You'd never guess from his bleating about changing the law that he's the one person alive who actually had the opportunity to do something about said laws, but decided to spend eight years playing golf instead.
Also, who the hell leaked the US Ambassador story?
Please don’t tell me we are supposed to believe it was that 19-yr-old “reporter” who apparently “heard it in a restaurant”.
I’ll have a go at number 2. Banging their big guns.
Does "banging their big guns" mean what I think it means?
Yes. She was guest of the military and went on manoeuvres with them.
Why? What was in it for her? What was in it for the Israelis? Or other parties?
As overseas aid and development secretary it may seem odd spending so much time with Israeli military. The likely reasoning is this is the kind of ‘player” she thought herself as, and using “British cabinet minister” as the ticket to ride. She tried to keep it quiet with a little white lie but that was an error of judgement.
Anyhow, she’s in a nice plum job now, where the Tory press and party are certainly warming to her. Those supporters who always claimed she’s got a certain X factor, as well as those critics who would say “x factor, what are you babbling on about, are you crazy?” Are going to get their confirmation either way.
That explains why she wanted to do it. It does not explain why the Israelis would give her the time of day. They are a pretty hard-headed bunch at the best of times, a fortiori the Israeli military. Why the hell would they waste time with her? Especially as it would have been easy enough to check whether this was an officially sanctioned visit. So why agree to an unofficial one?
It has a touch of the Jonathan Aitken story about it to me. Remember that? We all became so entranced about the lie he told about his Paris hotel visit and him getting his daughter to lie too and his conviction for perjury that we forgot to ask what he was doing with those nice Middle Eastern gentlemen.
Maybe there's nothing there. She lied for no good reason. And was caught out. But I wonder. People generally lie for a reason. I'd like to know what the reason was.
I’ve answered that. Israeli military were rubbing up against a British cabinet minister, she was rubbing up against Israeli top brass, each thought being on a jolly together would do their own reputations and share price no harm at all, it’s all perfectly innocent really.
Can't see this latest news that he would hang on after a vonc as serious, if it came to it he risks being fired by the Queen, he would be forever known as the PM who attempted a coup, and all this just to get brexit through? He doesn't even believe in the project.
Can anyone really imagine Boris Johnson having the courage to attempt a coup? He didn't even have the courage to attend a leadership debate.
I am still struggling to see how a Prime Minister going for a general election is a coup.
Err. Because if he loses a VONC and there is another person who could command a majority, he must resign. If he refuses to name that person to HMQ, that is a coup d'etat. Simple.
Can't see this latest news that he would hang on after a vonc as serious, if it came to it he risks being fired by the Queen, he would be forever known as the PM who attempted a coup, and all this just to get brexit through? He doesn't even believe in the project.
Can anyone really imagine Boris Johnson having the courage to attempt a coup? He didn't even have the courage to attend a leadership debate.
I am still struggling to see how a Prime Minister going for a general election is a coup.
Going for a GE to get a mandate for a policy before enacting it is fine.
Going for a GE after enacting the policy you are seeking a mandate for or enacting the policy in the middle of the GE is not fine at all. It is an outrage. Imagine if he lost heavily and a party won that was committed to not doing what the PM wanted to do. He'd have effectively prevented them from from enacting their policy and made the election pointless.
That is why there is a convention that you take no active steps during a GE i.e. you preserve the current position. But we have had suggestions - how serious or not is hard to tell - that in order to prevent Brexit being stopped the GE would be set for a date after 31 October i.e. to make sure that a policy which go ahead regardless of the result of the GE. That may or may not fall within your definition of a coup but it feels, at a minimum, as utterly contemptuous of what the point of a GE is.
If Boris had any sense he would do everything he can to stop this sort of talk spreading. If he wants a GE let him call it. If not then he has to persuade Parliament not ignore it. Them's the rules in Britain.
If Boris is trying to stop diehard Remainers trying to prevent the delivery of Brexit which 17 million people voted for by installing a technocrat PM to extend Article 50 again the coup d'état is from diehard Remainers not Boris trying to deny the will of the people
Also, who the hell leaked the US Ambassador story?
Please don’t tell me we are supposed to believe it was that 19-yr-old “reporter” who apparently “heard it in a restaurant”.
I’ll have a go at number 2. Banging their big guns.
Does "banging their big guns" mean what I think it means?
Yes. She was guest of the military and went on manoeuvres with them.
Why? What was in it for her? What was in it for the Israelis? Or other parties?
As overseas aid and development secretary it may seem odd spending so much time with Israeli military. The likely reasoning is this is the kind of ‘player” she thought herself as, and using “British cabinet minister” as the ticket to ride. She tried to keep it quiet with a little white lie but that was an error of judgement.
Anyhow, she’s in a nice plum job now, where the Tory press and party are certainly warming to her. Those supporters who always claimed she’s got a certain X factor, as well as those critics who would say “x factor, what are you babbling on about, are you crazy?” Are going to get their confirmation either way.
That explains why she wanted to do it. It does not explain why the Israelis would give her the time of day. They are a pretty hard-headed bunch at the best of times, a fortiori the Israeli military. Why the hell would they waste time with her? Especially as it would have been easy enough to check whether this was an officially sanctioned visit. So why agree to an unofficial one?
It has a touch of the Jonathan Aitken story about it to me. Remember that? We all became so entranced about the lie he told about his Paris hotel visit and him getting his daughter to lie too and his conviction for perjury that we forgot to ask what he was doing with those nice Middle Eastern gentlemen.
Maybe there's nothing there. She lied for no good reason. And was caught out. But I wonder. People generally lie for a reason. I'd like to know what the reason was.
