Some cosmetic changes to the deal, and parliament can finally finally choose whether we leave with a deal or without one.
I'd like to see it, but Bozo has painted himself into a corner - doubtful he can get anything that can be dressed up as acceptable to the backbenchers, and even a good chunk of his ministers.
And, of course, Corbyn will whip against any deal regardless of content. Even when he was offered WA + customs union, ie his own party policy, he refused it.
Even Leave voters barely support this suspension. But HYUFD will ignore this poll.
51% to 25%?
It’s an interesting question. I oppose doing this, but I also want to leave and I’m ok with No Deal; so I won’t lose much sleep over it. Many will be like that. The benefits of just being one voter are that you can say you dislike something whilst secretly being ok with its impact.
Voting intention questions in a week will be the interesting ones.
Some cosmetic changes to the deal, and parliament can finally finally choose whether we leave with a deal or without one.
I'd like to see it, but Bozo has painted himself into a corner - doubtful he can get anything that can be dressed up as acceptable to the backbenchers, and even a good chunk of his ministers.
And, of course, Corbyn will whip against any deal regardless of content. Even when he was offered WA + customs union, ie his own party policy, he refused it.
Isn’t the whole point of this to force the choice between the deal and no deal?
Just a thought: might the Palace have had some involvement in the shape of the prorogation? You can easily imagine that it would prefer MPs to have the opportunity to have a say on the idea beforehand and to take action afterwards.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was a compromise between Number 10 and Buckingham Palace.
Even if it was (and remember it seems legal advice was that other approaches wouldn't stand scrutiny) it has brought the Monarchy into the equation.
And that will probably do it no favours in the medium term.
I agree. Ironic that Boris Johnson has done more to jeopardise the medium term future of the monarchy than Jeremy Corbyn ever has.
Shuttering Parliament for a month, just before the Brexit deadline, goes some way towards that, yes.
In fairness the HOC was going into recess for the conference season and therefore it is only 4 days
However, if it was the intention of those who want to remain to cancel the conference season why has no conference been cancelled
Because either of the following is true:
a) Parliament doesn't have to be in recess for the conferences to take place. b) The logical sequence might have been: cancel the recess then cancel the conferences.
Just a thought: might the Palace have had some involvement in the shape of the prorogation? You can easily imagine that it would prefer MPs to have the opportunity to have a say on the idea beforehand and to take action afterwards.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was a compromise between Number 10 and Buckingham Palace.
Even if it was (and remember it seems legal advice was that other approaches wouldn't stand scrutiny) it has brought the Monarchy into the equation.
And that will probably do it no favours in the medium term.
I agree. Ironic that Boris Johnson has done more to jeopardise the medium term future of the monarchy than Jeremy Corbyn ever has.
How will Leavers view their project in years to come once it has led to the demise of both the UK and the monarchy?
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
Sadly Boris has introduced the monarchy into this mess. I don't see a problem while the Queen is alive but I suspect republican tendencies are going to increase as Charles takes over.
I've suspected that for a long time anyway.
HMQ has tried for a long time to stay above this mess. But she has to do what she is constitutionally obliged to do.
Charles, by contrast, would get stuck in by choice. Bercow style.
Some cosmetic changes to the deal, and parliament can finally finally choose whether we leave with a deal or without one.
I'd like to see it, but Bozo has painted himself into a corner - doubtful he can get anything that can be dressed up as acceptable to the backbenchers, and even a good chunk of his ministers.
And, of course, Corbyn will whip against any deal regardless of content. Even when he was offered WA + customs union, ie his own party policy, he refused it.
Isn’t the whole point of this to force the choice between the deal and no deal?
It is looking that way but MPs won't see it that way. Also Grieve (He is very bright when it comes to the particulars of Erskine May) and Bercow might be able to come up with some method of stopping Johnson - though obviously the Queen is the head of state so they can't trump her !
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
And she is doing it by openly supporting one side. Let's face it, she is supporting this Tory government.
She isn't doing any such thing.
HMQ always acts on the advice of her PM. Always.
You can make a case the PM has advised her very badly, for which I have some sympathy, but she had no choice.
Indeed. Ultimately it is still within the power of Parliament to show it has no confidence in this PM. She will then appoint one who does (if one can be found) and follow any alternative advice they may have. Parliament is in charge.
