Just on league, I'm not an especial follower but have heard a Canadian team (from Toronto, I think) might join the Super League. With them and the Catalan Dragons, it amuses me that such a surreal geographical mix could all play together.
Yep. Toronto Wolfpack are going to finish top of the Championship for the second year running. Need to win their playoffs to go up. Toulouse are also in the mix for promotion.
Yes that is a good piece although your executive summary is a lot less clear-cut than the article which in fact states that there do, indeed, appear to be mechanisms in place.
Can England still even win??? They've taken their target off the screen which was surely a very bad omen
In theory, yes.
Just as in theory David Warner might be named Greatest Foreign Sportsman by the BBC.
Thanks - it's complicated switching between ODI and test. I know what all the numbers on the screen mean but I don't think I'll ever understand the finer details
I've been watching cricket, on and off, for thirty-five years. And I still don't *quite* understand LBW.
You can go by the graphics nowadays but there is a complicated rule about the inside/outside the redbox part I think
Yes. That's the rule I never quite grasp. And I have had it explained to me, several times, by total leather-on-willowheads. Trouble is, they have all explained it slightly differently.
It's like the offside rule in football maybe - have you ever tried to explain it to someone of the female persuasion - they just don't seem to get it (or are very good, play naïve, bluffers)
Offside in o be frank
Yeah, I started watching in Ashes 05, and I figured that was one of the rules I was never going to get and concentrated on the other ones.
Perhaps we come across as proper Cricket dimwits to some affectionados
You don't have to understand ALL the rules to enjoy a sport.
I'm a huge rugby fan but the offside rules are a total and complicated mess, and often not comprehended by professional players, and national coaches. See this notorious England v Italy game as proof.
Play continues daily until either: - one side gets bored with all the pointless running up and down; - it starts to rain;
Whereupon the game is a draw.
I went for a jog /walk in the countryside yesterday. I reckon I was out about 3 1/2 hours in total. I parked in the village hall car park, and there was a cricket match going on. When I returned, 14 or so miles under my belt, the cricket match was still ongoing. Not sure anyone was doing anything as vulgar as actually winning. I did wonder as I got back to the car, who had achieved more in their afternoon?
Play continues daily until either: - one side gets bored with all the pointless running up and down; - it starts to rain;
Whereupon the game is a draw.
I went for a jog /walk in the countryside yesterday. I reckon I was out about 3 1/2 hours in total. I parked in the village hall car park, and there was a cricket match going on. When I returned, 14 or so miles under my belt, the cricket match was still ongoing. I did wonder as I got back to the car, who had achieved more in their afternoon?
I'm pro-hedonist - so while I'm sure you got an adrenalin high the cricketers would have been having fun - so-
Play continues daily until either: - one side gets bored with all the pointless running up and down; - it starts to rain;
Whereupon the game is a draw.
I went for a jog /walk in the countryside yesterday. I reckon I was out about 3 1/2 hours in total. I parked in the village hall car park, and there was a cricket match going on. When I returned, 14 or so miles under my belt, the cricket match was still ongoing. I did wonder as I got back to the car, who had achieved more in their afternoon?
There was a game of cricket in Birmingham that just finished, they were playing for four and a half days!
With 4 weeks until Parliament returns the one clear lesson from this is that the opponents of No Deal must be ready and decisively in play with a caretaker successor in mind. No ifs. No buts. No dithering. If they snooze, they'll lose.
The object of Cummings isn’t to solve the Rubix Cube, but to prod and goad their opponents such that, when the time arrives, they are ready and have a plan to force the election that Bozo is relying upon to try and escape from the world’s deepest hole.
Yes it's interesting, if you really wanted to no-deal, and if you wanted to avoid opponents grasping the opportunity to stop no-deal by installing a temporary government, the easiest way would be to convince a few MPs that no-deal can be stopped by other means, or by allowing a few MPs to understand that Boris isnt really going to go through with it, and running down the clock. Logically, it would seem that Cummings is therefore trying to force the anti-no-dealers to get organised.
However, it could just be that he is an arrogant tosser, who really does want no-deal. Plenty of the extremists who have taken over the Conservative party seem to only want brexit if it is a disorderly no deal brexit, and I guess that's because the mess will be such a great opportunity to scrap all kinds of regulation that get in the way of making a fast buck (which is their true religion, they don't really give a monkey's about Brexit itself), and to make the kind of shitty trade deal with the US that in normal circumstances would be totally unacceptable.
Just on league, I'm not an especial follower but have heard a Canadian team (from Toronto, I think) might join the Super League. With them and the Catalan Dragons, it amuses me that such a surreal geographical mix could all play together.
The significant feature of Rugby League is that if a player is injured, and not interfering with play, play goes on until it reaches a natural break.
Thank you for mentioning it, but perhaps I should do my own exec summary: Technically - yes. Politically - maybe.
Excellent - straight from the horse's mouth!
I think you've laid out the possibilities very well. These are very much uncharted constitutional and political waters, so one should be wary of anyone saying definitively that it can be done, or that it can't.
With 4 weeks until Parliament returns the one clear lesson from this is that the opponents of No Deal must be ready and decisively in play with a caretaker successor in mind. No ifs. No buts. No dithering. If they snooze, they'll lose.
The object of Cummings isn’t to solve the Rubix Cube, but to prod and goad their opponents such that, when the time arrives, they are ready and have a plan to force the election that Bozo is relying upon to try and escape from the world’s deepest hole.
However, it could just be that he is an arrogant tosser, who really does want no-deal. Plenty of the extremists who have taken over the Conservative party seem to only want brexit if it is a disorderly no deal brexit, and I guess that's because the mess will be such a great opportunity to scrap all kinds of regulation that get in the way of making a fast buck .
And I think that's the heart of it. He's basically an arrogant tosser who revels in s5it-stirring
Play continues daily until either: - one side gets bored with all the pointless running up and down; - it starts to rain;
Whereupon the game is a draw.
I went for a jog /walk in the countryside yesterday. I reckon I was out about 3 1/2 hours in total. I parked in the village hall car park, and there was a cricket match going on. When I returned, 14 or so miles under my belt, the cricket match was still ongoing. I did wonder as I got back to the car, who had achieved more in their afternoon?