I’ve answered that. Israeli military were rubbing up against a British cabinet minister, she was rubbing up against Israeli top brass, each thought being on a jolly together would do their own reputations and share price no harm at all, it’s all perfectly innocent really.
You may be right.
Do you know this? Or is this just your own interpretation?
Can't see this latest news that he would hang on after a vonc as serious, if it came to it he risks being fired by the Queen, he would be forever known as the PM who attempted a coup, and all this just to get brexit through? He doesn't even believe in the project.
Can anyone really imagine Boris Johnson having the courage to attempt a coup? He didn't even have the courage to attend a leadership debate.
I am still struggling to see how a Prime Minister going for a general election is a coup.
Err. Because if he loses a VONC and there is another person who could command a majority, he must resign. If he refuses to name that person to HMQ, that is a coup d'etat. Simple.
If Boris is trying to stop diehard Remainers trying to prevent the delivery of Brexit which 17 million people voted for by installing a technocrat PM to extend Article 50 again the coup d'état is from diehard Remainers not Boris trying to deny the will of the people
If someone can command the House, they are PM. Yours is the talk of a quasi-fascist. I used to think you were a reasonable guy. Ultra loyalist Tory, but unfailingly polite, good humoured and well informed. You seem to have taken a dark turn in your wish to abase yourself at the foot of your leader.
Can't see this latest news that he would hang on after a vonc as serious, if it came to it he risks being fired by the Queen, he would be forever known as the PM who attempted a coup, and all this just to get brexit through? He doesn't even believe in the project.
Can anyone really imagine Boris Johnson having the courage to attempt a coup? He didn't even have the courage to attend a leadership debate.
I am still struggling to see how a Prime Minister going for a general election is a coup.
Err. Because if he loses a VONC and there is another person who could command a majority, he must resign. If he refuses to name that person to HMQ, that is a coup d'etat. Simple.
If Boris is trying to stop diehard Remainers trying to prevent the delivery of Brexit which 17 million people voted for by installing a technocrat PM to extend Article 50 again the coup d'état is from diehard Remainers not Boris trying to deny the will of the people
The will of the people is a mandate to do something, but the action must be expressed thru the state bodies and within the law. Boris is not allowed to break the law.
Outrageous if true! PM without mandate stays in office even when he cannot command a majority. The UK is in real trouble...
Nothing to see here...just the PM’s spokesman briefing to the Times that he will essentially lead a coup d’etat to remain in power...
One of those lovely Brexit dividends Tyndall et al promised us.
We have not left yet - thanks to you anti-democratic Remainers.
I think you mean thanks to your nutty fellow travellers, the ERG.
Clearly you are having trouble with your maths again Mr Walker. If you think the 30 odd ERG idiots had more votes than the several hundred Remainer MPs who voted down the WA then we need to discuss your educational shortcomings.
What about the argument what got it over the line in 2016 wasn’t votes on the leave remain question? It was one year after Osborne cammo stole election from Miliband, and Labour areas, to some degree taking a lead from their leader that it didn’t matter much how they voted, were voting heavily in 2016 to give Osborne and Cammo a kicking in that poll, that’s what got it over the line. So there has never been a UK majority for Brexit. The majority of UK have always been against it. And it’s suspecting that is the case that’s holding us in this sort of zombie state till the confirmatory ref comes along.
Can't see this latest news that he would hang on after a vonc as serious, if it came to it he risks being fired by the Queen, he would be forever known as the PM who attempted a coup, and all this just to get brexit through? He doesn't even believe in the project.
Can anyone really imagine Boris Johnson having the courage to attempt a coup? He didn't even have the courage to attend a leadership debate.
I am still struggling to see how a Prime Minister going for a general election is a coup.
Going for a GE to get a mandate for a policy before enacting it is fine.
Going for a GE after enacting the policy you are seeking a mandate for or enacting the policy in the middle of the GE is not fine at all. It is an outrage. Imagine if he lost heavily and a party won that was committed to not doing what the PM wanted to do. He'd have effectively prevented them from from enacting their policy and made the election pointless.
That is why there is a convention that you take no active steps during a GE i.e. you preserve the current position. But we have had suggestions - how serious or not is hard to tell - that in order to prevent Brexit being stopped the GE would be set for a date after 31 October i.e. to make sure that a policy which go ahead regardless of the result of the GE. That may or may not fall within your definition of a coup but it feels, at a minimum, as utterly contemptuous of what the point of a GE is.
If Boris had any sense he would do everything he can to stop this sort of talk spreading. If he wants a GE let him call it. If not then he has to persuade Parliament not ignore it. Them's the rules in Britain.
It turns out that the argument over whether the status quo is best preserved by: - keeping us in the EU but changing the proposed exit date, or - taking us out but not asking for an extension, is surprisingly involved. I'm not in favour of No Deal, but I think it's the latter. Parliament had plenty of chances to vote for something else, and declined. If they can't even agree on the identity of the figurehead they want to stop Johnson, they don't deserve to be allowed to.
Tyndall is literally in the position of the supposed peace-loving Communist who rather regrets the invasion of Hungary but can’t see what it is to do with his beloved ideology.
Says the man who thinks democracy is an over-rated concept that should only be followed when his side is winning. You are an utter disgrace.
Mussolini was a political journalist before assuming power. He pursued policies based on expansion, social conservatism and fiscal incontinence. His power eventually collapsed because he failed to pay attention to logistics and the practical steps necessary for his vainglorious scheme. History records him as a buffoon but one who caused considerable damage to his country before he could be stopped.
There is a very close parallel between Mussolini and Trump. Imagine what Trump could do without the limits imposed by the US constitution on his powers and term.