Shuttering Parliament for a month, just before the Brexit deadline, goes some way towards that, yes.
In fairness the HOC was going into recess for the conference season and therefore it is only 4 days
However, if it was the intention of those who want to remain to cancel the conference season why has no conference been cancelled
Because either of the following is true:
a) Parliament doesn't have to be in recess for the conferences to take place. b) The logical sequence might have been: cancel the recess then cancel the conferences.
Parliament is going round and round in circles declaring that it opposes the most fundamental Government policy, but won’ttake The one step open to them as a consequence ie. bring down the Government. Ultimately if Parliament won’t bring down the Government then at the end of the day they can do what they damned well want that doesn’t require passing legislation.
Just a thought: might the Palace have had some involvement in the shape of the prorogation? You can easily imagine that it would prefer MPs to have the opportunity to have a say on the idea beforehand and to take action afterwards.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was a compromise between Number 10 and Buckingham Palace.
Yes. The private secretary to HMQ will have certainly been party to inner circle discussions.
Just a thought: might the Palace have had some involvement in the shape of the prorogation? You can easily imagine that it would prefer MPs to have the opportunity to have a say on the idea beforehand and to take action afterwards.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was a compromise between Number 10 and Buckingham Palace.
Even if it was (and remember it seems legal advice was that other approaches wouldn't stand scrutiny) it has brought the Monarchy into the equation.
And that will probably do it no favours in the medium term.
I agree. Ironic that Boris Johnson has done more to jeopardise the medium term future of the monarchy than Jeremy Corbyn ever has.
How will Leavers view their project in years to come once it has led to the demise of both the UK and the monarchy?
Leavers would accept slaughter of the first born, alien invasion and the triggering of the Yellowstone supervolcano as acceptable prices for Brexit. So long as Jeremy Corbyn doesn't become Prime Minister, they don't care about anything else.
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
Sadly Boris has introduced the monarchy into this mess. I don't see a problem while the Queen is alive but I suspect republican tendencies are going to increase as Charles takes over.
I've suspected that for a long time anyway.
HMQ has tried for a long time to stay above this mess. But she has to do what she is constitutionally obliged to do.
Charles, by contrast, would get stuck in by choice. Bercow style.
And Charles reaction would have been the correct one under these circumstances...
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
And she is doing it by openly supporting one side. Let's face it, she is supporting this Tory government.
She isn't doing any such thing.
HMQ always acts on the advice of her PM. Always.
You can make a case the PM has advised her very badly, for which I have some sympathy, but she had no choice.
So if, say, a future PM Corbyn advised her to prorogue parliament indefinitely, would she do so?
Permanent prorogation of parliament if Corbyn ever gets the reins seems an excellent idea. But how can he renationalise the trains without legislation ?
Even Leave voters barely support this suspension. But HYUFD will ignore this poll.
Responses would have been very different had YouGov added in the additional wording: "Standard procedure is for parliament not to meet during the party conference period from mid-September to early October."
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
And she is doing it by openly supporting one side. Let's face it, she is supporting this Tory government.
She isn't doing any such thing.
HMQ always acts on the advice of her PM. Always.
You can make a case the PM has advised her very badly, for which I have some sympathy, but she had no choice.
In which case, the question may well arise as to what is the point of a constitutional Head of State with absolutely no power whatsoever other than theoretical?
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
Hoey will still support Johnson. But she is really a DUP MP.
Even Leave voters barely support this suspension. But HYUFD will ignore this poll.
Responses would have been very different had YouGov added in the additional wording: "Standard procedure is for parliament not to meet during the party conference period from mid-September to early October."
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
Just a thought: might the Palace have had some involvement in the shape of the prorogation? You can easily imagine that it would prefer MPs to have the opportunity to have a say on the idea beforehand and to take action afterwards.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was a compromise between Number 10 and Buckingham Palace.
Yes. The private secretary to HMQ will have certainly been party to inner circle discussions.
Quite - for weeks we’ve had speculation that Johnson will do one of two things to force through (no deal) Brexit and deny Parliament a say. 1) call an election and set the polling date for post Oct 31st 2) prorogue Parliament until November. Both have now effectively been ruled out by this move, but needless to say the critics are piling in anyway because they’ve been completely wrong footed.
