What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
There was a time when one wouldn't have to be on particularly high moral ground not to be an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
And members chose IDS over Ken
Only because of Europe. If Tory MPs didn’t hold their membership in complete contempt, Clarke would have won easily in my view.
Imagine having your own views and because others disagree, they think you hold them in contempt!
You are obviously happy to vote for those who don’t care what you think or don’t care what they put in a manifesto. That’s ok if you want others to tell you what to think I suppose.
Well, they don't tell you what to think, but the point of our representative "democracy" is that you can't tell them how to think, because you delegate that to them to do on your behalf. That is how it used to work. Now, it seems, complicated issues are put to the electorate as referenda with very simplistic binary questions asked of them, where there clearly isn't a simplistic binary answer. Result: chaos !
Chaos happens when you ignore the manifesto on which you are elected. Representative democracy used to mean, for Tories anyway, that voters knew the principles which bound the party together. That no longer seems to apply.
I don't think the Tories would come well out of a "who governs?" GE. Particularly as the real question is about the internal politics of the Tory party, which our voting system doesn't allow voters to resolve.
What about "who do you really, really not want to govern us"
Nonsense. The Tories could not go into an election under a leader who has already announced her imminent departure. And what policy on Brexit could they unite behind?
Indeed - and the same question with Labour. This is the problem. We have no functioning government. We have a pressing deadline and the need for an excuse to delay. And the dread fear that they can't keep kicking things down the road any further...
I admire their optimism that they think they could get it through Parliament.
Saying there'll be a General Election if it fails sounds almost like they're helping the Labour whips to vote it down.
Labout MPs though would face a conundrum - vote against a GE they've spent 2 years calling for?
They could vote against the deal. And then, since it would inevitably lead to no-deal Brexit, they could vote against a general election on the basis that now really was not the time (and let us take over the reins).
Do you think a vote against the WA means a no deal now ?
No. I have reasonable hopes for the Letwin procedure.
Ken Clarke's Customs Union is the only possible outcome that I think can get over the line. I totted up the Beckett amendment limit and ran into pretty much a hard stop of 304 for it.
Nonsense. The Tories could not go into an election under a leader who has already announced her imminent departure. And what policy on Brexit could they unite behind?
The list of things this government could not do, and then did, is growing by the day...
True. And I think we will shortly add a long Brexit extension and UK participation in the EU elections to the list.
I admire their optimism that they think they could get it through Parliament.
Saying there'll be a General Election if it fails sounds almost like they're helping the Labour whips to vote it down.
Labout MPs though would face a conundrum - vote against a GE they've spent 2 years calling for?
They could vote against the deal. And then, since it would inevitably lead to no-deal Brexit, they could vote against a general election on the basis that now really was not the time (and let us take over the reins).
Do you think a vote against the WA means a no deal now ?
No. I have reasonable hopes for the Letwin procedure.
Agree, but it does need a certain amount of optimism. Parliament has over time got out of the way of understanding that it, and it alone, is the supreme authority in the UK. It has spent so long delegating its authority to government on the one hand, EU on the other and compounded it by handing out the trickiest question to a referendum that it is not only the public but also MPs who seem to have forgotten their position. If Oliver Letwin succeeds in his attempt he will be a parliamentary hero.
Nonsense. The Tories could not go into an election under a leader who has already announced her imminent departure. And what policy on Brexit could they unite behind?
Indeed - and the same question with Labour. This is the problem. We have no functioning government. We have a pressing deadline and the need for an excuse to delay. And the dread fear that they can't keep kicking things down the road any further...
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
Do members not get the right to take part in the selection of local MP candidates?
They do indeed, well, to some extent, and all sorts of highly exciting policy discussions/rows. As Mr Observer commented it is a great place to meet likeminded geeks and weirdos. To be fair I met one or two nice people as well in my time. Most of them make Mark Francois look like a well balanced even minded individual.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
There was a time when one wouldn't have to be on particularly high moral ground not to be an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
It's not a matter of morality, just a matter of fact.
What sort of people does one meet in the modern Labour Party though? I bet the SNP must be a bit of an eye opener too!
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
What rot. It’s the Labour Party which is anti business with economically insane policies, and which is xenophobic towards Jews.
Yay! The government has succeeded in organising yet another vote on their agreement -but not all of it! Oh no, just the bits that everyone really hates!
- Notes the extension (again!) and the new timetable - Notes the PD can be negotiated later - Notes the Letwin process - Declares it wishes to leave the EU with a deal - Approves the WA for exit 22 May - some legal qualifications at the end that I would need to see in writing
Edit/ questioning seems to be suggesting that the agreement to the WA would be "in principle" with the WA not actually formally secured until the Bill is approved. In other words it's a Meaningless not a Meaningful Vote, but one that is apparently enough for the EU for the time being.