When I was studying European fascism as part of a political science degree in the early 1980s, I found it quite hard to come to terms with how large swathes of people could have rejected democracy in favour of fascist demagogues and their transparently facile solutions and scapegoats. Having observed how Trump operates I no longer have that difficulty.
The question is whether Boris and Cummings are genuinely trying to explore every move in the book to force through no deal against Parliament's will, or have concluded that delivering Brexit is impossible without a majority, and so are trying to engineer a way to get one.
As has been discussed here: 1) the current Parliament will do all it can to prevent no deal, 2) there is no alternative deal that Boris could sell to the ERG et al, and 3) with VONC/GONU as a combined option, there is nothing constitutionally that Boris can do to force no deal through. That's not to say it can't happen (Corbyn being stubborn seems very possible), but Boris can't make sure it happens.
So that leaves him with the option of being as bilgerent as possible to force parliament into having to go down the VONC/GONU route, resulting in Brexit being delayed and Boris being able to blame everyone but himself. He can then go into the inevitable GE on the populist, hard Brexit ticket against a divided opposite.
Would still be high risk, but surely better than fighting and election in the midst of no deal or having deliberately broken his 'do or die' pledge.
Can't see this latest news that he would hang on after a vonc as serious, if it came to it he risks being fired by the Queen, he would be forever known as the PM who attempted a coup, and all this just to get brexit through? He doesn't even believe in the project.
Can anyone really imagine Boris Johnson having the courage to attempt a coup? He didn't even have the courage to attend a leadership debate.
I am still struggling to see how a Prime Minister going for a general election is a coup.
He can go for an election, that wouldn't be a coup. The process for that is to put a motion to parliament recommending an election, and for them to vote for it.
However if he is instead sacked by parliament, and parliament agrees on his successor, and he refuses to leave, that would be a coup. Or rather an *attempted* coup, because ultimately if all else failed I suppose the monarch would publicly sack him and appoint the new guy, and the army and police would take directions from that guy.
Of course. This, I suspect, is part of the strategy though. If Parliament is able to cobble together support for a VONC, and (which would be considerably more difficult) backing for an alternate PM, then a election would follow fairly soon anyway, in which Johnson could run as the true voice of Brexit, thwarted by the scurvy politicians. I some respects, it’s his best option, though lies outside of his control.
Can't see this latest news that he would hang on after a vonc as serious, if it came to it he risks being fired by the Queen, he would be forever known as the PM who attempted a coup, and all this just to get brexit through? He doesn't even believe in the project.
Can anyone really imagine Boris Johnson having the courage to attempt a coup? He didn't even have the courage to attend a leadership debate.
I am still struggling to see how a Prime Minister going for a general election is a coup.
Err. Because if he loses a VONC and there is another person who could command a majority, he must resign. If he refuses to name that person to HMQ, that is a coup d'etat. Simple.
If Boris is trying to stop diehard Remainers trying to prevent the delivery of Brexit which 17 million people voted for by installing a technocrat PM to extend Article 50 again the coup d'état is from diehard Remainers not Boris trying to deny the will of the people
Also, who the hell leaked the US Ambassador story?
don’t tell me it was that 19-yr-old “reporter” who apparently “heard it in a restaurant”.
I’ll have a go at number 2. Banging their big guns.
Does "banging their big guns" mean what I think it means?
Yes. She was guest of the military and went on manoeuvres with them.
Why? What was in it for her? What was in it for the Israelis? Or other parties?
As overseas aid and development secretary it may seem odd spending so much time with Israeli military. The likely reasoning is this is the kind of ‘player” she thought herself as, and using “British cabinet minister” as the ticket to ride. She tried to keep it quiet with a little white lie but that was an error of judgement.
Anyhow, she’s in a nice plum job now, where the Tory press and party are certainly warming to her. Those supporters who always claimed she’s got a certain X factor, as well as those critics who would say “x factor, what are you babbling on about, are you crazy?” Are going to get their confirmation either way.
That explains why she wanted to do it. It does not explain why the Israelis would give her the time of day. They are a pretty hard-headed bunch at the best of times, a fortiori the Israeli military. Why the hell would they waste time with her? Especially as it would have been easy enough to check whether this was an officially sanctioned visit. So why agree to an unofficial one?
Maybe there's nothing there. She lied for no good reason. And was caught out. But I wonder. People generally lie for a reason. I'd like to know what the reason was.
I’ve answered that. Israeli military were rubbing up against a British cabinet minister, she was rubbing up against Israeli top brass, each thought being on a jolly together would do their own reputations and share price no harm at all, it’s all perfectly innocent really.
You may be right.
Do you know this? Or is this just your own interpretation?
My own interpretation based on the facts. Your suspicion is she was doing some other business? On behalf of who though, quite obviously not May’s government or the party managers?
As Hilary said of Trump when he won, if he’s got himself in there he has the right to govern and show what he can do. Apply the same to Patel, if she’s good then she proves it, if she’s rubbish she will swing on her own rope...
There was a header a while back from the wonderful Mr Meeks which pointed out that Britain was at risk of being a new Argentina i.e. that from a good position economically, socially etc it ended up a mess as a result of very poor decisions and a useless political class. The result was that, far from fulfilling its promise, it ended up a sort of violent, reactionary Ruritania run by ludicrous but corrupt and malicious populists and generals and ended up as a third rate state rather than the state it could have been.
The fact that we are reading stories about PMs possibly hanging on in the face of VoNC and alternative governments and of opposition MPs desperately trying to find ways of overthrowing the government, of elections being held in the middle of country-changing events, of advisors taunting MPs that they can do nothing to stop matters, of the possibility of Parliament being prorogued or of no legislation being brought to stop Parliament doing its job etc etc - even allowing for spin and journalists not understanding and the silly season - does suggest that maybe our political institutions are not quite as fit for purpose as we would like to think.
