1. Because while a Deal vs No Deal referendum would be legitimate, Parliament would amend it to be Deal vs Remain. In so doing they would set aside the votes of 17.4 million people and teach them all that voting has no purpose if they disagree with their “betters”
2. Inertia is the most powerful force in politics. Once it is done it is done and it will go back to being a minority interest
3. Get a grip. It’s 4 f*****g days. After Bercow and others have abused parliamentary procedure
3 - It's not 4 days. It's 4 days + 4 days for the Queen's Speech which cannot be overridden.
At a minimum it's 8 days and that depends on when the proroguing begins. It's possible that it begins on September 9th which removes another 3 days of debates.
Between those items it reduces Parliament from 25 days of sitting where things were editable down to 14.
Don’t forget conference season which would have been cancelled but now wont be.
That was not a given. It needed a vote and would doubt Corbyn wants his cancelled when they decide another brexit policy
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
It will be used to break up the UK, HMQ, has unwittingly lit the blue touch paper. The PM should call an election not faff about with procedure and drag the monarchy into this. HMQ could have said NO and fired him as he obviously does not command a majority in the house if he has to undertake such dubious tactics. This creates a precedent for implementing things that goes against parliamentary support. It allows an executive action without the checks and balances of Parliament. It is an outrage...
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
I simply find it hard to believe otherwise sensible people are serious when they claim they want the monarch to refuse to do what a PM said because they disagreed with it. It’s always framed as a simple question of right and wrong, but we all know that in reality the pressure would be to do so because of disagreement and politics, not some easy moral quandry about good and evil. So many things are called evil by political opponents.
It all looks rather phoney, as does the surprise from those taking it from the other direction of being surprised.
It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
Nonsense, and completely disrespectful to people who truly live under jackboot rule.
The petition says that "Parliament will consider this for debate". Forgive my ignorance, but if Parliament were prorogued could it actually discuss such a petition?
873,326 signatures
8x the number of people who voted for Johnson as PM.
It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
Yeah, the laddish "cheer us all up" image is destroyed in one move.
Although perfectly legal, I believe the Queen made a serious mistake this morning.
She is seen - whether unfairly or not - to be enabling an act of constitutional theft.
Boris has faced Parliament for just ONE day so far, and he has not yet faced a SINGLE vote. His very Premiership rests on the flimsiest of constitutional conventions, and his majority exists only hypothetically.
The correct approach by the Queen would have been to delay somehow, perhaps to seek wider advice from her Privy Councillors.
This is a terrible day for democracy in this country, and indeed for the Union.
I tend to agree though that this is also terrible optics for Brexit. The whole project is now so toxic it is like a political Chernobyl.
I suspect in the medium term, today's decision, though seemingly minor and unavoidable, has destroyed the monarchy.
Still think the outwash of Andrew's friendship with Epstein and where that whole can of worms leads will be far more damaging. Disgust with the elite is going to rise and rise
Disgust with the Establishment is already at very high levels.
This is the thing - as much as I detest what Boris has done, there is action they can still take and I hope they take it rather than simply getting outraged.
A VoNC is not enough - without a replacement PM it gives Boris exactly what he wants.
Heck I think it gives him what he wants even with a replacement PM.
Legislation is what is needed to remove No Deal from Boris's tool kit.
Today we have had interventions of various sorts from the Queen, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Leader of the Opposition, Donald Trump, former PMs, the former Head of the Civil Service, and the (apolitical) national body for political scientists.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
In the government of this country, the monarch is not a check against policies or decisions people disagree with. That’s not the point of the monarchy.
You can criticise the system: I think people forget that the government of this country (and generally in Westminster systems) exercises tremendous power and parliament is very much second fiddle to that (the term “elective dictatorship” has, I think, been applied). But the Queen has acted on the advice of her ministers and that is what she has done, properly and in accordance with the constitution. As I said on a previous thread, she has the ability to warn a PM. Maybe she exercised that. Who knows? Whatever the case if a PM insists the monarch must defer.
There are advantages to such a system as well as disadvantages as we see today. I fundamentally disagree with the prorogation but it was always a weapon in the government’s arsenal.
This is the thing - as much as I detest what Boris has done, there is action they can still take and I hope they take it rather than simply getting outraged.
A VoNC is not enough - without a replacement PM it gives Boris exactly what he wants.
Heck I think it gives him what he wants even with a replacement PM.
Legislation is what is needed to remove No Deal from Boris's tool kit.
I see no reason they cannot find a replacement PM. If this is as important as they claim, agreement can be reached. If it cannot then it is not as important as they claim and they are posturing.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
One could just about imagine this is our parliament, government and courts all failed us. But to talk of HM the Queen being out of order over this matter when both parliament and courts have remedies if they don't like it it hyperbolic nonsense and unfair to the world's most popular lady.
World's most popular lady?
One of her sons spent time with a convicted nonce.
If she doesn't kick him out of the Royal Family then she's condoning that behaviour.
Although perfectly legal, I believe the Queen made a serious mistake this morning.
She is seen - whether unfairly or not - to be enabling an act of constitutional theft.
Boris has faced Parliament for just ONE day so far, and he has not yet faced a SINGLE vote. His very Premiership rests on the flimsiest of constitutional conventions, and his majority exists only hypothetically.