Yay! The government has succeeded in organising yet another vote on their agreement -but not all of it! Oh no, just the bits that everyone really hates!
You have to admit, as a strategy its bazin
It is the mechanism to exit. But does seem strange
Clearly, separating the WA from the PD is not enough. May has to make Labour a GE offer they can trust.
No idea how she can do that under FTPA.
Me neither, but thinking about it -
If Brexit is delayed with a long extension, for re-negotiation and possibly REF2, that requires a PM and a govt with the authority to pilot it all through. Not possible with this Parliament, therefore a GE.
Alternatively, if the WA is passed and we leave on 22/5, that requires a PM and a govt with the authority to negotiate the Future Relationship. Not possible with this Parliament, therefore a GE.
Either way, a GE in 2019. Amazed that it is not yet an odds-on shot. Fill your boots.
Yay! The government has succeeded in organising yet another vote on their agreement -but not all of it! Oh no, just the bits that everyone really hates!
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
Do members not get the right to take part in the selection of local MP candidates?
Usually - although only from an approved list. Not always though - as candidate selection in the last election was imposed on some constituencies against local association wishes. Wollaston was selected as a Tory candidate in an open primary.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
It's not a matter of morality, just a matter of fact.
Your inability to separate fact from opinion speaks volumes for the worth of your opinion
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
And members chose IDS over Ken
Only because of Europe. If Tory MPs didn’t hold their membership in complete contempt, Clarke would have won easily in my view.
Imagine having your own views and because others disagree, they think you hold them in contempt!
You are obviously happy to vote for those who don’t care what you think or don’t care what they put in a manifesto. That’s ok if you want others to tell you what to think I suppose.
Well, they don't tell you what to think, but the point of our representative "democracy" is that you can't tell them how to think, because you delegate that to them to do on your behalf. That is how it used to work. Now, it seems, complicated issues are put to the electorate as referenda with very simplistic binary questions asked of them, where there clearly isn't a simplistic binary answer. Result: chaos !
Chaos happens when you ignore the manifesto on which you are elected. Representative democracy used to mean, for Tories anyway, that voters knew the principles which bound the party together. That no longer seems to apply.
That is because the party got taken over by headbangers who put their obsession with Europe above being seen as a sensible party of stable government, and they were encouraged by the hapless Theresa May
The government appears to be trying to engineer a fair accompli where we become tied to the 22 May leaving date before we formally approve the WA. It's an empty motion tomorrow solely aimed at securing the later exit date.
I admire their optimism that they think they could get it through Parliament.
Saying there'll be a General Election if it fails sounds almost like they're helping the Labour whips to vote it down.
Labout MPs though would face a conundrum - vote against a GE they've spent 2 years calling for?
They could vote against the deal. And then, since it would inevitably lead to no-deal Brexit, they could vote against a general election on the basis that now really was not the time (and let us take over the reins).
Do you think a vote against the WA means a no deal now ?
No. I have reasonable hopes for the Letwin procedure.
Ken Clarke's Customs Union is the only possible outcome that I think can get over the line. I totted up the Beckett amendment limit and ran into pretty much a hard stop of 304 for it.
The Customs Union proposal being, of course, pertinent to the future relationship with the EU but not to the process of withdrawal itself.
We are still in the same situation as before. Parliament won't back the Withdrawal Agreement, it won't revoke and it won't vote for a Deal/Remain plebiscite, either.
Absent any positive solution to this conundrum, No Deal happens on April 12th. That is still where we are headed right now.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
There was a time when one wouldn't have to be on particularly high moral ground not to be an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
And members chose IDS over Ken
Only because of Europe. If Tory MPs didn’t hold their membership in complete contempt, Clarke would have won easily in my view.
Imagine having your own views and because others disagree, they think you hold them in contempt!
You are obviously happy to vote for those who don’t care what you think or don’t care what they put in a manifesto. That’s ok if you want others to tell you what to think I suppose.
Well, they don't tell you what to think, but the point of our representative "democracy" is that you can't tell them how to think, because you delegate that to them to do on your behalf. That is how it used to work. Now, it seems, complicated issues are put to the electorate as referenda with very simplistic binary questions asked of them, where there clearly isn't a simplistic binary answer. Result: chaos !
Chaos happens when you ignore the manifesto on which you are elected. Representative democracy used to mean, for Tories anyway, that voters knew the principles which bound the party together. That no longer seems to apply.
That is because the party got taken over by headbangers who put their obsession with Europe above being seen as a sensible party of stable government, and they were encouraged by the hapless Theresa May
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
There was a time when one wouldn't have to be on particularly high moral ground not to be an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist.
