Interesting article. But Tom Chivers is crucially wrong about one thing. We are not playing chicken with all of Europe. We are playing chicken with Ireland. An entirely different scenario.
Maybe, but if your opponent in the game of chicken *believes* that they are driving a tank and *believes* that you are driving a Chevy Vega then there is no reason for them to swerve even if they've seen that you've thrown your steering wheel away.
But Ireland aren't driving a tank.
We'll see though, we've got our seat belt on and if there's to be a collision then so be it.
The EU have previously said that they don’t care what Parliament’s view on the Withdrawal Agreement is - it was negotiated in good faith with the U.K. government and they will not reopen it. So why should it matter to them whether Parliament are being denied a few extra days to debate something that won’t make any difference to the EU position anyway?
Nigelb you asked me a question this morning. Apologies but I've only just seen it. Been out all.
Unfortunately I can't disclose the issue that is causing a bit of a panic re the prorogue of parliament and previous discussions on here over the last few months, as it relates to my wife's work. I suspect it isn't confidential at all, but I need to respect her concerns.
A fair answer.
But given that all those bills will fail on the proroguing of Parliament, I was curious how many of them are necessary to the managing of any no deal Brexit, and how much extra damage the loss of them would be likely to result in.
Anyone else care to comment on the loss of these bills in the context of a no deal Brexit?
Agriculture Bill Financial services (implementation of legislation) Bill Fisheries Bill Immigration & Social Security Coordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill Trade Bill
If need be they can be carried forward by a Minister or reintroduced. No big deal.
'I realise that anecdotes are not evidence but I am struck by how frequently I hear people all over the country saying that they have now changed their minds and would vote for independence if there was another referendum.'
I think somebody knew him from PB as they mentioned going for a pint with him! I cannot remember him ever using his name on here but he could of used an alias I suppose.
It's slightly strange when the PB world and the real world interact. I've realised I certainly know one PB poster, and I'm reasonably sure I've met another a couple of times. Not sure whether to broach it in real life...!
Interesting article. But Tom Chivers is crucially wrong about one thing. We are not playing chicken with all of Europe. We are playing chicken with Ireland. An entirely different scenario.
Maybe, but if your opponent in the game of chicken *believes* that they are driving a tank and *believes* that you are driving a Chevy Vega then there is no reason for them to swerve even if they've seen that you've thrown your steering wheel away.
We aren’t driving a Chevy Vega. The UK is using a rusty Mini Moke in the hope we can drive underneath without being decapitated.
Interesting article. But Tom Chivers is crucially wrong about one thing. We are not playing chicken with all of Europe. We are playing chicken with Ireland. An entirely different scenario.
Maybe, but if your opponent in the game of chicken *believes* that they are driving a tank and *believes* that you are driving a Chevy Vega then there is no reason for them to swerve even if they've seen that you've thrown your steering wheel away.
But Ireland aren't driving a tank.
We'll see though, we've got our seat belt on and if there's to be a collision then so be it.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
A report today said France and Germany stand to lose 55 billion alone on a no deal
We would not be the only ones shooting ourselves in the foot
Franco German combined GDP is 6trillion USD, these days it's about 5trillion GBP. 55billion is about 1%. Since their combined growth rate is approx 2%, mutatis mutandis they'll end the year about 1% up...
I think somebody knew him from PB as they mentioned going for a pint with him! I cannot remember him ever using his name on here but he could of used an alias I suppose.
It's slightly strange when the PB world and the real world interact. I've realised I certainly know one PB poster, and I'm reasonably sure I've met another a couple of times. Not sure whether to broach it in real life...!
Yes, I suppose it depends on whether you like to compartmentalise life so the virtual stays that way or whether you want to break the barriers down. It is different for everybody I suppose!
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
How does that work when calculating which party has the most seats? Given that Ken Clarke is simply a centralist Tory.
They should do if the alternative is anti-Semitic, Hamas-supporting bigot that is a betrayal of Labour values. The Labour movement is far more than the mottled crew that infiltrated and took over the party.
I sense yet another MASSIVE supporter of radical reform of our economy and society in favour of the working class - and in particular a full frontal assault on birth privilege - who to his or her bitter regret cannot contemplate voting or in any way supporting Labour whilst Jeremy Corbyn is the leader.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
It all came from his seat being abolished in the boundary review(s) when he decided to stand down in 2020 (when the election was going to be. He didn't want to try and fight for a new seat.
I could see a moderate labour candidate win against a brexit ultra tory candidate though. even a more moderate tory could lose if TBP stand
MPs had 68 working days. 26%: They were due to spend 16 working on annual Conference season. 40%: They chose to spend 27 on holiday. 7%: They choose to spend 5 taking Friday's off from the Commons. 6-10%: They're losing 4-7 due to proroguation. 22-24%: They have left still sitting.
Even if there had been no proroguation, the Commons knew when it chose to take a six week holiday that they were taking off 40% of the time it had left to it.
Even if there had been no proroguation, the Commons knew when it chose to take its six weeks holiday, and chose to continue taking Fridays off that it was taking off almost half the time available to it even excluding Conferences.
Parliament could regain the lost time by bothering to sit on Fridays.
I have no sympathies with 4 lost days when MPs still think that sorting out Brexit was less important than taking six weeks off in the sunshine or bothering to turn up on Fridays.
You are going to be surprised by this, but I agree with you. MP's true natures have been revealed by Brexit, and with the best will in the world, they are not adequate to the task.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Interesting article. But Tom Chivers is crucially wrong about one thing. We are not playing chicken with all of Europe. We are playing chicken with Ireland. An entirely different scenario.
Maybe, but if your opponent in the game of chicken *believes* that they are driving a tank and *believes* that you are driving a Chevy Vega then there is no reason for them to swerve even if they've seen that you've thrown your steering wheel away.
But Ireland aren't driving a tank.
We'll see though, we've got our seat belt on and if there's to be a collision then so be it.
Hence the word "belief" in my comment.