The correct approach by the Queen would have been to delay somehow, perhaps to seek wider advice from her Privy Councillors.
This is a terrible day for democracy in this country, and indeed for the Union.
I tend to agree though that this is also terrible optics for Brexit. The whole project is now so toxic it is like a political Chernobyl.
I suspect in the medium term, today's decision, though seemingly minor and unavoidable, has destroyed the monarchy.
Still think the outwash of Andrew's friendship with Epstein and where that whole can of worms leads will be far more damaging. Disgust with the elite is going to rise and rise
Disgust with the Establishment is already at very high levels.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
In relation to point 3, if a future Corbyn government had a manifesto commitment it was elected on and the Commons blocked it I would have no problem with Corbyn proroguing Parliament to ensure the commitment was implemented even if I disagreed with the policy, just as I believe Boris has the right to prorogue Parliament as a last resort to ensure the winning vote to Leave the EU is implemented.
Democracy must come first and the electorate's verdict implemented even if you disagreed with it, you can try and change course again at a future election or referendum
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
In the government of this country, the monarch is not a check against policies or decisions people disagree with. That’s not the point of the monarchy.
You can criticise the system: I think people forget that the government of this country (and generally in Westminster systems) exercises tremendous power and parliament is very much second fiddle to that (the term “elective dictatorship” has, I think, been applied). But the Queen has acted on the advice of her ministers and that is what she has done, properly and in accordance with the constitution. As I said on a previous thread, she has the ability to warn a PM. Maybe she exercised that. Who knows? Whatever the case if a PM insists the monarch must defer.
There are advantages to such a system as well as disadvantages as we see today. I fundamentally disagree with the prorogation but it was always a weapon in the government’s arsenal.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers, that includes the Queen. If she's as popular as her defenders think then she'll be up for a directly elected head of state, she'll win easily no?
It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
Nonsense, and completely disrespectful to people who truly live under jackboot rule.
Today is the day that Remainers have truly, utterly, spectaculalry lost it.
Do you think the penny has finally dropped? Is that why they've gone Bat-Shit 1?
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
In the government of this country, the monarch is not a check against policies or decisions people disagree with. That’s not the point of the monarchy.
You can criticise the system: I think people forget that the government of this country (and generally in Westminster systems) exercises tremendous power and parliament is very much second fiddle to that (the term “elective dictatorship” has, I think, been applied). But the Queen has acted on the advice of her ministers and that is what she has done, properly and in accordance with the constitution. As I said on a previous thread, she has the ability to warn a PM. Maybe she exercised that. Who knows? Whatever the case if a PM insists the monarch must defer.
There are advantages to such a system as well as disadvantages as we see today. I fundamentally disagree with the prorogation but it was always a weapon in the government’s arsenal.
I don't disagree that she has not done anything wrong. I think it will be used against her as she will be the focal point for the disgruntled in Scotland for instance. We have seen this before in Ireland...
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
One could just about imagine this is our parliament, government and courts all failed us. But to talk of HM the Queen being out of order over this matter when both parliament and courts have remedies if they don't like it it hyperbolic nonsense and unfair to the world's most popular lady.
World's most popular lady?
One of her sons spent time with a convicted nonce.
If she doesn't kick him out of the Royal Family then she's condoning that behaviour.
Shes made it clear she backs him. Randy Andy is untouchable. Or so they believe.
In relation to point 3, if a future Corbyn government had a manifesto commitment it was elected on and the Commons blocked it I would have no problem with Corbyn proroguing Parliament to ensure the commitment was implemented even if I disagreed with the policy, just as I believe Boris has the right to prorogue Parliament as a last resort to ensure the winning vote to Leave the EU is implemented.
Democracy must come first and the electorate's verdict implemented even if you disagreed with it, you can try and change course again at a future election or referendum
The current Government was elected to leave the EU with a deal.
Boris is proroguing Parliament so that we leave without a deal.
1. Because while a Deal vs No Deal referendum would be legitimate, Parliament would amend it to be Deal vs Remain. In so doing they would set aside the votes of 17.4 million people and teach them all that voting has no purpose if they disagree with their “betters”
2. Inertia is the most powerful force in politics. Once it is done it is done and it will go back to being a minority interest
3. Get a grip. It’s 4 f*****g days. After Bercow and others have abused parliamentary procedure
This four days rubbish has to stop. It's simply untrue.
The ways in which it is untrue.
1. The Commons may have voted against the Conference recess - certainly many members had already requested that Parliament be recalled from the summer recess, and clearly want more time to debate Brexit. 2. The Queen's Speech debate conventionally takes up six days of Parliamentary time, that will now not be available for Brexit debates/legislation.
Anyone repeating the four day talking point is being dishonest.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
I simply find it hard to believe otherwise sensible people are serious when they claim they want the monarch to refuse to do what a PM said because they disagreed with it. It’s always framed as a simple question of right and wrong, but we all know that in reality the pressure would be to do so because of disagreement and politics, not some easy moral quandry about good and evil. So many things are called evil by political opponents.
She doesn't have to refuse. She could delay for consultations. She could make it clear in general she disapproves of being used in divisive political manoeuvres. She could invite the Speaker of the House of Commons to Balmoral for a second opinion.