The government appears to be trying to engineer a fair accompli where we become tied to the 22 May leaving date before we formally approve the WA
Or the opposite. If they know this motion will fail, they are trying to engineer a situation where they have clean hands while requesting a longer extension.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
What rot. It’s the Labour Party which is anti business with economically insane policies, and which is xenophobic towards Jews.
Absolutely. That bit where Corbyn stood up, said Fuck Business and then pursued a policy that was derided noisily by the CBI, BCCs and IOD. Proves how anti-business he is.
Yay! The government has succeeded in organising yet another vote on their agreement -but not all of it! Oh no, just the bits that everyone really hates!
You have to admit, as a strategy its bazin
Labour's front bench has said they have no issue with the WA.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
It's not a matter of morality, just a matter of fact.
What sort of people does one meet in the modern Labour Party though? I bet the SNP must be a bit of an eye opener too!
You meet a lot of late middle aged people who carry stuff around in old plastic bags, wear corduroy caps and get very angry about "Zionists".
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
And members chose IDS over Ken
Only because of Europe. If Tory MPs didn’t hold their membership in complete contempt, Clarke would have won easily in my view.
Imagine having your own views and because others disagree, they think you hold them in contempt!
You are obviously happy to vote for those who don’t care what you think or don’t care what they put in a manifesto. That’s ok if you want others to tell you what to think I suppose.
Well, they don't tell you what to think, but the point of our representative "democracy" is that you can't tell them how to think, because you delegate that to them to do on your behalf. That is how it used to work. Now, it seems, complicated issues are put to the electorate as referenda with very simplistic binary questions asked of them, where there clearly isn't a simplistic binary answer. Result: chaos !
Chaos happens when you ignore the manifesto on which you are elected. Representative democracy used to mean, for Tories anyway, that voters knew the principles which bound the party together. That no longer seems to apply.
That is because the party got taken over by headbangers who put their obsession with Europe above being seen as a sensible party of stable government, and they were encouraged by the hapless Theresa May
Drivel.
I am skewered by your erudite decimation of my argument. I salute your capability, that is in the best traditions of great thinkers such as Ian Duncan Smith
ERG pushing to see the draft Bill. Bercow mischievoulsly confirming it is already written but saying it's up to the government whether MPs get to see it. Edit/ and now saying it would be good practice to publish it.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
And members chose IDS over Ken
Only because of Europe. If Tory MPs didn’t hold their membership in complete contempt, Clarke would have won easily in my view.
Imagine having your own views and because others disagree, they think you hold them in contempt!
You are obviously happy to vote for those who don’t care what you think or don’t care what they put in a manifesto. That’s ok if you want others to tell you what to think I suppose.
Well, they don't tell you what to think, but the point of our representative "democracy" is that you can't tell them how to think, because you delegate that to them to do on your behalf. That is how it used to work. Now, it seems, complicated issues are put to the electorate as referenda with very simplistic binary questions asked of them, where there clearly isn't a simplistic binary answer. Result: chaos !
Chaos happens when you ignore the manifesto on which you are elected. Representative democracy used to mean, for Tories anyway, that voters knew the principles which bound the party together. That no longer seems to apply.
That is because the party got taken over by headbangers who put their obsession with Europe above being seen as a sensible party of stable government, and they were encouraged by the hapless Theresa May
Um it was Cameron who gave us the referendum. Isn't doing what the people voted for supposed to be the basis of democracy? With the exception of the SNP and a few other worthy individuals the MPs can't even claim they were honest and said they would oppose Brexit when they got elected in 2017. The vast majority of them all emphasised their support for leaving in their personal election campaigns.
And people wonder why they are considered untrustworthy garbage who are unfit to hold any elected office.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
And members chose IDS over Ken
Only because of Europe. If Tory MPs didn’t hold their membership in complete contempt, Clarke would have won easily in my view.
Imagine having your own views and because others disagree, they think you hold them in contempt!
You are obviously happy to vote for those who don’t care what you think or don’t care what they put in a manifesto. That’s ok if you want others to tell you what to think I suppose.
Well, they don't tell you what to think, but the point of our representative "democracy" is that you can't tell them how to think, because you delegate that to them to do on your behalf. That is how it used to work. Now, it seems, complicated issues are put to the electorate as referenda with very simplistic binary questions asked of them, where there clearly isn't a simplistic binary answer. Result: chaos !
Chaos happens when you ignore the manifesto on which you are elected. Representative democracy used to mean, for Tories anyway, that voters knew the principles which bound the party together. That no longer seems to apply.
That is because the party got taken over by headbangers who put their obsession with Europe above being seen as a sensible party of stable government, and they were encouraged by the hapless Theresa May
Drivel.