The heir to the throne is a man who wished he was a tampon inside Camilla Parker-Bowles. If he can betray his wife for a quick shag then he’ll do the same to the country.
Andrew is a man who hangs around with convicted nonces.
Edward is a coward who couldn’t hack it with the water soldiers but wears a fucktonne of medals.
How do we take back control from this unelected mob?
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
And she is doing it by openly supporting one side. Let's face it, she is supporting this Tory government.
She isn't doing any such thing.
HMQ always acts on the advice of her PM. Always.
You can make a case the PM has advised her very badly, for which I have some sympathy, but she had no choice.
Indeed. Ultimately it is still within the power of Parliament to show it has no confidence in this PM. She will then appoint one who does (if one can be found) and follow any alternative advice they may have. Parliament is in charge.
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
Hoey will still support Johnson. But she is really a DUP MP.
Hoey won't vote for a dressed up WA because she'd prefer "No Deal". Sui generis but she is probably the only Labour spartan outside of Ronnie Campbell (Though he has a good deal more loyalty to Corbyn than Hoey). Hoey and Campbell, probably the hardest two Labour Brexiteers in that order will oppose any deal.
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
And she is doing it by openly supporting one side. Let's face it, she is supporting this Tory government.
She isn't doing any such thing.
HMQ always acts on the advice of her PM. Always.
You can make a case the PM has advised her very badly, for which I have some sympathy, but she had no choice.
In which case, the question may well arise as to what is the point of a constitutional Head of State with absolutely no power whatsoever other than theoretical?
Just a thought: might the Palace have had some involvement in the shape of the prorogation? You can easily imagine that it would prefer MPs to have the opportunity to have a say on the idea beforehand and to take action afterwards.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was a compromise between Number 10 and Buckingham Palace.
Yes. The private secretary to HMQ will have certainly been party to inner circle discussions.
Quite - for weeks we’ve had speculation that Johnson will do one of two things to force through (no deal) Brexit and deny Parliament a say. 1) call an election and set the polling date for post Oct 31st 2) prorogue Parliament until November. Both have now effectively been ruled out by this move, but needless to say the critics are piling in anyway because they’ve been completely wrong footed.
People don't follow detail. A lot of people are just going to see the headline "The Queen agrees to Boris Prorouging Parliament" and that will be enough to knock the monarchy down a few pegs.
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
Not for Flint, she's a Brexit thickie
Not so - She voted Remain but feels an obligation to honour how her constituency voted in 2016. Now she has a good excuse not to do so - on the basis of Johnson's threat to due pariamentary process and scrutiny.Indeed I suspect there will now be Tory MPs more determined to scupper any he Deal he might come back with - simply to deny Johnson any sense of triumph.
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
And she is doing it by openly supporting one side. Let's face it, she is supporting this Tory government.
She isn't doing any such thing.
HMQ always acts on the advice of her PM. Always.
You can make a case the PM has advised her very badly, for which I have some sympathy, but she had no choice.
In which case, the question may well arise as to what is the point of a constitutional Head of State with absolutely no power whatsoever other than theoretical?
You'd prefer an absolute monarch?
The Queen has the right to be consulted, to encourage, to be advised and to warn on political matters.
I wouldn't be surprised if on this occasion she's done all of those.
Just a thought: might the Palace have had some involvement in the shape of the prorogation? You can easily imagine that it would prefer MPs to have the opportunity to have a say on the idea beforehand and to take action afterwards.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was a compromise between Number 10 and Buckingham Palace.
Yes. The private secretary to HMQ will have certainly been party to inner circle discussions.
Quite - for weeks we’ve had speculation that Johnson will do one of two things to force through (no deal) Brexit and deny Parliament a say. 1) call an election and set the polling date for post Oct 31st 2) prorogue Parliament until November. Both have now effectively been ruled out by this move, but needless to say the critics are piling in anyway because they’ve been completely wrong footed.
People don't follow detail. A lot of people are just going to see the headline "The Queen agrees to Boris Prorouging Parliament" and that will be enough to knock the monarchy down a few pegs.