She would have been well advised to do any one of these things.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
One could just about imagine this is our parliament, government and courts all failed us. But to talk of HM the Queen being out of order over this matter when both parliament and courts have remedies if they don't like it it hyperbolic nonsense and unfair to the world's most popular lady.
World's most popular lady?
One of her sons spent time with a convicted nonce.
If she doesn't kick him out of the Royal Family then she's condoning that behaviour.
Richard Tyndall was quite correct earlier. You really are quite mad.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
It will be used to break up the UK, HMQ, has unwittingly lit the blue touch paper. The PM should call an election not faff about with procedure and drag the monarchy into this. HMQ could have said NO and fired him as he obviously does not command a majority in the house if he has to undertake such dubious tactics. This creates a precedent for implementing things that goes against parliamentary support. It allows an executive action without the checks and balances of Parliament. It is an outrage...
These are all things our constitution permits. We might not like it and maybe we will see reform (I hope so, the overuse of statutory instruments etc has already weakened parliament long before this latest kerfuffle).
Today we have had interventions of various sorts from the Queen, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Leader of the Opposition, Donald Trump, former PMs, the former Head of the Civil Service, and the (apolitical) national body for political scientists.
Although perfectly legal, I believe the Queen made a serious mistake this morning.
She is seen - whether unfairly or not - to be enabling an act of constitutional theft.
Boris has faced Parliament for just ONE day so far, and he has not yet faced a SINGLE vote. His very Premiership rests on the flimsiest of constitutional conventions, and his majority exists only hypothetically.
The correct approach by the Queen would have been to delay somehow, perhaps to seek wider advice from her Privy Councillors.
This is a terrible day for democracy in this country, and indeed for the Union.
I tend to agree though that this is also terrible optics for Brexit. The whole project is now so toxic it is like a political Chernobyl.
I suspect in the medium term, today's decision, though seemingly minor and unavoidable, has destroyed the monarchy.
What utter crap, it is the Queen respecting the will of the people who voted to Leave the EU while the MPs threw the people's verdict back in their face.
In any case if Corbyn won a VONC next week the Queen would then given him first try at forming a new government then call a general election if no government could be formed, she is not doing anything a president would not do in the same position while Boris is still PM
In relation to point 3, if a future Corbyn government had a manifesto commitment it was elected on and the Commons blocked it I would have no problem with Corbyn proroguing Parliament to ensure the commitment was implemented even if I disagreed with the policy, just as I believe Boris has the right to prorogue Parliament as a last resort to ensure the winning vote to Leave the EU is implemented.
Democracy must come first and the electorate's verdict implemented even if you disagreed with it, you can try and change course again at a future election or referendum
The current Government was elected to leave the EU with a deal.
Boris is proroguing Parliament so that we leave without a deal.
It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
Nonsense, and completely disrespectful to people who truly live under jackboot rule.
Today is the day that Remainers have truly, utterly, spectaculalry lost it.
Do you think the penny has finally dropped? Is that why they've gone Bat-Shit 1?
There has been an awful lot of screaming at the sky today. Full Henny Penny stuff
I don't even like Corbyn, but things like this make me hope he gets a three figure majority and does all the things that people like you are so scared of.
In relation to point 3, if a future Corbyn government had a manifesto commitment it was elected on and the Commons blocked it I would have no problem with Corbyn proroguing Parliament to ensure the commitment was implemented even if I disagreed with the policy, just as I believe Boris has the right to prorogue Parliament as a last resort to ensure the winning vote to Leave the EU is implemented.
Democracy must come first and the electorate's verdict implemented even if you disagreed with it, you can try and change course again at a future election or referendum
But festival-goers often find themselves too tired and emotional after a weekend partying to take the time and effort to pack up their belongings - and their tent.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
In the government of this country, the monarch is not a check against policies or decisions people disagree with. That’s not the point of the monarchy.
You can criticise the system: I think people forget that the government of this country (and generally in Westminster systems) exercises tremendous power and parliament is very much second fiddle to that (the term “elective dictatorship” has, I think, been applied). But the Queen has acted on the advice of her ministers and that is what she has done, properly and in accordance with the constitution. As I said on a previous thread, she has the ability to warn a PM. Maybe she exercised that. Who knows? Whatever the case if a PM insists the monarch must defer.
There are advantages to such a system as well as disadvantages as we see today. I fundamentally disagree with the prorogation but it was always a weapon in the government’s arsenal.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers, that includes the Queen. If she's as popular as her defenders think then she'll be up for a directly elected head of state, she'll win easily no?
More silliness, since it’s about the system and not her.if it is a good system it’s supported regardless of popularity of the incumbent, and if it is not a good system it is attacked regardless of who is incumbent.
Although perfectly legal, I believe the Queen made a serious mistake this morning.
She is seen - whether unfairly or not - to be enabling an act of constitutional theft.
Boris has faced Parliament for just ONE day so far, and he has not yet faced a SINGLE vote. His very Premiership rests on the flimsiest of constitutional conventions, and his majority exists only hypothetically.
The correct approach by the Queen would have been to delay somehow, perhaps to seek wider advice from her Privy Councillors.
This is a terrible day for democracy in this country, and indeed for the Union.
I tend to agree though that this is also terrible optics for Brexit. The whole project is now so toxic it is like a political Chernobyl.
I suspect in the medium term, today's decision, though seemingly minor and unavoidable, has destroyed the monarchy.