Nobody yet seems to have made the point that the UK can never really throw the steering wheel out of the window, because right up until the last moment there would be the option of writing a letter withdrawing from Article 50.
The option of 'swerving' would exist until the moment of impact.
I believe the same would not be true of the EU, but please correct me if I am wrong.
They should do if the alternative is anti-Semitic, Hamas-supporting bigot that is a betrayal of Labour values. The Labour movement is far more than the mottled crew that infiltrated and took over the party.
I sense yet another MASSIVE supporter of radical reform of our economy and society in favour of the working class - and in particular a full frontal assault on birth privilege - who to his or her bitter regret cannot contemplate voting or in any way supporting Labour whilst Jeremy Corbyn is the leader.
Such a problem. What on earth can be done.
I voted Labour for every election I could before Corbyn took over. I support big raises in the minimim wage, capital gains tax and inheritance tax. But I am also a (secular) Jew, who, for some odd reason, doesn't want to vote for a man that went to a remembrance service for a killer of Jewish civilians. Why do you think that could be?
Posted in haste but someone just made an interesting point I hadn’t appreciated
In proroguing Parliament, Boris opens up possibility of a new vote on the WA. The limitation on reintroduction is on the number of times *per session* not in total
That is important. Surprisingly overlooked. Still does not justify the move.
If the Scottish Tories were relying on just one person for their popularity, it wasn't really a very sustainable position.
They aren't, Yougov this week has the Tories on 21% in Scotland, still above their voteshare in Scotland at every general election from 1997 to 2017 (Davidson was leader in 2015 as well as 2017)
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Posted in haste but someone just made an interesting point I hadn’t appreciated
In proroguing Parliament, Boris opens up possibility of a new vote on the WA. The limitation on reintroduction is on the number of times *per session* not in total
That is important. Surprisingly overlooked. Still does not justify the move.
That occurred to me straight away.
Maybe having been shown the very edge of the abyss, enough MPs will pass a WA?
If the Scottish Tories were relying on just one person for their popularity, it wasn't really a very sustainable position.
They aren't, Yougov this week has the Tories on 21% in Scotland, still above their voteshare in Scotland at every general election from 1997 to 2017 (Davidson was leader in 2015 as well as 2017)
Nobody yet seems to have made the point that the UK can never really throw the steering wheel out of the window, because right up until the last moment there would be the option of writing a letter withdrawing from Article 50.
The option of 'swerving' would exist until the moment of impact.
I believe the same would not be true of the EU, but please correct me if I am wrong.
It kind of only works though if the EU believe it's a true change of position and not a mechanism for the delaying of exiting the EU. with what BJ has already said and TM before him it's not credible for the EU. It would require a new PM and probably another referendum.
what could happen is a request for an extension with the condition of an election / referendum. the SO for that could go through in a day
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
How does that work when calculating which party has the most seats? Given that Ken Clarke is simply a centralist Tory.
Ken Clarke is a very good MP, he did vote for the TM Deal as well IIRC. The Tories have collectively lost the plot IMO. I cannot believe the party has got to the point where it considers wrecking the economy for no apparent reason. Immigration will change from European to the rest of the world. The economic gravity of the EU on our doorstep will warp activity in the same way that if Scotland left the British Union, the rest of the UK would. It is better to be in both economic and political unions, maximising all our economic decisions than an abstentionist policy on the side-lines.
MPs had 68 working days. 26%: They were due to spend 16 working on annual Conference season. 40%: They chose to spend 27 on holiday. 7%: They choose to spend 5 taking Friday's off from the Commons. 6-10%: They're losing 4-7 due to proroguation. 22-24%: They have left still sitting.
Even if there had been no proroguation, the Commons knew when it chose to take a six week holiday that they were taking off 40% of the time it had left to it.
Even if there had been no proroguation, the Commons knew when it chose to take its six weeks holiday, and chose to continue taking Fridays off that it was taking off almost half the time available to it even excluding Conferences.
Parliament could regain the lost time by bothering to sit on Fridays.
I have no sympathies with 4 lost days when MPs still think that sorting out Brexit was less important than taking six weeks off in the sunshine or bothering to turn up on Fridays.
You are going to be surprised by this, but I agree with you. MP's true natures have been revealed by Brexit, and with the best will in the world, they are not adequate to the task.
surprised the Sun or the Mail or the Telegraph haven’t put something like this on their front page. Anti no deal MPs have been arguing for ages about the consequences of the short amount of time they have ( for which they have now got less). But have had almost zero scrutiny about how they had it within their power to give themselves substantially more Parliamentary time. but opted not to.
And for all this talk about how they “would” have cancelled the recess for the Party conferences. I really don’t see how that would have worked without also cancelling the conferences. Maybe they could have just cancelled the recess for the Libdem one...! After all the SNP conference normally falls outside the recess.
If the Scottish Tories were relying on just one person for their popularity, it wasn't really a very sustainable position.
They aren't, Yougov this week has the Tories on 21% in Scotland, still above their voteshare in Scotland at every general election from 1997 to 2017 (Davidson was leader in 2015 as well as 2017)
If the Scottish Tories were relying on just one person for their popularity, it wasn't really a very sustainable position.
They aren't, Yougov this week has the Tories on 21% in Scotland, still above their voteshare in Scotland at every general election from 1997 to 2017 (Davidson was leader in 2015 as well as 2017)
Posted in haste but someone just made an interesting point I hadn’t appreciated
In proroguing Parliament, Boris opens up possibility of a new vote on the WA. The limitation on reintroduction is on the number of times *per session* not in total
That is important. Surprisingly overlooked. Still does not justify the move.
Also removes the viability of the previously flagged threat to prorogue over October 31st if no new deal is agreed. Which I think is important.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
How does that work when calculating which party has the most seats? Given that Ken Clarke is simply a centralist Tory.
