politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Johnson appears to be planning to ignore parliament if it soug

SystemSystem Posts: 12,171
edited June 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Johnson appears to be planning to ignore parliament if it sought to block a no deal Brexit

Re-reading Johnson interview, he appears to imply he would ignore parliament if it voted against no deal

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Good. Unless the EU is going to renegotiate the WDA any more timewasting is unnecessary.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,414
    Where is the outrage about the utterly irresponsible tax and spend promises. In particular £15 bn extra for defence from Hunt. Defence from what?
    Mc Donnell is rapidly becoming the voice of fiscal reason. And he won't be spending it on tanks or wealthy pensioners.
  • mwjfrome17mwjfrome17 Posts: 158
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Good. Unless the EU is going to renegotiate the WDA any more timewasting is unnecessary.

    Yes fuck Parliament and its sovereignty - I mean who cares about that. I don't remember any leavers ever bringing it up.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Basing anything at all on a close textual analysis of one of Boris's stream-of-consciousness interview answers is like trying to understand US policy by reading the Donald's tweets.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Uncertainty is harming the country - the PM might choose to stop this harm.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,679
    Well Boris as a historian knows what happened to Charles I when he tried this democratic obscenity.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,679
    In case you forget what a [language that gets you banned from PB] Boris Johnson is.

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1016631522080718848
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    Boris is going to take back control! :D
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    edited June 2019
    If Brexit is a disaster it's best that one of it's architects is in charge of the building when it collapses. He'll have plenty of time afterwards to reflect on his arrogance hopefully in a home for the criminally insane in Hartlepool
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    The mechanism by which parliament could force the government to request an extension is completely unclear at the moment. It might indeed not be possible, but my guess would be that the parliamentary majority against a no-deal crash out is so large, that they'd find a way. Bercow would help enormously.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    All small beer this compared to the cricket World Cup and England facing exit.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,912
    TGOHF said:

    Uncertainty is harming the country - the PM might choose to stop this harm.

    Ending uncertainty by all but guaranteeing that you will abruptly crash out of the EU come what may does indeed end the harm caused by uncertainty, at the small cost of the harm caused by crashing out without much preparation or notice.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    If he tried that he'd be VONCed quicker than he could say something stupid in Latin.
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 7,152
    I think this article implies Johnson has even thought it through. In reality he's clueless - he didn't understand there's no implementation period without a deal, didn't understand what the WTO allows, doesn't understand what Parliament can and can't do, etc.

    He just bumbles through with whatever comes to his head... which is why his team are cautious about allowing him out, letting him drink red wine on the sofa, having access to the grown-up, non-safety scissors etc.

    They say he's "not a details man". Possibly he's just a thicko with enough of a surface smattering of classical general knowledge for it not to be immediately obvious to the punters.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,406
    TGOHF said:

    All small beer this compared to the cricket World Cup and England facing exit.

    It's why we need to take back control and stop the foreigners coming into the UK...
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,490
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well Boris as a historian knows what happened to Charles I when he tried this democratic obscenity.

    I trust this post will be roundly condemned by many of your fellow remainers who rightly deplore the undercurrent of violence that is creeping into political discourse.

    Or not.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    The mechanism by which parliament could force the government to request an extension is completely unclear at the moment. It might indeed not be possible, but my guess would be that the parliamentary majority against a no-deal crash out is so large, that they'd find a way. Bercow would help enormously.

    Is it so large? The Cooper amendment to rule out no deal under any circumstances passed by 1 vote.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,238
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    The mechanism by which parliament could force the government to request an extension is completely unclear at the moment. It might indeed not be possible, but my guess would be that the parliamentary majority against a no-deal crash out is so large, that they'd find a way. Bercow would help enormously.

    The only certain way would be a VONC, followed by a short lived GNU which requested an extension.
    Given that the only thing such an administration could agree on would be the request, an election would have immediately to follow.
    I don’t see how that helps - particularly as it would be extremely difficult to achieve.

    (Of course revocation would them also be an option, but I don’t think that would fly, at all.)

    Any procedural attempt to tie a PM’s hands would I think be doomed to failure. All the PM would have to do would be to stall.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    OnlyLivingBoy said:

    If he tried that he'd be VONCed quicker than he could say something stupid in Latin.

    Would Labour fight the election on “rejoin” ?

    Would Farage fight the election ? The job would be done.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    glw said:

    TGOHF said:

    Uncertainty is harming the country - the PM might choose to stop this harm.

    Ending uncertainty by all but guaranteeing that you will abruptly crash out of the EU come what may does indeed end the harm caused by uncertainty, at the small cost of the harm caused by crashing out without much preparation or notice.
    Come on, we've had by then 3.5 years to prepare. With warning bells regularly that no deal was a very serious prospect for a year at least.

    If there has not been "much preparation" then that is a damning indictment of our Civil Service at the very least.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,679
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well Boris as a historian knows what happened to Charles I when he tried this democratic obscenity.

    I trust this post will be roundly condemned by many of your fellow remainers who rightly deplore the undercurrent of violence that is creeping into political discourse.

    Or not.
    Don't be a snowflake comrade.

    I was talking about Boris, like Charles I, being removed from power.

    It was your vile Leaver mind that jumped to execution.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,490
    SirNorfolkPassmore said:

    I think this article implies Johnson has even thought it through. In reality he's clueless - he didn't understand there's no implementation period without a deal, didn't understand what the WTO allows, doesn't understand what Parliament can and can't do, etc.

    He just bumbles through with whatever comes to his head... which is why his team are cautious about allowing him out, letting him drink red wine on the sofa, having access to the grown-up, non-safety scissors etc.

    They say he's "not a details man". Possibly he's just a thicko with enough of a surface smattering of classical general knowledge for it not to be immediately obvious to the punters.

    Cameron wasn't a details man. He was forever saying he would make sure electricity customers were put on the cheapest tariff and other such silly off the cuff pronouncements that other people then had to defend and scrabble around to make come true. People forget this now he has been elevated to sainthood.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,406
    edited June 2019
    Philip_Thompson said:

    glw said:

    TGOHF said:

    Uncertainty is harming the country - the PM might choose to stop this harm.