Especially crap too given Wills and Kate and Harry and Meghan and Prince Charles are almost certainly all Remainers, even if the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh have more private sympathy with Brexit
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
One could just about imagine this is our parliament, government and courts all failed us. But to talk of HM the Queen being out of order over this matter when both parliament and courts have remedies if they don't like it it hyperbolic nonsense and unfair to the world's most popular lady.
World's most popular lady?
One of her sons spent time with a convicted nonce.
If she doesn't kick him out of the Royal Family then she's condoning that behaviour.
Richard Tyndall was quite correct earlier. You really are quite mad.
Nice, at least I know Mansfield and Stoke are not in the North.
Although perfectly legal, I believe the Queen made a serious mistake this morning.
She is seen - whether unfairly or not - to be enabling an act of constitutional theft.
Boris has faced Parliament for just ONE day so far, and he has not yet faced a SINGLE vote. His very Premiership rests on the flimsiest of constitutional conventions, and his majority exists only hypothetically.
The correct approach by the Queen would have been to delay somehow, perhaps to seek wider advice from her Privy Councillors.
This is a terrible day for democracy in this country, and indeed for the Union.
I tend to agree though that this is also terrible optics for Brexit. The whole project is now so toxic it is like a political Chernobyl.
I suspect in the medium term, today's decision, though seemingly minor and unavoidable, has destroyed the monarchy.
What utter crap, it is the Queen respecting the will of the people who voted to Leave the EU while the MPs threw the people's verdict back in their face.
In any case if Corbyn won a VONC next week the Queen would then given him first try at forming a new government then call a general election if no government could be formed, she is not doing anything a president would not do in the same position while Boris is still PM
I don't even like Corbyn, but things like this make me hope he gets a three figure majority and does all the things that people like you are so scared of.
Ooh nasty!! I don’t particularly dislike him, just sharing a joke. People like me, huh!!! 😊
In relation to point 3, if a future Corbyn government had a manifesto commitment it was elected on and the Commons blocked it I would have no problem with Corbyn proroguing Parliament to ensure the commitment was implemented even if I disagreed with the policy, just as I believe Boris has the right to prorogue Parliament as a last resort to ensure the winning vote to Leave the EU is implemented.
Democracy must come first and the electorate's verdict implemented even if you disagreed with it, you can try and change course again at a future election or referendum
The current Government was elected to leave the EU with a deal.
Boris is proroguing Parliament so that we leave without a deal.
We do not know if Boris is proroguing to leave without a deal. There is an argument that says that a new deal is more likely if parliament does not pass legislation to take no deal of the table. It has been reported in quality newspapers that the EU will not move whilst no deal can be taken off the table.
It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
Did you say the same sbout Major in 1997? Do you thijk the same sbout Atlee in 1948? Both did the same thing for similarly self serving reasons. Not sure anyone said there was something of the jackboot about them
Boris is stupid and wrong on this but the hyperbole coming from his opponents is farcical.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
In the government of this country, the monarch is not a check against policies or decisions people disagree with. That’s not the point of the monarchy.
You can criticise the system: I think people forget that the government of this country (and generally in Westminster systems) exercises tremendous power and parliament is very much second fiddle to that (the term “elective dictatorship” has, I think, been applied). But the Queen has acted on the advice of her ministers and that is what she has done, properly and in accordance with the constitution. As I said on a previous thread, she has the ability to warn a PM. Maybe she exercised that. Who knows? Whatever the case if a PM insists the monarch must defer.
There are advantages to such a system as well as disadvantages as we see today. I fundamentally disagree with the prorogation but it was always a weapon in the government’s arsenal.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers, that includes the Queen. If she's as popular as her defenders think then she'll be up for a directly elected head of state, she'll win easily no?
More silliness, since it’s about the system and not her.if it is a good system it’s supported regardless of popularity of the incumbent, and if it is not a good system it is attacked regardless of who is incumbent.
It's a terrible system, we all know Prince Charles will keep on screwing things up.
The big story of the day is being missed. It's now apparent that the constitutionalists have got a clear majority in Parliament. They will use it. The only question is how.
It was very embarrassing having to explain this to some foreign colleagues today. They assumed, understandably, that this was some kind of Trumpite government shutdown. I had to tell them it was much much worse.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
The Andrew stuff will be far more damaging to the monarchy
Not really, Andrew is being gradually erased from the picture anyway and I suspect Charles will send him off to be Governor of St Helena for life or something when he becomes King and he will effectively never be seen again
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
One could just about imagine this is our parliament, government and courts all failed us. But to talk of HM the Queen being out of order over this matter when both parliament and courts have remedies if they don't like it it hyperbolic nonsense and unfair to the world's most popular lady.
World's most popular lady?
One of her sons spent time with a convicted nonce.
If she doesn't kick him out of the Royal Family then she's condoning that behaviour.
Richard Tyndall was quite correct earlier. You really are quite mad.
Nice, at least I know Mansfield and Stoke are not in the North.
It was nice compared with some of the vile vulgar stuff you come out with it.
The big story of the day is being missed. It's now apparent that the constitutionalists have got a clear majority in Parliament. They will use it. The only question is how.
I think we are headed for an election. That might have been the plan all along...
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
In the government of this country, the monarch is not a check against policies or decisions people disagree with. That’s not the point of the monarchy.