Ken Clarke is a very good MP, he did vote for the TM Deal as well IIRC. The Tories have collectively lost the plot IMO. I cannot believe the party has got to the point where it considers wrecking the economy for no apparent reason. Immigration will change from European to the rest of the world. The economic gravity of the EU on our doorstep will warp activity in the same way that if Scotland left the British Union, the rest of the UK would. It is better to be in both economic and political unions, maximising all our economic decisions than an abstentionist policy on the side-lines.
The only thing that matters is the future of the Tory party no more no less and even more important is Johnson staying as PM you can’t expect them to do anything in support of any other interest. There is ample proof on here for that point of view.
Posted in haste but someone just made an interesting point I hadn’t appreciated
In proroguing Parliament, Boris opens up possibility of a new vote on the WA. The limitation on reintroduction is on the number of times *per session* not in total
That is important. Surprisingly overlooked. Still does not justify the move.
That occurred to me straight away.
Maybe having been shown the very edge of the abyss, enough MPs will pass a WA?
Why would they?
Farage and the Brexit Party would destroy them. They wouldn't care much for that abyss either.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit
How would you know? You boast of not having read it. You take your cue from others who have not read it. So you do not understand it.
The simple fact is Rees-Mogg had the option to vote to leave the EU. He voted not to. Ken Clarke did.
So it's Somerset NE, not Rushcliffe, that needs a change of MP if we're to leave.
"If something is achieved through cheating – or perceived as such – then it loses a vital bit of legitimacy." Well said.
Which explains why pro EU types have never accepted the original 2016 vote.
It's telling that the National Crime Agency still has not pronounced on the file handed to it by the electoral commission as to the true source of the Banks donation.
Never mind the fact that Cameron foolishly allowed Leave to be completely undefined, which explains why noone really can say what it should be now. At least the Scots Nats had the decency to produce a full manifesto that was debated.
And what about the way Liddington scoffed at Salmond as he tried to put across the point that such a massive change requires a supermajority. "Oh no silly man it is just advisory" smirk smirk.
MPs had 68 working days. 26%: They were due to spend 16 working on annual Conference season. 40%: They chose to spend 27 on holiday. 7%: They choose to spend 5 taking Friday's off from the Commons. 6-10%: They're losing 4-7 due to proroguation. 22-24%: They have left still sitting.
Even if there had been no proroguation, the Commons knew when it chose to take a six week holiday that they were taking off 40% of the time it had left to it.
Even if there had been no proroguation, the Commons knew when it chose to take its six weeks holiday, and chose to continue taking Fridays off that it was taking off almost half the time available to it even excluding Conferences.
Parliament could regain the lost time by bothering to sit on Fridays.
I have no sympathies with 4 lost days when MPs still think that sorting out Brexit was less important than taking six weeks off in the sunshine or bothering to turn up on Fridays.
You are going to be surprised by this, but I agree with you. MP's true natures have been revealed by Brexit, and with the best will in the world, they are not adequate to the task.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
Ken Clarke is honest. He is not one of these people who changes opinions like a weather vein! KC is a man of principle, he was in limited company when he voted against the Iraq war as well. I think KC has very good judgement. KC has clearly stated he would rather Remain in the EU but did support the TM Brexit deal.
They should do if the alternative is anti-Semitic, Hamas-supporting bigot that is a betrayal of Labour values. The Labour movement is far more than the mottled crew that infiltrated and took over the party.
I sense yet another MASSIVE supporter of radical reform of our economy and society in favour of the working class - and in particular a full frontal assault on birth privilege - who to his or her bitter regret cannot contemplate voting or in any way supporting Labour whilst Jeremy Corbyn is the leader.
Ken Clarke is a very good MP, he did vote for the TM Deal as well IIRC. The Tories have collectively lost the plot IMO. I cannot believe the party has got to the point where it considers wrecking the economy for no apparent reason. Immigration will change from European to the rest of the world. The economic gravity of the EU on our doorstep will warp activity in the same way that if Scotland left the British Union, the rest of the UK would. It is better to be in both economic and political unions, maximising all our economic decisions than an abstentionist policy on the side-lines.
I saw a quote somewhere (I think it was heseltine) that the difference between the Tory party and Labour was that the labour party was always interested in ideals and dogma but the Tory party was most interested in power. this gave the Tories an advantage because they would change what they were offering to enable them to win power and didn't have any baggage to prevent it. What has happened, starting in the 1980s and has been growing ever since is they have been infected with the labour disease of idealism. this idealism has become fundamentalism on the issue of europe and is now more important than getting and maintaining power. it has also bled into the economic competence where a more fundamentalist view of how to run the economy has taken over.
The Tory party will only exist long term, let alone form a government, if it can cure itself of this fundamentalism.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
An oft made criticism of MPs who oppose no deal, but favour Brexit with a deal is that they should have “known what they were voting for when voting to trigger Article 50”. With the benefit of hindsight what would your advice have been to such an MP when the Article 50 vote came before the House?
Posted in haste but someone just made an interesting point I hadn’t appreciated
In proroguing Parliament, Boris opens up possibility of a new vote on the WA. The limitation on reintroduction is on the number of times *per session* not in total
Yes, but they could have brought it back before by suspending standing orders, if they had the votes to pass it at all. They didn't and don't, since Boris won't bring it back - he could have essentially promised a new deal or no deal to be out, do or die, and then reluctantly stated parliament would block no deal, there was no new deal, so back to the WA it was as a 'do or die' moment. He hasn't, he's ramped up his attacks on it, never refers to the old deal without talking about the anti-democratic backstop. Sure we know he personally could accept the backstop because he voted for it, but he's effectively ruled out backing the WA again - it's election if no deal does not happen, not reintroducing the WA.
And if someone else tried reintroducing it Boris will surely whip against it, and how many are Tory loyalists and this not going to lend their votes to it again?
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit
How would you know? You boast of not having read it. You take your cue from others who have not read it. So you do not understand it.
The simple fact is Rees-Mogg had the option to vote to leave the EU. He voted not to. Ken Clarke did.