There was a game of cricket in Birmingham that just finished, they were playing for four and a half days!
There was a win for one side, too. Could have been a draw.
I've made the mistake of looking on Labour List. Every time I visit the site I read something else which makes me despair over the bollocks going on within the party. Fecking entryist loons.
Can't be as bad as what is going on in the Democrat Party. Did you see that clip from one of their conferences posted here yesterday?
With 4 weeks until Parliament returns the one clear lesson from this is that the opponents of No Deal must be ready and decisively in play with a caretaker successor in mind. No ifs. No buts. No dithering. If they snooze, they'll lose.
The object of Cummings isn’t to solve the Rubix Cube, but to prod and goad their opponents such that, when the time arrives, they are ready and have a plan to force the election that Bozo is relying upon to try and escape from the world’s deepest hole.
Yes it's interesting, if you really wanted to no-deal, and if you wanted to avoid opponents grasping the opportunity to stop no-deal by installing a temporary government, the easiest way would be to convince a few MPs that no-deal can be stopped by other means, or by allowing a few MPs to understand that Boris isnt really going to go through with it, and running down the clock. Logically, it would seem that Cummings is therefore trying to force the anti-no-dealers to get organised.
However, it could just be that he is an arrogant tosser, who really does want no-deal. Plenty of the extremists who have taken over the Conservative party seem to only want brexit if it is a disorderly no deal brexit, and I guess that's because the mess will be such a great opportunity to scrap all kinds of regulation that get in the way of making a fast buck (which is their true religion, they don't really give a monkey's about Brexit itself), and to make the kind of shitty trade deal with the US that in normal circumstances would be totally unacceptable.
As I said yesterday, we also need to remember that his expertise isn’t in parliamentary procedure, or managing the civil service, but in campaign messaging. His writing now is in large part to prepare the ground for the betrayal theme on which Bozo intends to fight the election.
Okay that's what Malky said - I don't think you ever stop being schizo, but the medication regime can certainly be reviewed.
The reviewing process can get several reasonably well paid professionals in a discussion for several hours.
My relation has the illness and I sometimes think the medicine is almost as bad as the symptoms though obviously not. Have to say it was scary when he was not on medication.
Burns – batted well in first innings. Hopefully will do a job as the grafter any side needs but Aussies will target a possible vulnerability to the sharply rising short ball. 7.
Roy – got the talent but of no use unless he adapts his mind set to Test Cricket.4.
Root – world class batsmen, useful part-time off spinner. ordinary skipper.6.
Denly- probably picked too late in career and a couple of years after he peaked. A good athlete and handy part time leggie but probably not now quite good enough to hold down number 4 slot.4.
Buttler – slightly concerning dip in form that was apparent even at the World Cup. Seems out of sorts.3.
Stokes – world class all rounder but can’t do it on his own.7.
Bairstow – alarming slump in form with the bat which seems to be affecting his glovework. Vulnerable to being replaced by Foakes.2.
Moeen Ali – seems to suffer from a disastrous lack of confidence when taking on the Aussies. Has to be replaced by Leach or another spinner.2.
Woakes – if fit an automatic for Lords. Could bat higher.7.
Broad – Bowled and batted well in the first half of the match but eventually suffered on an unresponsive pitch and without Jimmy at the other end.7.
Anderson- an underappreciated great of the game but may have played his last game of this series because of injury.3.
With 4 weeks until Parliament returns the one clear lesson from this is that the opponents of No Deal must be ready and decisively in play with a caretaker successor in mind. No ifs. No buts. No dithering. If they snooze, they'll lose.
The object of Cummings isn’t to solve the Rubix Cube, but to prod and goad their opponents such that, when the time arrives, they are ready and have a plan to force the election that Bozo is relying upon to try and escape from the world’s deepest hole.
Yes it's interesting, if you really wanted to no-deal, and if you wanted to avoid opponents grasping the opportunity to stop no-deal by installing a temporary government, the easiest way would be to convince a few MPs that no-deal can be stopped by other means, or by allowing a few MPs to understand that Boris isnt really going to go through with it, and running down the clock. Logically, it would seem that Cummings is therefore trying to force the anti-no-dealers to get organised.
However, it could just be that he is an arrogant tosser, who really does want no-deal. Plenty of the extremists who have taken over the Conservative party seem to only want brexit if it is a disorderly no deal brexit, and I guess that's because the mess will be such a great opportunity to scrap all kinds of regulation that get in the way of making a fast buck (which is their true religion, they don't really give a monkey's about Brexit itself), and to make the kind of shitty trade deal with the US that in normal circumstances would be totally unacceptable.
As I said yesterday, we also need to remember that his expertise isn’t in parliamentary procedure, or managing the civil service, but in campaign messaging. His writing now is in large part to prepare the ground for the betrayal theme on which Bozo intends to fight the election.
good point. and the most likely explanation. but will it be fought on a promise of an immediate no-deal exit (assuming a longish extension is in place by then)?
Can England still even win??? They've taken their target off the screen which was surely a very bad omen
In theory, yes.
Just as in theory David Warner might be named Greatest Foreign Sportsman by the BBC.
Thanks -t think I'll ever understand the finer details
I've been watching cricket, on and off, for thirty-five years. And I still don't *quite* understand LBW.
You can go by the graphics nowadays but there is a complicated rule about the inside/outside the redbox part I think
Yes. That's the rule I never quite grasp. And I have had it explained to me, several times, by total leather-on-willowheads. Trouble is, they have all explained it slightly differently.
It's like the oe persuasion - they just don't seem to get it (or are very good, play naïve, bluffers)
Offside in o be frank
Yeah, I started watching in Ashes 05, and I figured that was one of the rules I was never going to get and concentrated on the other ones.
Perhaps we come across as proper Cricket dimwits to some affectionados
You dond-story/
So many of the rules of professional, it’s probably too late to do it now.
They did start again. It's called Rugby League. A world away fro the kick & clap / 5 reset scrum nonsense played by the posh lads.
Rugby League is a bit like communism (perhaps that's why they like it in the North?)
Great in theory, terrible in practice.
