38% of Scots voted to Leave the EU, more even the 28% who voted Tory in 2017. Not one poll has the SNP polling over 50%, the biggest gainers since 2017 in Scotland have been the LDs and the Brexit Party NOT the SNP
An hour ago you told me that it was untrue that the front pages in Scotland a dream for the SNP. I await your apology expectantly. Or have you now given up on any kind of pretence that the truth matters?
They aren't, as I said the Daily Record is a pro Labour, anti Tory paper and prefers the SNP to the Tories and all the Scottish only papers are pro Remain despite 38% of Scots voting Leave
In what way are these headlines not a dream for the SNP? They are a direct assault on the idea of the union, illustrated by the poster child of unionism.
They are a direct assault on the union by diehard Remainers who dream of breaking up the Union as punishment for the Leave vote, what is new?
Yet still the SNP is polling below the 50% it got in 2015 BEFORE the Brexit vote
Boris is basing all this on polling that shows he will win more seats than he will lose if he calls an election quickly.
Yes, and when the campaign comes people will remember Boris tried to use these arcane laws to "stab democracy in the back" or something like that. I think he would still win a majority but maybe 10-15, nothing like the 80-120 he would need to ram no deal through in a permanent sense. This makes me question whether I'd go and vote for Boris.
We've arguably been in a critical period for years, during which Parliament has achieved nothing. And if it gets its way it will just keep kicking the can until 2022 whilst it continues to achieve nothing.
Meanwhile, the outcome of the 2016 referendum, which the vast bulk of Parliament voted to hold, continues to remain unimplemented. Somehow we are meant to regard MPs having had some utterly useless hot air generation time taken off them as a major constitutional outrage, whereas a total disregard for an exercise in mass democracy that most of them appear to wish to set aside is, presumably, all fair and above board?
Parliament doesn't need more time. It has had enough time. It needs to make its collective mind up as to whether to let this Government do what it plans or to throw it out. How many more months or years are we meant to wait whilst it dithers?
It's called democracy. You don't get to call time on it just because you're impatient to throw yourself into your death cult antics.
Oh for God's sake, it's not as if Parliament is being deprived of agency here. The Government has decided that it is determined to get out of the EU on October 31st. If Parliament disagrees then it can vote out the Government and install one that will reverse the policy. Whatever else the events of the past day have done, they haven't closed this route. It is available both before and after the period of Prorogation.
Parliament has the weapons at its disposal. It's up to MPs whether or not they choose to use them.
So you think it's acceptable that an unelected Prime Minister who has yet to face a vote leading a government with no majority pursuing a policy that has never been put to the electorate should seek to impose that policy by suspending Parliament?
Surely the aim is to get Labour to table a VoNC before the prorogue begins and for the government to lose and have an election forced upon them?
Personally I think people won't forget this and while Boris will win a majority, it will be wafer thin, little better than today.
I think that's absolutely right. And there's a small - but real - chance we end up in a worse state than currently.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Agreed. All a reactive strategy does is run the clock down.
Clearly the opposition is not united; there are many things which rightly divide them. But they have common ground on this issue, and they need to use that to seize the initiative.
Would Johnson consider repealing the fixed term parliament act? I assume you just need a simple majority to do that.
A simple majority in the Commons, but also a majority in the Lords. If they think he is doing it for game-playing reasons they would presumably block repeal in the Lords.
Just as a note, I'm not convinced this is the best idea. I think there are better ways of goading the opposition into calling a VoNC, which is surely the ultimate aim here.
You are right. However, that clearly signalled goal appears to have been spotted pretty sharpish. The best tactic would be let the PM dangle and repeatedly ask him how his re-negotiation is proceeding.
It just makes the party look shifty. I'm firmly of the belief that MPs are guilty of a serious dereliction of duty for the past couple of years. Too busy navel gazing not wanting to take the blame for voting through the deal hoping that A. N. Other MP will. However, this kind of manoeuvring is wrong and wil be seen as scheming by the voters.
They've been a disaster the last year, that's for sure. But before that, Mrs May refused to even discuss what she was up to.
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
We've arguably been in a critical period for years, during which Parliament has achieved nothing. And if it gets its way it will just keep kicking the can until 2022 whilst it continues to achieve nothing.
Meanwhile, the outcome of the 2016 referendum, which the vast bulk of Parliament voted to hold, continues to remain unimplemented. Somehow we are meant to regard MPs having had some utterly useless hot air generation time taken off them as a major constitutional outrage, whereas a total disregard for an exercise in mass democracy that most of them appear to wish to set aside is, presumably, all fair and above board?
Parliament doesn't need more time. It has had enough time. It needs to make its collective mind up as to whether to let this Government do what it plans or to throw it out. How many more months or years are we meant to wait whilst it dithers?
It's called democracy. You don't get to call time on it just because you're impatient to throw yourself into your death cult antics.
Oh for God's sake, it's not as if Parliament is being deprived of agency here. The Government has decided that it is determined to get out of the EU on October 31st. If Parliament disagrees then it can vote out the Government and install one that will reverse the policy. Whatever else the events of the past day have done, they haven't closed this route. It is available both before and after the period of Prorogation.
Parliament has the weapons at its disposal. It's up to MPs whether or not they choose to use them.
So you think it's acceptable that an unelected Prime Minister who has yet to face a vote leading a government with no majority pursuing a policy that has never been put to the electorate should seek to impose that policy by suspending Parliament?
Surely the aim is to get Labour to table a VoNC before the prorogue begins and for the government to lose and have an election forced upon them?
Personally I think people won't forget this and while Boris will win a majority, it will be wafer thin, little better than today.
It's a 30% strategy, not even a 50% one. Johnson has to hope he can squeeze the Brexit Party enough while hanging onto enough of the never-mind-what-are-like-i-have-always-voted-Tory crowd and at the same time Labour and the Lib Dems exactly split the opposition.
Tough needle to thread. Today's machinations has surely made Labour and LD tactical voting more likely? Hold your nose and oppose? Hey, that could be a slogan!
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
38% of Scots voted to Leave the EU, more even the 28% who voted Tory in 2017. Not one poll has the SNP polling over 50%, the biggest gainers since 2017 in Scotland have been the LDs and the Brexit Party NOT the SNP
An hour ago you told me that it was untrue that the front pages in Scotland a dream for the SNP. I await your apology expectantly. Or have you now given up on any kind of pretence that the truth matters?
They aren't, as I said the Daily Record is a pro Labour, anti Tory paper and prefers the SNP to the Tories and all the Scottish only papers are pro Remain despite 38% of Scots voting Leave
In what way are these headlines not a dream for the SNP? They are a direct assault on the idea of the union, illustrated by the poster child of unionism.
They are a direct assault on the union by diehard Remainers who dream of breaking up the Union as punishment for the Leave vote, what is new?
Yet still the SNP is polling below the 50% it got in 2015 BEFORE the Brexit vote
Can you concentrate on the question that you were asked, since you accused me of an untruth based on it? Or alternatively, apologise for your mistake.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
We've arguably been in a critical period for years, during which Parliament has achieved nothing. And if it gets its way it will just keep kicking the can until 2022 whilst it continues to achieve nothing.