So it's Somerset NE, not Rushcliffe, that needs a change of MP if we're to leave.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
Ken Clarke is honest. He is not one of these people who changes opinions like a weather vein! KC is a man of principle, he was in limited company when he voted against the Iraq war as well. I think KC has very good judgement. KC has clearly stated he would rather Remain in the EU but did support the TM Brexit deal.
Although of course for hard core Leavers, Clarke voting for the WA is proof that it wasn’t really Brexit!
The Johnson government is a strange combination of ruthlessness, dishonesty and incompetence. The worst possible governance but fascinating for us politics geeks. You never know what he is going to do next
These pro-EU protesters are losing the plot. Alex Chalk is very pro-EU and it was stated in Shipmans book that he was at the fringes of the Grieve group. I admit that he has kept his head down but he could be an ally of these people. I imagine the local Lib Dems got their rabble out.
He's a good MP but he'll do well to stave off the LDs at the next GE.
I think he has a very good chance, as well as being a good local MP fighting the right issues, the demographics of Cheltenham are changing, lots of retirement apartments have been and are being built. You can see the result in turnout in GE's since 2010
"If something is achieved through cheating – or perceived as such – then it loses a vital bit of legitimacy." Well said.
Which explains why pro EU types have never accepted the original 2016 vote.
It's telling that the National Crime Agency still has not pronounced on the file handed to it by the electoral commission as to the true source of the Banks donation.
Never mind the fact that Cameron foolishly allowed Leave to be completely undefined, which explains why noone really can say what it should be now. At least the Scots Nats had the decency to produce a full manifesto that was debated.
And what about the way Liddington scoffed at Salmond as he tried to put across the point that such a massive change requires a supermajority. "Oh no silly man it is just advisory" smirk smirk.
Both sides 'cheated' in your sense.
A stronger point is that the Leave campaign barely mentioned the possibility of a No Deal Brexit, and to the extent it did portrayed it as extremely unlikely. Indeed it strongly indicated that a Deal would be very easy to negotiate and that we 'held all the cards'.
The consequences of such misrepresentation are now all too apparent and undermine the authority of those who are prepared to take us out of the EU without a deal.
Leaving the EU speedily does not. And yet it is speed which is prized. How very adolescent.
Article 50 set the 2 year deadline, not the UK.
Then the Government should have thought things through much more carefully and completely before triggering Article 50.
Whichever way you cut it it's down to the Tory party's gross incompetence we're in this mess.
Tory incompetence, Lib Dem intransigence, Labour game playing. There is a lot of blame to go round.
Just as Israel produces more history than can be consumed locally, so Brexit is producing more blame than can be digested by any one entity.
No... The Tories started the referendum process for their own internal political ends and at every point they have doubled down and made the crisis ever worse.
They have never offered the slightest gesture either to the nearly 50% who voted Remain or the large numbers of Leavers who wanted less political EU, but enough economic EU to be going on with. No compromise, no recognition, no sense, so now:
No EFTA No Single Market No Customs Union No Backstop
and now... a No Deal rammed through against the wishes of the clear majority of MPs and of the voters.
They are prepared to trash:
the economy, the union, the constitution the monarchy
in order to get an ultra hard Brexit
So the Tories own this fiasco and they can bloody well take whats coming to them.
Personally I can think of no humiliation that the repellent trio of Cummings, Mogg and Johnson do not deserve.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
How does that work when calculating which party has the most seats? Given that Ken Clarke is simply a centralist Tory.
What is a "centralist Tory"?
Ken Clarke was the only Tory to vote against Article 50 and beginning the Brexit process. He was one of only 17 Tories to vote for the Spelman amendment to 'definitively rule out No Deal'. He was one of the minority of Tory MPs to vote to extend Article 50.
Leaving the EU speedily does not. And yet it is speed which is prized. How very adolescent.
Article 50 set the 2 year deadline, not the UK.
Then the Government should have thought things through much more carefully and completely before triggering Article 50.
Whichever way you cut it it's down to the Tory party's gross incompetence we're in this mess.
Tory incompetence, Lib Dem intransigence, Labour game playing. There is a lot of blame to go round.
Just as Israel produces more history than can be consumed locally, so Brexit is producing more blame than can be digested by any one entity.
No... The Tories started the referendum process for their own internal political ends and at every point they have doubled down and made the crisis ever worse.
They have never offered the slightest gesture either to the nearly 50% who voted Remain or the large numbers of Leavers who wanted less political EU, but enough economic EU to be going on with. No compromise, no recognition, no sense, so now:
No EFTA No Single Market No Customs Union No Backstop
and now... a No Deal rammed through against the wishes of the clear majority of MPs and of the voters.
They are prepared to trash:
the economy, the union, the constitution the monarchy
in order to get an ultra hard Brexit
So the Tories own this fiasco and they can bloody well take whats coming to them.
Personally I can think of no humiliation that the repellent trio of Cummings, Mogg and Johnson do not deserve.
But as long as they make money out of it it will all be worth it. This was never an argument about principle it was about saving millions in undeclared revenue and making money by betting against the pound.
These pro-EU protesters are losing the plot. Alex Chalk is very pro-EU and it was stated in Shipmans book that he was at the fringes of the Grieve group. I admit that he has kept his head down but he could be an ally of these people. I imagine the local Lib Dems got their rabble out.
He's a good MP but he'll do well to stave off the LDs at the next GE.
I think he has a very good chance, as well as being a good local MP fighting the right issues, the demographics of Cheltenham are changing, lots of retirement apartments have been and are being built. You can see the result in turnout in GE's since 2010
Noted with interest, Ralph, a definitely a result to watch.
I live just outside the constituency so cannot assist, one way or the other. I'm stuck with Laurence Robertson, of whom the least said the better.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
An oft made criticism of MPs who oppose no deal, but favour Brexit with a deal is that they should have “known what they were voting for when voting to trigger Article 50”. With the benefit of hindsight what would your advice have been to such an MP when the Article 50 vote came before the House?