    Ending uncertainty by all but guaranteeing that you will abruptly crash out of the EU come what may does indeed end the harm caused by uncertainty, at the small cost of the harm caused by crashing out without much preparation or notice.
    Come on, we've had by then 3.5 years to prepare. With warning bells regularly that no deal was a very serious prospect for a year at least.

    If there has not been "much preparation" then that is a damning indictment of our Civil Service at the very least.
    Nope - it's a damning indictment of the Government who lead the Civil Service...

    the Civil Service only do things the Government is willing to pay for, if the Government isn't willing to pay for full scale no deal preparation the Civil Service doesn't have the money to do it...
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    dixiedean said:

    Where is the outrage about the utterly irresponsible tax and spend promises. In particular £15 bn extra for defence from Hunt. Defence from what?
    Mc Donnell is rapidly becoming the voice of fiscal reason. And he won't be spending it on tanks or wealthy pensioners.

    I like tanks.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    Nigelb said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    The mechanism by which parliament could force the government to request an extension is completely unclear at the moment. It might indeed not be possible, but my guess would be that the parliamentary majority against a no-deal crash out is so large, that they'd find a way. Bercow would help enormously.

    The only certain way would be a VONC, followed by a short lived GNU which requested an extension.
    Given that the only thing such an administration could agree on would be the request, an election would have immediately to follow.
    I don’t see how that helps - particularly as it would be extremely difficult to achieve.

    (Of course revocation would them also be an option, but I don’t think that would fly, at all.)

    Any procedural attempt to tie a PM’s hands would I think be doomed to failure. All the PM would have to do would be to stall.

    Pocket veto... :(
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/VictoriaLIVE/status/1143451283635838977

    My parents lived in Switzerland for some years, they were forever hopping over the French border, there were rarely to never physical checks. The whole thing is a confected nonsense. If it wasn't this there would be a looming crisis over the harmonisation of duck eggs or something.
    How many times did they drive a goods lorry across the border?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,679
    Perhaps we're missing the bigger picture, Boris Johnson's campaign isn't going well and he's having to throw some red meat to Tory members who are appalled at his private life.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    viewcode said:

    dixiedean said:

    Where is the outrage about the utterly irresponsible tax and spend promises. In particular £15 bn extra for defence from Hunt. Defence from what?
    Mc Donnell is rapidly becoming the voice of fiscal reason. And he won't be spending it on tanks or wealthy pensioners.

    I like tanks.
    You could get a lot of fish in one for £15 billion.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,238
    OnlyLivingBoy said:

    If he tried that he'd be VONCed quicker than he could say something stupid in Latin.

    As the essence of ‘that’ is delay, a VONC would not happen anywhere near so quickly.

    I’d say a VONC would be better that evens, albeit no certainty given how long it takes parliament to get its act together, but what then ?

    Time is tight.

  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well Boris as a historian knows what happened to Charles I when he tried this democratic obscenity.

    I trust this post will be roundly condemned by many of your fellow remainers who rightly deplore the undercurrent of violence that is creeping into political discourse.

    Or not.
    For context, am I correct in thinking that you were the one who thought Jo Cox was a false flag operation?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    The mechanism by which parliament could force the government to request an extension is completely unclear at the moment. It might indeed not be possible, but my guess would be that the parliamentary majority against a no-deal crash out is so large, that they'd find a way. Bercow would help enormously.

    Is it so large? The Cooper amendment to rule out no deal under any circumstances passed by 1 vote.
    Good point. Rule 1 applies. Ok, Rule 1.1... :(
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,490
    viewcode said:

    dixiedean said:

    Where is the outrage about the utterly irresponsible tax and spend promises. In particular £15 bn extra for defence from Hunt. Defence from what?
    Mc Donnell is rapidly becoming the voice of fiscal reason. And he won't be spending it on tanks or wealthy pensioners.

    I like tanks.
    I can't imagine us spending the money on anything so sensible as tanks. Seems more likely to me that we'll be funding some big US defence project like stealth airships that may or may not one day deliver anything we could usefully use to defend our country.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Good. Unless the EU is going to renegotiate the WDA any more timewasting is unnecessary.

    Ignoring Parliament in a Parliamentary democracy......hmm.

    And these people have the nerve to call themselves Conservatives. Imagine what a fantastic precedent that would set for Corbyn.

    The No Deal Brexiteers are rapidly turning into the Jacobins of the Brexit revolution, stopping at nothing to get their own way.

    Boris would make a good Danton. Who would be the Robespierre figure? Steve Baker perhaps.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    TGOHF said:

    OnlyLivingBoy said:

    If he tried that he'd be VONCed quicker than he could say something stupid in Latin.

    Would Labour fight the election on “rejoin” ?

    Would Farage fight the election ? The job would be done.
    He would be VONCed a week or two before 31 Oct, and an interim PM would request an extension to run a GE and/or referendum. Obviously they can't wait until 31 October, Remainers aren't stupid.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,490
    viewcode said:

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well Boris as a historian knows what happened to Charles I when he tried this democratic obscenity.

    I trust this post will be roundly condemned by many of your fellow remainers who rightly deplore the undercurrent of violence that is creeping into political discourse.

    Or not.
    For context, am I correct in thinking that you were the one who thought Jo Cox was a false flag operation?
    That would make me approve of violent language why?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Perhaps we're missing the bigger picture, Boris Johnson's campaign isn't going well and he's having to throw some red meat to Tory members who are appalled at his private life.

    Tory MPs voted for Boris - they have to wear the consequences.

    But - perhaps the EU boil needs lanced.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,912
    Philip_Thompson said:

    glw said:

    TGOHF said:

    Uncertainty is harming the country - the PM might choose to stop this harm.

    Ending uncertainty by all but guaranteeing that you will abruptly crash out of the EU come what may does indeed end the harm caused by uncertainty, at the small cost of the harm caused by crashing out without much preparation or notice.
    Come on, we've had by then 3.5 years to prepare. With warning bells regularly that no deal was a very serious prospect for a year at least.