Maybe the line between being a reasonably sensible well-run state and one which ends up prey to all sorts of nonsense is much thinner than we all realised.
Or maybe Mr Meeks is being his usual hysterical self again and making a fool of himself. Remember this is the man who claimed the day after the referendum that he had 'lost his country' and the 'thread of allegiance' was broken. He is hardly someone I would consider stable or sensible.
Mussolini was a political journalist before assuming power. He pursued policies based on expansion, social conservatism and fiscal incontinence. His power eventually collapsed because he failed to pay attention to logistics and the practical steps necessary for his vainglorious scheme. History records him as a buffoon but one who caused considerable damage to his country before he could be stopped.
There is a very close parallel between Mussolini and Trump. Imagine what Trump could do without the limits imposed by the US constitution on his powers and term.
When I was studying European fascism as part of a political science degree in the early 1980s, I found it quite hard to come to terms with how large swathes of people could have rejected democracy in favour of fascist demagogues and their transparently facile solutions and scapegoats. Having observed how Trump operates I no longer have that difficulty.
Parenthetically one of my nephews has just graduated with a politics degree of some description. What is a good job for him to enter?
Margaret Beckett would be a decent GONU PM, relatively acceptable across the house and to both wings of the Labour Party I would have thought.
Hell will freeze over before Corbyn whips his MPs to back anyone other than himself as PM. And why should he? If No Deal's so bad, and he's the only one who can stop it, they should be begging him to become PM, not scheming to find ways to deny him.
All things are relative and everyone has their own priorities, known or unknown. Good luck sorting that out with MPs.
At least we can be sure Jezza would not No Deal if he was PM. The strategy is for Johnson or another Tory to be the No Deal merchant.
"No deal" is the default option. Unless a deal is agreed that is what will happen, unless there are perpetual extensions. Now that would be the fuck up to out fuck all fuck ups.
Not at all. Instead of focusing on the situation on 1st November, focus on what happens in the weeks and months immediately beyond that in a context in which both sides had called each others bluff. Negotiations would begin between a UK government and the EU to change a situation which was the preferred outcome of neither of them. That will happen whatever the political colour of the UK government. An agreement could also be reached relatively quickly. Both sides know that, and the prospect of the "no deal" scenario being a very short term one is a reason why both are in practice prepared if necessary to go to the wire rather than give ground at this point.
In the EU's case, there is no reason to budge at this point unless it feels that it is all but certain that Johnson has a foolproof mechanism to get us out without a deal on 31st October. (A perception that Cummings is clearly trying to foster.) And even then it might not back down if it felt that the general election would most likely deliver a government led by a Remain PM who would be willing to accept very poor terms as the price of the UK rejoining.
Except it wouldn't be quick. And it wouldn't be to our advantage. Cos the moment we step out it would have to pass 28 different Parliaments. Who'd be begging to give us what we wanted, I'm sure.
Outrageous if true! PM without mandate stays in office even when he cannot command a majority. The UK is in real trouble...
Nothing to see here...just the PM’s spokesman briefing to the Times that he will essentially lead a coup d’etat to remain in power...
One of those lovely Brexit dividends Tyndall et al promised us.
We have not left yet - thanks to you anti-democratic Remainers.
I think you mean thanks to your nutty fellow travellers, the ERG.
Clearly you are having trouble with your maths again Mr Walker. If you think the 30 odd ERG idiots had more votes than the several hundred Remainer MPs who voted down the WA then we need to discuss your educational shortcomings.
What about the argument what got it over the line in 2016 wasn’t votes on the leave remain question? It was one year after Osborne cammo stole election from Miliband, and Labour areas, to some degree taking a lead from their leader that it didn’t matter much how they voted, were voting heavily in 2016 to give Osborne and Cammo a kicking in that poll, that’s what got it over the line. So there has never been a UK majority for Brexit. The majority of UK have always been against it. And it’s suspecting that is the case that’s holding us in this sort of zombie state till the confirmatory ref comes along.
Well its a good story but it has absolutely no basis in fact. The addition of zombies is a good move though,. Might interest the film companies as they love a bit of zombie fiction.
Margaret Beckett would be a decent GONU PM, relatively acceptable across the house and to both wings of the Labour Party I would have thought.
Hell will freeze over before Corbyn whips his MPs to back anyone other than himself as PM. And why should he? If No Deal's so bad, and he's the only one who can stop it, they should be begging him to become PM, not scheming to find ways to deny him.
All things are relative and everyone has their own priorities, known or unknown. Good luck sorting that out with MPs.
At least we can be sure Jezza would not No Deal if he was PM. The strategy is for Johnson or another Tory to be the No Deal merchant.
"No deal" is the default option. Unless a deal is agreed that is what will happen, unless there are perpetual extensions. Now that would be the fuck up to out fuck all fuck ups.
Not at all. Instead of focusing on the situation on 1st November, focus on what happens in the weeks and months immediately beyond that in a context in which both sides had called each others bluff. Negotiations would begin between a UK government and the EU to change a situation which was the preferred outcome of neither of them. That will happen whatever the political colour of the UK government. An agreement could also be reached relatively quickly. Both sides know that, and the prospect of the "no deal" scenario being a very short term one is a reason why both are in practice prepared if necessary to go to the wire rather than give ground at this point.
In the EU's case, there is no reason to budge at this point unless it feels that it is all but certain that Johnson has a foolproof mechanism to get us out without a deal on 31st October. (A perception that Cummings is clearly trying to foster.) And even then it might not back down if it felt that the general election would most likely deliver a government led by a Remain PM who would be willing to accept very poor terms as the price of the UK rejoining.