To think seriously about the consequences of their votes. To understand that once a process has begun there are no guarantees as to how it will end.
Interesting comment from The Columnist. His moderate Tory MP in the story has been through trying to get a moderate deal while everyone knew we would not crash out, and it achieved nothing. If he wants an acceptable deal it is impossible to think that excluding no deal/going for extensions will do anything but prolong his agony. His government's policy is to get a deal and get it through parliament. There is no evidence that anything but a game of chicken can achieve it.
So the Tories own this fiasco and they can bloody well take whats coming to them.
Personally I can think of no humiliation that the repellent trio of Cummings, Mogg and Johnson do not deserve.
Harsh but true.
The problem I have as a voter is there is nothing I can vote for which will actually make a difference. I have, throughout my life, always lived in seats at a council level or parliament level which my vote didn't matter. I currently live in both a ward and constituency which have voted labour for my entire life (as far as I'm aware). Even at the next local council elections where the labour councillor up for election who is distrusted and responsible for some shady, if not outright corrupt, practices will still be elected.
it's not right but at the moment it is what it is.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
Ken Clarke is honest. He is not one of these people who changes opinions like a weather vein! KC is a man of principle, he was in limited company when he voted against the Iraq war as well. I think KC has very good judgement. KC has clearly stated he would rather Remain in the EU but did support the TM Brexit deal.
Indeed he did which speaks volumes about how crap May's deal was and how petty politics is the only reason opposition Remainers voted against it. Also how arrogant and dishonest people like Grieve [who unlike Clarke pledged to honour the referendum] are.
Clarke understood that Parliament had voted in a way that could result in No Deal and he seized onto a soft deal when presented to him. Shame for Remainers that so many of his fellow travellers on Europe didn't follow his lead.
These pro-EU protesters are losing the plot. Alex Chalk is very pro-EU and it was stated in Shipmans book that he was at the fringes of the Grieve group. I admit that he has kept his head down but he could be an ally of these people. I imagine the local Lib Dems got their rabble out.
He's a good MP but he'll do well to stave off the LDs at the next GE.
I think he has a very good chance, as well as being a good local MP fighting the right issues, the demographics of Cheltenham are changing, lots of retirement apartments have been and are being built. You can see the result in turnout in GE's since 2010
Noted with interest, Ralph, a definitely a result to watch.
I live just outside the constituency so cannot assist, one way or the other. I'm stuck with Laurence Robertson, of whom the least said the better.
My Father is in your con and he moans about Laurence, even votes lib dem some times to register his protest.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
These pro-EU protesters are losing the plot. Alex Chalk is very pro-EU and it was stated in Shipmans book that he was at the fringes of the Grieve group. I admit that he has kept his head down but he could be an ally of these people. I imagine the local Lib Dems got their rabble out.
He's a good MP but he'll do well to stave off the LDs at the next GE.
I think he has a very good chance, as well as being a good local MP fighting the right issues, the demographics of Cheltenham are changing, lots of retirement apartments have been and are being built. You can see the result in turnout in GE's since 2010
Noted with interest, Ralph, a definitely a result to watch.
I live just outside the constituency so cannot assist, one way or the other. I'm stuck with Laurence Robertson, of whom the least said the better.
My Father is in your con and he moans about Laurence, even votes lib dem some times to register his protest.
He's pretty safe. Even in the most extreme Tory meltdown, it is far from clear whether the challenge to him would come from Labour or the LDs.
I voted Labour for every election I could before Corbyn took over. I support big raises in the minimim wage, capital gains tax and inheritance tax. But I am also a (secular) Jew, who, for some odd reason, doesn't want to vote for a man that went to a remembrance service for a killer of Jewish civilians. Why do you think that could be?
OK. Perhaps I have misread you. If you voted Labour at GE 2015 then I have and I apologize.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
An oft made criticism of MPs who oppose no deal, but favour Brexit with a deal is that they should have “known what they were voting for when voting to trigger Article 50”. With the benefit of hindsight what would your advice have been to such an MP when the Article 50 vote came before the House?
To think seriously about the consequences of their votes. To understand that once a process has begun there are no guarantees as to how it will end.
Do you think that is unreasonable advice?
I would advise that there is no other lawful route for getting what he would like, that the UK was exceedingly foolish to agree to a treaty containing such one sided terms and that one of the reasons for so many wanting to leave the EU is that it sometimes acts in a dominating manner. Make the best of it and hope you win the game of chicken.
Leaving the EU speedily does not. And yet it is speed which is prized. How very adolescent.
Article 50 set the 2 year deadline, not the UK.
Then the Government should have thought things through much more carefully and completely before triggering Article 50.
Whichever way you cut it it's down to the Tory party's gross incompetence we're in this mess.
Tory incompetence, Lib Dem intransigence, Labour game playing. There is a lot of blame to go round.
Just as Israel produces more history than can be consumed locally, so Brexit is producing more blame than can be digested by any one entity.
No... The Tories started the referendum process for their own internal political ends and at every point they have doubled down and made the crisis ever worse.
They have never offered the slightest gesture either to the nearly 50% who voted Remain or the large numbers of Leavers who wanted less political EU, but enough economic EU to be going on with. No compromise, no recognition, no sense, so now:
No EFTA No Single Market No Customs Union No Backstop
and now... a No Deal rammed through against the wishes of the clear majority of MPs and of the voters.
They are prepared to trash:
the economy, the union, the constitution the monarchy
in order to get an ultra hard Brexit
So the Tories own this fiasco and they can bloody well take whats coming to them.
Personally I can think of no humiliation that the repellent trio of Cummings, Mogg and Johnson do not deserve.
But as long as they make money out of it it will all be worth it. This was never an argument about principle it was about saving millions in undeclared revenue and making money by betting against the pound.
Who got what revenue from where and failed to disclose it to whom?