I am skewered by your erudite decimation of my argument. I salute your capability, that is in the best traditions of great thinkers such as Ian Duncan Smith
It was as accurate description of your last comment - and the only answer it deserved.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
It's not a matter of morality, just a matter of fact.
What sort of people does one meet in the modern Labour Party though? I bet the SNP must be a bit of an eye opener too!
You meet a lot of late middle aged people who carry stuff around in old plastic bags, wear corduroy caps and get very angry about "Zionists".
... and in the TIG/Centrists? Dont tell me... open minded, reasonable, self aware, snappy dressers?
By-elections today in two very different places. LD defence in Sutton should be straightforward. In Clackmannan the SNP will probably lose a seat to Lab due to the voting system.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
It's not a matter of morality, just a matter of fact.
What sort of people does one meet in the modern Labour Party though? I bet the SNP must be a bit of an eye opener too!
You meet a lot of late middle aged people who carry stuff around in old plastic bags, wear corduroy caps and get very angry about "Zionists".
Haha. They ought to do a reality TV shows where you mix the apparently opposite political loon/activist and then get them exchange clothes and see if the Great British Public can tell them apart
Yay! The government has succeeded in organising yet another vote on their agreement -but not all of it! Oh no, just the bits that everyone really hates!
You have to admit, as a strategy its bazin
Labour's front bench has said they have no issue with the WA.
The government really, really doesn't want to talk about customs unions. It will risk ultimate No Deal chaos to avoid doing so.
It's not yet properly appreciated how a Customs Union Brexit or tying the deal to a new referendum puts the government on the rack. It is fiercely opposed to both but if Parliament (through the Letwin procedure) settles upon it, the government will be in contempt of Parliament if it fails to implement it.
Right now it is like Gromit frantically laying down train tracks in front of the train in order to make sure the whole government isn't derailed.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
What rot. It’s the Labour Party which is anti business with economically insane policies, and which is xenophobic towards Jews.
Absolutely. That bit where Corbyn stood up, said Fuck Business and then pursued a policy that was derided noisily by the CBI, BCCs and IOD. Proves how anti-business he is.
Its why most businesses seem to regard a Corbyn Gov as a bigger threat to their business than Brexit
I admire their optimism that they think they could get it through Parliament.
Saying there'll be a General Election if it fails sounds almost like they're helping the Labour whips to vote it down.
Labout MPs though would face a conundrum - vote against a GE they've spent 2 years calling for?
They could vote against the deal. And then, since it would inevitably lead to no-deal Brexit, they could vote against a general election on the basis that now really was not the time (and let us take over the reins).
Do you think a vote against the WA means a no deal now ?
No. I have reasonable hopes for the Letwin procedure.
Ken Clarke's Customs Union is the only possible outcome that I think can get over the line. I totted up the Beckett amendment limit and ran into pretty much a hard stop of 304 for it.
The Customs Union proposal being, of course, pertinent to the future relationship with the EU but not to the process of withdrawal itself.
We are still in the same situation as before. Parliament won't back the Withdrawal Agreement, it won't revoke and it won't vote for a Deal/Remain plebiscite, either.
Absent any positive solution to this conundrum, No Deal happens on April 12th. That is still where we are headed right now.
Why not abolish general elections altogether? Instead, elect all members for a maximum term length of of five years. Calling an election in said constituency early is entirely up to him/her. But it has to happen after five years. Benefits are more independent thinking mps, less dependent on whim or popularity of their leaders. I suspect there are disadvantages, though.
That's quite interesting. So at the implementation, all 650 MPs are up, but after five years, likely as not only 635 (or so) are up, as the remaining 15 resigned/died in the period and forced by-elections. Rinse and repeat and eventually all MPs would be out of step, and Parliament a moving feast. Governments would change on a by-election rather than all at once.
Not sure if it would work though. Governments tend to lose support over time (at least in the UK). A government starting out a 330MPs clearly has a majority. Once it slipped to 324 are they still the government? Presumably so if the remaining 326 are all split from other parties. So they either become a minority or need to seek a deal. Or the other main party needs to start talking to all the other parties.
At some point a critical event would happen, perhaps a by-election or the second party concludes a deal with the third and they become the government. Does their support then erode perhaps?
I suspect you'd end up with governments formed of minorities/coalitions all the time, and no party ever having more than about 330 seats. Not sure that's a good idea now I think about it.
Labour's solution being to create a Venezuelan-style economy, in which all those nasty greenhouse gas emissions are ended through the total destruction of industry, the cessation of electricity generation and of the use of powered transport, mass depopulation through the emigration of refugee boat people to the Continent, and the slow, agonising death by starvation of most of those who can't make the journey.