Meanwhile, the outcome of the 2016 referendum, which the vast bulk of Parliament voted to hold, continues to remain unimplemented. Somehow we are meant to regard MPs having had some utterly useless hot air generation time taken off them as a major constitutional outrage, whereas a total disregard for an exercise in mass democracy that most of them appear to wish to set aside is, presumably, all fair and above board?
Parliament doesn't need more time. It has had enough time. It needs to make its collective mind up as to whether to let this Government do what it plans or to throw it out. How many more months or years are we meant to wait whilst it dithers?
It's called democracy. You don't get to call time on it just because you're impatient to throw yourself into your death cult antics.
Oh for God's sake, it's not as if Parliament is being deprived of agency here. The Government has decided that it is determined to get out of the EU on October 31st. If Parliament disagrees then it can vote out the Government and install one that will reverse the policy. Whatever else the events of the past day have done, they haven't closed this route. It is available both before and after the period of Prorogation.
Parliament has the weapons at its disposal. It's up to MPs whether or not they choose to use them.
So you think it's acceptable that an unelected Prime Minister who has yet to face a vote leading a government with no majority pursuing a policy that has never been put to the electorate should seek to impose that policy by suspending Parliament?
Surely the aim is to get Labour to table a VoNC before the prorogue begins and for the government to lose and have an election forced upon them?
Personally I think people won't forget this and while Boris will win a majority, it will be wafer thin, little better than today.
It's a 30% strategy, not even a 50% one. Johnson has to hope he can squeeze the Brexit Party enough while hanging onto enough of the never-mind-what-are-like-i-have-always-voted-Tory crowd and at the same time Labour and the Lib Dems exactly split the opposition.
Tough needle to thread. Today's machinations has surely made Labour and LD tactical voting more likely? Hold your nose and oppose? Hey, that could be a slogan!
In reality they would need to go in on a coupon, but Jez will never do that.
Just as a note, I'm not convinced this is the best idea. I think there are better ways of goading the opposition into calling a VoNC, which is surely the ultimate aim here.
You are right. However, that clearly signalled goal appears to have been spotted pretty sharpish. The best tactic would be let the PM dangle and repeatedly ask him how his re-negotiation is proceeding.
It just makes the party look shifty. I'm firmly of the belief that MPs are guilty of a serious dereliction of duty for the past couple of years. Too busy navel gazing not wanting to take the blame for voting through the deal hoping that A. N. Other MP will. However, this kind of manoeuvring is wrong and wil be seen as scheming by the voters.
They've been a disaster the last year, that's for sure. But before that, Mrs May refused to even discuss what she was up to.
Well now we know why, it turns out she wasn't up to a lot.
Would Johnson consider repealing the fixed term parliament act? I assume you just need a simple majority to do that.
A simple majority in the Commons, but also a majority in the Lords. If they think he is doing it for game-playing reasons they would presumably block repeal in the Lords.
I’m not sure you could just repeal the FTPA anyway. Putting back together what was there before is rather tricky when it was never codified to begin with. I’d have to think about t, but I suspect you’d be left in a position of having to replace the Act if you didn’t want an awkward situation to arise where the monarch genuinely had to take a view (the last time any of this wasn’t cloaked in years of tradition and precedents that was no a shocking thought).
We've arguably been in a critical period for years, during which Parliament has achieved nothing. And if it gets its way it will just keep kicking the can until 2022 whilst it continues to achieve nothing.
Meanwhile, the outcome of the 2016 referendum, which the vast bulk of Parliament voted to hold, continues to remain unimplemented. Somehow we are meant to regard MPs having had some utterly useless hot air generation time taken off them as a major constitutional outrage, whereas a total disregard for an exercise in mass democracy that most of them appear to wish to set aside is, presumably, all fair and above board?
Parliament doesn't need more time. It has had enough time. It needs to make its collective mind up as to whether to let this Government do what it plans or to throw it out. How many more months or years are we meant to wait whilst it dithers?
It's called democracy. You don't get to call time on it just because you're impatient to throw yourself into your death cult antics.
Oh for God's sake, it's not as if Parliament is being deprived of agency here. The Government has decided that it is determined to get out of the EU on October 31st. If Parliament disagrees then it can vote out the Government and install one that will reverse the policy. Whatever else the events of the past day have done, they haven't closed this route. It is available both before and after the period of Prorogation.
Parliament has the weapons at its disposal. It's up to MPs whether or not they choose to use them.
So you think it's by suspending Parliament?
Surely the aim is to get Labour to table a VoNC before the prorogue begins and for the government to lose and have an election forced upon them?
Personally I think people won't forget this and while Boris will win a majority, it will be wafer thin, little better than today.
It's a 30% strategy, not even a 50% one. Johnson has to hope he can squeeze the Brexit Party enough while hanging onto enough of the never-mind-what-are-like-i-have-always-voted-Tory crowd and at the same time Labour and the Lib Dems exactly split the opposition.
Tough needle to thread. Today's machinations has surely made Labour and LD tactical voting more likely? Hold your nose and oppose? Hey, that could be a slogan!
Yep - I’d hazard that come the next election today’s events will inspire a shedload of tactical voting. If the Tories are relying on a nice, uniform split in the anti-No Deal vote they are making a significant error IMO.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
I don't know why my fellow EU supporters in England are gloating about the situation in Scotland. It is disastrous for us. If Scotland leaves, how are we supposed to rejoin with a much more eurosceptic, right wing electorate?
Remainders should call Boris’s bluff and go for the VONC. If a GE is called for after 31st October, Parliament will be closed and it will be impossible for MPs to approve any deal so it will have to be No Deal. I don’t think Boris can actually risk No a deal hapenning in an election campaign.
Boris is basing all this on polling that shows he will win more seats than he will lose if he calls an election quickly.
Yes, and when the campaign comes people will remember Boris tried to use these arcane laws to "stab democracy in the back" or something like that. I think he would still win a majority but maybe 10-15, nothing like the 80-120 he would need to ram no deal through in a permanent sense. This makes me question whether I'd go and vote for Boris.
I think a bit higher if he achieves the objective of a knife fight between Labour and Lib Dem over who “enabled” what. It doesn’t bode well for a peaceful or happy country, but it might get him a working majority.
38% of Scots voted to Leave the EU, more even the 28% who voted Tory in 2017. Not one poll has the SNP polling over 50%, the biggest gainers since 2017 in Scotland have been the LDs and the Brexit Party NOT the SNP
An hour ago you told me that it was untrue that the front pages in Scotland a dream for the SNP. I await your apology expectantly. Or have you now given up on any kind of pretence that the truth matters?
They aren't, as I said the Daily Record is a pro Labour, anti Tory paper and prefers the SNP to the Tories and all the Scottish only papers are pro Remain despite 38% of Scots voting Leave
In what way are these headlines not a dream for the SNP? They are a direct assault on the idea of the union, illustrated by the poster child of unionism.
They are a direct assault on the union by diehard Remainers who dream of breaking up the Union as punishment for the Leave vote, what is new?
Yet still the SNP is polling below the 50% it got in 2015 BEFORE the Brexit vote
Can you concentrate on the question that you were asked, since you accused me of an untruth based on it? Or alternatively, apologise for your mistake.
I will neither apologise nor admit a mistake as none was made.