The Johnson government is a strange combination of ruthlessness, dishonesty and incompetence. The worst possible governance but fascinating for us politics geeks. You never know what he is going to do next
I think as an elector one has to take the unpalatable view of mitigating the potential for screw ups by a party aspiring to govern. It is this realisation that the only course of action for me at this time is to vote LD and hope enough people do the same to cause a very hung parliament...
There are going to be lots of posters with Swinson in Corbyns pocket in Con/Lib marginals and Corbyn in Nicola's pocket in Con/Lab marginals.
That may well be true but it suffers from the same thing that Labour have been suffering from over the last 2 years. It is fighting the last election and not the next one.
The only ones of the UK parties which are fighting the next election are the greens (who always fight with the same strategy) and the Lib Dems.
Boris Johnson’s suspension of parliament is an affront to democracy MPs must pass a no-confidence vote in the government and trigger a general election"
Is this the same Jeremy Corbyn who couldn't be bothered to be seen by photographers in the same room as Swinson, Blackford and the others?
They should have just about enough votes to install a new government and leader by a week today. Interesting that they don't mention it among the demands they make on others.
I voted Labour for every election I could before Corbyn took over. I support big raises in the minimim wage, capital gains tax and inheritance tax. But I am also a (secular) Jew, who, for some odd reason, doesn't want to vote for a man that went to a remembrance service for a killer of Jewish civilians. Why do you think that could be?
OK. Perhaps I have misread you. If you voted Labour at GE 2015 then I have and I apologize.
Did you vote Labour at GE 2015?
Trying to work out whether he's a good one or not?
I note the statement does not say that the move was illegal or unconstitutional, which is good since in advance of the legal case it may be that it is perfectly legal. Focusing on it being a bad idea, never mind if it is legal, seems sound.
An excellent denunciation of Johnson's lies during the Referendum campaign by Ruth Davidson. I'd not noticed her much but in that one speech repeated on Ch4 News she exposed him more effectively than most for the lying turd he is.
Boris Johnson’s suspension of parliament is an affront to democracy MPs must pass a no-confidence vote in the government and trigger a general election"
Yes they should - though of course that might result in Boris getting the backing for no deal in a GE which most of those upset at him want to avoid. Not guaranteed of course, I don't think he'd definitely do well, but if they want to stick it to him by ensuring we do not no deal, then passing a deal is the way to go rather than no confidence him, not agree on someone else, and trigger a GE.
Is this the same Jeremy Corbyn who couldn't be bothered to be seen by photographers in the same room as Swinson, Blackford and the others?
They should have just about enough votes to install a new government and leader by a week today. Interesting that they don't mention it among the demands they make on others.
In order for that to happen it needs to happen very quickly and they don't have the leader who can command the confidence of the house. What I suspect BJ to do with a VoNC is to hold out for two weeks and make election day the same a B-Day. then he gets his no-deal and the election on the same day, it'd work as a strategy to get leavers to vote for him.
I note the statement does not say that the move was illegal or unconstitutional, which is good since in advance of the legal case it may be that it is perfectly legal. Focusing on it being a bad idea, never mind if it is legal, seems sound.
It is being presented in many places as though it were at the least constitutionally murky. The optics are very bad but perhaps it will all add to the drama when he presents the deal.
I would feel this a lot more likely without Cummings skulking around.
Leaving the EU speedily does not. And yet it is speed which is prized. How very adolescent.
Article 50 set the 2 year deadline, not the UK.
Then the Government should have thought things through much more carefully and completely before triggering Article 50.
Whichever way you cut it it's down to the Tory party's gross incompetence we're in this mess.
Tory incompetence, Lib Dem intransigence, Labour game playing. There is a lot of blame to go round.
Just as Israel produces more history than can be consumed locally, so Brexit is producing more blame than can be digested by any one entity.
No... The Tories started the referendum process for their own internal political ends and at every point they have doubled down and made the crisis ever worse.
They have never offered the slightest gesture either to the nearly 50% who voted Remain or the large numbers of Leavers who wanted less political EU, but enough economic EU to be going on with. No compromise, no recognition, no sense, so now:
No EFTA No Single Market No Customs Union No Backstop
and now... a No Deal rammed through against the wishes of the clear majority of MPs and of the voters.
They are prepared to trash:
the economy, the union, the constitution the monarchy
in order to get an ultra hard Brexit
So the Tories own this fiasco and they can bloody well take whats coming to them.
Personally I can think of no humiliation that the repellent trio of Cummings, Mogg and Johnson do not deserve.
But as long as they make money out of it it will all be worth it. This was never an argument about principle it was about saving millions in undeclared revenue and making money by betting against the pound.
Who got what revenue from where and failed to disclose it to whom?
In 2020 new regulations come into force that requires EU citizens to declare their worldwide wealth and income, failure to do so would be a criminal offense. Therefore if you are, for example an MEP with very large offshore investments you would not be very keen to have to declare that, currently, tax free income. That is why they are so desperate to get the U.K. out before these regulations come into force.
Boris Johnson’s suspension of parliament is an affront to democracy MPs must pass a no-confidence vote in the government and trigger a general election"
I note the statement does not say that the move was illegal or unconstitutional, which is good since in advance of the legal case it may be that it is perfectly legal. Focusing on it being a bad idea, never mind if it is legal, seems sound.
It is being presented in many places as though it were at the least constitutionally murky. The optics are very bad but perhaps it will all add to the drama when he presents the deal.
I would feel this a lot more likely without Cummings skulking around.
It may or may not be murky, but that's really just a detail when the action to stop him lies with parliament and does not need to rely on the courts agreeing it was murky, and they can wait for confirmation it was murky before hitting home hard with that.
Leaving the EU speedily does not. And yet it is speed which is prized. How very adolescent.
Article 50 set the 2 year deadline, not the UK.
Then the Government should have thought things through much more carefully and completely before triggering Article 50.
Whichever way you cut it it's down to the Tory party's gross incompetence we're in this mess.
Tory incompetence, Lib Dem intransigence, Labour game playing. There is a lot of blame to go round.
Just as Israel produces more history than can be consumed locally, so Brexit is producing more blame than can be digested by any one entity.