Just a lot of endless running about with no variation.
You obviously don't watch much.
I can still remember the name "Eddie Waring" with a shudder
Incidentally, idly googling rugby league in Canada, I came across something called "Canadian Football", which can get 5m TV viewers in Canada.
How amazing. An entirely new form of professional football, with significant support, that I had never heard of. Am I just dim or is this a surprise to others?
With 4 weeks until Parliament returns the one clear lesson from this is that the opponents of No Deal must be ready and decisively in play with a caretaker successor in mind. No ifs. No buts. No dithering. If they snooze, they'll lose.
The object of Cummings isn’t to solve the Rubix Cube, but to prod and goad their opponents such that, when the time arrives, they are ready and have a plan to force the election that Bozo is relying upon to try and escape from the world’s deepest hole.
Yes it's interesting, if you really wanted to no-deal, and if you wanted to avoid opponents grasping the opportunity to stop no-deal by installing a temporary government, the easiest way would be to convince a few MPs that no-deal can be stopped by other means, or by allowing a few MPs to understand that Boris isnt really going to go through with it, and running down the clock. Logically, it would seem that Cummings is therefore trying to force the anti-no-dealers to get organised.
However, it could just be that he is an arrogant tosser, who really does want no-deal. Plenty of the extremists who have taken over the Conservative party seem to only want brexit if it is a disorderly no deal brexit, and I guess that's because the mess will be such a great opportunity to scrap all kinds of regulation that get in the way of making a fast buck (which is their true religion, they don't really give a monkey's about Brexit itself), and to make the kind of shitty trade deal with the US that in normal circumstances would be totally unacceptable.
As I said yesterday, we also need to remember that his expertise isn’t in parliamentary procedure, or managing the civil service, but in campaign messaging. His writing now is in large part to prepare the ground for the betrayal theme on which Bozo intends to fight the election.
good point. and the most likely explanation. but will it be fought on a promise of an immediate no-deal exit (assuming a longish extension is in place by then)?
My guess is that a long extension would suit Bozo best, and the election message would be the same “deal or no deal” theme that he just fought the leadership on. It worked for him that time despite almost everyone seeing that there isn’t enough time for a deal; given a longish extension next time there might just be.
With 4 weeks until Parliament returns the one clear lesson from this is that the opponents of No Deal must be ready and decisively in play with a caretaker successor in mind. No ifs. No buts. No dithering. If they snooze, they'll lose.
The object of Cummings isn’t to solve the Rubix Cube, but to prod and goad their opponents such that, when the time arrives, they are ready and have a plan to force the election that Bozo is relying upon to try and escape from the world’s deepest hole.
Yes it's interesting, if you really wanted to no-deal, and if you wanted to avoid opponents grasping the opportunity to stop no-deal by installing a temporary government, the easiest way would be to convince a few MPs that no-deal can be stopped by other means, or by allowing a few MPs to understand that Boris isnt really going to go through with it, and running down the clock. Logically, it would seem that Cummings is therefore trying to force the anti-no-dealers to get organised.
However, it could just be that he is an arrogant tosser, who really does want no-deal. Plenty of the extremists who have taken over the Conservative party seem to only want brexit if it is a disorderly no deal brexit, and I guess that's because the mess will be such a great opportunity to scrap all kinds of regulation that get in the way of making a fast buck (which is their true religion, they don't really give a monkey's about Brexit itself), and to make the kind of shitty trade deal with the US that in normal circumstances would be totally unacceptable.
As I said yesterday, we also need to remember that his expertise isn’t in parliamentary procedure, or managing the civil service, but in campaign messaging. His writing now is in large part to prepare the ground for the betrayal theme on which Bozo intends to fight the election.
good point. and the most likely explanation. but will it be fought on a promise of an immediate no-deal exit (assuming a longish extension is in place by then)?
My guess is that a long extension would suit Bozo next and the election message will be the same “deal or no deal” theme that he just fought the leadership on. It worked for him that time despite almost everyone seeing that there isn’t enough time for a deal; given a longish extension next time there might just be.
yes but then he maybe gets outflanked by the Brexit Party "enough is enough, we're leaving now" and the leave-ish vote is split again
Mr. D, didn't see it here, but was it the one about the chap asking for everyone to stop murmuring?
There's a drive to pathologise every little quirk and eccentricity which I don't think is helpful.
Agree 100pc with this Morris. I've never heard voices in my life so I think the quacks are just playing the game (get people not suitable for work onto benefits).
Watching Rugby is frustrating since the moment it gets interesting the game has to stop and the players shuffle about getting into some formation or other.
Rugby League is worst for that. Union at least has the potential for continuous open play.
That's like saying tennis has the potential for serve & volley.
It is in League that players offload as they are tackled to keep play moving; in Union they jut go to ground - then we get 10 'phases' of a prop falling over back into the ruck before someone knocks on, we get a scrum (which has to be reset 6 times and takes 5 minutes), and then the fly half hefts the ball into the stands prompting applause from the rest of the backs (who never get a touch). Then a lineout - with the ridiculous spectacle of players being suspended in mid air (try jumping properly) - followed by the other fly half hefting the ball back into the stand, more clapping, and off we go again...
I think it's fair to say that both League and Union have dull games and great ones.
Can England still even win??? They've taken their target off the screen which was surely a very bad omen
In theory, yes.
Just as in theory David Warner might be named Greatest Foreign Sportsman by the BBC.
Thanks - it's complicated switching between ODI and test. I know what all the numbers on the screen mean but I don't think I'll ever understand the finer details
I've been watching cricket, on and off, for thirty-five years. And I still don't *quite* understand LBW.
You can go by the graphics nowadays but there is a complicated rule about the inside/outside the redbox part I think
Yes. That's the rule I never quite grasp. And I have had it explained to me, several times, by total leather-on-willowheads. Trouble is, they have all explained it slightly differently.
It's like the offside rule in football maybe - have you ever tried to explain it to someone of the female persuasion - they just don't seem to get it (or are very good, play naïve, bluffers)
Offside in o be frank
Yeah, I started watching in Ashes 05, and I figured that was one of the rules I was never going to get and concentrated on the other ones.