The Queen was always going to follow convention though, unlike say Bercow
Just a thought: might the Palace have had some involvement in the shape of the prorogation? You can easily imagine that it would prefer MPs to have the opportunity to have a say on the idea beforehand and to take action afterwards.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was a compromise between Number 10 and Buckingham Palace.
Even if it was (and remember it seems legal advice was that other approaches wouldn't stand scrutiny) it has brought the Monarchy into the equation.
And that will probably do it no favours in the medium term.
I agree. Ironic that Boris Johnson has done more to jeopardise the medium term future of the monarchy than Jeremy Corbyn ever has.
How will Leavers view their project in years to come once it has led to the demise of both the UK and the monarchy?
The heir to the throne is a man who wished he was a tampon inside Camilla Parker-Bowles. If he can betray his wife for a quick shag then he’ll do the same to the country.
Andrew is a man who hangs around with convicted nonces.
Edward is a coward who couldn’t hack it with the water soldiers but wears a fucktonne of medals.
How do we take back control from this unelected mob?
At least North Korea’s Kim family have elections.
Your not convincing when you try to troll so obviously.
Just a thought: might the Palace have had some involvement in the shape of the prorogation? You can easily imagine that it would prefer MPs to have the opportunity to have a say on the idea beforehand and to take action afterwards.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was a compromise between Number 10 and Buckingham Palace.
Yes. The private secretary to HMQ will have certainly been party to inner circle discussions.
Quite - for weeks we’ve had speculation that Johnson will do one of two things to force through (no deal) Brexit and deny Parliament a say. 1) call an election and set the polling date for post Oct 31st 2) prorogue Parliament until November. Both have now effectively been ruled out by this move, but needless to say the critics are piling in anyway because they’ve been completely wrong footed.
People don't follow detail. A lot of people are just going to see the headline "The Queen agrees to Boris Prorouging Parliament" and that will be enough to knock the monarchy down a few pegs.
Has anyone yet worked out how the Prorogation is compatible with the Northern Ireland act amendment requiring parliament to sit for 5 days in every fortnight?
The heir to the throne is a man who wished he was a tampon inside Camilla Parker-Bowles. If he can betray his wife for a quick shag then he’ll do the same to the country.
Andrew is a man who hangs around with convicted nonces.
Edward is a coward who couldn’t hack it with the water soldiers but wears a fucktonne of medals.
How do we take back control from this unelected mob?
At least North Korea’s Kim family have elections.
Your not convincing when you try to troll so obviously.
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
Not for Flint, she's a Brexit thickie
Not so - She voted Remain but feels an obligation to honour how her constituency voted in 2016. Now she has a good excuse not to do so - on the basis of Johnson's threat to due pariamentary process and scrutiny.Indeed I suspect there will now be Tory MPs more determined to scupper any he Deal he might come back with - simply to deny Johnson any sense of triumph.
I'll have a charity fiver if you like that Flint will vote in favour of any MV4 proposed.
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
And she is doing it by openly supporting one side. Let's face it, she is supporting this Tory government.
She isn't doing any such thing.
HMQ always acts on the advice of her PM. Always.
You can make a case the PM has advised her very badly, for which I have some sympathy, but she had no choice.
In which case, the question may well arise as to what is the point of a constitutional Head of State with absolutely no power whatsoever other than theoretical?
Ask places with elected heads of state that have about as little power, which seems even more pointless.
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
Sadly Boris has introduced the monarchy into this mess. I don't see a problem while the Queen is alive but I suspect republican tendencies are going to increase as Charles takes over.
I've suspected that for a long time anyway.
HMQ has tried for a long time to stay above this mess. But she has to do what she is constitutionally obliged to do.
Charles, by contrast, would get stuck in by choice. Bercow style.
And Charles reaction would have been the correct one under these circumstances...
In a battle you can't win keep well away from it.
If we're choosing our opinions on what the monarchy should or should not have done based upon our opinion on the politics of the situation then the battle has already been lost.
The head of state must be strictly neutral on political matters at all times.
Both sides should be hanging their heads in shame at the moment.
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
For the moment Flint is still voting for a deal put forward to parliament. No tweets from her thus far wrt prorogation.