No... The Tories started the referendum process for their own internal political ends and at every point they have doubled down and made the crisis ever worse.
They have never offered the slightest gesture either to the nearly 50% who voted Remain or the large numbers of Leavers who wanted less political EU, but enough economic EU to be going on with. No compromise, no recognition, no sense, so now:
No EFTA No Single Market No Customs Union No Backstop
and now... a No Deal rammed through against the wishes of the clear majority of MPs and of the voters.
They are prepared to trash:
the economy, the union, the constitution the monarchy
in order to get an ultra hard Brexit
So the Tories own this fiasco and they can bloody well take whats coming to them.
Personally I can think of no humiliation that the repellent trio of Cummings, Mogg and Johnson do not deserve.
Utter crap, the Withdrawal Agreement was voted for by most Leave MPs 3 times but rejected by uncompromising die hard Remainers and Corbyn, despite the fact the political declaration was non binding.
Diehard Remainers and Labour deserve the humiliation of No Deal followed by Boris majority (even if I still back an amended Withdrawal Agreement) for their refusal to respect the Leave vote.
Is this the same Jeremy Corbyn who couldn't be bothered to be seen by photographers in the same room as Swinson, Blackford and the others?
They should have just about enough votes to install a new government and leader by a week today. Interesting that they don't mention it among the demands they make on others.
In order for that to happen it needs to happen very quickly and they don't have the leader who can command the confidence of the house. What I suspect BJ to do with a VoNC is to hold out for two weeks and make election day the same a B-Day. then he gets his no-deal and the election on the same day, it'd work as a strategy to get leavers to vote for him.
If there is not an identified new PM there won’t be a VONC, if there is then Johnson can’t hang on he has to go.
Boris Johnson’s suspension of parliament is an affront to democracy MPs must pass a no-confidence vote in the government and trigger a general election"
Yes they should - though of course that might result in Boris getting the backing for no deal in a GE which most of those upset at him want to avoid. Not guaranteed of course, I don't think he'd definitely do well, but if they want to stick it to him by ensuring we do not no deal, then passing a deal is the way to go rather than no confidence him, not agree on someone else, and trigger a GE.
Maybe it's time for voters to decide once again, in a general election.
Ken did good work as Chancellor but it is time for Ken to retire now.
That's what he's been trying to do for the last couple of years. he's already said that he'd stand down at the next election and is why he's the perfect candidate for a temporary PM
Another Con Gain at the next election for Brexit maths then.
He voted for Brexit.
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
Don't confuse May's deal with Brexit, he voted against Brexit.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
An oft made criticism of MPs who oppose no deal, but favour Brexit with a deal is that they should have “known what they were voting for when voting to trigger Article 50”. With the benefit of hindsight what would your advice have been to such an MP when the Article 50 vote came before the House?
To think seriously about the consequences of their votes. To understand that once a process has begun there are no guarantees as to how it will end.
Do you think that is unreasonable advice?
No, but for such an individual who “thought long and hard” and concluded that despite being a supporter of Brexit (with a deal as the referendum advocates promised) the risk of no deal was too great and voted against triggering - would you have 3 years down the line characterised them as a “remainer”, if events continued as they have?
Is this the same Jeremy Corbyn who couldn't be bothered to be seen by photographers in the same room as Swinson, Blackford and the others?
They should have just about enough votes to install a new government and leader by a week today. Interesting that they don't mention it among the demands they make on others.
In order for that to happen it needs to happen very quickly and they don't have the leader who can command the confidence of the house. What I suspect BJ to do with a VoNC is to hold out for two weeks and make election day the same a B-Day. then he gets his no-deal and the election on the same day, it'd work as a strategy to get leavers to vote for him.
If there is not an identified new PM there won’t be a VONC, if there is then Johnson can’t hang on he has to go.
If there is no VoNC he'll just hang on anyway and get no-deal.
There are going to be lots of posters with Swinson in Corbyns pocket in Con/Lib marginals and Corbyn in Nicola's pocket in Con/Lab marginals.
Yeah but the killer image will be Johnson with his pants on fire... Childish nonsense of course, but the cartoon image of the Tories will hit home harder.
Leaving the EU speedily does not. And yet it is speed which is prized. How very adolescent.
Article 50 set the 2 year deadline, not the UK.
Then the Government should have thought things through much more carefully and completely before triggering Article 50.
Whichever way you cut it it's down to the Tory party's gross incompetence we're in this mess.
Tory incompetence, Lib Dem intransigence, Labour game playing. There is a lot of blame to go round.
Just as Israel produces more history than can be consumed locally, so Brexit is producing more blame than can be digested by any one entity.
No... The Tories started the referendum process for their own internal political ends and at every point they have doubled down and made the crisis ever worse.
They have never offered the slightest gesture either to the nearly 50% who voted Remain or the large numbers of Leavers who wanted less political EU, but enough economic EU to be going on with. No compromise, no recognition, no sense, so now:
No EFTA No Single Market No Customs Union No Backstop
and now... a No Deal rammed through against the wishes of the clear majority of MPs and of the voters.
They are prepared to trash:
the economy, the union, the constitution the monarchy
in order to get an ultra hard Brexit
So the Tories own this fiasco and they can bloody well take whats coming to them.
Personally I can think of no humiliation that the repellent trio of Cummings, Mogg and Johnson do not deserve.
But as long as they make money out of it it will all be worth it. This was never an argument about principle it was about saving millions in undeclared revenue and making money by betting against the pound.
Who got what revenue from where and failed to disclose it to whom?
In 2020 new regulations come into force that requires EU citizens to declare their worldwide wealth and income, failure to do so would be a criminal offense. Therefore if you are, for example an MEP with very large offshore investments you would not be very keen to have to declare that, currently, tax free income. That is why they are so desperate to get the U.K. out before these regulations come into force.
Sounds a bit batshit to me. If they haven't been declaring this money to HMRC why wouldn't they just not declare it to the EU as well?