    If there has not been "much preparation" then that is a damning indictment of our Civil Service at the very least.
    Organisations can't prepare for all possible outcomes, what's going to happen next regarding our relationship with the EU keeps changing, and in fact we don't even know today what will happen come October. And it's a bit rich to say "you should be prepared" when the next PM — God help us — is still peddling the line that "I'll knock out a new deal in the next few months".
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48631741

    Perhaps Boris has been talking to the head of civil service.

    "The government is in "pretty good shape" to cope with a no-deal Brexit, the head of civil service has said."
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720
    TGOHF said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Perhaps we're missing the bigger picture, Boris Johnson's campaign isn't going well and he's having to throw some red meat to Tory members who are appalled at his private life.

    Tory MPs voted for Boris - they have to wear the consequences.

    But - perhaps the EU boil needs lanced.
    Some in the EU see a no deal Brexit as a way to lance the UK boil...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    In case you forget what a [language that gets you banned from PB] Boris Johnson is.

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1016631522080718848

    Perhaps if Boris had been in charge the UK's response would not have been completely fucking pathetic.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    williamglenn said:

    TGOHF said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Perhaps we're missing the bigger picture, Boris Johnson's campaign isn't going well and he's having to throw some red meat to Tory members who are appalled at his private life.

    Tory MPs voted for Boris - they have to wear the consequences.

    But - perhaps the EU boil needs lanced.
    Some in the EU see a no deal Brexit as a way to lance the UK boil...
    Will they retreat behind their protectionist iron curtain ?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,237
    I've now watched the clip of him doing that 'model of buses' act and I wish I hadn't. Guy is taking the piss. Just a dreadful old ham straining to be amusing. It's verging on poshboy David Brent. Yuck. If this character were to win a general election I would feel utter contempt for millions of my fellow citizens. So no change there.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,490
    williamglenn said:

    TGOHF said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Perhaps we're missing the bigger picture, Boris Johnson's campaign isn't going well and he's having to throw some red meat to Tory members who are appalled at his private life.

    Tory MPs voted for Boris - they have to wear the consequences.

    But - perhaps the EU boil needs lanced.
    Some in the EU see a no deal Brexit as a way to lance the UK boil...
    And that's fair enough. The EU's participant nations deserve the opportunity to proceed unencumbered with their project.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    viewcode said:

    dixiedean said:

    Where is the outrage about the utterly irresponsible tax and spend promises. In particular £15 bn extra for defence from Hunt. Defence from what?
    Mc Donnell is rapidly becoming the voice of fiscal reason. And he won't be spending it on tanks or wealthy pensioners.

    I like tanks.
    I can't imagine us spending the money on anything so sensible as tanks. Seems more likely to me that we'll be funding some big US defence project like stealth airships that may or may not one day deliver anything we could usefully use to defend our country.
    The Challenger 2 tanks need upgrades, not least the fact that it's rifled barrel can only take one set of shells and we've stopped making them (this is a real thing). There are two proposals for upgrades but (iirc) not yet resolved. The Warriors (think a battle taxi with tracks and a gun) need an upgrade but that's hit the sands. The Boxers (a battle taxi with wheels and no gun) still aren't complete. They slapped extra armour on the Ajax (a reconnaissance vehicle with enough gun to get out of trouble) but now it's so heavy it won't fit in the plane (yes, that really happened).

    I'll stop ranting now... :)
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Boris is entirely correct. If the Commons doesn't like it then the way for the Commons to establish its supremacy over the Prime Minister is a Vote of No Confidence followed by choosing one amongst them to lead a Ministry that would avoid No Deal.

    It's constitutionally improper for the Commons to seek to compel a Prime Minister to use their Executive power in a specific way. That's not how it works. I suppose if there was such a conflict it might be best for the PM of the day to treat it as a de facto vote of no confidence and tell HMQ that she should appoint a replacement.

    If avoiding No Deal is not important enough to the Commons to choose another Prime Minister to do so then we will end up with No Deal and the Commons will have to answer to the electorate for their inaction.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    williamglenn said:

    TGOHF said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Perhaps we're missing the bigger picture, Boris Johnson's campaign isn't going well and he's having to throw some red meat to Tory members who are appalled at his private life.

    Tory MPs voted for Boris - they have to wear the consequences.

    But - perhaps the EU boil needs lanced.
    Some in the EU see a no deal Brexit as a way to lance the UK boil...
    And that's fair enough. The EU's participant nations deserve the opportunity to proceed unencumbered with their project.
    They see the UK more as a self-destructive nuisance than an encumbrance.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006
    Philip_Thompson said:

    glw said:

    TGOHF said:

    Uncertainty is harming the country - the PM might choose to stop this harm.

    Ending uncertainty by all but guaranteeing that you will abruptly crash out of the EU come what may does indeed end the harm caused by uncertainty, at the small cost of the harm caused by crashing out without much preparation or notice.
    Come on, we've had by then 3.5 years to prepare. With warning bells regularly that no deal was a very serious prospect for a year at least.

    If there has not been "much preparation" then that is a damning indictment of our Civil Service at the very least.
    July 2017

    "Speaking in the Commons today, the foreign secretary (Boris Johnson) said “there is no plan for no deal because we are going to get a great deal.”

    Straight from the mouth of the man that is shortly to become PM and responsible for Brexit. No point trying to blame the Civil Service
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    OllyT said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    glw said:

    TGOHF said:

    Uncertainty is harming the country - the PM might choose to stop this harm.

    Ending uncertainty by all but guaranteeing that you will abruptly crash out of the EU come what may does indeed end the harm caused by uncertainty, at the small cost of the harm caused by crashing out without much preparation or notice.
    Come on, we've had by then 3.5 years to prepare. With warning bells regularly that no deal was a very serious prospect for a year at least.

    If there has not been "much preparation" then that is a damning indictment of our Civil Service at the very least.
    July 2017

    "Speaking in the Commons today, the foreign secretary (Boris Johnson) said “there is no plan for no deal because we are going to get a great deal.”