Diehard Remainers and anti Tories, jncluding in much of the Scottish press, are determined to destroy the Union in order to use it as a weapon to try and destroy Brexit, despite the fact most Leavers would still back Brexit regardless and the SNP was polling higher in 2015 than it is now BEFORE Brexit
Would Johnson consider repealing the fixed term parliament act? I assume you just need a simple majority to do that.
A simple majority in the Commons, but also a majority in the Lords. If they think he is doing it for game-playing reasons they would presumably block repeal in the Lords.
I’m not sure you could just repeal the FTPA anyway. Putting back together what was there before is rather tricky when it was never codified to begin with. I’d have to think about t, but I suspect you’d be left in a position of having to replace the Act if you didn’t want an awkward situation to arise where the monarch genuinely had to take a view (the last time any of this wasn’t cloaked in years of tradition and precedents that was no a shocking thought).
Quite. I don’t think that simply repealing the FTPA will result in the status quo ante simply springing back. I think sections 15 and 16 of the Interpretation Act 1978 have some bearing here.
38% of Scots voted to Leave the EU, more even the 28% who voted Tory in 2017. Not one poll has the SNP polling over 50%, the biggest gainers since 2017 in Scotland have been the LDs and the Brexit Party NOT the SNP
An hour ago you told me that it was untrue that the front pages in Scotland a dream for the SNP. I await your apology expectantly. Or have you now given up on any kind of pretence that the truth matters?
They aren't, as I said the Daily Record is a pro Labour, anti Tory paper and prefers the SNP to the Tories and all the Scottish only papers are pro Remain despite 38% of Scots voting Leave
In what way are these headlines not a dream for the SNP? They are a direct assault on the idea of the union, illustrated by the poster child of unionism.
They are a direct assault on the union by diehard Remainers who dream of breaking up the Union as punishment for the Leave vote, what is new?
Yet still the SNP is polling below the 50% it got in 2015 BEFORE the Brexit vote
Can you concentrate on the question that you were asked, since you accused me of an untruth based on it? Or alternatively, apologise for your mistake.
I will neither apologise nor admit a mistake as none was made.
Diehard Remainers and anti Tories, jncluding in much of the Scottish press, are determined to destroy the Union in order to use it as a weapon to try and destroy Brexit, despite the fact most Leavers would still back Brexit regardless and the SNP was polling higher in 2015 than it is now BEFORE Brexit
You don’t think the main political goal of nationalists is independence for its own sake and not as a weapon against Brexit or the Tories?
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Cummings only does blitzkrieg.
Is there anyone on the Remain side as focused and ruthless as he?
Iain Dale points out that nobody from Government has come onto Newsnight or any show today.
Total contempt for the public.
Also a bit incompetent I would have thought, not to have someone to repeat the party line?
[Though I suppose maybe it was cunning. In their absence the BBC felt the need to put their point of view from the presenter's mouth, in the interests of balance.]
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Cummings only does blitzkrieg.
Is there anyone on the Remain side as focused and ruthless as he?
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Blitzkrieg is a lighting attack with overwhelming force. I think it is pretty laughable your jingoistic claptrap. The Tories are in no shape for a GE and the armies you move on maps are ghosts. Besides Hitler thought he was a strategic genius and look how that ended for him....
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
38% of Scots voted to Leave the EU, more even the 28% who voted Tory in 2017. Not one poll has the SNP polling over 50%, the biggest gainers since 2017 in Scotland have been the LDs and the Brexit Party NOT the SNP
An hour ago you told me that it was untrue that the front pages in Scotland a dream for the SNP. I await your apology expectantly. Or have you now given up on any kind of pretence that the truth matters?
They aren't, as I said the Daily Record is a pro Labour, anti Tory paper and prefers the SNP to the Tories and all the Scottish only papers are pro Remain despite 38% of Scots voting Leave
In what way are these headlines not a dream for the SNP? They are a direct assault on the idea of the union, illustrated by the poster child of unionism.
They are a direct assault on the union by diehard Remainers who dream of breaking up the Union as punishment for the Leave vote, what is new?
Yet still the SNP is polling below the 50% it got in 2015 BEFORE the Brexit vote
Can you concentrate on the question that you were asked, since you accused me of an untruth based on it? Or alternatively, apologise for your mistake.
I will neither apologise nor admit a mistake as none was made.
Diehard Remainers and anti Tories, jncluding in much of the Scottish press, are determined to destroy the Union in order to use it as a weapon to try and destroy Brexit, despite the fact most Leavers would still back Brexit regardless and the SNP was polling higher in 2015 than it is now BEFORE Brexit
Is the second half of your first sentence strictly necessary?
38% of Scots voted to Leave the EU, more even the 28% who voted Tory in 2017. Not one poll has the SNP polling over 50%, the biggest gainers since 2017 in Scotland have been the LDs and the Brexit Party NOT the SNP
An hour ago you told me that it was untrue that the front pages in Scotland a dream for the SNP. I await your apology expectantly. Or have you now given up on any kind of pretence that the truth matters?
They aren't, as I said the Daily Record is a pro Labour, anti Tory paper and prefers the SNP to the Tories and all the Scottish only papers are pro Remain despite 38% of Scots voting Leave
In what way are these headlines not a dream for the SNP? They are a direct assault on the idea of the union, illustrated by the poster child of unionism.
They are a direct assault on the union by diehard Remainers who dream of breaking up the Union as punishment for the Leave vote, what is new?
Yet still the SNP is polling below the 50% it got in 2015 BEFORE the Brexit vote
Can you concentrate on the question that you were asked, since you accused me of an untruth based on it? Or alternatively, apologise for your mistake.
I will neither apologise nor admit a mistake as none was made.
Diehard Remainers and anti Tories, jncluding in much of the Scottish press, are determined to destroy the Union in order to use it as a weapon to try and destroy Brexit, despite the fact most Leavers would still back Brexit regardless and the SNP was polling higher in 2015 than it is now BEFORE Brexit
You don’t think the main political goal of nationalists is independence for its own sake and not as a weapon against Brexit or the Tories?
Of course but for diehard Remainers like you it has always been a weapon against Brexit.
In 2014 when we were still in the EU and before the Leave vote could you care less about Scottish independence and the independence referendum? No. Now you are more of a Nat than William Wallace!
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Cummings only does blitzkrieg.
Is there anyone on the Remain side as focused and ruthless as he?
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Cummings only does blitzkrieg.
Is there anyone on the Remain side as focused and ruthless as he?
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Blitzkrieg is a lighting attack with overwhelming force. I think it is pretty laughable your jingoistic claptrap. The Tories are in no shape for a GE and the armies you move on maps are ghosts. Besides Hitler thought he was a strategic genius and look how that ended for him....
Hitler conquered most of Europe through blitzkrieg and was only defeated after a 6 year War and with the combined might of the USA and USSR and British Empire, he may have been evil but he was a military and strategic genius for his first few years
He’s taken his eye off the ball and let his enemy take an enormous amount of territory, which he’ll only be able to recover later at enormous cost if he’s very lucky?
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
I think you can make a case that they voted against the deal as a means to try and force a deal that involved us remaining in the single market. Although the withdrawal agreement itself did not deal with the future relationship, the way in which MPs had been shut out of the negotiations for it would encourage them to use whatever leverage they had in ensuring that they took more control of the second stage of negotiations - by voting against the withdrawal agreement until they had single market membership in the political declaration.