At the end of this process, the few miserable survivors will have regressed to living in Iron Age roundhouses.
The Green Party will pop up at the end of this process and remind us that reform still hasn't gone far enough, because we need to abandon agriculture and allow the wildwood to grow back again in order to be truly environmentally friendly.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
There was a time when one wouldn't have to be on particularly high moral ground not to be an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist.
The government appears to be trying to engineer a fair accompli where we become tied to the 22 May leaving date before we formally approve the WA
Or the opposite. If they know this motion will fail, they are trying to engineer a situation where they have clean hands while requesting a longer extension.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
What rot. It’s the Labour Party which is anti business with economically insane policies, and which is xenophobic towards Jews.
Absolutely. That bit where Corbyn stood up, said Fuck Business and then pursued a policy that was derided noisily by the CBI, BCCs and IOD. Proves how anti-business he is.
Its why most businesses seem to regard a Corbyn Gov as a bigger threat to their business than Brexit
Corbyn's at a fundamental advantage over May in all this Brexit stuff because he doesn't really give a hoot about the outcome so long as it stuffs the Tories.
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement.
The terms of the Irish backstop, keeping Northern Ireland in large parts of single market legislation and the EU’s customs territory, in order to protect the Good Friday agreement would remain as the bloc’s solution for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland.
Given c £15-18bn was explicitly for the "implementation" period, I think they might be doing some whistling...
The EU would argue it's the other way round. The money is committed so the UK can get the benefit. Doesn't matter diddly squat. We're going to be _desperate_ to get a deal after a few days of No Deal. Money no object. The EU could double its demand.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
It's not a matter of morality, just a matter of fact.
What sort of people does one meet in the modern Labour Party though? I bet the SNP must be a bit of an eye opener too!
You meet a lot of late middle aged people who carry stuff around in old plastic bags, wear corduroy caps and get very angry about "Zionists".
Haha. They ought to do a reality TV shows where you mix the apparently opposite political loon/activist and then get them exchange clothes and see if the Great British Public can tell them apart
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
If you are an anti-business, socially conservative, xenophobic, English nationalist the Conservative party is a good place to meet like-minded people.
Do we have to guess your righteous vantage point on the moral high ground?
It's not a matter of morality, just a matter of fact.
What sort of people does one meet in the modern Labour Party though? I bet the SNP must be a bit of an eye opener too!
You meet a lot of late middle aged people who carry stuff around in old plastic bags, wear corduroy caps and get very angry about "Zionists".
I wasn't aware that Corbyn is also a fashion guru in Labour cicles
I do not get this at all. The WA contains the backstop and it is the backstop that the ERG and DUP hate. Why would taking the PD out change anything?
The government has the twin problems of meeting Bercow's ruling and agreeing something tomorrow that hangs onto the 22 May extension. This is their answer - a hollow "in principle" motion on the WA only, tomorrow, with the WA and PD formally agreed as part of the passage of the Bill. Neither of these are the "same proposition" coming back to the house after being defeated.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
And members chose IDS over Ken
Only because of Europe. If Tory MPs didn’t hold their membership in complete contempt, Clarke would have won easily in my view.
Imagine having your own views and because others disagree, they think you hold them in contempt!
You are obviously happy to vote for those who don’t care what you think or don’t care what they put in a manifesto. That’s ok if you want others to tell you what to think I suppose.
Well, they don't tell you what to think, but the point of our representative "democracy" is that you can't tell them how to think, because you delegate that to them to do on your behalf. That is how it used to work. Now, it seems, complicated issues are put to the electorate as referenda with very simplistic binary questions asked of them, where there clearly isn't a simplistic binary answer. Result: chaos !
Chaos happens when you ignore the manifesto on which you are elected. Representative democracy used to mean, for Tories anyway, that voters knew the principles which bound the party together. That no longer seems to apply.
That is because the party got taken over by headbangers who put their obsession with Europe above being seen as a sensible party of stable government, and they were encouraged by the hapless Theresa May
Um it was Cameron who gave us the referendum. Isn't doing what the people voted for supposed to be the basis of democracy? With the exception of the SNP and a few other worthy individuals the MPs can't even claim they were honest and said they would oppose Brexit when they got elected in 2017. The vast majority of them all emphasised their support for leaving in their personal election campaigns.
And people wonder why they are considered untrustworthy garbage who are unfit to hold any elected office.
I couldn't help thinking of that when last night I saw footage of Justine Greening nodding along right next to Theresa May while she promised to deliver Brexit at her inaugral speech to journalists following her election as leader. The Greening who in real time yesterday evening voted to revoke A50.
Oh dear the governments latest ruse is beginning to unravel quickly . The suggestion that they could go straight to the WAIB before the political declaration has been passed .