    Straight from the mouth of the man that is shortly to become PM and responsible for Brexit. No point trying to blame the Civil Service
    Didn’t he resign because the PM screwed it up ? What more do you want - a hunger strike ?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,617
    ralphmalph said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48631741

    Perhaps Boris has been talking to the head of civil service.

    "The government is in "pretty good shape" to cope with a no-deal Brexit, the head of civil service has said."

    I think his official title is now "Can I please stay the Head of the Civil Service?"
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    TGOHF said:

    OllyT said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    glw said:

    TGOHF said:

    Uncertainty is harming the country - the PM might choose to stop this harm.

    Ending uncertainty by all but guaranteeing that you will abruptly crash out of the EU come what may does indeed end the harm caused by uncertainty, at the small cost of the harm caused by crashing out without much preparation or notice.
    Come on, we've had by then 3.5 years to prepare. With warning bells regularly that no deal was a very serious prospect for a year at least.

    If there has not been "much preparation" then that is a damning indictment of our Civil Service at the very least.
    July 2017

    "Speaking in the Commons today, the foreign secretary (Boris Johnson) said “there is no plan for no deal because we are going to get a great deal.”

    Straight from the mouth of the man that is shortly to become PM and responsible for Brexit. No point trying to blame the Civil Service
    Didn’t he resign because the PM screwed it up ? What more do you want - a hunger strike ?
    A few weeks wouldn't do him any harm
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    TGOHF said:

    OllyT said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    glw said:

    TGOHF said:

    Uncertainty is harming the country - the PM might choose to stop this harm.

    Ending uncertainty by all but guaranteeing that you will abruptly crash out of the EU come what may does indeed end the harm caused by uncertainty, at the small cost of the harm caused by crashing out without much preparation or notice.
    Come on, we've had by then 3.5 years to prepare. With warning bells regularly that no deal was a very serious prospect for a year at least.

    If there has not been "much preparation" then that is a damning indictment of our Civil Service at the very least.
    July 2017

    "Speaking in the Commons today, the foreign secretary (Boris Johnson) said “there is no plan for no deal because we are going to get a great deal.”

    Straight from the mouth of the man that is shortly to become PM and responsible for Brexit. No point trying to blame the Civil Service
    Didn’t he resign because the PM screwed it up ? What more do you want - a hunger strike ?
    It might do him some good.
  • valleyboyvalleyboy Posts: 606
    Roger said:

    If Brexit is a disaster it's best that one of it's architects is in charge of the building when it collapses. He'll have plenty of time afterwards to reflect on his arrogance hopefully in a home for the criminally insane in Hartlepool

    Or prison.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Good. Unless the EU is going to renegotiate the WDA any more timewasting is unnecessary.

    Only if you think parliament is unnecessary. In a parliamentary democracy perhaps it might be considered necessary, if it has given a clear view?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    AlastairMeeks said:

    viewcode said:

    dixiedean said:

    Where is the outrage about the utterly irresponsible tax and spend promises. In particular £15 bn extra for defence from Hunt. Defence from what?
    Mc Donnell is rapidly becoming the voice of fiscal reason. And he won't be spending it on tanks or wealthy pensioners.

    I like tanks.
    You could get a lot of fish in one for £15 billion.
    Yes. But they can't fire the gun. Because i) they have little comprehension of armed warfare and ii) they have fins.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    God he’s awful, mr Johnson there isn’t time to strike a new deal is there?
    Answer, we didn’t used to make wine in the uk now we make lots of wine.

    What do you do to relax?
    I make models of buses and paint them!

    Well at least he’s moved on from painting cheese boxes white!
  • valleyboyvalleyboy Posts: 606
    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Corbyn is sane compared with this madman.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,573
    I don't particularly support leaving with No Deal, but the suggestion that in going ahead a future Boris would be bypassing parliament is misplaced. When parliament voted to trigger Art 50 it knowingly triggered (the text is short and simple) the whole Article, and knew that it was giving away its direct power to remain in the EU from 2 years later to the day.

    Parliament then declines 3 opportunities to agree a deal and has given no sign as to what deal (of a non-unicorn nature) it would accept.

    For us to leave without a deal (which I don't want) is, given the facts, wholly in accord with the acts and deeds of parliament and they are responsible for it.

    If parliament has changed its mind about triggering the whole of Article 50 it is in luck. A surprising ruling has said it can be revoked. Parliament has no power to grant an extension, but it has the power to pass an Act compelling the government to revoke. My guess is that the speaker has spotted this.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    algarkirk said:

    I don't particularly support leaving with No Deal, but the suggestion that in going ahead a future Boris would be bypassing parliament is misplaced. When parliament voted to trigger Art 50 it knowingly triggered (the text is short and simple) the whole Article, and knew that it was giving away its direct power to remain in the EU from 2 years later to the day.

    Parliament then declines 3 opportunities to agree a deal and has given no sign as to what deal (of a non-unicorn nature) it would accept.

    For us to leave without a deal (which I don't want) is, given the facts, wholly in accord with the acts and deeds of parliament and they are responsible for it.

    If parliament has changed its mind about triggering the whole of Article 50 it is in luck. A surprising ruling has said it can be revoked. Parliament has no power to grant an extension, but it has the power to pass an Act compelling the government to revoke. My guess is that the speaker has spotted this.

    If he could take the UK without a deal could he not also unilaterally take us out with the WA?
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    nichomar said:

    God he’s awful, mr Johnson there isn’t time to strike a new deal is there?
    Answer, we didn’t used to make wine in the uk now we make lots of wine.

    What do you do to relax?
    I make models of buses and paint them!

    Well at least he’s moved on from painting cheese boxes white!

    I dont believe Johnson on the painting and bus making! Lets see some evidence and pictures of him doing this. Does he think it is some parallel with Churchill with his painting and brick laying?