Certainly some MPs may have voted against as being consistently opposed to Brexit in any form, and have said as much, but I don't think all did so, and many have claimed otherwise. Without evidence to the contrary it seems a bit off to contradict their public statements.
Perhaps MPs who wanted Brexit should have voted for it?
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
They were part of the opposition. They opposed.
They played party politics with a non partisan referendum result. It’s why they shouldn’t have been let near a vote on the agreement. Now it’s 50/50 whether their gamble with the public’s decision has led to what they all considered the worst possible end.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Blitzkrieg is a lighting attack with overwhelming force. I think it is pretty laughable your jingoistic claptrap. The Tories are in no shape for a GE and the armies you move on maps are ghosts. Besides Hitler thought he was a strategic genius and look how that ended for him....
Hitler conquered most of Europe and was only defeated after a 6 year War and with the combined might of the USA and USSR and British Empire, he may have been evil but he was a military and strategic genius for his first few years
No he wasn’t. He beat a demoralised and badly led France and walked over a number of smaller nations in no position to resist a large industrialised nation like Germany - but that didn’t take a genius to do. Military and strategic geniuses don’t willingly declare two front wars on superpowers.
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Cummings only does blitzkrieg.
Is there anyone on the Remain side as focused and ruthless as he?
Worth noting that Blitzkrieg was ultimately a failure that destroyed the wehrmacht.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Blitzkrieg is a lighting attack with overwhelming force. I think it is pretty laughable your jingoistic claptrap. The Tories are in no shape for a GE and the armies you move on maps are ghosts. Besides Hitler thought he was a strategic genius and look how that ended for him....
Not sure that blitzkrieg as practiced by the Germans was overwhelming force, but more overwhelmingly focused force moved with speed to unfoot the enemy. That may indeed be Cummings intent here. [Indeed, in the Battle of France, Germany did not have overwhelming force - basically parity in men, a big disadvantage in artillery and tanks, and a big advantage in the air.]
But, as you mention, it did not work out so well vis-a-vis a war as opposed to a battle for the Germans, nor did its American baby 'shock-and-awe' work so well in the long term.
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Blitzkrieg is a lighting attack with overwhelming force. I think it is pretty laughable your jingoistic claptrap. The Tories are in no shape for a GE and the armies you move on maps are ghosts. Besides Hitler thought he was a strategic genius and look how that ended for him....
Hitler conquered most of Europe and was only defeated after a 6 year War and with the combined might of the USA and USSR and British Empire, he may have been evil but he was a military and strategic genius for his first few years
No he wasn’t. He beat a demoralised and badly led France and walked over a number of smaller nations in no position to resist a large industrialised nation like Germany - but that didn’t take a genius to do. Military and strategic geniuses don’t willingly declare two front wars on superpowers.
Maybe not but he also managed to reach Moscow by November 1941, his biggest mistake may have been to invade too late in the year
I was very disappointed with Jo Swinson's interview on Newsnight. To her, a No Deal Brexit is less harmful [ even though it is permanent ] than a Corbyn led temporary government [ remember he also will not have an inherent majority ]. So it will be a No Deal Brexit !
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
I don’t really care what spinners and headline writers make of it, I’m more interested in what individuals did. And they did as I posted.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Cummings only does blitzkrieg.
Is there anyone on the Remain side as focused and ruthless as he?
Worth noting that Blitzkrieg was ultimately a failure that destroyed the wehrmacht.
Cummings is only interested in destruction. Reconstruction he regards as somebody else's problem.
He orchestrated the success of Vote Leave, but took no part in the business of implementing the policy (quite possibly because he recognised it was unimplementable.)
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
They were part of the opposition. They opposed.
They played party politics with a non partisan referendum result. It’s why they shouldn’t have been let near a vote on the agreement. Now it’s 50/50 whether their gamble with the public’s decision has led to what they all considered the worst possible end.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Cummings only does blitzkrieg.
Is there anyone on the Remain side as focused and ruthless as he?
Worth noting that Blitzkrieg was ultimately a failure that destroyed the wehrmacht.
Blitzkrieg wasn't a failure, it was what conquered most of Europe for the Nazis. The Nazi defeat came on the defensive through invasion by Allied powers not the all out attack of blitzkrieg
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
I don’t really care what spinners and headline writers make of it, I’m more interested in what individuals did. And they did as I posted.
You don't know that. You are claiming some special insight into their private thoughts that you don't have,
38% of Scots voted to Leave the EU, more even the 28% who voted Tory in 2017. Not one poll has the SNP polling over 50%, the biggest gainers since 2017 in Scotland have been the LDs and the Brexit Party NOT the SNP
An hour ago you told me that it was untrue that the front pages in Scotland a dream for the SNP. I await your apology expectantly. Or have you now given up on any kind of pretence that the truth matters?
They aren't, as I said the Daily Record is a pro Labour, anti Tory paper and prefers the SNP to the Tories and all the Scottish only papers are pro Remain despite 38% of Scots voting Leave
In what way are these headlines not a dream for the SNP? They are a direct assault on the idea of the union, illustrated by the poster child of unionism.
They are a direct assault on the union by diehard Remainers who dream of breaking up the Union as punishment for the Leave vote, what is new?
Yet still the SNP is polling below the 50% it got in 2015 BEFORE the Brexit vote
Can you concentrate on the question that you were asked, since you accused me of an untruth based on it? Or alternatively, apologise for your mistake.
I will neither apologise nor admit a mistake as none was made.
Diehard Remainers and anti Tories, jncluding in much of the Scottish press, are determined to destroy the Union in order to use it as a weapon to try and destroy Brexit, despite the fact most Leavers would still back Brexit regardless and the SNP was polling higher in 2015 than it is now BEFORE Brexit
Is the second half of your first sentence strictly necessary?
LOL, Robert. What are you considering the second half of the sentence - from 'as none', or 'nor admit'?
Boris is basing all this on polling that shows he will win more seats than he will lose if he calls an election quickly.
Yes, and when the campaign comes people will remember Boris tried to use these arcane laws to "stab democracy in the back" or something like that. I think he would still win a majority but maybe 10-15, nothing like the 80-120 he would need to ram no deal through in a permanent sense. This makes me question whether I'd go and vote for Boris.
I think a bit higher if he achieves the objective of a knife fight between Labour and Lib Dem over who “enabled” what. It doesn’t bode well for a peaceful or happy country, but it might get him a working majority.
Whereas, the evidence of yesterday's meeting was ...well warm words all round from the opposition parties. Proroging Parliament won't have widened any rift there. Meanwhile, Tories seem to be peeling off as fast as Brexit Party fans clamber on board.
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
I don’t really care what spinners and headline writers make of it, I’m more interested in what individuals did. And they did as I posted.
You don't know that. You are claiming some special insight into their private thoughts that you don't have,
I’m comparing what MPs said in their election campaigns to what they did when elected, it’s not a special insight of mine, just plain facts.
I was very disappointed with Jo Swinson's interview on Newsnight. To her, a No Deal Brexit is less harmful [ even though it is permanent ] than a Corbyn led temporary government [ remember he also will not have an inherent majority ]. So it will be a No Deal Brexit !