Except it wouldn't be quick. And it wouldn't be to our advantage. Cos the moment we step out it would have to pass 28 different Parliaments. Who'd be begging to give us what we wanted, I'm sure.
Can't see this latest news that he would hang on after a vonc as serious, if it came to it he risks being fired by the Queen, he would be forever known as the PM who attempted a coup, and all this just to get brexit through? He doesn't even believe in the project.
Can anyone really imagine Boris Johnson having the courage to attempt a coup? He didn't even have the courage to attend a leadership debate.
I am still struggling to see how a Prime Minister going for a general election is a coup.
Err. Because if he loses a VONC and there is another person who could command a majority, he must resign. If he refuses to name that person to HMQ, that is a coup d'etat. Simple.
If Boris is trying to stop diehard Remainers trying to prevent the delivery of Brexit which 17 million people voted for by installing a technocrat PM to extend Article 50 again the coup d'état is from diehard Remainers not Boris trying to deny the will of the people
If someone can command the House, they are PM. Yours is the talk of a quasi-fascist. I used to think you were a reasonable guy. Ultra loyalist Tory, but unfailingly polite, good humoured and well informed. You seem to have taken a dark turn in your wish to abase yourself at the foot of your leader.
I sadly have to agree. The combination of suggesting using force to prevent Scottish independence and ignoring the law to allow Boris to stay in power makes me think HYUFD no longer has a grasp of acceptable behaviour.
The question is whether Boris and Cummings are genuinely trying to explore every move in the book to force through no deal against Parliament's will, or have concluded that delivering Brexit is impossible without a majority, and so are trying to engineer a way to get one.
As has been discussed here: 1) the current Parliament will do all it can to prevent no deal, 2) there is no alternative deal that Boris could sell to the ERG et al, and 3) with VONC/GONU as a combined option, there is nothing constitutionally that Boris can do to force no deal through. That's not to say it can't happen (Corbyn being stubborn seems very possible), but Boris can't make sure it happens.
So that leaves him with the option of being as bilgerent as possible to force parliament into having to go down the VONC/GONU route, resulting in Brexit being delayed and Boris being able to blame everyone but himself. He can then go into the inevitable GE on the populist, hard Brexit ticket against a divided opposite.
Would still be high risk, but surely better than fighting and election in the midst of no deal or having deliberately broken his 'do or die' pledge.
That is the optimistic take on events. I hope it is the correct one, too.
Margaret Beckett would be a decent GONU PM, relatively acceptable across the house and to both wings of the Labour Party I would have thought.
Hell will freeze over before Corbyn whips his MPs to back anyone other than himself as PM. And why should he? If No Deal's so bad, and he's the only one who can stop it, they should be begging him to become PM, not scheming to find ways to deny him.
I agree with your first sentence - see my 11.24 post sent simultaneously.
But don't assume that Corbyn is averse to No Deal in practice, whatever he says in public. It amounts to the UK leaving (Corbyn's preferred outcome) with a blank slate on which Corbyn could subsequently try and negotiate a new agreement with the EU, rather than being tied to the terms of one negotiated by a Tory PM.
I think he doesn't care. If No Deal helps him become PM, he's all for it (albeit quietly). If it'll make no difference but will lose him support then he's against. The goal is a radical socialist government enacting worker friendly policies; all else is secondary.
What won't help him become PM is a GONU led by someone other than himself. It would lead to a long term political realignment with a strengthening of the political centre. And I don't think the parliamentary arithmetic is there at present to allow Corbyn to become PM. So that means a VONC leading to a general election, not a replacement government.
Sure they do, having a country in the EU gives their citizens and businesses all kinds of benefits to trade and travel. The question here is:
1) Would some member states refuse immediate reentry and instead prefer to let the UK take some time to work through it's various psychoses before coming back in
2) Nobody wants the UK to join the Euro, but would they agree for the UK to retain (reobtain?) the Euro opt-out in theory, or would someone insist that the UK formally signed up to the normal menu, and only had the opt-out in practice.
However given all the headaches No Deal leaves unresolved, I think people would likely prefer a quick return to the status quo ante that made the whole thing go away, rather than having to negotiate and ratify a No Deal Deal first, then throw that away and do the same for a reaccession.
Margaret Beckett would be a decent GONU PM, relatively acceptable across the house and to both wings of the Labour Party I would have thought.
Hell will freeze over before Corbyn whips his MPs to back anyone other than himself as PM. And why should he? If No Deal's so bad, and he's the only one who can stop it, they should be begging him to become PM, not scheming to find ways to deny him.
All things are relative and everyone has their own priorities, known or unknown. Good luck sorting that out with MPs.
At least we can be sure Jezza would not No Deal if he was PM. The strategy is for Johnson or another Tory to be the No Deal merchant.
"No deal" is the default option. Unless a deal is agreed that is what will happen, unless there are perpetual extensions. Now that would be the fuck up to out fuck all fuck ups.
Not at all. Instead of focusing on the situation on 1st November, focus on what happens in the weeks and months immediately beyond that in a context in which both sides had called each others bluff. Negotiations would begin between a UK government and the EU to change a situation which was the preferred outcome of neither of them. That will happen whatever the political colour of the UK government. An agreement could also be reached relatively quickly. Both sides know that, and the prospect of the "no deal" scenario being a very short term one is a reason why both are in practice prepared if necessary to go to the wire rather than give ground at this point.
In the EU's case, there is no reason to budge at this point unless it feels that it is all but certain that Johnson has a foolproof mechanism to get us out without a deal on 31st October. (A perception that Cummings is clearly trying to foster.) And even then it might not back down if it felt that the general election would most likely deliver a government led by a Remain PM who would be willing to accept very poor terms as the price of the UK rejoining.