I will be surprised if today's news has no effect on her. The issue now goes way beyond Brexit per se - much more to do with abuse of process and failing to adhere to convention.
The heir to the throne is a man who wished he was a tampon inside Camilla Parker-Bowles. If he can betray his wife for a quick shag then he’ll do the same to the country.
Andrew is a man who hangs around with convicted nonces.
Edward is a coward who couldn’t hack it with the water soldiers but wears a fucktonne of medals.
How do we take back control from this unelected mob?
At least North Korea’s Kim family have elections.
Your not convincing when you try to troll so obviously.
The heir to the throne is a man who wished he was a tampon inside Camilla Parker-Bowles. If he can betray his wife for a quick shag then he’ll do the same to the country.
Andrew is a man who hangs around with convicted nonces.
Edward is a coward who couldn’t hack it with the water soldiers but wears a fucktonne of medals.
How do we take back control from this unelected mob?
At least North Korea’s Kim family have elections.
Your not convincing when you try to troll so obviously.
It’s all true. Not one of those facts is untrue.
The trying too hard tone is the unconvincing troll bit. Donald Trump could pull it off, as could other trolls.
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
For the moment Flint is still voting for a deal put forward to parliament. No tweets from her thus far wrt prorogation.
I will be surprised if today's news has no effect on her. The issue now goes way beyond Brexit per se - much more to do with abuse of process and failing to adhere to convention.
I know you think that, do you want the charity bet though ?
Just a thought: might the Palace have had some involvement in the shape of the prorogation? You can easily imagine that it would prefer MPs to have the opportunity to have a say on the idea beforehand and to take action afterwards.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was a compromise between Number 10 and Buckingham Palace.
Yes. The private secretary to HMQ will have certainly been party to inner circle discussions.
Quite - for weeks we’ve had speculation that Johnson will do one of two things to force through (no deal) Brexit and deny Parliament a say. 1) call an election and set the polling date for post Oct 31st 2) prorogue Parliament until November. Both have now effectively been ruled out by this move, but needless to say the critics are piling in anyway because they’ve been completely wrong footed.
People don't follow detail. A lot of people are just going to see the headline "The Queen agrees to Boris Prorouging Parliament" and that will be enough to knock the monarchy down a few pegs.
The Queen was always going to follow convention though, unlike say Bercow
The Queen has acted far better than Bercow throughout, IMHO.
Has anyone yet worked out how the Prorogation is compatible with the Northern Ireland act amendment requiring parliament to sit for 5 days in every fortnight?
The deadline won't have changed on the project as December 2020 is stupidly short anyway and changing a date means restarting the entire process.
Yes, he seemed sceptical that Dec 2020 was a realistic deadline, but his contract is for the initial stages and he expects to have returned to his home country by then. "My approach. Get paid and leave."
The heir to the throne is a man who wished he was a tampon inside Camilla Parker-Bowles. If he can betray his wife for a quick shag then he’ll do the same to the country.
Andrew is a man who hangs around with convicted nonces.
Edward is a coward who couldn’t hack it with the water soldiers but wears a fucktonne of medals.
How do we take back control from this unelected mob?
At least North Korea’s Kim family have elections.
Your not convincing when you try to troll so obviously.
It’s all true. Not one of those facts is untrue.
Well, unless you know either that Andrew still "hangs around with convicted nonces" (present tense), or that a certain high-profile "suicide" has been faked and he is hiding in Andrew's cellar, that one ain't true.....
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
Not for Flint, she's a Brexit thickie
Not so - She voted Remain but feels an obligation to honour how her constituency voted in 2016. Now she has a good excuse not to do so - on the basis of Johnson's threat to due pariamentary process and scrutiny.Indeed I suspect there will now be Tory MPs more determined to scupper any he Deal he might come back with - simply to deny Johnson any sense of triumph.
I'll have a charity fiver if you like that Flint will vote in favour of any MV4 proposed.
Obviously void if no further MVs take place.
Were May still there , I would agree. Johnson's malign and disreputable character changes that - he is showing himself to be very much the Monster figure I alluded to a few days ago.
Now I know it's early, and we shouldn't read too much etc etc but there is no way the two party vote should be near Even money the pair.
Those are astoundingly dreadful numbers.
They've got Biden on 32, Warren 19, Sanders 15.