Tory Remainers who oppose No Deal Brexit will only vote LD they would never vote for a Corbyn Premiership so tactically sensible from Swinson
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
This is the crux of the issue and why we’re all cross with each other by the way. You look at the paperwork and conclude it will be genuinely terrible. I look at the same paperwork and conclude it’s undesirable but manageable, and few will notice too much.
If we assume neither of us is stupid it would be nice to live in a world where both sides spent a bit more time trying to understand each other and how different conclusions can be reached from the same projections.
But then I’m a dreamer who still prays for common sense to break out and an EFTA compromise to come in. Sadly it’s a bit late for that, given the trenchant positions on the Irish border, and how dug in we all are (see above).
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
They were part of the opposition. They opposed.
They played party politics with a non partisan referendum result. It’s why they shouldn’t have been let near a vote on the agreement. Now it’s 50/50 whether their gamble with the public’s decision has led to what they all considered the worst possible end.
And not all of them were part of the opposition.
Non-partisan? Are you having a giraffe?
No. The result of the referendum ended the Tory PMs career and was a crushing blow to most Labour MPs, wasn’t it?
Well for all the sound and fury the bottom line is that what Boris has done is perfectly constitutional (which is why HMQ could do nothing other than agree to it) and so the legal challenge will go nowhere.
There is no way Parliamement can "legislate" to force the government to stop No Deal if the government doesn't want to. And even if Parliament did its doubful it would pass the Lords in time.
So that really leaves VONC - which no one seems to to want... Probably because there might actually be an election at the end of it and MPs would have to return to their constituences and explain their behaviour since 2017.
So that really leaves Boris holding all the cards.
We will Brexit on 31st October. The only question will be deal or no deal...
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Blitzkrieg is a lighting attack with overwhelming force. I think it is pretty laughable your jingoistic claptrap. The Tories are in no shape for a GE and the armies you move on maps are ghosts. Besides Hitler thought he was a strategic genius and look how that ended for him....
Hitler conquered most of Europe through blitzkrieg and was only defeated after a 6 year War and with the combined might of the USA and USSR and British Empire, he may have been evil but he was a military and strategic genius for his first few years
I appreciate you said the first few years, but how could declaring war on the USA ever have been considered anything close to coming from a strategic genius. In the end he was fighting with non existent armies and the Russian campaign was flawed on so many counts.
38% of Scots voted to Leave the EU, more even the 28% who voted Tory in 2017. Not one poll has the SNP polling over 50%, the biggest gainers since 2017 in Scotland have been the LDs and the Brexit Party NOT the SNP
An hour ago you told me that it was untrue that the front pages in Scotland a dream for the SNP. I await your apology expectantly. Or have you now given up on any kind of pretence that the truth matters?
They aren't, as I said the Daily Record is a pro Labour, anti Tory paper and prefers the SNP to the Tories and all the Scottish only papers are pro Remain despite 38% of Scots voting Leave
In what way are these headlines not a dream for the SNP? They are a direct assault on the idea of the union, illustrated by the poster child of unionism.
They are a direct assault on the union by diehard Remainers who dream of breaking up the Union as punishment for the Leave vote, what is new?
Yet still the SNP is polling below the 50% it got in 2015 BEFORE the Brexit vote
Can you concentrate on the question that you were asked, since you accused me of an untruth based on it? Or alternatively, apologise for your mistake.
I will neither apologise nor admit a mistake as none was made.
Diehard Remainers and anti Tories, jncluding in much of the Scottish press, are determined to destroy the Union in order to use it as a weapon to try and destroy Brexit, despite the fact most Leavers would still back Brexit regardless and the SNP was polling higher in 2015 than it is now BEFORE Brexit
Is the second half of your first sentence strictly necessary?
LOL, Robert. What are you considering the second half of the sentence - from 'as none', or 'nor admit'?
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
I don’t really care what spinners and headline writers make of it, I’m more interested in what individuals did. And they did as I posted.
I am more interested in what happens next. Each to their own.
Well for all the sound and fury the bottom line is that what Boris has done is perfectly constitutional (which is why HMQ could do nothing other than agree to it) and so the legal challenge will go nowhere.
There is no way Parliamement can "legislate" to force the government to stop No Deal if the government doesn't want to. And even if Parliament did its doubful it would pass the Lords in time.
So that really leaves VONC - which no one seems to to want... Probably because there might actually be an election at the end of it and MPs would have to return to their constituences and explain their behaviour since 2017.
So that really leaves Boris holding all the cards.
We will Brexit on 31st October. The only question will be deal or no deal...
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
I don’t really care what spinners and headline writers make of it, I’m more interested in what individuals did. And they did as I posted.
You don't know that. You are claiming some special insight into their private thoughts that you don't have,
I’m comparing what MPs said in their election campaigns to what they did when elected, it’s not a special insight of mine, just plain facts.
You said that they voted against the withdrawal agreement in an attempt to stop Brexit altogether - but many have said (and voted in the indicative votes) that they would support a deal that would lead to a softer Brexit, such as remaining in the single market.
With PB's most vocal fanboi for Johnson and South American strong men in mind, which figure from the Falklands War does BJ most resemble?
Galtieri resorted to bellicose populism in a failing economy, thought he had US backing, that the UK was bluffing over defending the Falklands and lasted just over six months as president.
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
I don’t really care what spinners and headline writers make of it, I’m more interested in what individuals did. And they did as I posted.
I am more interested in what happens next. Each to their own.
The map will be ideal to devote resources in an election.
Genuine question - is anything emerging from the map that we didn’t already know (or at least assume)?
It is more up-to-date and can be compared to the vote in 2016. Who would have thought Bristol West was the No.1 Remain hotspot.
Don’t we have to be a bit careful in over interpreting a mobilised set of people in an area that may not reflect enough actual votes? To give a silly example if there was a large Uni I’m Eastborne I’d expect it to be red on that map, but I’d still expect the overall area to be strongly enough pro-Brexit that it wouldn’t change the price of metaphorical fish.
Genuinely thinking out loud from a “does this help me decide where to risk my cash on bets” perspective.
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
I don’t really care what spinners and headline writers make of it, I’m more interested in what individuals did. And they did as I posted.
You don't know that. You are claiming some special insight into their private thoughts that you don't have,
I’m comparing what MPs said in their election campaigns to what they did when elected, it’s not a special insight of mine, just plain facts.
You said that they voted against the withdrawal agreement in an attempt to stop Brexit altogether - but many have said (and voted in the indicative votes) that they would support a deal that would lead to a softer Brexit, such as remaining in the single market.
So your statement is contrary to the known facts.
“The MPs who formed Change UK” weren’t attempting to stop Brexit altogether?
As for the others, they gambled on their version of Brexit vs No deal, and we are where we are.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Blitzkrieg is a lighting attack with overwhelming force. I think it is pretty laughable your jingoistic claptrap. The Tories are in no shape for a GE and the armies you move on maps are ghosts. Besides Hitler thought he was a strategic genius and look how that ended for him....