Except it wouldn't be quick. And it wouldn't be to our advantage. Cos the moment we step out it would have to pass 28 different Parliaments. Who'd be begging to give us what we wanted, I'm sure.
Rejoin? I very much dobt the EU27 would want us.
I was referring to agreements to mitigate the worst effects of No Deal, not about rejoining. Can see I wasn't clear about that. Apologies.
Not at all. Instead of focusing on the situation on 1st November, focus on what happens in the weeks and months immediately beyond that in a context in which both sides had called each others bluff. Negotiations would begin between a UK government and the EU to change a situation which was the preferred outcome of neither of them. That will happen whatever the political colour of the UK government. An agreement could also be reached relatively quickly. Both sides know that, and the prospect of the "no deal" scenario being a very short term one is a reason why both are in practice prepared if necessary to go to the wire rather than give ground at this point.
In the EU's case, there is no reason to budge at this point unless it feels that it is all but certain that Johnson has a foolproof mechanism to get us out without a deal on 31st October. (A perception that Cummings is clearly trying to foster.) And even then it might not back down if it felt that the general election would most likely deliver a government led by a Remain PM who would be willing to accept very poor terms as the price of the UK rejoining.
Except it wouldn't be quick. And it wouldn't be to our advantage. Cos the moment we step out it would have to pass 28 different Parliaments. Who'd be begging to give us what we wanted, I'm sure.
You miss my point. A new trade agreement would be quick, at least as a temporary stop gap. I suppose the Irish Government might try and persuade the EU to keep a hard border and the likes of VW would lobby to keep paying tariffs on their exports to the UK, but personally I can't see it. Post 31st October the EU will no longer be playing a game with the aim of persuading the UK to change its mind by taking the hardest of negotiating positions.
Mussolini was a political journalist before assuming power. He pursued policies based on expansion, social conservatism and fiscal incontinence. His power eventually collapsed because he failed to pay attention to logistics and the practical steps necessary for his vainglorious scheme. History records him as a buffoon but one who caused considerable damage to his country before he could be stopped.
There is a very close parallel between Mussolini and Trump. Imagine what Trump could do without the limits imposed by the US constitution on his powers and term.
When I was studying European fascism as part of a political science degree in the early 1980s, I found it quite hard to come to terms with how large swathes of people could have rejected democracy in favour of fascist demagogues and their transparently facile solutions and scapegoats. Having observed how Trump operates I no longer have that difficulty.
Parenthetically one of my nephews has just graduated with a politics degree of some description. What is a good job for him to enter?
A PGCE is always good. Doesn't mean he has to teach. But opens up doors...and they don't have to be classroom doors.
This, I suspect, is part of the strategy though. If Parliament is able to cobble together support for a VONC, and (which would be considerably more difficult) backing for an alternate PM, then a election would follow fairly soon anyway, in which Johnson could run as the true voice of Brexit, thwarted by the scurvy politicians. I some respects, it’s his best option, though lies outside of his control.
Yes, I think it's increasingly clear that's what's going on. They're doing a few things to get a True Voice of Brexit election: 1) Paint any caretaker government as a devious constitutional trick, rather than parliament doing its job when there's a PM they don't have confidence in 2) Signal to parliament that nothing short of a VONC will stop Boris going kamikaze 3) Goad the said moderates into jumping, just in case they haven't made up their minds
Sure they do, having a country in the EU gives their citizens and businesses all kinds of benefits to trade and travel. The question here is:
1) Would some member states refuse immediate reentry and instead prefer to let the UK take some time to work through it's various psychoses before coming back in
2) Nobody wants the UK to join the Euro, but would they agree for the UK to retain (reobtain?) the Euro opt-out in theory, or would someone insist that the UK formally signed up to the normal menu, and only had the opt-out in practice.
However given all the headaches No Deal leaves unresolved, I think people would likely prefer a quick return to the status quo ante that made the whole thing go away, rather than having to negotiate and ratify a No Deal Deal first, then throw that away and do the same for a reaccession.
Whilst not members of the EU, Norway and Switzerland are always adjusting their relationship with the EU. I think this is why some people want a No Deal as it burns the bridges! I still think BJ is bluffing on a No Deal. The economic and social damage is too great imo for even nutters to contemplate!
Can't see this latest news that he would hang on after a vonc as serious, if it came to it he risks being fired by the Queen, he would be forever known as the PM who attempted a coup, and all this just to get brexit through? He doesn't even believe in the project.
Can anyone really imagine Boris Johnson having the courage to attempt a coup? He didn't even have the courage to attend a leadership debate.
Margaret Beckett would be a decent GONU PM, relatively acceptable across the house and to both wings of the Labour Party I would have thought.
Hell will freeze over before Corbyn whips his MPs to back anyone other than himself as PM. And why should he? If No Deal's so bad, and he's the only one who can stop it, they should be begging him to become PM, not scheming to find ways to deny him.
I agree with your first sentence - see my 11.24 post sent simultaneously.
But don't assume that Corbyn is averse to No Deal in practice, whatever he says in public. It amounts to the UK leaving (Corbyn's preferred outcome) with a blank slate on which Corbyn could subsequently try and negotiate a new agreement with the EU, rather than being tied to the terms of one negotiated by a Tory PM.
I think he doesn't care. If No Deal helps him become PM, he's all for it (albeit quietly). If it'll make no difference but will lose him support then he's against. The goal is a radical socialist government enacting worker friendly policies; all else is secondary.