You can criticise the system: I think people forget that the government of this country (and generally in Westminster systems) exercises tremendous power and parliament is very much second fiddle to that (the term “elective dictatorship” has, I think, been applied). But the Queen has acted on the advice of her ministers and that is what she has done, properly and in accordance with the constitution. As I said on a previous thread, she has the ability to warn a PM. Maybe she exercised that. Who knows? Whatever the case if a PM insists the monarch must defer.
There are advantages to such a system as well as disadvantages as we see today. I fundamentally disagree with the prorogation but it was always a weapon in the government’s arsenal.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers, that includes the Queen. If she's as popular as her defenders think then she'll be up for a directly elected head of state, she'll win easily no?
I have been a republican all my life until recently when I have grown to respect her decades of service to the Country
However, on her passing I will rejoin my republican sentiments
The big story of the day is being missed. It's now apparent that the constitutionalists have got a clear majority in Parliament. They will use it. The only question is how.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
It will be used to break up the UK, HMQ, has unwittingly lit the blue touch paper. The PM should call an election not faff about with procedure and drag the monarchy into this. HMQ could have said NO and fired him as he obviously does not command a majority in the house if he has to undertake such dubious tactics. This creates a precedent for implementing things that goes against parliamentary support. It allows an executive action without the checks and balances of Parliament. It is an outrage...
1. He can't call an election without Labour support. 2. The precedent was already set at least 70 years ago by Atlee.
It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
Did you say the same sbout Major in 1997? Do you thijk the same sbout Atlee in 1948? Both did the same thing for similarly self serving reasons. Not sure anyone said there was something of the jackboot about them
Boris is stupid and wrong on this but the hyperbole coming from his opponents is farcical.
Yup, diehard Remainers wanted a war by voting down the Withdrawal Agreement and No Deal and ignoring the Leave vote in the EU referendum, Boris and Cummings are now prepared to fight it to deliver Brexit come hell or high water on 31st October
The big story of the day is being missed. It's now apparent that the constitutionalists have got a clear majority in Parliament. They will use it. The only question is how.
I highly doubt anything significant will happen.
If the likes of Oliver Letwin are on board, there are at least 30 Conservative MPs and probably closer to 50 who are going to co-operate now.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
The Andrew stuff will be far more damaging to the monarchy
Not really, Andrew is being gradually erased from the picture anyway and I suspect Charles will send him off to be Governor of St Helena for life or something when he becomes King and he will effectively never be seen again
The big story of the day is being missed. It's now apparent that the constitutionalists have got a clear majority in Parliament. They will use it. The only question is how.
That's a big question. They are divided on the how - and thus they will fail.
Johnson has a determined and united group of MPs behind him. Not a majority, but 250-300, perhaps, while those opposed to him are divided on strategy, tactics and leadership, and so will lose.
In relation to point 3, if a future Corbyn government had a manifesto commitment it was elected on and the Commons blocked it I would have no problem with Corbyn proroguing Parliament to ensure the commitment was implemented even if I disagreed with the policy, just as I believe Boris has the right to prorogue Parliament as a last resort to ensure the winning vote to Leave the EU is implemented.
Democracy must come first and the electorate's verdict implemented even if you disagreed with it, you can try and change course again at a future election or referendum
The current Government was elected to leave the EU with a deal.
Boris is proroguing Parliament so that we leave without a deal.
No, it was elected to leave the EU full stop, page 7 of the Conservative Manifesto 2017 'We will get on with the job and take Britain out of the European Union.'
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
In the government of this country, the monarch is not a check against policies or decisions people disagree with. That’s not the point of the monarchy.
You can criticise the system: I think people forget that the government of this country (and generally in Westminster systems) exercises tremendous power and parliament is very much second fiddle to that (the term “elective dictatorship” has, I think, been applied). But the Queen has acted on the advice of her ministers and that is what she has done, properly and in accordance with the constitution. As I said on a previous thread, she has the ability to warn a PM. Maybe she exercised that. Who knows? Whatever the case if a PM insists the monarch must defer.
There are advantages to such a system as well as disadvantages as we see today. I fundamentally disagree with the prorogation but it was always a weapon in the government’s arsenal.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers, that includes the Queen. If she's as popular as her defenders think then she'll be up for a directly elected head of state, she'll win easily no?
More silliness, since it’s about the system and not her.if it is a good system it’s supported regardless of popularity of the incumbent, and if it is not a good system it is attacked regardless of who is incumbent.
It's a terrible system, we all know Prince Charles will keep on screwing things up.
It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
Did you say the same sbout Major in 1997? Do you thijk the same sbout Atlee in 1948? Both did the same thing for similarly self serving reasons. Not sure anyone said there was something of the jackboot about them
Boris is stupid and wrong on this but the hyperbole coming from his opponents is farcical.
Yup, diehard Remainers wanted a war by voting down the Withdrawal Agreement and No Deal and ignoring the Leave vote in the EU referendum, Boris and Cummings are now prepared to fight it to deliver Brexit come hell or high water on 31st October
Yes, against the will of the people.
The public do not want no deal and they want Parliament sitting. The polls are clear.
Just because some angry racist Essex people shouted at you doesn’t change that.
But festival-goers often find themselves too tired and emotional after a weekend partying to take the time and effort to pack up their belongings - and their tent.