Hitler conquered most of Europe through blitzkrieg and was only defeated after a 6 year War and with the combined might of the USA and USSR and British Empire, he may have been evil but he was a military and strategic genius for his first few years
I appreciate you said the first few years, but how could declaring war on the USA ever have been considered anything close to coming from a strategic genius. In the end he was fighting with non existent armies and the Russian campaign was flawed on so many counts.
It was Japan who declared war on the USA when it attacked Pearl Harbour, under the Tripartite Pact of 1940 between Germany, Italy and Japan, Hitler therefore had to declare war on the USA
With PB's most vocal fanboi for Johnson and South American strong men in mind, which figure from the Falklands War does BJ most resemble?
Galtieri resorted to bellicose populism in a failing economy, thought he had US backing, that the UK was bluffing over defending the Falklands and lasted just over six months as president.
Boris is not invading the EU, Boris is liberating the UK!
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
I don’t really care what spinners and headline writers make of it, I’m more interested in what individuals did. And they did as I posted.
You don't know that. You are claiming some special insight into their private thoughts that you don't have,
I’m comparing what MPs said in their election campaigns to what they did when elected, it’s not a special insight of mine, just plain facts.
You said that they voted against the withdrawal agreement in an attempt to stop Brexit altogether - but many have said (and voted in the indicative votes) that they would support a deal that would lead to a softer Brexit, such as remaining in the single market.
So your statement is contrary to the known facts.
“The MPs who formed Change UK” weren’t attempting to stop Brexit altogether?
"..and many others from both sides of the house.."
Sure, you can point to some individuals, as I noted, but you can't sweep them all into the same group.
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really iso deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
They voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
This is the crux of the issue and why we’re all cross with each other by the way. You look at the paperwork and conclude it will be genuinely terrible. I look at the same paperwork and conclude it’s undesirable but manageable, and few will notice too much.
If we assume neither of us is stupid it would be nice to live in a world where both sides spent a bit more time trying to understand each other and how different conclusions can be reached from the same projections.
But then I’m a dreamer who still prays for common sense to break out and an EFTA compromise to come in. Sadly it’s a bit late for that, given the trenchant positions on the Irish border, and how dug in we all are (see above).
Your sentiments are commendable but dangerously naive.
Just take the Irish border, as one example. The men of violence are already tooling up for the anticipated increase in business which is expected to follow on from a hard Brexit. Yes, it's manageable. So was World War Two. My parents and their relatives were evacuated from the East End to Leicester, and they 'managed'.
Wasn't a bundle of fun though, but unlike Brexit, it wasn't avoidable.
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
I don’t really care what spinners and headline writers make of it, I’m more interested in what individuals did. And they did as I posted.
You don't know that. You are claiming some special insight into their private thoughts that you don't have,
I’m comparing what MPs said in their election campaigns to what they did when elected, it’s not a special insight of mine, just plain facts.
You said that they voted against the withdrawal agreement in an attempt to stop Brexit altogether - but many have said (and voted in the indicative votes) that they would support a deal that would lead to a softer Brexit, such as remaining in the single market.
So your statement is contrary to the known facts.
“The MPs who formed Change UK” weren’t attempting to stop Brexit altogether?
"..and many others from both sides of the house.."
Sure, you can point to some individuals, as I noted, but you can't sweep them all into the same group.
The others gambled on their version of Brexit vs No Deal, and we are where we are.
Well for all the sound and fury the bottom line is that what Boris has done is perfectly constitutional (which is why HMQ could do nothing other than agree to it) and so the legal challenge will go nowhere.
There is no way Parliamement can "legislate" to force the government to stop No Deal if the government doesn't want to. And even if Parliament did its doubful it would pass the Lords in time.
So that really leaves VONC - which no one seems to to want... Probably because there might actually be an election at the end of it and MPs would have to return to their constituences and explain their behaviour since 2017.
So that really leaves Boris holding all the cards.
We will Brexit on 31st October. The only question will be deal or no deal...
This sums up what I think too. This could be the thing that finally extinguishes the EU's belief that parliament will bring down Brexit.
So you think it's acceptable that an unelected Prime Minister who has yet to face a vote leading a government with no majority pursuing a policy that has never been put to the electorate should seek to impose that policy by suspending Parliament?
Let's take these points one at a time.
I think we can set aside the customary unelected Prime Minister argument. For better or worse, we do not have a directly elected head of Government in this country. Boris Johnson has been appointed according to the prevailing constitutional norms, and may also be removed by them should the Commons wish to do so when it returns next week. Mr Corbyn has signalled his availability to replace Mr Johnson immediately should the numbers exist for him to win a vote of confidence. That would also neatly resolve the issue of which, if any, possible Government can command a Parliamentary majority.
The fact that Boris Johnson's policy has yet to be voted on in Parliament is also irrelevant, because Parliament will have the opportunity to have its say before there is a chance for the policy to be implemented. Given that the Government is completely committed to withdrawal on October 31st regardless of the terms then, if Parliament wishes to veto this policy, it will have to replace the Government. There is sufficient time left in which to do this.
No Deal has not specifically been put to the electorate, but the general concept of staying in or leaving the EU has. The electorate has already voted to leave the EU. If Parliament can't agree to the Withdrawal Agreement that Theresa May negotiated with the EU, and the EU won't negotiate a new Withdrawal Agreement, then the only logical means available to follow through on the referendum result is No Deal. Again, if a majority of MPs believes that most of their constituents don't want No Deal, and that this is a belief they are happy to represent, then the means exists for them to prevent it by replacing the current Government.
Personally, I do not agree that the decision to prorogue itself was correct, because it was unnecessary: the Government has a lot on its plate getting ready to leave on October 31st, and would arguably have been better prepared to lay out a new legislative programme once Brexit and its immediate aftermath had been dispensed with. Doubtless others will take a different view. The criticism that it conveniently happens to cut down the amount of time left for anti-Brexit shenanigans in Parliament is, frankly, also valid.
The reason why I can't, however, bring myself to have a fit of the vapours over this business is as follows. Firstly, it is also obvious that the majority of MPs want to set aside the referendum result (whether through revocation, a second referendum, or by making a technical exit on terms closer to the EU than Norway, with the full intention of trying to negotiate reaccession in five or ten years' time once the public tires of the yoke.) It's simply that most of them, as with the Government over its justification of the prorogation decision, are too dishonest to say so: as always in this sorry business, neither side comes out looking clean.
Secondly, MPs have thus far shown themselves capable, as Theresa May once put it, of saying only what they do not want but not what they actually do want. Consequently, their further deliberations are worse than useless: they just want to keep on kicking the can down the road, like they did under Mrs May, because they want to avoid making any decision that would resolve the conundrum which they themselves created by voting to have this referendum in the first place. They won't acquiesce to any form of Brexit because they don't want it to happen at all, but nor will they act to kill Brexit off because they can't make up their minds how, and a great many of them also fear the potential scale of the electoral backlash. So they dither and dither and dither, which means in turn that the uncertainty over Brexit can never end.
In order for Brexit to be resolved, people need to take decisive action. The Government has done this. It is now for Parliament either to back the Government, or to throw it out and install one more to its liking.
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
It does seem as if Johnson and Cummins genuinely believe the No Deal is going to be an endpoint. They may find they are wrong.
No Deal isn't an end point - it just removes all the legal agreements that exist and requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the IraqParliament to ensure it happened.