Perhaps we come across as proper Cricket dimwits to some affectionados
You don't have to understand ALL the rules to enjoy a sport.
I'm a huge rugby fan but the offside rules are a total and complicated mess, and often not comprehended by professional players, and national coaches. See this notorious England v Italy game as proof.
Offside is easily understood, by far the easiest of Rugby's myriad laws. The England players were particularly thick that game given that exactly the same tactic had been used by Aus vs Ireland that autumn and England claimed they were ready to counter it pre Eng-Aus.
The tactic was also used a few weeks before the Italy match in the Toulouse Wasps match in which a number of the England players played.
Just dumb shit England players, not complicated laws.
Hopefully it could be someone like Starmer or Cooper. Whether or not they are temporary in the office, the extra stature of having been a Prime Minister would give them much greater authority and credibility. They could then use that standing to force out Corbyn and the vile leftists running the Labour Party.
Of Olympic sports, probably a tossup between Dressage and Rhythmic Gymnastics.
Oi! You can take your cricket, football, rugby and stick’em where the sun don’t shine. But on no account do you mess with Horse Dancing, which is something to behold every 4 years.
In our new Green Future with no cars, being able to handle a horse will come in very useful. And all that lovely horse manure to be turned into compost ..... mmm!
The object of Cummings isn’t to solve the Rubix Cube, but to prod and goad their opponents such that, when the time arrives, they are ready and have a plan to force the election that Bozo is relying upon to try and escape from the world’s deepest hole.
Yes it's interesting, if you really wanted to no-deal, and if you wanted to avoid opponents grasping the opportunity to stop no-deal by installing a temporary government, the easiest way would be to convince a few MPs that no-deal can be stopped by other means, or by allowing a few MPs to understand that Boris isnt really going to go through with it, and running down the clock. Logically, it would seem that Cummings is therefore trying to force the anti-no-dealers to get organised.
However, it could just be that he is an arrogant tosser, who really does want no-deal. Plenty of the extremists who have taken over the Conservative party seem to only want brexit if it is a disorderly no deal brexit, and I guess that's because the mess will be such a great opportunity to scrap all kinds of regulation that get in the way of making a fast buck (which is their true religion, they don't really give a monkey's about Brexit itself), and to make the kind of shitty trade deal with the US that in normal circumstances would be totally unacceptable.
As I said yesterday, we also need to remember that his expertise isn’t in parliamentary procedure, or managing the civil service, but in campaign messaging. His writing now is in large part to prepare the ground for the betrayal theme on which Bozo intends to fight the election.
good point. and the most likely explanation. but will it be fought on a promise of an immediate no-deal exit (assuming a longish extension is in place by then)?
My guess is that a long extension would suit Bozo next and the election message will be the same “deal or no deal” theme that he just fought the leadership on. It worked for him that time despite almost everyone seeing that there isn’t enough time for a deal; given a longish extension next time there might just be.
yes but then he maybe gets outflanked by the Brexit Party "enough is enough, we're leaving now" and the leave-ish vote is split again
One can only hope. Bozo gets to fulfil his life’s ambition of having his mugshot attached to the wall by the Downing Street staircase, and we get to stop Brexit. Result.
Burns – batted well in first innings. Hopefully will do a job as the grafter any side needs but Aussies will target a possible vulnerability to the sharply rising short ball. 7.
Roy – got the talent but of no use unless he adapts his mind set to Test Cricket.4.
Root – world class batsmen, useful part-time off spinner. ordinary skipper.6.
Denly- probably picked too late in career and a couple of years after he peaked. A good athlete and handy part time leggie but probably not now quite good enough to hold down number 4 slot.4.
Buttler – slightly concerning dip in form that was apparent even at the World Cup. Seems out of sorts.3.
Stokes – world class all rounder but can’t do it on his own.7.
Bairstow – alarming slump in form with the bat which seems to be affecting his glovework. Vulnerable to being replaced by Foakes.2.
Moeen Ali – seems to suffer from a disastrous lack of confidence when taking on the Aussies. Has to be replaced by Leach or another spinner.2.
Woakes – if fit an automatic for Lords. Could bat higher.7.
Broad – Bowled and batted well in the first half of the match but eventually suffered on an unresponsive pitch and without Jimmy at the other end.7.
Anderson- an underappreciated great of the game but may have played his last game of this series because of injury.3.
On Burns, a maiden century is a maiden century but he won't play and miss the outside edge 50 times every innings.
Can England still even win??? They've taken their target off the screen which was surely a very bad omen
In theory, yes.
Just as in theory David Warner might be named Greatest Foreign Sportsman by the BBC.
Thanks -t think I'll ever understand the finer details
I've been watching cricket, on and off, for thirty-five years. And I still don't *quite* understand LBW.
You can go by the graphics nowadays but there is a complicated rule about the inside/outside the redbox part I think
Yes. That's the rule I never quite grasp. And I have had it explained to me, several times, by total leather-on-willowheads. Trouble is, they have all explained it slightly differently.
It's like the oe persuasion - they just don't seem to get it (or are very good, play naïve, bluffers)
Offside in o be frank
Yeah, I started watching in Ashes 05, and I figured that was one of the rules I was never going to get and concentrated on the other ones.
Perhaps we come across as proper Cricket dimwits to some affectionados
You dond-story/
So many of the rules of professional, it’s probably too late to do it now.
They did start again. It's called Rugby League. A world away fro the kick & clap / 5 reset scrum nonsense played by the posh lads.
Rugby League is a bit like communism (perhaps that's why they like it in the North?)
Great in theory, terrible in practice.
Just a lot of endless running about with no variation.
You obviously don't watch much.
I can still remember the name "Eddie Waring" with a shudder
Incidentally, idly googling rugby league in Canada, I came across something called "Canadian Football", which can get 5m TV viewers in Canada.
How amazing. An entirely new form of professional football, with significant support, that I had never heard of. Am I just dim or is this a surprise to others?
Okay that's what Malky said - I don't think you ever stop being schizo, but the medication regime can certainly be reviewed.
The reviewing process can get several reasonably well paid professionals in a discussion for several hours.