What won't help him become PM is a GONU led by someone other than himself. It would lead to a long term political realignment with a strengthening of the political centre. And I don't think the parliamentary arithmetic is there at present to allow Corbyn to become PM. So that means a VONC leading to a general election, not a replacement government.
Either that or enough Labour MPs defying him and voting to install a gonu anyway. So far we haven't seen much resistance to Corbyn from his MPs since 2017, but they could back someone else when push comes to shove
Big drop in the oil price to below $60. Any reason for this? Maybe the Iran situation, although I don't understand why the price would go down rather than up.
I think Cummings (who I don't think is a genius, but isn't stupid either) is simply trying to present Johnson as a "mad man figure who can't be controlled and really will do anything to get no deal", to make the EU think "Oh my god, he's serious about no deal, let's give in to their demands." I suspect the EU will see right through it though.
I think Cummings (who I don't think is a genius, but isn't stupid either) is simply trying to present Johnson as a "mad man figure who can't be controlled and really will do anything to get no deal", to make the EU think "Oh my god, he's serious about no deal, let's give in to their demands." I suspect the EU will see right through it though.
The whole situation is very unedifying, whichever side you're on I suspect.
Big drop in the oil price to below $60. Any reason for this? Maybe the Iran situation, although I don't understand why the price would go down rather than up.
Outrageous if true! PM without mandate stays in office even when he cannot command a majority. The UK is in real trouble...
Nothing to see here...just the PM’s spokesman briefing to the Times that he will essentially lead a coup d’etat to remain in power...
One of those lovely Brexit dividends Tyndall et al promised us.
We have not left yet - thanks to you anti-democratic Remainers.
I think you mean thanks to your nutty fellow travellers, the ERG.
Clearly you are having trouble with your maths again Mr Walker. If you think the 30 odd ERG idiots had more votes than the several hundred Remainer MPs who voted down the WA then we need to discuss your educational shortcomings.
What about the argument what got it over the line in 2016 wasn’t votes on the leave remain question? It was one year after Osborne cammo stole election from Miliband, and Labour areas, to some degree taking a lead from their leader that it didn’t matter much how they voted, were voting heavily in 2016 to give Osborne and Cammo a kicking in that poll, that’s what got it over the line. So there has never been a UK majority for Brexit. The majority of UK have always been against it. And it’s suspecting that is the case that’s holding us in this sort of zombie state till the confirmatory ref comes along.
Well its a good story but it has absolutely no basis in fact. The addition of zombies is a good move though,. Might interest the film companies as they love a bit of zombie fiction.
I distinctly remember adverts on this very site during the referendum in 2016 encouraging us to "stick it to the posh boys" by voting Brexit.
Also, who the hell leaked the US Ambassador story?
don’t tell me it was that 19-yr-old “reporter” who apparently “heard it in a restaurant”.
That explains why she wanted to do it. It does not explain why the Israelis would give her the time of day. They are a pretty hard-headed bunch at the best of times, a fortiori the Israeli military. Why the hell would they waste time with her? Especially as it would have been easy enough to check whether this was an officially sanctioned visit. So why agree to an unofficial one?
Maybe there's nothing there. She lied for no good reason. And was caught out. But I wonder. People generally lie for a reason. I'd like to know what the reason was.
I’ve answered that. Israeli military were rubbing up against a British cabinet minister, she was rubbing up against Israeli top brass, each thought being on a jolly together would do their own reputations and share price no harm at all, it’s all perfectly innocent really.
You may be right.
Do you know this? Or is this just your own interpretation?
My own interpretation based on the facts. Your suspicion is she was doing some other business? On behalf of who though, quite obviously not May’s government or the party managers?
As Hilary said of Trump when he won, if he’s got himself in there he has the right to govern and show what he can do. Apply the same to Patel, if she’s good then she proves it, if she’s rubbish she will swing on her own rope...
I wonder what the Israelis thought they were getting out of it. I wonder about Patel too. Since getting sacked she has not been slow in getting paid by one company, Viasat, which, inter alia, sells some sort of security equipment to the MoD. It - like many companies in this field - has an Israeli operation. She has declared this lucrative arrangement. I assume as a Cabinet Minister she has now given this up.
Perhaps on that personal holiday (how do you just rub up against top military brass in a Tel Aviv beach?) she was a bit too enthusiastic about her contacts, panicked when confronted and lied. But maybe it was more than just a jolly day out looking at big guns.
Big drop in the oil price to below $60. Any reason for this? Maybe the Iran situation, although I don't understand why the price would go down rather than up.
I actually think there's a chance the SNP might be the spanner in the works in preventing the formation of a GNU. If Sturgeon asks for Indyref2 in return for supporting it, there's a good chance the entire thing won't be able to get off the ground... as either some unionist anti-no dealers vote it down along with the rump of the Tory party to prevent another Indyref, or the SNP vote it down if the prospective caretaker PM refuses them.
Pause.
What, *the* Randall Flagg?
Oh thats just put the tin lid on it, that has...
I am an agent of chaos and despair. Why else do you think I want no deal to go through?
I think Cummings (who I don't think is a genius, but isn't stupid either) is simply trying to present Johnson as a "mad man figure who can't be controlled and really will do anything to get no deal", to make the EU think "Oh my god, he's serious about no deal, let's give in to their demands." I suspect the EU will see right through it though.
The problem with this as a strategy is that he's also saying he won't extend, and you'd need an extension to change the WA and get a new version passed, so if they really believe he's serious, there's no point in even bothering to talk to him.
So I think they're targeting British opinion, rather than EU opinion.
Just noted that absolutely noone seems to be both right of centre and pro EU on twitter. I appreciate it's not the largest cohort but even Grieve may well be wedded to it through his past.