I think Sanders is ahead of Warren given ALL the polls we have right now but it's harder to tell than the fact Biden is likely still out ahead by at least 9 points or so.
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
Sadly Boris has introduced the monarchy into this mess. I don't see a problem while the Queen is alive but I suspect republican tendencies are going to increase as Charles takes over.
I've suspected that for a long time anyway.
HMQ has tried for a long time to stay above this mess. But she has to do what she is constitutionally obliged to do.
Charles, by contrast, would get stuck in by choice. Bercow style.
And Charles reaction would have been the correct one under these circumstances...
In a battle you can't win keep well away from it.
If we're choosing our opinions on what the monarchy should or should not have done based upon our opinion on the politics of the situation then the battle has already been lost.
The head of state must be strictly neutral on political matters at all times.
Both sides should be hanging their heads in shame at the moment.
The head of state needs to be both strictly neutral and to be seen to be neutral. The issue here is that monarchy has ended up failing on the latter point here
While constitutionally it's unlikely that things could have played out differently, the way its occurred has given Republicans an open goal.
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
For the moment Flint is still voting for a deal put forward to parliament. No tweets from her thus far wrt prorogation.
I will be surprised if today's news has no effect on her. The issue now goes way beyond Brexit per se - much more to do with abuse of process and failing to adhere to convention.
I know you think that, do you want the charity bet though ?
I have never bet on politics - and very rarely indeed on anything else.Three horse races in the last thirty years has been the extent of my gambling - beyond the stockmarket.
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
For the moment Flint is still voting for a deal put forward to parliament. No tweets from her thus far wrt prorogation.
I will be surprised if today's news has no effect on her. The issue now goes way beyond Brexit per se - much more to do with abuse of process and failing to adhere to convention.
I know you think that, do you want the charity bet though ?
I have never bet on politics - and very rarely indeed on anything else.Three horse races in the last thirty years has been the extent of my gambling - beyond the stockmarket.
Fair enough, we'll both have to settle for the "I was right about that" feeling if MV4 comes about and Flint heads through the Aye or No lobby.
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
And she is doing it by openly supporting one side. Let's face it, she is supporting this Tory government.
She isn't doing any such thing.
HMQ always acts on the advice of her PM. Always.
You can make a case the PM has advised her very badly, for which I have some sympathy, but she had no choice.
In which case, the question may well arise as to what is the point of a constitutional Head of State with absolutely no power whatsoever other than theoretical?
(a) She is a non-political unifying figure that the majority of people can support regardless of party political preference. If you want a non-partisan President you either end up with a superannuated failed politician or someone like the Queen.
(b) It prevents the creation of an alternative power source with a democratic mandate. Let's say - for example - that Blair had been elected President in 2005 (instead of running for PM in the GE). Again let's suppose that he had a 7 year term. Do you think he would have co-existed comfortably with Brown and Cameron?
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
For the moment Flint is still voting for a deal put forward to parliament. No tweets from her thus far wrt prorogation.
I will be surprised if today's news has no effect on her. The issue now goes way beyond Brexit per se - much more to do with abuse of process and failing to adhere to convention.
I know you think that, do you want the charity bet though ?
I have never bet on politics - and very rarely indeed on anything else.Three horse races in the last thirty years has been the extent of my gambling - beyond the stockmarket.
Fair enough, we'll both have to settle for the "I was right about that" feeling if MV4 comes about and Flint heads through the Aye or No lobby.
Oh if I am proved wrong, I will concede the point to you.
Just plain silly to think it will be over then. More than that it is dishonest in promising an end to division on this subject. I believe stopping it is the least damaging at this point, but it will not be without ongoing pain and division .
Some cosmetic changes to the deal, and parliament can finally finally choose whether we leave with a deal or without one.
I'd like to see it, but Bozo has painted himself into a corner - doubtful he can get anything that can be dressed up as acceptable to the backbenchers, and even a good chunk of his ministers.
And, of course, Corbyn will whip against any deal regardless of content. Even when he was offered WA + customs union, ie his own party policy, he refused it.
Isn’t the whole point of this to force the choice between the deal and no deal?