    What is going on in Boris's head he is as mad as a box of frogs...
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    The one thing this is doing is actually showcasing to those who are watching how thick so many of our MPs are. It's embarrassing to watch them spout off on things they know f... all about. I used to think the Labour front bench was populated by morons but the Tory’s are doing their best to out thick them.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    valleyboy said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Corbyn is sane compared with this madman.
    He really, really isn't.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    algarkirk said:

    I don't particularly support leaving with No Deal, but the suggestion that in going ahead a future Boris would be bypassing parliament is misplaced. When parliament voted to trigger Art 50 it knowingly triggered (the text is short and simple) the whole Article, and knew that it was giving away its direct power to remain in the EU from 2 years later to the day.

    Parliament then declines 3 opportunities to agree a deal and has given no sign as to what deal (of a non-unicorn nature) it would accept.

    For us to leave without a deal (which I don't want) is, given the facts, wholly in accord with the acts and deeds of parliament and they are responsible for it.

    If parliament has changed its mind about triggering the whole of Article 50 it is in luck. A surprising ruling has said it can be revoked. Parliament has no power to grant an extension, but it has the power to pass an Act compelling the government to revoke. My guess is that the speaker has spotted this.

    The parliament that triggered A50 is a different one to the current parliament in terms of members and composition.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,573
    edited June 2019
    nichomar said:

    algarkirk said:

    I don't particularly support leaving with No Deal, but the suggestion that in going ahead a future Boris would be bypassing parliament is misplaced. When parliament voted to trigger Art 50 it knowingly triggered (the text is short and simple) the whole Article, and knew that it was giving away its direct power to remain in the EU from 2 years later to the day.

    Parliament then declines 3 opportunities to agree a deal and has given no sign as to what deal (of a non-unicorn nature) it would accept.

    For us to leave without a deal (which I don't want) is, given the facts, wholly in accord with the acts and deeds of parliament and they are responsible for it.

    If parliament has changed its mind about triggering the whole of Article 50 it is in luck. A surprising ruling has said it can be revoked. Parliament has no power to grant an extension, but it has the power to pass an Act compelling the government to revoke. My guess is that the speaker has spotted this.

    If he could take the UK without a deal could he not also unilaterally take us out with the WA?
    No. Revoking is in parliament's hands, as was triggering Art 50. Parliament has done all it can do to leave after the (extended) time expires. The WA requires the consent of parliament as the details of it affect domestic rights. (BTW IMO the government can revoke without parliament's agreement as revocation affirms the status quo and does not affect domestic rights).

    Parliament has given 100% legitimacy to leaving without a deal by virtue of triggering Art 50 and parliament's subsequent actions. It is of course in total denial about this.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,573
    The_Taxman said:

    algarkirk said:

    I don't particularly support leaving with No Deal, but the suggestion that in going ahead a future Boris would be bypassing parliament is misplaced. When parliament voted to trigger Art 50 it knowingly triggered (the text is short and simple) the whole Article, and knew that it was giving away its direct power to remain in the EU from 2 years later to the day.

    Parliament then declines 3 opportunities to agree a deal and has given no sign as to what deal (of a non-unicorn nature) it would accept.

    For us to leave without a deal (which I don't want) is, given the facts, wholly in accord with the acts and deeds of parliament and they are responsible for it.

    If parliament has changed its mind about triggering the whole of Article 50 it is in luck. A surprising ruling has said it can be revoked. Parliament has no power to grant an extension, but it has the power to pass an Act compelling the government to revoke. My guess is that the speaker has spotted this.

    The parliament that triggered A50 is a different one to the current parliament in terms of members and composition.
    That makes no difference to the substance of what I have said. Parliament is of course bound by the decisions of its predecessors until, crucially, it enacts otherwise. It can and it hasn't.

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,490
    williamglenn said:

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    williamglenn said:

    TGOHF said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Perhaps we're missing the bigger picture, Boris Johnson's campaign isn't going well and he's having to throw some red meat to Tory members who are appalled at his private life.

    Tory MPs voted for Boris - they have to wear the consequences.

    But - perhaps the EU boil needs lanced.
    Some in the EU see a no deal Brexit as a way to lance the UK boil...
    And that's fair enough. The EU's participant nations deserve the opportunity to proceed unencumbered with their project.
    They see the UK more as a self-destructive nuisance than an encumbrance.
    That's fine, they're entitled to their opinion, and to get on with the EU as a core group, and we can be a nuisance elsewhere.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    algarkirk said:

    The_Taxman said:

    algarkirk said:

    I don't particularly support leaving with No Deal, but the suggestion that in going ahead a future Boris would be bypassing parliament is misplaced. When parliament voted to trigger Art 50 it knowingly triggered (the text is short and simple) the whole Article, and knew that it was giving away its direct power to remain in the EU from 2 years later to the day.

    Parliament then declines 3 opportunities to agree a deal and has given no sign as to what deal (of a non-unicorn nature) it would accept.

    For us to leave without a deal (which I don't want) is, given the facts, wholly in accord with the acts and deeds of parliament and they are responsible for it.

    If parliament has changed its mind about triggering the whole of Article 50 it is in luck. A surprising ruling has said it can be revoked. Parliament has no power to grant an extension, but it has the power to pass an Act compelling the government to revoke. My guess is that the speaker has spotted this.

    The parliament that triggered A50 is a different one to the current parliament in terms of members and composition.
    That makes no difference to the substance of what I have said. Parliament is of course bound by the decisions of its predecessors until, crucially, it enacts otherwise. It can and it hasn't.