Comments
We'll see though, we've got our seat belt on and if there's to be a collision then so be it.
https://tinyurl.com/yy2k9llr
These dreadful Nats with their made up anecdotes.
'I realise that anecdotes are not evidence but I am struck by how frequently I hear people all over the country saying that they have now changed their minds and would vote for independence if there was another referendum.'
It is noticeable that there is no clamour amongst other EU members to follow the UK's example. Brexit has if nothing else helped bind the EU together.
Such a problem. What on earth can be done.
I could see a moderate labour candidate win against a brexit ultra tory candidate though. even a more moderate tory could lose if TBP stand
And what is his view of referendums and whether the outcome should be respected?
If Somerset North East were to be taken by a pro-Brexit candidate, that would change the maths a bit.
The option of 'swerving' would exist until the moment of impact.
I believe the same would not be true of the EU, but please correct me if I am wrong.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/08/29/voting-intention-con-34-lab-22-lib-dem-17-brex-13-
Maybe having been shown the very edge of the abyss, enough MPs will pass a WA?
what could happen is a request for an extension with the condition of an election / referendum. the SO for that could go through in a day
And for all this talk about how they “would” have cancelled the recess for the Party conferences. I really don’t see how that would have worked without also cancelling the conferences. Maybe they could have just cancelled the recess for the Libdem one...! After all the SNP conference normally falls outside the recess.
The Murdo Fraser party has a nice ring to it, mind.
Farage and the Brexit Party would destroy them. They wouldn't care much for that abyss either.
He voted against the referendum and he voted against Article 50 and he voted in favour of extending Article 50
He was the ONLY Tory MP to vote against Brexit when Article 50 was triggered.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/02/mps-who-voted-against-article-50
The simple fact is Rees-Mogg had the option to vote to leave the EU. He voted not to. Ken Clarke did.
So it's Somerset NE, not Rushcliffe, that needs a change of MP if we're to leave.
Which explains why pro EU types have never accepted the original 2016 vote.
It's telling that the National Crime Agency still has not pronounced on the file handed to it by the electoral commission as to the true source of the Banks donation.
Never mind the fact that Cameron foolishly allowed Leave to be completely undefined, which explains why noone really can say what it should be now. At least the Scots Nats had the decency to produce a full manifesto that was debated.
And what about the way Liddington scoffed at Salmond as he tried to put across the point that such a massive change requires a supermajority. "Oh no silly man it is just advisory" smirk smirk.
The Tory party will only exist long term, let alone form a government, if it can cure itself of this fundamentalism.
Go on block those roads and bridges - it's a great idea
Yes, but they could have brought it back before by suspending standing orders, if they had the votes to pass it at all. They didn't and don't, since Boris won't bring it back - he could have essentially promised a new deal or no deal to be out, do or die, and then reluctantly stated parliament would block no deal, there was no new deal, so back to the WA it was as a 'do or die' moment. He hasn't, he's ramped up his attacks on it, never refers to the old deal without talking about the anti-democratic backstop. Sure we know he personally could accept the backstop because he voted for it, but he's effectively ruled out backing the WA again - it's election if no deal does not happen, not reintroducing the WA.
And if someone else tried reintroducing it Boris will surely whip against it, and how many are Tory loyalists and this not going to lend their votes to it again?
A stronger point is that the Leave campaign barely mentioned the possibility of a No Deal Brexit, and to the extent it did portrayed it as extremely unlikely. Indeed it strongly indicated that a Deal would be very easy to negotiate and that we 'held all the cards'.
The consequences of such misrepresentation are now all too apparent and undermine the authority of those who are prepared to take us out of the EU without a deal.
They have never offered the slightest gesture either to the nearly 50% who voted Remain or the large numbers of Leavers who wanted less political EU, but enough economic EU to be going on with. No compromise, no recognition, no sense, so now:
No EFTA
No Single Market
No Customs Union
No Backstop
and now... a No Deal rammed through against the wishes of the clear majority of MPs and of the voters.
They are prepared to trash:
the economy,
the union,
the constitution
the monarchy
in order to get an ultra hard Brexit
So the Tories own this fiasco and they can bloody well take whats coming to them.
Personally I can think of no humiliation that the repellent trio of Cummings, Mogg and Johnson do not deserve.
Ken Clarke was the only Tory to vote against Article 50 and beginning the Brexit process. He was one of only 17 Tories to vote for the Spelman amendment to 'definitively rule out No Deal'. He was one of the minority of Tory MPs to vote to extend Article 50.
How is that "centralist"?
I live just outside the constituency so cannot assist, one way or the other. I'm stuck with Laurence Robertson, of whom the least said the better.
Do you think that is unreasonable advice?
The problem I have as a voter is there is nothing I can vote for which will actually make a difference. I have, throughout my life, always lived in seats at a council level or parliament level which my vote didn't matter. I currently live in both a ward and constituency which have voted labour for my entire life (as far as I'm aware). Even at the next local council elections where the labour councillor up for election who is distrusted and responsible for some shady, if not outright corrupt, practices will still be elected.
it's not right but at the moment it is what it is.
Clarke understood that Parliament had voted in a way that could result in No Deal and he seized onto a soft deal when presented to him. Shame for Remainers that so many of his fellow travellers on Europe didn't follow his lead.
Did you vote Labour at GE 2015?
The only ones of the UK parties which are fighting the next election are the greens (who always fight with the same strategy) and the Lib Dems.
Boris Johnson’s suspension of parliament is an affront to democracy
MPs must pass a no-confidence vote in the government and trigger a general election"
https://www.ft.com/content/9dbc7852-c9b2-11e9-af46-b09e8bfe60c0
I would feel this a lot more likely without Cummings skulking around.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-bristol-49501692/metal-detectorists-find-hoard-of-norman-coins-in-somerset#
Diehard Remainers and Labour deserve the humiliation of No Deal followed by Boris majority (even if I still back an amended Withdrawal Agreement) for their refusal to respect the Leave vote.