Well I am sure you have seen my views on whether we actually have democracy Richard. We have a system that is working in some regards and not in others. It is also possible to argue that they are not necessarily opposing Brexit, it is just pretty undeliverable due to Mrs May's incompetence. Surely it is a good thing for an MP to vote with their conscience? If I were an MP and there was a marginal referendum in favour of torture or capital punishment, I would still vote against it, whips or no whips.
I couldn't help thinking of that when last night I saw footage of Justine Greening nodding along right next to Theresa May while she promised to deliver Brexit at her inaugral speech to journalists following her election as leader. The Greening who in real time yesterday evening voted to revoke A50.
There was no vote on revoking A50 last night. The amendment was to set revocation as the default instead of no deal.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
And members chose IDS over Ken
Only because of Europe. If Tory MPs didn’t hold their membership in complete contempt, Clarke would have won easily in my view.
Imagine having your own views and because others disagree, they think you hold them in contempt!
You are obviously happy to vote for those who don’t care what you think or don’t care what they put in a manifesto. That’s ok if you want others to tell you what to think I suppose.
Well, they don't tell you what to think, but the point of our representative "democracy" is that you can't tell them how to think, because you delegate that to them to do on your behalf. That is how it used to work. Now, it seems, complicated issues are put to the electorate as referenda with very simplistic binary questions asked of them, where there clearly isn't a simplistic binary answer. Result: chaos !
Chaos happens when you ignore the manifesto on which you are elected. Representative democracy used to mean, for Tories anyway, that voters knew the principles which bound the party together. That no longer seems to apply.
That is because the party got taken over by headbangers who put their obsession with Europe above being seen as a sensible party of stable government, and they were encouraged by the hapless Theresa May
Drivel.
I am skewered by your erudite decimation of my argument. I salute your capability, that is in the best traditions of great thinkers such as Ian Duncan Smith
It was as accurate description of your last comment - and the only answer it deserved.
Overwhelming. You are Ian Duncan Smith and I claim my £5
Labour's solution being to create a Venezuelan-style economy, in which all those nasty greenhouse gas emissions are ended through the total destruction of industry, the cessation of electricity generation and of the use of powered transport, mass depopulation through the emigration of refugee boat people to the Continent, and the slow, agonising death by starvation of most of those who can't make the journey.
At the end of this process, the few miserable survivors will have regressed to living in Iron Age roundhouses.
The Green Party will pop up at the end of this process and remind us that reform still hasn't gone far enough, because we need to abandon agriculture and allow the wildwood to grow back again in order to be truly environmentally friendly.
What is the capitalist pro-free market response to climate and environmental change? Apart from the cheap "Venezuela" jibes, has anyone got anything to offer?
Is it a Trumpian denial that anything is happening? Perhaps 70F in February isn't so bad after all but it's far more than climate change. Look at air quality and air pollution in our towns and cities. Do we want to breathe bad air - do we want our children to breathe bad air?
It's all very well sniping about the Greens and Labour but the centre and centre-right have abdicated the field to the authoritarian Left who make headway simply because they are offering some solutions. All the Right seems to be about is climate change denial and pro-nuclear power and that won't wash anymore.
I don't think there's a major problem with members being involved in the process, but the parties have clearly set things up to screen the candidates through the MPs, via different methods, to set the parameters for the members, which seems perfectly sensible. I'm not convinced it really was an issue for Ed M, because he still had plenty of backing among MPs.
Inasmuch as members being involved is a problem it is in MPs then not really holding up their end by screening out those they do not wish to serve under any circumstances.
Though it is surprising how members for decades who presumably remember that they did not always have involvement get so angry at the prospect of changing leader even in an emergency without their say so. The expectations have changed quite a bit.
What’s the point of Tory Party membership if members have no membership benefits and are ignored on policy. The right to vote on the party leader is the only one membership benefit left. MPs saddled us with May, members voted for Cameron.
And members chose IDS over Ken
Only because of Europe. If Tory MPs didn’t hold their membership in complete contempt, Clarke would have won easily in my view.
Imagine having your own views and because others disagree, they think you hold them in contempt!
You are obviously happy to vote for those who don’t care what you think or don’t care what they put in a manifesto. That’s ok if you want others to tell you what to think I suppose.
Well, they don't tell you what to think, but the point of our representative "democracy" is that you can't tell them how to think, because you delegate that to them to do on your behalf. That is how it used to work. Now, it seems, complicated issues are put to the electorate as referenda with very simplistic binary questions asked of them, where there clearly isn't a simplistic binary answer. Result: chaos !
