerations, and technocrats are not better placed to address - indeed, I'd say they are often incapable of addressing - them.
His biggest problem IMO is that many of his MPs would much rather have REF2 than a general election.
Although in the event that my postulated scenario happens they could get both!
https://www.trusselltrust.org/news-and-blog/latest-stats/end-year-stats/
So 8k tonnes is a substantial amount in the context, however you count it.
I don't understand this type of attempted critique. An extensive coordinated network of food banks did not exist in the UK until 2011, and the supermarkets were giving substantial support from at the latest 2012. The stuff about "tokenism" and "drops in buckets" does not stand up imo.
Labour have TM utterly cornered.
All they need to do is close off all escape routes.
Vote down Cooper Boles - so she herself must choose to ask the EU for an extension.
Do NOT offer REF2 at this stage - force TM herself to choose that if she prefers it to GE.
Offer REF2 only in the event of a GE. Force Remainers to swallow JC as PM if they want to Remain.
May has had done as much as any of her colleagues(?) in the ERG to promote The MYTH of The Mandate That Must Be Obeyed. It ought to have been possible for MPs of any Party, and especially of Labour, to dislodge the myth. To explain its mythical character is not to advocate Remain. But such is the grip of the Myth that any challenge to it is said to come from anti-democratic Remoaners.
NEW THREAD
The longer the delay goes on, I think the more likely my bet will win, on "railway timetable" grounds if nothing else. I don't know whether to be happy or sad...
Is that complex enough?
And if Labour do not get an early GE out of this - well national interest or no national interest, that is a massive failure as far as I'm concerned.
I'm not captain keen on him but he will almost certainly be getting my vote if and when the time comes.
They suddenly fall behind by 3 points - and that's before a potential no deal happening / in the mix as well. A lot of conservative support is definitely anti Corbyn / hard left and not a positive statement....
[1] https://www.respublica.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/pfr_ResPublica-Reflections-on-Representation-and-Reform-in-the-House-of-Lords.pdf
' Barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. A Brexiteers dream of Empire days... '
Perhaps you'd like to address your response to that as well.
Whilst I was pointing out that modern middle class life (and I don't deny I partake of it myself) is dependent upon a lot of exploitation of others, about which many people are in uneasy denial of.