These f*ckers will be bleating about carbon budgets and climate change next week. Doesn't apply to them if they are 'immersing themselves in their cultural birthright'
The big story of the day is being missed. It's now apparent that the constitutionalists have got a clear majority in Parliament. They will use it. The only question is how.
I highly doubt anything significant will happen.
If the likes of Oliver Letwin are on board, there are at least 30 Conservative MPs and probably closer to 50 who are going to co-operate now.
Doesn’t sound like they will be Conservative candidates at the next election.
The big story of the day is being missed. It's now apparent that the constitutionalists have got a clear majority in Parliament. They will use it. The only question is how.
I highly doubt anything significant will happen.
If the likes of Oliver Letwin are on board, there are at least 30 Conservative MPs and probably closer to 50 who are going to co-operate now.
They need to be in a room right now planning their strategy otherwise they will be out maneuvered. I doubt legislation will be so easily passed as last time.
In relation to point 3, if a future Corbyn government had a manifesto commitment it was elected on and the Commons blocked it I would have no problem with Corbyn proroguing Parliament to ensure the commitment was implemented even if I disagreed with the policy, just as I believe Boris has the right to prorogue Parliament as a last resort to ensure the winning vote to Leave the EU is implemented.
Democracy must come first and the electorate's verdict implemented even if you disagreed with it, you can try and change course again at a future election or referendum
The current Government was elected to leave the EU with a deal.
Boris is proroguing Parliament so that we leave without a deal.
We do not know if Boris is proroguing to leave without a deal. There is an argument that says that a new deal is more likely if parliament does not pass legislation to take no deal of the table. It has been reported in quality newspapers that the EU will not move whilst no deal can be taken off the table.
Back from a tense penalty shootout...Leicester never in doubt...
Proroguing means No Deal. There simply is not the legislative time for anything else.
Incidentally, one of the last times I remember that three PCs used Orders in Council to such effect was the Falklands, when the three PCs were Thatcher, Nott and Tebbit and the Orders authorised the task-force. Can anybody remember another?
The quorum of the Privy Council is HM (or Counsellors of State) +3. Meetings rarely have more than 3, usually the Lord President and the minister whose departmental business is being discuss and one other.
+1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
In the government of this country, the monarch is not a check against policies or decisions people disagree with. That’s not the point of the monarchy.
You can criticise the system: I think people forget that the government of this country (and generally in Westminster systems) exercises tremendous power and parliament is very much second fiddle to that (the term “elective dictatorship” has, I think, been applied). But the Queen has acted on the advice of her ministers and that is what she has done, properly and in accordance with the constitutione case if a PM insists the monarch must defer.
There are advantages to such a system as well as disadvantages as we see today. I fundamentally disagree with the prorogation but it was always a weapon in the government’s arsenal.
We need to take back control from our unelected rulers, that includes the Queen. If she's as popular as her defenders think then she'll be up for a directly elected head of state, she'll win easily no?
More silliness, since it’s about the system and not her.if it is a good system it’s supported regardless of popularity of the incumbent, and if it is not
It's a terrible system, we all know Prince Charles will keep on screwing things up.
https://twitter.com/pkelso/status/1143817764970356736 People are welcome to want to change a terrible system and think Charles et al are personally terrible. But pretending it’s about if HM would be personally popular enough to get the position in an election is avoiding whether it is good or terrible and focusing on the individuals. There are no shortage of arguments against it without going down that weak sauce route.
It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
Did you say the same sbout Major in 1997? Do you thijk the same sbout Atlee in 1948? Both did the same thing for similarly self serving reasons. Not sure anyone said there was something of the jackboot about them
Boris is stupid and wrong on this but the hyperbole coming from his opponents is farcical.
I was merely pointing out the perception rather than the reality. After today Boris’s character seems somehow darker.
In relation to point 3, if a future Corbyn government had a manifesto commitment it was elected on and the Commons blocked it I would have no problem with Corbyn proroguing Parliament to ensure the commitment was implemented even if I disagreed with the policy, just as I believe Boris has the right to prorogue Parliament as a last resort to ensure the winning vote to Leave the EU is implemented.
Democracy must come first and the electorate's verdict implemented even if you disagreed with it, you can try and change course again at a future election or referendum
The current Government was elected to leave the EU with a deal.
Boris is proroguing Parliament so that we leave without a deal.
We do not know if Boris is proroguing to leave without a deal. There is an argument that says that a new deal is more likely if parliament does not pass legislation to take no deal of the table. It has been reported in quality newspapers that the EU will not move whilst no deal can be taken off the table.
Back from a tense penalty shootout...Leicester never in doubt...
Proroguing means No Deal. There simply is not the legislative time for anything else.
If Boris gets a new deal with the EU, gets it approved by Parliament then the EU will grant an extension to get the legislation through.
The one good thing about today is that it should focus the minds of those who wish to stop no deal Brexit. They are going to get one shot at it, and they need to get all their ducks in a row. We will know shortly whether stopping the UK crashing out is possible. If not, everybody has about seven weeks to get ready as it is almost certain to happen now.
No Deal can be stopped on October 31st by VONCing and installing a PM to revoke Article 50. They don’t just have one shot at it.