Well last time it took about 5 seconds from me going "please reduce my dosage" to my consultant saying "okay" - so it's not always that way.
Hmmm. Not quite certain 'bout that.
Well I'm getting 50mg of [Confidential] in a weeks time as opposed to 75.
That's how things looked from my side.
Best of. Hope it works OK.
Thanks OKC - I'm looking forward to not sleeping 12+ hours a day
Does it mean you put on weight as well , as you are pretty lethargic etc
A very common side-effect of anti-psychotics (putting on weight). I am overweight but it's under control.
Certainly affected my relative but he was real bad with it so ended up he had to get the depot jag and difficult to get right dose etc for a happy medium but at least now he can lead a reasonably normal life.
I see Matt Hancock has repeated the Dominic Cummings line, but given it a fresh twist.
Cummings, we will recall, stated that in the event of a successful VONC, Johnson will simply call a General Election for after Oct 31st.
It was soon pointed out to him that this wasn't quite how the FTPA works
So, Hancock, about whom I have little good to say, has said that if Johnson loses a VONC he will simply stay on.
What they don't seem to get, or perhaps they do but they're increasingly desperate, is that if the House of Commons successfully votes no confidence in the Government they CAN then vote confidence in another Government:
"If this motion is carried, there is a 14 calendar-day period in which a Government may be confirmed in office by a resolution in the form:
“That this House has confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.”
Under Standing Orders, a debate on a motion arising from an Act is limited to 90 minutes. However, it is likely that a longer debate would be provided on a motion of no confidence.
The confusion only arises if the House of Commons is not ready to place confidence in a successor. If, on the other hand, they are on the ball, prepared, and have all their cards lined up the Queen will call for whomever clearly would have the confidence of the House.
With 4 weeks until Parliament returns the one clear lesson from this is that the opponents of No Deal must be ready and decisively in play with a caretaker successor in mind. No ifs. No buts. No dithering. If they snooze, they'll lose.
Absolutely no room for wasting time on this. Hammond and co must be meeting this August with sound Labour people with a view to get the right parliamentary stuff ready for 4th September.
Okay that's what Malky said - I don't think you ever stop being schizo, but the medication regime can certainly be reviewed.
The reviewing process can get several reasonably well paid professionals in a discussion for several hours.
Well last time it took about 5 seconds from me going "please reduce my dosage" to my consultant saying "okay" - so it's not always that way.
Almost no psychiatric med reliably outperforms placebo. I used to take comfort in the fact that antidepressants appear to beat this rule in cases of severe depression until it was pointed out to me that the severely depressed are too far gone to cook up a placebo response, so this is a fail for placebo and not a win for ADs. The corollary to trust is that the rational response to any proposed alteration is yeah, sure, whatever, which fits quite easily into 5 seconds.
The better news is that you occasionally hit upon something which does work, irrespective of what the trials say.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
I can still remember the name "Eddie Waring" with a shudder
Incidentally, idly googling rugby league in Canada, I came across something called "Canadian Football", which can get 5m TV viewers in Canada.
How amazing. An entirely new form of professional football, with significant support, that I had never heard of. Am I just dim or is this a surprise to others?
I’ve tried to like it but so far as I can tell the CFL is vastly inferior to the NFL. The rules are worse, and the players are smaller. ( not that that is a bad thing, but not all athletes can be giants ). They show a lot of it on BT. A few people do get through to the NFL, though, like Warren Moon and Doug Flutie.
Okay that's what Malky said - I don't think you ever stop being schizo, but the medication regime can certainly be reviewed.
The reviewing process can get several reasonably well paid professionals in a discussion for several hours.
Well last time it took about 5 seconds from me going "please reduce my dosage" to my consultant saying "okay" - so it's not always that way.
Hmmm. Not quite certain 'bout that.
Well I'm getting 50mg of [Confidential] in a weeks time as opposed to 75.
That's how things looked from my side.
Best of. Hope it works OK.
Thanks OKC - I'm looking forward to not sleeping 12+ hours a day
Does it mean you put on weight as well , as you are pretty lethargic etc
A very common side-effect of anti-psychotics (putting on weight). I am overweight but it's under control.
My knowledge is getting out of date, since I've just 'celebrated' ten years since I last practiced pharmacy, but the weight gain might be associated with increased appetite, although the ref. book I've still got access to confirms your comment. Some, of course, are worse than others.
Swinson certainly gives the LDs the best chance of the Unionist parties of making progress against the SNP in the next general election for Westminster (though her seat remains marginal) but on that poll Ruth Davidson is even more popular than Swinson in Scotland so remains the best hope for a Unionist First Minister
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Unless there comes a point where so many are signed up that it is no longer suicidal.
Okay that's what Malky said - I don't think you ever stop being schizo, but the medication regime can certainly be reviewed.
The reviewing process can get several reasonably well paid professionals in a discussion for several hours.
Well last time it took about 5 seconds from me going "please reduce my dosage" to my consultant saying "okay" - so it's not always that way.
Hmmm. Not quite certain 'bout that.
Well I'm getting 50mg of [Confidential] in a weeks time as opposed to 75.
That's how things looked from my side.
Best of. Hope it works OK.
Thanks OKC - I'm looking forward to not sleeping 12+ hours a day
Does it mean you put on weight as well , as you are pretty lethargic etc
A very common side-effect of anti-psychotics (putting on weight). I am overweight but it's under control.
Certainly affected my relative but he was real bad with it so ended up he had to get the depot jag and difficult to get right dose etc for a happy medium but at least now he can lead a reasonably normal life.
Well I'm in the same boat as your relative so fist-bump to him.
Okay that's what Malky said - I don't think you ever stop being schizo, but the medication regime can certainly be reviewed.
The reviewing process can get several reasonably well paid professionals in a discussion for several hours.
Well last time it took about 5 seconds from me going "please reduce my dosage" to my consultant saying "okay" - so it's not always that way.
Hmmm. Not quite certain 'bout that.
Well I'm getting 50mg of [Confidential] in a weeks time as opposed to 75.
That's how things looked from my side.
Best of. Hope it works OK.