    Yet.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,156
    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,391
    valleyboy said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Corbyn is sane compared with this madman.
    Do you not think Johnson's rhetoric is meticulously planned? He is calculating, and clever. To paraphrase the mafia boss in the Italian Job '(he) planned this ... jam, (he) must have planned a way out of it'!
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Mexicanpete said:

    valleyboy said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Corbyn is sane compared with this madman.
    Do you not think Johnson's rhetoric is meticulously planned? He is calculating, and clever. To paraphrase the mafia boss in the Italian Job '(he) planned this ... jam, (he) must have planned a way out of it'!
    Yes by blowing the bloody doors off
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    Frightened by Johnson?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,414
    nichomar said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    valleyboy said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Corbyn is sane compared with this madman.
    Do you not think Johnson's rhetoric is meticulously planned? He is calculating, and clever. To paraphrase the mafia boss in the Italian Job '(he) planned this ... jam, (he) must have planned a way out of it'!
    Yes by blowing the bloody doors off
    Yes. And now we are teetering over a precipice with a large quantity of gold at risk.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,406
    The_Taxman said:

    algarkirk said:

    I don't particularly support leaving with No Deal, but the suggestion that in going ahead a future Boris would be bypassing parliament is misplaced. When parliament voted to trigger Art 50 it knowingly triggered (the text is short and simple) the whole Article, and knew that it was giving away its direct power to remain in the EU from 2 years later to the day.

    Parliament then declines 3 opportunities to agree a deal and has given no sign as to what deal (of a non-unicorn nature) it would accept.

    For us to leave without a deal (which I don't want) is, given the facts, wholly in accord with the acts and deeds of parliament and they are responsible for it.

    If parliament has changed its mind about triggering the whole of Article 50 it is in luck. A surprising ruling has said it can be revoked. Parliament has no power to grant an extension, but it has the power to pass an Act compelling the government to revoke. My guess is that the speaker has spotted this.

    The parliament that triggered A50 is a different one to the current parliament in terms of members and composition.
    And no Parliament can bind it's successor - and the Parliament elected on June 7th 2017 is a successor of the Parliament elected in 2015 that created this mess...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    edited June 2019
    nichomar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    Frightened by Johnson?
    I'm quite happy to admit to that. Just as I was frightened by Chavez, and still am by Erdogan, Modi, Trump, Putin and Corbyn.

    Just not especially for that reason.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    dixiedean said:

    nichomar said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    valleyboy said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Corbyn is sane compared with this madman.
    Do you not think Johnson's rhetoric is meticulously planned? He is calculating, and clever. To paraphrase the mafia boss in the Italian Job '(he) planned this ... jam, (he) must have planned a way out of it'!
    Yes by blowing the bloody doors off
    Yes. And now we are teetering over a precipice with a large quantity of gold at risk.
    Not quite the self-preservation society!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,391
    nichomar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    Frightened by Johnson?
    Speak for yourself. He is a Machiavellian narcissist and scares the living daylights out of me!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    Mexicanpete said:

    nichomar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    Frightened by Johnson?
    Speak for yourself. He is a Machiavellian narcissist and scares the living daylights out of me!
    Machiavellian?!!!
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Mexicanpete said:

    nichomar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    Frightened by Johnson?
    Speak for yourself. He is a Machiavellian narcissist and scares the living daylights out of me!
    Well yes I agree with you but not in the way HYUFD thinks I’m frightened.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    The EU have made the best of a bad situation .

    The UK is leaving but there’s no domino effect much to the disappointment of the Farage hate mob .

    Support for the EU has gone up . The much vaunted right wing populist wave turned into a trickle .

    The media were desperate for that to happen, instead the Greens and Liberal Democrat parties did well .

    Parties that originally had an EU ref or exit from the Euro have ditched that as the UK example of 3 years of political chaos has not gone unnoticed by voters from the remaining 27 EU members and is now a vote loser.

    Brexiters won’t get any validation but can be happy in the knowledge that Trump and Putin are on their side !



  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    I don't think he will win an overall majority.

    I am more worried about the harm he will do to the economy and my life by following the Brexit extremist agenda...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,156
    edited June 2019
    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1143534903805526018?s=20

    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1143535602526314498?s=20
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    ydoethur said:

    dixiedean said:

    nichomar said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    valleyboy said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Corbyn is sane compared with this madman.
    Do you not think Johnson's rhetoric is meticulously planned? He is calculating, and clever. To paraphrase the mafia boss in the Italian Job '(he) planned this ... jam, (he) must have planned a way out of it'!
    Yes by blowing the bloody doors off
    Yes. And now we are teetering over a precipice with a large quantity of gold at risk.
    Not quite the self-preservation society!
    More the village green preservation society
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,156
    The_Taxman said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    I don't think he will win an overall majority.

    I am more worried about the harm he will do to the economy and my life by following the Brexit extremist agenda...
    Boris is the only Tory who could win an overall majority
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    HYUFD said:

    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1143534903805526018?s=20

    They were expecting leadership? From Corbyn?

    That would be like expecting integrity from Prince Andrew.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,900
    HYUFD said:


    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit

    I'm not sure the first part is true but you're entitled to your view. Why should anyone be "frightened" of Boris Johnson? Yes, he has his critics of whom you aren't one but he's entitled to scrutiny and he's allowed to be asked questions to which he ought to be able to respond - as an aside, I don't care about his private life but his position on public policy such as taxation, Heathrow and other issues should be a matter of public record.

    The point about winning a GE and delivering Brexit - that's your view and to be fair that's supported by some polls but not all. Some have asked about the timing of a GE - I think a mid-October election is feasible but a Conservative is entitled to ask what the Party's manifesto position would be.

    Would a vote for Johnson be a vote for leaving a) with the current WA b) with a new WA or c) without a WA on 31/10? I genuinely don't know. I know what a vote for the LDs and TBP would mean and I'm equally unclear about Labour's position but I'm not bothered about that and I suspect you aren't either.

    The position or policy may not be one all Conservatives can or would support so would you advocate deselecting MPs or PPCs who refuse to sign up to the policy? We hear there are 10-12 MPs who would fight any attempt to leave without a Deal - would you recommend the deselection of those MPs such as Tobias Ellwood?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,156
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:


    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit

    I'm not sure the first part is true but you're entitled to your view. Why should anyone be "frightened" of Boris Johnson? Yes, he has his critics of whom you aren't one but he's entitled to scrutiny and he's allowed to be asked questions to which he ought to be able to respond - as an aside, I don't care about his private life but his position on public policy such as taxation, Heathrow and other issues should be a matter of public record.

    The point about winning a GE and delivering Brexit - that's your view and to be fair that's supported by some polls but not all. Some have asked about the timing of a GE - I think a mid-October election is feasible but a Conservative is entitled to ask what the Party's manifesto position would be.