I think you may be right but if Johnson/Cummings use what is seen to be fairly outrageous (but legal) manoeuvring in order to push through a form of Brexit that appears to be opposed by 70% of voters and which a lot of people do not see as having a mandate (given the assurances given bt the leave campaigns) then I don't see how there is a happy ending for the Johnson government.
If it is all designed to get Parliament to accept May's deal with a tiny fig leaf then surely Farage and the BXP go into full battle mode and put a huge dent in Johnson's election prospects.
Much gloating today by the Brexiteers but I am struggling to see how this works out well for Johnson in the medium to long term.
I would have thought that Johnson's action will now make it very difficult for Labour MPs such as Caroline Flint and Gareth Snell to be seen to do anything but oppose him in the Division Lobbies. His contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny will surely override other considerations.
For the moment Flint is still voting for a deal put forward to parliament. No tweets from her thus far wrt prorogation.
I will be surprised if today's news has no effect on her. The issue now goes way beyond Brexit per se - much more to do with abuse of process and failing to adhere to convention.
Agreed. That's why we've been calling for Bercow to be sacked for years. The man's unfit to be Speaker
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
Sadly Boris has introduced the monarchy into this mess. I don't see a problem while the Queen is alive but I suspect republican tendencies are going to increase as Charles takes over.
I've suspected that for a long time anyway.
HMQ has tried for a long time to stay above this mess. But she has to do what she is constitutionally obliged to do.
Charles, by contrast, would get stuck in by choice. Bercow style.
And Charles reaction would have been the correct one under these circumstances...
In a battle you can't win keep well away from it.
If we're choosing our opinions on what the monarchy should or should not have done based upon our opinion on the politics of the situation then the battle has already been lost.
The head of state must be strictly neutral on political matters at all times.
Both sides should be hanging their heads in shame at the moment.
The head of state needs to be both strictly neutral and to be seen to be neutral. The issue here is that monarchy has ended up failing on the latter point here
While constitutionally it's unlikely that things could have played out differently, the way its occurred has given Republicans an open goal.
For which Boris Johnson, the incumbent PM, should be blamed. He advised her badly.
I expect the Palace will, very subtly, be at pains to explain via certain channels over the next few days why they acted with complete propriety with respect to the constitution.
In the medium-long term I expect legislation at some point in the future to constrain the rights of the Executive to advise the monarch on prorogation.
The unelected Queen has confirmed that she is mandateless Boris Johnson’s parrot.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers.
This is why the Queen will do whatever she can to stay above this very dangerous political fray.
Sadly Boris has introduced the monarchy into this mess. I don't see a problem while the Queen is alive but I suspect republican tendencies are going to increase as Charles takes over.
I've suspected that for a long time anyway.
HMQ has tried for a long time to stay above this mess. But she has to do what she is constitutionally obliged to do.
Charles, by contrast, would get stuck in by choice. Bercow style.
And Charles reaction would have been the correct one under these circumstances...
In a battle you can't win keep well away from it.
If we're choosing our opinions on what the monarchy should or should not have done based upon our opinion on the politics of the situation then the battle has already been lost.
The head of state must be strictly neutral on political matters at all times.
Both sides should be hanging their heads in shame at the moment.
The head of state needs to be both strictly neutral and to be seen to be neutral. The issue here is that monarchy has ended up failing on the latter point here
While constitutionally it's unlikely that things could have played out differently, the way its occurred has given Republicans an open goal.
You've set an impossible standard that suggests the monarch ever doing anything the pm suggests fails on neutrality grounds.
Mr. eek, disagree. The Queen could've done no better.
Had she refused to prorogue that would've been refusing her own Government and interfering in politics.
She was damned as soon as she was asked.
IMHO Boris should simply have gone for the bog standard traditional prorogation. It would have avoided creating a rallying point and would still have meant MPs only had 2-3 weeks to get their act together.
The Queen is acting in the national interest here - there is an opportunity for a VONC and an alternative govt to be formed - why don’t remoaners get on with it instead of silly tweets and petitions?
Mr. eek, disagree. The Queen could've done no better.
Had she refused to prorogue that would've been refusing her own Government and interfering in politics.
Her Private Secretary should have killed this stone dead. Now she is totally interfering in politics and supporting one side - the Leavers. Unelected, costly and one member of the firm up to no good in another country.