Thanks OKC - I'm looking forward to not sleeping 12+ hours a day
Does it mean you put on weight as well , as you are pretty lethargic etc
A very common side-effect of anti-psychotics (putting on weight). I am overweight but it's under control.
My knowledge is getting out of date, since I've just 'celebrated' ten years since I last practiced pharmacy, but the weight gain might be associated with increased appetite, although the ref. book I've still got access to confirms your comment. Some, of course, are worse than others.
I didn't say it wasn't because of increased appetite. Ms Brisk wanted to say that the depot's are apparently better for this side-effect but I totally vetoed it and said I would never let such comment enter PB
I see Matt Hancock has repeated the Dominic Cummings line, but given it a fresh twist.
Cummings, we will recall, stated that in the event of a successful VONC, Johnson will simply call a General Election for after Oct 31st.
It was soon pointed out to him that this wasn't quite how the FTPA works
So, Hancock, about whom I have little good to say, has said that if Johnson loses a VONC he will simply stay on.
What they don't seem to get, or perhaps they do but they're increasingly desperate, is that if the House of Commons successfully votes no confidence in the Government they CAN then vote confidence in another Government:
"If this motion is carried, there is a 14 calendar-day period in which a Government may be confirmed in office by a resolution in the form:
“That this House has confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.”
Under Standing Orders, a debate on a motion arising from an Act is limited to 90 minutes. However, it is likely that a longer debate would be provided on a motion of no confidence.
The confusion only arises if the House of Commons is not ready to place confidence in a successor. If, on the other hand, they are on the ball, prepared, and have all their cards lined up the Queen will call for whomever clearly would have the confidence of the House.
With 4 weeks until Parliament returns the one clear lesson from this is that the opponents of No Deal must be ready and decisively in play with a caretaker successor in mind. No ifs. No buts. No dithering. If they snooze, they'll lose.
Absolutely no room for wasting time on this. Hammond and co must be meeting this August with sound Labour people with a view to get the right parliamentary stuff ready for 4th September.
Presumably what Hancock meant was that even if a majority of the Commons indicated support for an alternative PM, and even if the Queen were advised to ask that person to form a government, Johnson would refuse to cooperate and instead would dare the Queen to dismiss him.
Swinson certainly gives the LDs the best chance of the Unionist parties of making progress against the SNP in the next general election for Westminster (though her seat remains marginal) but on that poll Ruth Davidson is even more popular than Swinson in Scotland so remains the best hope for a Unionist First Minister
By best hope you mean absolutely NO hope, for either of the donkeys. Davidson will need to be sure she is also top of List so she gets a booby prize , even if somewhat embarrassing.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Quite.
Parliament has been Stakhanovite in telling us what it doesn't want, but spectacularly coy about what it does.
So I can easily imagine it squeaking a VONC, but very much doubt it will get within 50 votes of an alternative replacement.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Quite.
Parliament has been Stakhanovite in telling us what it doesn't want, but spectacularly coy about what it does.
So I can easily imagine it squeaking a VONC, but very much doubt it will get within 50 votes of an alternative replacement.
If diehard Remainers want to avoid a No Deal Brexit or indeed have an opportunity to have a second referendum, they would accept a Corbyn led government temporarily. Remember: 1. Corbyn government itself will be a minority 2. It can be VoNCed easily. I think any "agreement" would include a second referendum with a Remain option which , I think, Corbyn will accept.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Exactly.
Despite the fact that No Deal has no mandate, either from the referendum or from the last election, a determined minority of MPs and their advisors, elected by 92,000 people, can push it through and are apparently willing to do whatever it takes to do so, regardless of conventions, constitutional proprieties or anything else.
How on earth they think they can win an election in such circumstances or make their decision last, God only knows. And as for unifying the country ..... all this sort of behaviour will do is deepen the divisions.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Unless there comes a point where so many are signed up that it is no longer suicidal.
The last breakaway got up to 10 before they started arguing and splitting. How does a breakaway of over 200 work, in the face of a likely autumn election?
Swinson certainly gives the LDs the best chance of the Unionist parties of making progress against the SNP in the next general election for Westminster (though her seat remains marginal) but on that poll Ruth Davidson is even more popular than Swinson in Scotland so remains the best hope for a Unionist First Minister
By best hope you mean absolutely NO hope, for either of the donkeys. Davidson will need to be sure she is also top of List so she gets a booby prize , even if somewhat embarrassing.
The LDs would back Davidson for First Minister of Scotland even if they would not back Boris for UK PM
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Quite.
Parliament has been Stakhanovite in telling us what it doesn't want, but spectacularly coy about what it does.
So I can easily imagine it squeaking a VONC, but very much doubt it will get within 50 votes of an alternative replacement.
If diehard Remainers want to avoid a No Deal Brexit or indeed have an opportunity to have a second referendum, they would accept a Corbyn led government temporarily. Remember: 1. Corbyn government itself will be a minority 2. It can be VoNCed easily. I think any "agreement" would include a second referendum with a Remain option which , I think, Corbyn will accept.
That is certainly a plausible scenario.
If a substantial number of Tory MPs have effectively formed a new grouping by voting down Johnson's government the Tories may suddenly decide that an immediate general election is not such a good idea after all.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Quite.
Parliament has been Stakhanovite in telling us what it doesn't want, but spectacularly coy about what it does.
So I can easily imagine it squeaking a VONC, but very much doubt it will get within 50 votes of an alternative replacement.
If diehard Remainers want to avoid a No Deal Brexit or indeed have an opportunity to have a second referendum, they would accept a Corbyn led government temporarily. Remember: 1. Corbyn government itself will be a minority 2. It can be VoNCed easily. I think any "agreement" would include a second referendum with a Remain option which , I think, Corbyn will accept.
That would require Labour, the SNP, PC, the LDs, CUK and at least 1 more Tory MP e.g. Grieve or Lee to back Corbyn, it would be a very unstable government while Boris could go into opposition with Leavers united behind him crying 'betrayal'
Nonetheless Hong Kong is in a very scary place. As the trade war intensifies twixt Xi and Trump, China will want to look hard and resolute. They won't allow a rebellious province to go it alone.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Exactly.