This is the crux of the issue and why we’re all cross with each other by the way. You look at the paperwork and conclude it will be genuinely terrible. I look at the same paperwork and conclude it’s undesirable but manageable, and few will notice too much.
If we assume neither of us is stupid it would be nice to live in a world where both sides spent a bit more time trying to understand each other and how different conclusions can be reached from the same projections.
But then I’m a dreamer who still prays for common sense to break out and an EFTA compromise to come in. Sadly it’s a bit late for that, given the trenchant positions on the Irish border, and how dug in we all are (see above).
I think we’ll manage, nothing will collapse. We’ll just be poorer, less free and have less control. It will solve nothing. I agree that EFTA would have been the right route to follow after the referendum. The only thing that has genuinely surprised me over the last three years is that the Tories did not follow that path. I really thought they would, which is why, initially, the referendum result did not bother me that much, even though I voted Remain.
It seems to me that today’s debate is exactly what Cummings wanted. And he’ll love the idea of some remainers having a pop at Her Majesty as that’s a brilliant way to split the cause when the likes of Sir John Major won’t go along with it.
If remainers want to beat this man they need to be united and to have a clear plan. This won’t be the end of it this week. There’ll be more from Cummings - probably popular domestic policies. If remainers let him dictate the pace, and don’t get inside his decision cycle, they will lose.
Yes, Cummings believes in all out war and he is now ready for blitzkrieg against diehard Remainers in the autumn
Cummings only does blitzkrieg.
Is there anyone on the Remain side as focused and ruthless as he?
Worth noting that Blitzkrieg was ultimately a failure that destroyed the wehrmacht.
Blitzkrieg wasn't a failure, it was what conquered most of Europe for the Nazis. The Nazi defeat came on the defensive through invasion by Allied powers not the all out attack of blitzkrieg
It failed in Russia big time. Admittedly you need the land and numbers to do this, but fail it did. To quote someone more informed than me 'This put an end to blitzkrieg as a phenomenon of that period of history'.
Well for all the sound and fury the bottom line is that what Boris has done is perfectly constitutional (which is why HMQ could do nothing other than agree to it) and so the legal challenge will go nowhere.
There is no way Parliamement can "legislate" to force the government to stop No Deal if the government doesn't want to. And even if Parliament did its doubful it would pass the Lords in time.
So that really leaves VONC - which no one seems to to want... Probably because there might actually be an election at the end of it and MPs would have to return to their constituences and explain their behaviour since 2017.
So that really leaves Boris holding all the cards.
We will Brexit on 31st October. The only question will be deal or no deal...
I reckon we will leave with a deal
Me too. I actually get the sense Boris' is now taking a position that he wants to negotiate more than just the backstop out of the WA. Where he gets the cojones to think that he can do that is beyond me, but God speed to him.
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed Change UK, and many others from both sides of the house, were elected in 2017 by promising to honour the referendum result. When Theresa May and the EU agreed a deal, those MPs gambled that it was worth the risk of no deal to vote against that agreement, in the hope of delaying things long enough to stop Brexit altogether. They allowed this to happen, they voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the Iraq war, Labour owned it. No Deal Brexit will be the property of the former Conservative and Unionist Party, and voters will remember that Boris Johnson said it would be no problem and that he shut down Parliament to ensure it happened.
I don’t really care what spinners and headline writers make of it, I’m more interested in what individuals did. And they did as I posted.
You don't know that. You are claiming some special insight into their private thoughts that you don't have,
I’m comparing what MPs said in their election campaigns to what they did when elected, it’s not a special insight of mine, just plain facts.
You said that they voted against the withdrawal agreement in an attempt to stop Brexit altogether - but many have said (and voted in the indicative votes) that they would support a deal that would lead to a softer Brexit, such as remaining in the single market.
So your statement is contrary to the known facts.
“The MPs who formed Change UK” weren’t attempting to stop Brexit altogether?
"..and many others from both sides of the house.."
Sure, you can point to some individuals, as I noted, but you can't sweep them all into the same group.
The others gambled on their version of Brexit vs No Deal, and we are where we are.
They voted against something they did not want. If they find that they can vote against something else they don't want - a no deal exit - then we will find we are somewhere else.
If we end up with no Brexit after all, I guess you will be critical of the Brexit supporting MPs who gambled on their version of Brexit vs No Brexit and lost?
Or perhaps it would be too hard for you to criticise people on your side of the grand chasm of British politics?
With PB's most vocal fanboi for Johnson and South American strong men in mind, which figure from the Falklands War does BJ most resemble?
Galtieri resorted to bellicose populism in a failing economy, thought he had US backing, that the UK was bluffing over defending the Falklands and lasted just over six months as president.
Boris is not invading the EU, Boris is liberating the UK!
The map will be ideal to devote resources in an election.
Genuine question - is anything emerging from the map that we didn’t already know (or at least assume)?
It is more up-to-date and can be compared to the vote in 2016. Who would have thought Bristol West was the No.1 Remain hotspot.
Don’t we have to be a bit careful in over interpreting a mobilised set of people in an area that may not reflect enough actual votes? To give a silly example if there was a large Uni I’m Eastborne I’d expect it to be red on that map, but I’d still expect the overall area to be strongly enough pro-Brexit that it wouldn’t change the price of metaphorical fish.
Genuinely thinking out loud from a “does this help me decide where to risk my cash on bets” perspective.
If the previous mass petition (People's Vote) is anything to go by it's quite a good guide as to how constituencies are likely to vote. The main problem from a betting viewpoint is that Shadsy can see it too.
With PB's most vocal fanboi for Johnson and South American strong men in mind, which figure from the Falklands War does BJ most resemble?
Galtieri resorted to bellicose populism in a failing economy, thought he had US backing, that the UK was bluffing over defending the Falklands and lasted just over six months as president.
Boris is not invading the EU, Boris is liberating the UK!
By giving up control and making all its citizens less free. Rejoice!
Evening all. I've been away for a few days in Greece, the cradle of democracy. Looks like I've missed an eventful couple of days.
What I find most striking about the government's latest constitutional outrage is that it really is the action of a political suicide cult. If you diligently wanted to search out how to make a no-deal crash-out even more disastrous for the Conservative Party than it would otherwise have to be, then coming up with a no-deal crash-out achieved through manifest cheating designed to deny parliament's right to intervene is an answer of genius: a very, very good way to ensure that the party is consigned in disgrace to the history books.
No Deal isn't an end point - requires them to be recreated, individually, agreement by agreement, That is likely to take decades
Indeed. And when voters are confronted with the reality of No Deal they will remember Boris Johnson closed down Parliament to ensure No Deal happened. They’ll also remember that Johnson said the UK could easily manage No Deal.
The MPs who formed voted with the ERG, yet seem beyond criticism.
The Tories voted for the IraqParliament to ensure it happened.
This is the crux of the issue and why we’re all cross with each other by the way. You look at the paperwork and conclude it will be genuinely terrible. I look at the same paperwork and conclude it’s undesirable but manageable, and few will notice too much.
If we assume neither of us is stupid it would be nice to live in a world where both sides spent a bit more time trying to understand each other and how different conclusions can be reached from the same projections.