The die is cast Britain are leaving but then what ?.Britain is a broken society and Brexit wont fix it .Britain won the War but Germany got the trophy ,Since the end of the war Britain has been navel gazing .Spent all its energy making War films and pop music while Germany and Japan took over its manufacturing industries.Hard to believe now that Wales was the first industralised country in the world (industrial being more people employed in industry than those employed on the land )Britain got mugged by its own smuggness it decided to continue the fight but this time it fought itself .Strikes killed off the Shipbuilding,Car,Mining industries .Brexit might be good for the National Spirit but then what .What do you have to sell to the world .Brexit may turn out to be Old Mother Hubbard when you go to the cupboard you might find it is empty .
Horrendously, all UK problems relate to Corbyn and his Cult. He failed to explain Brexit to his regional voters, he prevaricated on Remain, he is deeply disliked by swing voters throughout UK, the cult overturned the MPs 80% + vote of no confidence in him, he cannot win another election soon, he is unlikely to win approval by H. of C. for any alternative administration and up against Boris on TV debates and massive media support we are looking at Tories until mid 2020s
Horrendously, all UK problems relate to Corbyn and his Cult. He failed to explain Brexit to his regional voters, he prevaricated on Remain, he is deeply disliked by swing voters throughout UK, the cult overturned the MPs 80% + vote of no confidence in him, he cannot win another election soon, he is unlikely to win approval by H. of C. for any alternative administration and up against Boris on TV debates and massive media support we are looking at Tories until mid 2020s
Comments
Going for a GE after enacting the policy you are seeking a mandate for or enacting the policy in the middle of the GE is not fine at all. It is an outrage. Imagine if he lost heavily and a party won that was committed to not doing what the PM wanted to do. He'd have effectively prevented them from from enacting their policy and made the election pointless.
That is why there is a convention that you take no active steps during a GE i.e. you preserve the current position. But we have had suggestions - how serious or not is hard to tell - that in order to prevent Brexit being stopped the GE would be set for a date after 31 October i.e. to make sure that a policy which go ahead regardless of the result of the GE. That may or may not fall within your definition of a coup but it feels, at a minimum, as utterly contemptuous of what the point of a GE is.
If Boris had any sense he would do everything he can to stop this sort of talk spreading. If he wants a GE let him call it. If not then he has to persuade Parliament not ignore it. Them's the rules in Britain.
https://funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/2926771/How/
Do you know this? Or is this just your own interpretation?
Yours is the talk of a quasi-fascist. I used to think you were a reasonable guy. Ultra loyalist Tory, but unfailingly polite, good humoured and well informed. You seem to have taken a dark turn in your wish to abase yourself at the foot of your leader.
- keeping us in the EU but changing the proposed exit date, or
- taking us out but not asking for an extension,
is surprisingly involved.
I'm not in favour of No Deal, but I think it's the latter. Parliament had plenty of chances to vote for something else, and declined. If they can't even agree on the identity of the figurehead they want to stop Johnson, they don't deserve to be allowed to.
When I was studying European fascism as part of a political science degree in the early 1980s, I found it quite hard to come to terms with how large swathes of people could have rejected democracy in favour of fascist demagogues and their transparently facile solutions and scapegoats. Having observed how Trump operates I no longer have that difficulty.
As has been discussed here: 1) the current Parliament will do all it can to prevent no deal, 2) there is no alternative deal that Boris could sell to the ERG et al, and 3) with VONC/GONU as a combined option, there is nothing constitutionally that Boris can do to force no deal through. That's not to say it can't happen (Corbyn being stubborn seems very possible), but Boris can't make sure it happens.
So that leaves him with the option of being as bilgerent as possible to force parliament into having to go down the VONC/GONU route, resulting in Brexit being delayed and Boris being able to blame everyone but himself. He can then go into the inevitable GE on the populist, hard Brexit ticket against a divided opposite.
Would still be high risk, but surely better than fighting and election in the midst of no deal or having deliberately broken his 'do or die' pledge.
This, I suspect, is part of the strategy though.
If Parliament is able to cobble together support for a VONC, and (which would be considerably more difficult) backing for an alternate PM, then a election would follow fairly soon anyway, in which Johnson could run as the true voice of Brexit, thwarted by the scurvy politicians.
I some respects, it’s his best option, though lies outside of his control.
As Hilary said of Trump when he won, if he’s got himself in there he has the right to govern and show what he can do. Apply the same to Patel, if she’s good then she proves it, if she’s rubbish she will swing on her own rope...
1) Would some member states refuse immediate reentry and instead prefer to let the UK take some time to work through it's various psychoses before coming back in
2) Nobody wants the UK to join the Euro, but would they agree for the UK to retain (reobtain?) the Euro opt-out in theory, or would someone insist that the UK formally signed up to the normal menu, and only had the opt-out in practice.
However given all the headaches No Deal leaves unresolved, I think people would likely prefer a quick return to the status quo ante that made the whole thing go away, rather than having to negotiate and ratify a No Deal Deal first, then throw that away and do the same for a reaccession.
1) Paint any caretaker government as a devious constitutional trick, rather than parliament doing its job when there's a PM they don't have confidence in
2) Signal to parliament that nothing short of a VONC will stop Boris going kamikaze
3) Goad the said moderates into jumping, just in case they haven't made up their minds
https://www.bloomberg.com/energy
Perhaps on that personal holiday (how do you just rub up against top military brass in a Tel Aviv beach?) she was a bit too enthusiastic about her contacts, panicked when confronted and lied. But maybe it was more than just a jolly day out looking at big guns.
"HEY, BORIS, YOU SCROOWED IT UP!"
So I think they're targeting British opinion, rather than EU opinion.
Or would she be anathema to the SNP?