One of the more irritating things about the whole disreputable action is that they won’t even own it as a tactic. They’re trying to pretend it’s all just routine,
1. The Government clearly sees no need to call a second referendum because it regards it as its duty to implement the result of the first one; it hasn't called a General Election for the same reason; and if Parliament is determined to stop No Deal then it can vote the Government out and install an alternative that will be willing to prevent it. 2. This we can't answer for certain until we know the effects of No Deal. My supposition is that, if No Deal is anything other than an epochal catastrophe, the bulk of the population will then consider Brexit as finished business and be desperate both to move on and not to revisit the whole issue of EU membership ever again. Such an outcome would create a broad consensus, encompassing all the hardcore Leavers and the great mass of thoroughly fed-up public opinion in the middle. Some of the hardcore Remainers might not want to let it drop, but you can never please all of the people all of the time, can you? 3. Notwithstanding the fact that Parliament has had over three years to bend the executive to its will on this matter - and has failed miserably, for the simple reason that Parliament can't make up its mind on any specific course of action - this Prorogation effectively robs the Commons of only a few days in which to generate useless hot air resolving to continue to do nothing, whilst still giving it more than enough time to act decisively against the Government if it reveals a hitherto undetected ruthless streak and opts so to do. The squealing over it is, therefore, vastly overdone. It does not create a useful precedent for a theoretical Corbyn Government to suspend the Commons for a hundred years and rule by decree.
I think that would fit on one side of paper, even in my execrable handwriting.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
The Andrew stuff will be far more damaging to the monarchy
Not really, Andrew is being gradually erased from the picture anyway and I suspect Charles will send him off to be Governor of St Helena for life or something when he becomes King and he will effectively never be seen again
One of the more irritating things about the whole disreputable action is that they won’t even own it as a tactic. They’re trying to pretend it’s all just routine,
Better if they just owned it. It’s insulting to allconcerned, those lied to and those forced to lie to defend it.
It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
Did you say the same sbout Major in 1997? Do you thijk the same sbout Atlee in 1948? Both did the same thing for similarly self serving reasons. Not sure anyone said there was something of the jackboot about them
Boris is stupid and wrong on this but the hyperbole coming from his opponents is farcical.
I was merely pointing out the perception rather than the reality. After today Boris’s character seems somehow darker.
To be honest given his backstory on having people beaten up I have never had any illusions about the darkness of his soul. I was and remain firmly in the 'anyone but Boris' camp. Today's actions just confirm that.
The headlines in the Scottish newspapers are an SNP dream.
Rubbish, even Wings over Scotland today attacked the SNP for blocking the Brexit UK voters voted for, saying how would they feel if Unionists blocked a 52% to 48% Leave the UK vote?
But festival-goers often find themselves too tired and emotional after a weekend partying to take the time and effort to pack up their belongings - and their tent.
These f*ckers will be bleating about carbon budgets and climate change next week. Doesn't apply to them if they are 'immersing themselves in their cultural birthright'
But festival-goers often find themselves too tired and emotional after a weekend partying to take the time and effort to pack up their belongings - and their tent.
These f*ckers will be bleating about carbon budgets and climate change next week. Doesn't apply to them if they are 'immersing themselves in their cultural birthright'
Leeds and Reading get a more working class crowd than more liberal festivals like Latitude. Hate the mess myself, but these are not an environmentally conscious crowds.
It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
Did you say the same sbout Major in 1997? Do you thijk the same sbout Atlee in 1948? Both did the same thing for similarly self serving reasons. Not sure anyone said there was something of the jackboot about them
Boris is stupid and wrong on this but the hyperbole coming from his opponents is farcical.
Yup, diehard Remainers wanted a war by voting down the Withdrawal Agreement and No Deal and ignoring the Leave vote in the EU referendum, Boris and Cummings are now prepared to fight it to deliver Brexit come hell or high water on 31st October
Yes, against the will of the people.
The public do not want no deal and they want Parliament sitting. The polls are clear.
Just because some angry racist Essex people shouted at you doesn’t change that.
The people want Brexit, they voted for it, you wanted a war by voting down the Withdrawal Agreement, a war you have now got.
The one good thing about today is that it should focus the minds of those who wish to stop no deal Brexit. They are going to get one shot at it, and they need to get all their ducks in a row. We will know shortly whether stopping the UK crashing out is possible. If not, everybody has about seven weeks to get ready as it is almost certain to happen now.
No Deal can be stopped on October 31st by VONCing and installing a PM to revoke Article 50. They don’t just have one shot at it.
I'm sorry, but I don't think that's realistic. You can't do these things at the last minute.
But festival-goers often find themselves too tired and emotional after a weekend partying to take the time and effort to pack up their belongings - and their tent.
These f*ckers will be bleating about carbon budgets and climate change next week. Doesn't apply to them if they are 'immersing themselves in their cultural birthright'
But festival-goers often find themselves too tired and emotional after a weekend partying to take the time and effort to pack up their belongings - and their tent.
These f*ckers will be bleating about carbon budgets and climate change next week. Doesn't apply to them if they are 'immersing themselves in their cultural birthright'
Leeds and Reading get a more working class crowd than more liberal festivals like Latitude. Hate the mess myself, but these are not an environmentally conscious crowds.
The crowd were all very excited a few days ago when billie eilish played a Greta speech.
Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.