Chaos happens when you ignore the manifesto on which you are elected. Representative democracy used to mean, for Tories anyway, that voters knew the principles which bound the party together. That no longer seems to apply.
That is because the party got taken over by headbangers who put their obsession with Europe above being seen as a sensible party of stable government, and they were encouraged by the hapless Theresa May
Drivel.
I am skewered by your erudite decimation of my argument. I salute your capability, that is in the best traditions of great thinkers such as Ian Duncan Smith
It was as accurate description of your last comment - and the only answer it deserved.
Overwhelming. You are Ian Duncan Smith and I claim my £5
Corbyn's at a fundamental advantage over May in all this Brexit stuff because he doesn't really give a hoot about the outcome so long as it stuffs the Tories.
That is his main objective. I suspect he still hasn't read the WA.
What is the capitalist pro-free market response to climate and environmental change? Apart from the cheap "Venezuela" jibes, has anyone got anything to offer?.
Yes, of course. In the UK, the switch-over to renewable energy - especially, offshore wind - since 2010 has been stunningly fast. I don't think anyone was expecting anything even remotely so rapid and cost-effective as the private sector has been able to deliver over that period (with a bit of good government nudging).
Solar is less relevant to the UK, but the same story applies in that sector - a stunning reduction in costs over the last few years.
Why not abolish general elections altogether? Instead, elect all members for a maximum term length of of five years. Calling an election in said constituency early is entirely up to him/her. But it has to happen after five years. Benefits are more independent thinking mps, less dependent on whim or popularity of their leaders. I suspect there are
Why not abolish general elections altogether? Instead, elect all members for a maximum term length of of five years. Calling an election in said constituency early is entirely up to him/her. But it has to happen after five years. Benefits are more independent thinking mps, less dependent on whim or popularity of their leaders. I suspect there are disadvantages, though.
That's quite interesting. So at the implementation, all 650 MPs are up, but after five years, likely as not only 635 (or so) are up, as the remaining 15 resigned/died in the period and forced by-elections. Rinse and repeat and eventually all MPs would be out of step, and Parliament a moving feast. Governments would change on a by-election rather than all at once.
Not sure if it would work though. Governments tend to lose support over time (at least in the UK). A government starting out a 330MPs clearly has a majority. Once it slipped to 324 are they still the government? Presumably so if the remaining 326 are all split from other parties. So they either become a minority or need to seek a deal. Or the other main party needs to start talking to all the other parties.
At some point a critical event would happen, perhaps a by-election or the second party concludes a deal with the third and they become the government. Does their support then erode perhaps?
I suspect you'd end up with governments formed of minorities/coalitions all the time, and no party ever having more than about 330 seats. Not sure that's a good idea now I think about it.
That all struck me too! But you mght also get group resignations as well. Thus the Prime Minister has to resign after five years, and lots of other mps in the same party also resigning.
What is the capitalist pro-free market response to climate and environmental change? Apart from the cheap "Venezuela" jibes, has anyone got anything to offer?.
Yes, of course. In the UK, the switch-over to renewable energy - especially, offshore wind - since 2010 has been stunningly fast. I don't think anyone was expecting anything even remotely so rapid and cost-effective as the private sector has been able to deliver over that period (with a bit of good government nudging).
Solar is less relevant to the UK, but the same story applies in that sector - a stunning reduction in costs over the last few years.
This was debated on This Week last Thursday... Johnson & Portillpo made the same point to this fellow, who went off on one on twitter at them the next day
ERG pushing to see the draft Bill. Bercow mischievoulsly confirming it is already written but saying it's up to the government whether MPs get to see it. Edit/ and now saying it would be good practice to publish it.
absolutely inappropriate once again. He is a snide little shit isn't he.
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement.
The terms of the Irish backstop, keeping Northern Ireland in large parts of single market legislation and the EU’s customs territory, in order to protect the Good Friday agreement would remain as the bloc’s solution for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland.
Or the opposite. If they know this motion will fail, they are trying to engineer a situation where they have clean hands while requesting a longer extension.
Yes.
Stripped of the meaningless PD, this vote pitches the pure question "Do you insist on blocking Brexit?" If the answer is 'Yes', the Labour opposition are exposed, since their Brexit policy requires the WA.
And if by some chance it passes, well bingo.
It's a good and rational move. Rather late though. They should have done this for MV2.
ERG pushing to see the draft Bill. Bercow mischievoulsly confirming it is already written but saying it's up to the government whether MPs get to see it. Edit/ and now saying it would be good practice to publish it.
absolutely inappropriate once again. He is a snide little shit isn't he.
Comments
Resign.. its the simplest way. I did, they never contact me these days.