But then I’m a dreamer who still prays for common sense to break out and an EFTA compromise to come in. Sadly it’s a bit late for that, given the trenchant positions on the Irish border, and how dug in we all are (see above).
I think we’ll manage, nothing will collapse. We’ll just be poorer, less free and have less control. It will solve nothing. I agree that EFTA would have been the right route to follow after the referendum. The only thing that has genuinely surprised me over the last three years is that the Tories did not follow that path. I really thought they would, which is why, initially, the referendum result did not bother me that much, even though I voted Remain.
It was Mrs May who was responsible. Her delay and dithering and secrecy allowed the ERG to become a monster. May simply was not a politician.
Comments
Yet still the SNP is polling below the 50% it got in 2015 BEFORE the Brexit vote
All a reactive strategy does is run the clock down.
Clearly the opposition is not united; there are many things which rightly divide them. But they have common ground on this issue, and they need to use that to seize the initiative.
Hold your nose and oppose?
Hey, that could be a slogan!
Total contempt for the public.
Diehard Remainers and anti Tories, jncluding in much of the Scottish press, are determined to destroy the Union in order to use it as a weapon to try and destroy Brexit, despite the fact most Leavers would still back Brexit regardless and the SNP was polling higher in 2015 than it is now BEFORE Brexit
Is there anyone on the Remain side as focused and ruthless as he?
[Though I suppose maybe it was cunning. In their absence the BBC felt the need to put their point of view from the presenter's mouth, in the interests of balance.]
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/28/boriss-falklands-war-will-do-everything-can-win/
https://twitter.com/ianbirrell/status/1166821141207494656?s=21
In 2014 when we were still in the EU and before the Leave vote could you care less about Scottish independence and the independence referendum? No. Now you are more of a Nat than William Wallace!
Goodnight.
Certainly some MPs may have voted against as being consistently opposed to Brexit in any form, and have said as much, but I don't think all did so, and many have claimed otherwise. Without evidence to the contrary it seems a bit off to contradict their public statements.
Perhaps MPs who wanted Brexit should have voted for it?
And not all of them were part of the opposition.
But, as you mention, it did not work out so well vis-a-vis a war as opposed to a battle for the Germans, nor did its American baby 'shock-and-awe' work so well in the long term.
So it will be a No Deal Brexit !
He orchestrated the success of Vote Leave, but took no part in the business of implementing the policy (quite possibly because he recognised it was unimplementable.)
The SW is looking pretty orange.
Proroging Parliament won't have widened any rift there. Meanwhile, Tories seem to be peeling off as fast as Brexit Party fans clamber on board.
If we assume neither of us is stupid it would be nice to live in a world where both sides spent a bit more time trying to understand each other and how different conclusions can be reached from the same projections.
But then I’m a dreamer who still prays for common sense to break out and an EFTA compromise to come in. Sadly it’s a bit late for that, given the trenchant positions on the Irish border, and how dug in we all are (see above).
There is no way Parliamement can "legislate" to force the government to stop No Deal if the government doesn't want to. And even if Parliament did its doubful it would pass the Lords in time.
So that really leaves VONC - which no one seems to to want... Probably because there might actually be an election at the end of it and MPs would have to return to their constituences and explain their behaviour since 2017.
So that really leaves Boris holding all the cards.
We will Brexit on 31st October. The only question will be deal or no deal...
So your statement is contrary to the known facts.
Galtieri resorted to bellicose populism in a failing economy, thought he had US backing, that the UK was bluffing over defending the Falklands and lasted just over six months as president.
Genuinely thinking out loud from a “does this help me decide where to risk my cash on bets” perspective.
As for the others, they gambled on their version of Brexit vs No deal, and we are where we are.
Sure, you can point to some individuals, as I noted, but you can't sweep them all into the same group.
Just take the Irish border, as one example. The men of violence are already tooling up for the anticipated increase in business which is expected to follow on from a hard Brexit. Yes, it's manageable. So was World War Two. My parents and their relatives were evacuated from the East End to Leicester, and they 'managed'.
Wasn't a bundle of fun though, but unlike Brexit, it wasn't avoidable.
I think we can set aside the customary unelected Prime Minister argument. For better or worse, we do not have a directly elected head of Government in this country. Boris Johnson has been appointed according to the prevailing constitutional norms, and may also be removed by them should the Commons wish to do so when it returns next week. Mr Corbyn has signalled his availability to replace Mr Johnson immediately should the numbers exist for him to win a vote of confidence. That would also neatly resolve the issue of which, if any, possible Government can command a Parliamentary majority.
The fact that Boris Johnson's policy has yet to be voted on in Parliament is also irrelevant, because Parliament will have the opportunity to have its say before there is a chance for the policy to be implemented. Given that the Government is completely committed to withdrawal on October 31st regardless of the terms then, if Parliament wishes to veto this policy, it will have to replace the Government. There is sufficient time left in which to do this.
No Deal has not specifically been put to the electorate, but the general concept of staying in or leaving the EU has. The electorate has already voted to leave the EU. If Parliament can't agree to the Withdrawal Agreement that Theresa May negotiated with the EU, and the EU won't negotiate a new Withdrawal Agreement, then the only logical means available to follow through on the referendum result is No Deal. Again, if a majority of MPs believes that most of their constituents don't want No Deal, and that this is a belief they are happy to represent, then the means exists for them to prevent it by replacing the current Government.
(TBC)
Personally, I do not agree that the decision to prorogue itself was correct, because it was unnecessary: the Government has a lot on its plate getting ready to leave on October 31st, and would arguably have been better prepared to lay out a new legislative programme once Brexit and its immediate aftermath had been dispensed with. Doubtless others will take a different view. The criticism that it conveniently happens to cut down the amount of time left for anti-Brexit shenanigans in Parliament is, frankly, also valid.
The reason why I can't, however, bring myself to have a fit of the vapours over this business is as follows. Firstly, it is also obvious that the majority of MPs want to set aside the referendum result (whether through revocation, a second referendum, or by making a technical exit on terms closer to the EU than Norway, with the full intention of trying to negotiate reaccession in five or ten years' time once the public tires of the yoke.) It's simply that most of them, as with the Government over its justification of the prorogation decision, are too dishonest to say so: as always in this sorry business, neither side comes out looking clean.
Secondly, MPs have thus far shown themselves capable, as Theresa May once put it, of saying only what they do not want but not what they actually do want. Consequently, their further deliberations are worse than useless: they just want to keep on kicking the can down the road, like they did under Mrs May, because they want to avoid making any decision that would resolve the conundrum which they themselves created by voting to have this referendum in the first place. They won't acquiesce to any form of Brexit because they don't want it to happen at all, but nor will they act to kill Brexit off because they can't make up their minds how, and a great many of them also fear the potential scale of the electoral backlash. So they dither and dither and dither, which means in turn that the uncertainty over Brexit can never end.
In order for Brexit to be resolved, people need to take decisive action. The Government has done this. It is now for Parliament either to back the Government, or to throw it out and install one more to its liking.
If we end up with no Brexit after all, I guess you will be critical of the Brexit supporting MPs who gambled on their version of Brexit vs No Brexit and lost?
Or perhaps it would be too hard for you to criticise people on your side of the grand chasm of British politics?