    Would a vote for Johnson be a vote for leaving a) with the current WA b) with a new WA or c) without a WA on 31/10? I genuinely don't know. I know what a vote for the LDs and TBP would mean and I'm equally unclear about Labour's position but I'm not bothered about that and I suspect you aren't either.

    The position or policy may not be one all Conservatives can or would support so would you advocate deselecting MPs or PPCs who refuse to sign up to the policy? We hear there are 10-12 MPs who would fight any attempt to leave without a Deal - would you recommend the deselection of those MPs such as Tobias Ellwood?
    Boris' position is we leave the EU Deal or No Deal by October 31st and all Tory MPs should be expected to support that if Boris wins the Tory leadership.

    I still think as is rumoured Boris will deliver a FTA for GB and remove the temporary Customs Union and let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 684
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:


    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit

    I'm not sure the first part is true but you're entitled to your view. Why should anyone be "frightened" of Boris Johnson? Yes, he has his critics of whom you aren't one but he's entitled to scrutiny and he's allowed to be asked questions to which he ought to be able to respond - as an aside, I don't care about his private life but his position on public policy such as taxation, Heathrow and other issues should be a matter of public record.

    The point about winning a GE and delivering Brexit - that's your view and to be fair that's supported by some polls but not all. Some have asked about the timing of a GE - I think a mid-October election is feasible but a Conservative is entitled to ask what the Party's manifesto position would be.

    Would a vote for Johnson be a vote for leaving a) with the current WA b) with a new WA or c) without a WA on 31/10? I genuinely don't know. I know what a vote for the LDs and TBP would mean and I'm equally unclear about Labour's position but I'm not bothered about that and I suspect you aren't either.

    The position or policy may not be one all Conservatives can or would support so would you advocate deselecting MPs or PPCs who refuse to sign up to the policy? We hear there are 10-12 MPs who would fight any attempt to leave without a Deal - would you recommend the deselection of those MPs such as Tobias Ellwood?
    Boris' position is we leave the EU Deal or No Deal by October 31st and all Tory MPs should be expected to support that if Boris wins the Tory leadership.

    I still think as is rumoured Boris will deliver a FTA for GB and remove the temporary Customs Union and let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop
    Evidence for these rumours please.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,362
    edited June 2019
    Can you believe the state of this absolute tosser..............he is well named
    https://archive.fo/gIfxm
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:


    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit

    I'm not sure the first part is true but you're entitled to your view. Why should anyone be "frightened" of Boris Johnson? Yes, he has his critics of whom you aren't one but he's entitled to scrutiny and he's allowed to be asked questions to which he ought to be able to respond - as an aside, I don't care about his private life but his position on public policy such as taxation, Heathrow and other issues should be a matter of public record.

    The point about winning a GE and delivering Brexit - that's your view and to be fair that's supported by some polls but not all. Some have asked about the timing of a GE - I think a mid-October election is feasible but a Conservative is entitled to ask what the Party's manifesto position would be.

    Would a vote for Johnson be a vote for leaving a) with the current WA b) with a new WA or c) without a WA on 31/10? I genuinely don't know. I know what a vote for the LDs and TBP would mean and I'm equally unclear about Labour's position but I'm not bothered about that and I suspect you aren't either.

    The position or policy may not be one all Conservatives can or would support so would you advocate deselecting MPs or PPCs who refuse to sign up to the policy? We hear there are 10-12 MPs who would fight any attempt to leave without a Deal - would you recommend the deselection of those MPs such as Tobias Ellwood?
    Boris' position is we leave the EU Deal or No Deal by October 31st and all Tory MPs should be expected to support that if Boris wins the Tory leadership.

    I still think as is rumoured Boris will deliver a FTA for GB and remove the temporary Customs Union and let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop
    As is rumoured ;)

    Out of interest, why did you back Remain in the referendum?
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    HYUFD said:

    The_Taxman said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    I don't think he will win an overall majority.

    I am more worried about the harm he will do to the economy and my life by following the Brexit extremist agenda...
    Boris is the only Tory who could win an overall majority
    To be honest i think a coalition government with a heavily hung pariament is the best option at the moment! I dont view everything through the perspective of the Tories being the only viable government.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    HYUFD said:

    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1143534903805526018?s=20

    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1143535602526314498?s=20

    I keep banging on about Corbyn being a Leaver at heart. He keeps proving me right. He'll keep going until it's too late, then turn to the audience and say "well, I tried" and shrug. Just like Boris will. Our nomenklatura. Lucky us.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Streeter said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:


    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit

    I'm not sure the first part is true but you're entitled to your view. Why should anyone be "frightened" of Boris Johnson? Yes, he has his critics of whom you aren't one but he's entitled to scrutiny and he's allowed to be asked questions to which he ought to be able to respond - as an aside, I don't care about his private life but his position on public policy such as taxation, Heathrow and other issues should be a matter of public record.

    The point about winning a GE and delivering Brexit - that's your view and to be fair that's supported by some polls but not all. Some have asked about the timing of a GE - I think a mid-October election is feasible but a Conservative is entitled to ask what the Party's manifesto position would be.

    Would a vote for Johnson be a vote for leaving a) with the current WA b) with a new WA or c) without a WA on 31/10? I genuinely don't know. I know what a vote for the LDs and TBP would mean and I'm equally unclear about Labour's position but I'm not bothered about that and I suspect you aren't either.

    The position or policy may not be one all Conservatives can or would support so would you advocate deselecting MPs or PPCs who refuse to sign up to the policy? We hear there are 10-12 MPs who would fight any attempt to leave without a Deal - would you recommend the deselection of those MPs such as Tobias Ellwood?
    Boris' position is we leave the EU Deal or No Deal by October 31st and all Tory MPs should be expected to support that if Boris wins the Tory leadership.