The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
The Andrew stuff will be far more damaging to the monarchy
Not really, Andrew is being gradually erased from the picture anyway and I suspect Charles will send him off to be Governor of St Helena for life or something when he becomes King and he will effectively never be seen again
MONARCHISM = SOCIALISM!
Utter crap, monarchy is the essence of British conservatism. The Tory Party was monarchist well before it backed free trade or joining the EU.
Government control of most of the economy is socialism
Comments
It all looks rather phoney, as does the surprise from those taking it from the other direction of being surprised.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/08/28/the-most-dishonest-demo-ive-ever-seen/
Heck I think it gives him what he wants even with a replacement PM.
Legislation is what is needed to remove No Deal from Boris's tool kit.
https://twitter.com/odysseanproject/status/1166805256963088384?s=21
Also, he’s wrong.
Today we have had interventions of various sorts from the Queen, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Leader of the Opposition, Donald Trump, former PMs, the former Head of the Civil Service, and the (apolitical) national body for political scientists.
This is indeed a constitutional crisis.
You can criticise the system: I think people forget that the government of this country (and generally in Westminster systems) exercises tremendous power and parliament is very much second fiddle to that (the term “elective dictatorship” has, I think, been applied). But the Queen has acted on the advice of her ministers and that is what she has done, properly and in accordance with the constitution. As I said on a previous thread, she has the ability to warn a PM. Maybe she exercised that. Who knows? Whatever the case if a PM insists the monarch must defer.
There are advantages to such a system as well as disadvantages as we see today. I fundamentally disagree with the prorogation but it was always a weapon in the government’s arsenal.
One of her sons spent time with a convicted nonce.
If she doesn't kick him out of the Royal Family then she's condoning that behaviour.
Democracy must come first and the electorate's verdict implemented even if you disagreed with it, you can try and change course again at a future election or referendum
Do you think the penny has finally dropped? Is that why they've gone Bat-Shit 1?
Boris is proroguing Parliament so that we leave without a deal.
1. The Commons may have voted against the Conference recess - certainly many members had already requested that Parliament be recalled from the summer recess, and clearly want more time to debate Brexit.
2. The Queen's Speech debate conventionally takes up six days of Parliamentary time, that will now not be available for Brexit debates/legislation.
Anyone repeating the four day talking point is being dishonest.
She would have been well advised to do any one of these things.
In any case if Corbyn won a VONC next week the Queen would then given him first try at forming a new government then call a general election if no government could be formed, she is not doing anything a president would not do in the same position while Boris is still PM
https://twitter.com/martinboon/status/1166816088874729475
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49494957
Too emotional....to pack a tent up?
Boris is stupid and wrong on this but the hyperbole coming from his opponents is farcical.
https://twitter.com/pkelso/status/1143817764970356736
However, on her passing I will rejoin my republican sentiments
2. The precedent was already set at least 70 years ago by Atlee.
You're the one throwing mental health issues as insults.
Johnson has a determined and united group of MPs behind him. Not a majority, but 250-300, perhaps, while those opposed to him are divided on strategy, tactics and leadership, and so will lose.
Wont somebody save me from this terrible coup?"
https://www.conservatives.com/manifesto
Mind you long term this could all go completely wrong for him.
https://twitter.com/andreajenkyns/status/1166792547827687426
The public do not want no deal and they want Parliament sitting. The polls are clear.
Just because some angry racist Essex people shouted at you doesn’t change that.
Getting abuse from Tyndalls is the lot of my family.
Proroguing means No Deal. There simply is not the legislative time for anything else.
https://twitter.com/pkelso/status/1143817764970356736
People are welcome to want to change a terrible system and think Charles et al are personally terrible. But pretending it’s about if HM would be personally popular enough to get the position in an election is avoiding whether it is good or terrible and focusing on the individuals. There are no shortage of arguments against it without going down that weak sauce route.
https://twitter.com/AppleNews/status/1166737733454389249
One of the more irritating things about the whole disreputable action is that they won’t even own it as a tactic.
They’re trying to pretend it’s all just routine,
1. The Government clearly sees no need to call a second referendum because it regards it as its duty to implement the result of the first one; it hasn't called a General Election for the same reason; and if Parliament is determined to stop No Deal then it can vote the Government out and install an alternative that will be willing to prevent it.
2. This we can't answer for certain until we know the effects of No Deal. My supposition is that, if No Deal is anything other than an epochal catastrophe, the bulk of the population will then consider Brexit as finished business and be desperate both to move on and not to revisit the whole issue of EU membership ever again. Such an outcome would create a broad consensus, encompassing all the hardcore Leavers and the great mass of thoroughly fed-up public opinion in the middle. Some of the hardcore Remainers might not want to let it drop, but you can never please all of the people all of the time, can you?
3. Notwithstanding the fact that Parliament has had over three years to bend the executive to its will on this matter - and has failed miserably, for the simple reason that Parliament can't make up its mind on any specific course of action - this Prorogation effectively robs the Commons of only a few days in which to generate useless hot air resolving to continue to do nothing, whilst still giving it more than enough time to act decisively against the Government if it reveals a hitherto undetected ruthless streak and opts so to do. The squealing over it is, therefore, vastly overdone. It does not create a useful precedent for a theoretical Corbyn Government to suspend the Commons for a hundred years and rule by decree.
I think that would fit on one side of paper, even in my execrable handwriting.
Government control of most of the economy is socialism