Despite the fact that No Deal has no mandate, either from the referendum or from the last election, a determined minority of MPs and their advisors, elected by 92,000 people, can push it through and are apparently willing to do whatever it takes to do so, regardless of conventions, constitutional proprieties or anything else.
How on earth they think they can win an election in such circumstances or make their decision last, God only knows. And as for unifying the country ..... all this sort of behaviour will do is deepen the divisions.
There is a No Deal mandate - the MPs have voted for it as the default option.
(PS - I know could have said this to Mike a few threads ago, but don't we have so much fun together Cyclefree??)
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Quite.
Parliament has been Stakhanovite in telling us what it doesn't want, but spectacularly coy about what it does.
So I can easily imagine it squeaking a VONC, but very much doubt it will get within 50 votes of an alternative replacement.
If diehard Remainers want to avoid a No Deal Brexit or indeed have an opportunity to have a second referendum, they would accept a Corbyn led government temporarily. Remember: 1. Corbyn government itself will be a minority 2. It can be VoNCed easily. I think any "agreement" would include a second referendum with a Remain option which , I think, Corbyn will accept.
That would require Labour, the SNP, PC, the LDs, CUK and at least 1 more Tory MP e.g. Grieve or Lee to back Corbyn, it would be a very unstable government while Boris could go into opposition with Leavers united behind him crying 'betrayal'
I'm sure it would be very unstable. But it would only have to last long enough to ask the EU for an extension.
Not difficult, provided the will is there among MPs. Which admittedly seems very questionable.
Swinson certainly gives the LDs the best chance of the Unionist parties of making progress against the SNP in the next general election for Westminster (though her seat remains marginal) but on that poll Ruth Davidson is even more popular than Swinson in Scotland so remains the best hope for a Unionist First Minister
By best hope you mean absolutely NO hope, for either of the donkeys. Davidson will need to be sure she is also top of List so she gets a booby prize , even if somewhat embarrassing.
The LDs would back Davidson for First Minister of Scotland even if they would not back Boris for UK PM
They may well. But with the separatists polling c40pc for over a decade the only thing that can change Scotland right now is a major Brit-pop revival.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Quite.
Parliament has been Stakhanovite in telling us what it doesn't want, but spectacularly coy about what it does.
So I can easily imagine it squeaking a VONC, but very much doubt it will get within 50 votes of an alternative replacement.
Surely that’s because when it votes against something governments usually then don’t go ahead with what Parliament has said no to.
It’s the fact that this government is determined to ignore Parliament which is causing the problems.
Easy to criticise Parliament for not acting like the executive, which is not in any case its function. But what is far more worthy of criticism is a party in government which is determined to ignore Parliament. That’s not democracy but a government acting like a dictator.
If Johnson wants to have a No Deal Brexit then he should get an express mandate to do it from the voters not use Parliamentary or other constitutional shenanigans to get his own way.
Swinson certainly gives the LDs the best chance of the Unionist parties of making progress against the SNP in the next general election for Westminster (though her seat remains marginal) but on that poll Ruth Davidson is even more popular than Swinson in Scotland so remains the best hope for a Unionist First Minister
By best hope you mean absolutely NO hope, for either of the donkeys. Davidson will need to be sure she is also top of List so she gets a booby prize , even if somewhat embarrassing.
The LDs would back Davidson for First Minister of Scotland even if they would not back Boris for UK PM
They will never get more than 50% of the seats in a million years
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Exactly.
Despite the fact that No Deal has no mandate, either from the referendum or from the last election, a determined minority of MPs and their advisors, elected by 92,000 people, can push it through and are apparently willing to do whatever it takes to do so, regardless of conventions, constitutional proprieties or anything else.
How on earth they think they can win an election in such circumstances or make their decision last, God only knows. And as for unifying the country ..... all this sort of behaviour will do is deepen the divisions.
There is a No Deal mandate - the MPs have voted for it as the default option.
Since when does MPs voting for something define a mandate?
A mandate is when the people tell the MPs to do something.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Exactly.
Despite the fact that No Deal has no mandate, either from the referendum or from the last election, a determined minority of MPs and their advisors, elected by 92,000 people, can push it through and are apparently willing to do whatever it takes to do so, regardless of conventions, constitutional proprieties or anything else.
How on earth they think they can win an election in such circumstances or make their decision last, God only knows. And as for unifying the country ..... all this sort of behaviour will do is deepen the divisions.
There is a No Deal mandate - the MPs have voted for it as the default option.
Since when does MPs voting for something define a mandate?
A mandate is when the people tell the MPs to do something.
The people voted for the MPs - there's your mandate.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Exactly.
Despite the fact that No Deal has no mandate, either from the referendum or from the last election, a determined minority of MPs and their advisors, elected by 92,000 people, can push it through and are apparently willing to do whatever it takes to do so, regardless of conventions, constitutional proprieties or anything else.
How on earth they think they can win an election in such circumstances or make their decision last, God only knows. And as for unifying the country ..... all this sort of behaviour will do is deepen the divisions.
There is a No Deal mandate - the MPs have voted for it as the default option.
Since when does MPs voting for something define a mandate?
A mandate is when the people tell the MPs to do something.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
Exactly.
Despite the fact that No Deal has no mandate, either from the referendum or from the last election, a determined minority of MPs and their advisors, elected by 92,000 people, can push it through and are apparently willing to do whatever it takes to do so, regardless of conventions, constitutional proprieties or anything else.
How on earth they think they can win an election in such circumstances or make their decision last, God only knows. And as for unifying the country ..... all this sort of behaviour will do is deepen the divisions.
I think Boris's strategy is falling into place before our eyes:
Win the Tory leadership on a macho 'Brexit do or die' ticket.
Pack your government with No Deal nutters to make it look as if you're one of them.
Force parliament to do something drastic like VONCing you and delaying the Brexit date.
With the chaos of No Deal not yet unleashed, fight the subsequent election as the man who stood up to the weaselly establishment politicians who thwarted the People's Will.
Comments
Technically - yes.
Politically - maybe.
My executive summary: 'Probably'
Score Draw?
I think golf courses look great. Shame about the golf, so.