    I still think as is rumoured Boris will deliver a FTA for GB and remove the temporary Customs Union and let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop
    Evidence for these rumours please.
    Phillip Thompson I believe
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:


    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit

    I'm not sure the first part is true but you're entitled to your view. Why should anyone be "frightened" of Boris Johnson? Yes, he has his critics of whom you aren't one but he's entitled to scrutiny and he's allowed to be asked questions to which he ought to be able to respond - as an aside, I don't care about his private life but his position on public policy such as taxation, Heathrow and other issues should be a matter of public record.

    The point about winning a GE and delivering Brexit - that's your view and to be fair that's supported by some polls but not all. Some have asked about the timing of a GE - I think a mid-October election is feasible but a Conservative is entitled to ask what the Party's manifesto position would be.

    Would a vote for Johnson be a vote for leaving a) with the current WA b) with a new WA or c) without a WA on 31/10? I genuinely don't know. I know what a vote for the LDs and TBP would mean and I'm equally unclear about Labour's position but I'm not bothered about that and I suspect you aren't either.

    The position or policy may not be one all Conservatives can or would support so would you advocate deselecting MPs or PPCs who refuse to sign up to the policy? We hear there are 10-12 MPs who would fight any attempt to leave without a Deal - would you recommend the deselection of those MPs such as Tobias Ellwood?
    Brexiters will remove anyone that stands in the way of the capitalism on steroids UK they want .

    Even Mother Theresa would be for the chop if she didn’t show total loyalty to the cause!
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    O/T

    My favourite essayist Anthony Daniels has written an article about cricket.

    https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2019/05/the-blue-skies-of-sporting-memory/
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,391
    ydoethur said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    nichomar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    Frightened by Johnson?
    Speak for yourself. He is a Machiavellian narcissist and scares the living daylights out of me!
    Machiavellian?!!!
    Duplicitous, underhand and without moral compass.
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 597
    OblitusSumMe said:

    Boris is entirely correct. If the Commons doesn't like it then the way for the Commons to establish its supremacy over the Prime Minister is a Vote of No Confidence followed by choosing one amongst them to lead a Ministry that would avoid No Deal.

    It's constitutionally improper for the Commons to seek to compel a Prime Minister to use their Executive power in a specific way. That's not how it works. I suppose if there was such a conflict it might be best for the PM of the day to treat it as a de facto vote of no confidence and tell HMQ that she should appoint a replacement.

    If avoiding No Deal is not important enough to the Commons to choose another Prime Minister to do so then we will end up with No Deal and the Commons will have to answer to the electorate for their inaction.

    That would require remainer Tory MP's not only to vote to bring down their own government but to support a Corbyn ministry in a vote of confidence.

    What if a Cooper-Letwin Mk 2 were passed requiring the PM to request another extension and Boris refused to do so? Are they going to have him arrested?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    Mexicanpete said:

    ydoethur said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    nichomar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    Frightened by Johnson?
    Speak for yourself. He is a Machiavellian narcissist and scares the living daylights out of me!
    Machiavellian?!!!
    Duplicitous, underhand and without moral compass.
    But Machiavellian, to me at least, also implies some kind of intelligent plotting behind the slyness.

    With Boris, you never quite get that feeling. He just comes across as malevolent, untrustworthy and incompetent rather than actually skilful.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,573
    eek said:

    The_Taxman said:

    algarkirk said:

    I don't particularly support leaving with No Deal, but the suggestion that in going ahead a future Boris would be bypassing parliament is misplaced. When parliament voted to trigger Art 50 it knowingly triggered (the text is short and simple) the whole Article, and knew that it was giving away its direct power to remain in the EU from 2 years later to the day.

    Parliament then declines 3 opportunities to agree a deal and has given no sign as to what deal (of a non-unicorn nature) it would accept.

    For us to leave without a deal (which I don't want) is, given the facts, wholly in accord with the acts and deeds of parliament and they are responsible for it.

    If parliament has changed its mind about triggering the whole of Article 50 it is in luck. A surprising ruling has said it can be revoked. Parliament has no power to grant an extension, but it has the power to pass an Act compelling the government to revoke. My guess is that the speaker has spotted this.

    The parliament that triggered A50 is a different one to the current parliament in terms of members and composition.
    And no Parliament can bind it's successor - and the Parliament elected on June 7th 2017 is a successor of the Parliament elected in 2015 that created this mess...
    Not even parliament can go back in time, so it can't declare that it has not triggered Art 50, nor does a new parliament start from year zero. By a good fortune it can revoke Art 50 (or mandate the government to do so) but would need to get on with it. As things stand it can't do so after 31 October, and it could only (I think) do so by an Act of Parliament. Parliaments are bound by their predecessors until they change it, which is fair enough as each parliament passes laws which it fondly believes the rest of us should obey, just like the parliament before.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,391
    ydoethur said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ydoethur said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    nichomar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    I've never seen such unanimity on PB about the unsuitability of a politician for high office and particularly one from the right. Even Corbyn had his followers.

    Only because the vast majority of PBers are Remainers determined to stop Brexit and they are frightened of Boris as he might actually win a general election and deliver Brexit
    Frightened by Johnson?
    Speak for yourself. He is a Machiavellian narcissist and scares the living daylights out of me!
    Machiavellian?!!!
    Duplicitous, underhand and without moral compass.
    But Machiavellian, to me at least, also implies some kind of intelligent plotting behind the slyness.

    With Boris, you never quite get that feeling. He just comes across as malevolent, untrustworthy and incompetent rather than actually skilful.
    His underhand manouvring is about to make him a wholly unworthy Prime Minister.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,900
    HYUFD said:


    Boris' position is we leave the EU Deal or No Deal by October 31st and all Tory MPs should be expected to support that if Boris wins the Tory leadership.

    I still think as is rumoured Boris will deliver a FTA for GB and remove the temporary Customs Union and let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop

    I fully understand Boris's position - it's the only hope your Party has in all honesty. However, and I say this with all respect, there do seem to be some Conservative MPs resolutely opposed to leaving the EU without an agreed WA. To expect them to fall in line seems foolish given the willingness of other Conservative MPs to defy their leader in the recent past.
This discussion has been closed.