You have to admit, as a strategy its bazin
- Notes the extension (again!) and the new timetable
- Notes the PD can be negotiated later
- Notes the Letwin process
- Declares it wishes to leave the EU with a deal
- Approves the WA for exit 22 May
- some legal qualifications at the end that I would need to see in writing
Edit/ questioning seems to be suggesting that the agreement to the WA would be "in principle" with the WA not actually formally secured until the Bill is approved. In other words it's a Meaningless not a Meaningful Vote, but one that is apparently enough for the EU for the time being.
https://twitter.com/labourlewis/status/1111278149919232007
If Brexit is delayed with a long extension, for re-negotiation and possibly REF2, that requires a PM and a govt with the authority to pilot it all through. Not possible with this Parliament, therefore a GE.
Alternatively, if the WA is passed and we leave on 22/5, that requires a PM and a govt with the authority to negotiate the Future Relationship. Not possible with this Parliament, therefore a GE.
Either way, a GE in 2019. Amazed that it is not yet an odds-on shot. Fill your boots.
In other news, has anyone figured out yet if tomorrow's vote on the WA alone qualifies as "meaningful"?
We are still in the same situation as before. Parliament won't back the Withdrawal Agreement, it won't revoke and it won't vote for a Deal/Remain plebiscite, either.
Absent any positive solution to this conundrum, No Deal happens on April 12th. That is still where we are headed right now.
Oh, they came up with another excuse to vote with the ERG nutters? Shocker.
Are they lieing for political gain ?
And people wonder why they are considered untrustworthy garbage who are unfit to hold any elected office.
So the government is heading for losing two meaningful votes and one meaningless one.
Opposition aren't happy. Don't believe it meets legal requirements for an MV
Right now it is like Gromit frantically laying down train tracks in front of the train in order to make sure the whole government isn't derailed.
Its why most businesses seem to regard a Corbyn Gov as a bigger threat to their business than Brexit
Not sure if it would work though. Governments tend to lose support over time (at least in the UK). A government starting out a 330MPs clearly has a majority. Once it slipped to 324 are they still the government? Presumably so if the remaining 326 are all split from other parties. So they either become a minority or need to seek a deal. Or the other main party needs to start talking to all the other parties.
At some point a critical event would happen, perhaps a by-election or the second party concludes a deal with the third and they become the government. Does their support then erode perhaps?
I suspect you'd end up with governments formed of minorities/coalitions all the time, and no party ever having more than about 330 seats. Not sure that's a good idea now I think about it.
At the end of this process, the few miserable survivors will have regressed to living in Iron Age roundhouses.
The Green Party will pop up at the end of this process and remind us that reform still hasn't gone far enough, because we need to abandon agriculture and allow the wildwood to grow back again in order to be truly environmentally friendly.
I want to hear the news but the presenter is a serious barrier.
And as William says, conversely if they lose tomorrow it's 12 April, extension or revocation.
What's the latest in Gotham City?
Good Friday agreement will apply in all Brexit scenarios - EU's Barnier
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-barnier/good-friday-agreement-will-apply-in-all-brexit-scenarios-eus-barnier-idUKKCN1R80YE?il=0
Her only aim is to get Meaningful Vote 3: Mission To Brussels back for another go.
Still not likely to get over the line, though.
Is it a Trumpian denial that anything is happening? Perhaps 70F in February isn't so bad after all but it's far more than climate change. Look at air quality and air pollution in our towns and cities. Do we want to breathe bad air - do we want our children to breathe bad air?
It's all very well sniping about the Greens and Labour but the centre and centre-right have abdicated the field to the authoritarian Left who make headway simply because they are offering some solutions. All the Right seems to be about is climate change denial and pro-nuclear power and that won't wash anymore.
Inasmuch as members being involved is a problem it is in MPs then not really holding up their end by screening out those they do not wish to serve under any circumstances.
Though it is surprising how members for decades who presumably remember that they did not always have involvement get so angry at the prospect of changing leader even in an emergency without their say so. The expectations have changed quite a bit.
Solar is less relevant to the UK, but the same story applies in that sector - a stunning reduction in costs over the last few years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v70irTWTmM
The EU (like pretty much every pseudo-governmental entity in the world) has net liabilities - whether explicit debts, rental obligations, or pensions.
It is not unreasonable for the UK to take on our share of the net liabilities accumulated during our membership period.
The total of these is somewhere in the £12-18bn range depending on discount rates, and how certain contingent liabilities are treated.
Did they mean that, or did they not?
Stripped of the meaningless PD, this vote pitches the pure question "Do you insist on blocking Brexit?" If the answer is 'Yes', the Labour opposition are exposed, since their Brexit policy requires the WA.
And if by some chance it passes, well bingo.
It's a good and rational move. Rather late though. They should have done this for MV2.