Mr. eek, disagree. The Queen could've done no better.
Had she refused to prorogue that would've been refusing her own Government and interfering in politics.
Her Private Secretary should have killed this stone dead. Now she is totally interfering in politics and supporting one side - the Leavers. Unelected, costly and one member of the firm up to no good in another country.
She acted on advice of her Prime Minister. Would you be saying the same thing if she had refused Corbyn's advice?
I still think that the thing that would come closest to keeping both sides and the most number of people content is something like EFTA with a customs arrangement. Unfortunately we seem to have gotten into a position where only extreme outcomes are now possible, with all the trouble that they inevitably will cause.
Comments
And, of course, Corbyn will whip against any deal regardless of content. Even when he was offered WA + customs union, ie his own party policy, he refused it.
Voting intention questions in a week will be the interesting ones.
a) Parliament doesn't have to be in recess for the conferences to take place.
b) The logical sequence might have been: cancel the recess then cancel the conferences.
HMQ always acts on the advice of her PM. Always.
You can make a case the PM has advised her very badly, for which I have some sympathy, but she had no choice.
HMQ has tried for a long time to stay above this mess. But she has to do what she is constitutionally obliged to do.
Charles, by contrast, would get stuck in by choice. Bercow style.
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1166712433970503680
In a battle you can't win keep well away from it.
So much for the 'mandate' for No Deal.
For the moment Flint is still voting for a deal put forward to parliament. No tweets from her thus far wrt prorogation.
The DoE is a bona fide racist
The heir to the throne is a man who wished he was a tampon inside Camilla Parker-Bowles. If he can betray his wife for a quick shag then he’ll do the same to the country.
Andrew is a man who hangs around with convicted nonces.
Edward is a coward who couldn’t hack it with the water soldiers but wears a fucktonne of medals.
How do we take back control from this unelected mob?
At least North Korea’s Kim family have elections.
Hoey and Campbell, probably the hardest two Labour Brexiteers in that order will oppose any deal.
The Queen has the right to be consulted, to encourage, to be advised and to warn on political matters.
I wouldn't be surprised if on this occasion she's done all of those.
Did this get explained yet?
No.
I have no idea how this pans out but brexit has to be lanced
Obviously void if no further MVs take place.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1166725896964907008?s=20
The head of state must be strictly neutral on political matters at all times.
Both sides should be hanging their heads in shame at the moment.
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/08/01/asif-hameed-proroguing-parliament/
No deal , deal , election - they are moving to cover all bases - there is no bluff or sleight of hand.
https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1166727017041207297?s=20
While constitutionally it's unlikely that things could have played out differently, the way its occurred has given Republicans an open goal.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157?fbclid=IwAR0xZDEcMTEMXUJ6Ipm10EOt8SkWZL5IuEK8rceZPhuoRtyqvOCk-C-vbnA
Is anyone keeping a list?
(b) It prevents the creation of an alternative power source with a democratic mandate. Let's say - for example - that Blair had been elected President in 2005 (instead of running for PM in the GE). Again let's suppose that he had a 7 year term. Do you think he would have co-existed comfortably with Brown and Cameron?
https://twitter.com/JackWDart/status/1166384551251386368
Will the public in any great numbers? No, and any politician talking of getting rid of the Queen will still be committing electoral suicide.
It may all look different when the Queen is gone, but that’s a question for another day.
If it is all designed to get Parliament to accept May's deal with a tiny fig leaf then surely Farage and the BXP go into full battle mode and put a huge dent in Johnson's election prospects.
Much gloating today by the Brexiteers but I am struggling to see how this works out well for Johnson in the medium to long term.
Had she refused to prorogue that would've been refusing her own Government and interfering in politics.
I expect the Palace will, very subtly, be at pains to explain via certain channels over the next few days why they acted with complete propriety with respect to the constitution.
In the medium-long term I expect legislation at some point in the future to constrain the rights of the Executive to advise the monarch on prorogation.
IMHO Boris should simply have gone for the bog standard traditional prorogation. It would have avoided creating a rallying point and would still have meant MPs only had 2-3 weeks to get their act together.
Unelected, costly and one member of the firm up to no good in another country.