However, it could just be that he is an arrogant tosser, who really does want no-deal. Plenty of the extremists who have taken over the Conservative party seem to only want brexit if it is a disorderly no deal brexit, and I guess that's because the mess will be such a great opportunity to scrap all kinds of regulation that get in the way of making a fast buck (which is their true religion, they don't really give a monkey's about Brexit itself), and to make the kind of shitty trade deal with the US that in normal circumstances would be totally unacceptable.
The significant feature of Rugby League is that if a player is injured, and not interfering with play, play goes on until it reaches a natural break.
I think you've laid out the possibilities very well. These are very much uncharted constitutional and political waters, so one should be wary of anyone saying definitively that it can be done, or that it can't.
I quite like the slightly surreal idea of a league that's mostly in the north of England but also has clubs in southern France and Canada.
https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1158400628420468737
That's how things looked from my side.
Burns – batted well in first innings. Hopefully will do a job as the grafter any side needs but Aussies will target a possible vulnerability to the sharply rising short ball. 7.
Roy – got the talent but of no use unless he adapts his mind set to Test Cricket.4.
Root – world class batsmen, useful part-time off spinner. ordinary skipper.6.
Denly- probably picked too late in career and a couple of years after he peaked. A good athlete and handy part time leggie but probably not now quite good enough to hold down number 4 slot.4.
Buttler – slightly concerning dip in form that was apparent even at the World Cup. Seems out of sorts.3.
Stokes – world class all rounder but can’t do
it on his own.7.
Bairstow – alarming slump in form with the bat which seems to be affecting his glovework. Vulnerable to being replaced by Foakes.2.
Moeen Ali – seems to suffer from a disastrous lack of confidence when taking on the Aussies. Has to be replaced by Leach or another spinner.2.
Woakes – if fit an automatic for Lords. Could bat higher.7.
Broad – Bowled and batted well in the first half of the match but eventually suffered on an unresponsive pitch and without Jimmy at the other end.7.
Anderson- an underappreciated great of the game but may have played his last game of this series because of injury.3.
There's a drive to pathologise every little quirk and eccentricity which I don't think is helpful.
Incidentally, idly googling rugby league in Canada, I came across something called "Canadian Football", which can get 5m TV viewers in Canada.
How amazing. An entirely new form of professional football, with significant support, that I had never heard of. Am I just dim or is this a surprise to others?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_football
Playing Workington, Keighley, Doncaster, Rochdale Hornets, etc.
Amazing to do, however.
The tactic was also used a few weeks before the Italy match in the Toulouse Wasps match in which a number of the England players played.
Just dumb shit England players, not complicated laws.
No further comment needed...
In our new Green Future with no cars, being able to handle a horse will come in very useful. And all that lovely horse manure to be turned into compost ..... mmm!
We should get a team from Mongolia in as well.
Fun fact: Mongolia is one of very few countries who whom we've never ever been at war. Probably.
Rochdale will be a dream destination from New York.
I never knew you were such an awesome punner as well as an authority on turnips Malc!
The better news is that you occasionally hit upon something which does work, irrespective of what the trials say.
There’s fewer than 100 non-Con and non-Lab MPs, so anyone wanting to form a government against the wishes of Mr Johnson and Mr Corbyn has to find over 200 defectors from those parties.
A couple of dozen might well be possible, but there’s no chance of a couple of hundred MPs willing to commit what’s almost certainly going to be instant career suicide.
I can still remember the name "Eddie Waring" with a shudder
Incidentally, idly googling rugby league in Canada, I came across something called "Canadian Football", which can get 5m TV viewers in Canada.
How amazing. An entirely new form of professional football, with significant support, that I had never heard of. Am I just dim or is this a surprise to others?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_football
I’ve tried to like it but so far as I can tell the CFL is vastly inferior to the NFL. The rules are worse, and the players are smaller. ( not that that is a bad thing, but not all athletes can be giants ). They show a lot of it on BT. A few people do get through to the NFL, though, like Warren Moon and Doug Flutie.
Edit: although it may not be what the tweet purports it to be.
https://twitter.com/pmcroninhudson/status/1158359282380955650?s=21
Parliament has been Stakhanovite in telling us what it doesn't want, but spectacularly coy about what it does.
So I can easily imagine it squeaking a VONC, but very much doubt it will get within 50 votes of an alternative replacement.
I think any "agreement" would include a second referendum with a Remain option which , I think, Corbyn will accept.
Despite the fact that No Deal has no mandate, either from the referendum or from the last election, a determined minority of MPs and their advisors, elected by 92,000 people, can push it through and are apparently willing to do whatever it takes to do so, regardless of conventions, constitutional proprieties or anything else.
How on earth they think they can win an election in such circumstances or make their decision last, God only knows. And as for unifying the country ..... all this sort of behaviour will do is deepen the divisions.
If a substantial number of Tory MPs have effectively formed a new grouping by voting down Johnson's government the Tories may suddenly decide that an immediate general election is not such a good idea after all.
Nonetheless Hong Kong is in a very scary place. As the trade war intensifies twixt Xi and Trump, China will want to look hard and resolute. They won't allow a rebellious province to go it alone.
Grim.
(PS - I know could have said this to Mike a few threads ago, but don't we have so much fun together Cyclefree??)
Not difficult, provided the will is there among MPs. Which admittedly seems very questionable.
It’s the fact that this government is determined to ignore Parliament which is causing the problems.
Easy to criticise Parliament for not acting like the executive, which is not in any case its function. But what is far more worthy of criticism is a party in government which is determined to ignore Parliament. That’s not democracy but a government acting like a dictator.
If Johnson wants to have a No Deal Brexit then he should get an express mandate to do it from the voters not use Parliamentary or other constitutional shenanigans to get his own way.
A mandate is when the people tell the MPs to do something.
Win the Tory leadership on a macho 'Brexit do or die' ticket.
Pack your government with No Deal nutters to make it look as if you're one of them.
Force parliament to do something drastic like VONCing you and delaying the Brexit date.
With the chaos of No Deal not yet unleashed, fight the subsequent election as the man who stood up to the weaselly establishment politicians who thwarted the People's Will.
Win the election.
Sack the No Deal nutters.
Take it from there.