Cummings works for the PM and has been authorised by the PM to take responsibility for stopping SPADs from leaking and authorised by the PM to fire any SPADs who are doing so.
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
HYUFD is Squealer from Animal Farm
if you cant cope with contrary opinions why do you come on a politcal chatroom ?
It's not posters with opposing opinions that is the problem.
It's the continous circle of rebbuttal using another untruth which has already been retutted 24 hours ago which is very tiresome.
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
I did a bit of Googling and found this quote by Goebbels (1941)
"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous"
It is almost like he could peer 78 years into the future and see Boris
Cummings works for the PM and has been authorised by the PM to take responsibility for stopping SPADs from leaking and authorised by the PM to fire any SPADs who are doing so.
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
Perhaps he is... or do you know all the details of all the telephone calls that Mr Javid has made in the last 24 hours.
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
HYUFD is Squealer from Animal Farm
if you cant cope with contrary opinions why do you come on a politcal chatroom ?
I've no problem with well-reasoned arguments that contradict my views. But it's tedious to constantly read post after post of embarrassingly facile attempts at statistical manipulation of poll results
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
I did a bit of Googling and found this quote by Goebbels (1941)
"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous"
It is almost like he could peer 78 years into the future and see Boris
Evelyn Waugh said, after his experiences of the rather shambolic Allied withdrawal from Crete in May-June 1941:
“The English are a very base people. I did not know this, living as I do. Now I know them through and through, and they disgust me.”
No one ever votes for any coalition in any country. But the resulting Government did get over 50% of the votes.
It's very amusing that the proponents of PR are often the same people who hated the coalition.
I hope you are not including me in your statement. I am very pro both. I am though of the opinion that Mr Clegg *#%$-ed up the coalition in a pretty major way. And I accept that not eveyone agrees with me on that.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
So you would be OK with an NI-only backstop if the people of NI could remove it should they so wish? This has not been suggested by anyone. I think it’s the best solution.
No one ever votes for any coalition in any country. But the resulting Government did get over 50% of the votes.
It's very amusing that the proponents of PR are often the same people who hated the coalition.
I hope you are not including me in your statement. I am very pro both. I am though of the opinion that Mr Clegg *#%$-ed up the coalition in a pretty major way. And I accept that not eveyone agrees with me on that.
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
So you would be OK with an NI-only backstop if the people of NI could remove it should they so wish? This has not been suggested by anyone. I think it’s the best solution.
Isn’t that the case anyway? The Good Friday agreement means that a majority leads to a united Ireland and in such a circumstance the Backstop ceases to be an issue.
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
I did a bit of Googling and found this quote by Goebbels (1941)
"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous"
It is almost like he could peer 78 years into the future and see Boris
Dear Diary, today the Remainers were happily quoting the insight of Goebbels.....
Cummings works for the PM and has been authorised by the PM to take responsibility for stopping SPADs from leaking and authorised by the PM to fire any SPADs who are doing so.
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
I'd have been VERY cross if someone in Cummings position had fired one of my staff, even if for a serious offence, without telling me first. Suspended yes, no problem.
Cummings works for the PM and has been authorised by the PM to take responsibility for stopping SPADs from leaking and authorised by the PM to fire any SPADs who are doing so.
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
I'd have been VERY cross if someone in Cummings position had fired one of my staff, even if for a serious offence, without telling me first. Suspended yes, no problem.
This Gov't is doing remarkably little leaking compared to the May ministry though.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
What about a free trade zone. What if NI was made one of those? Would that be ok?
No one ever votes for any coalition in any country. But the resulting Government did get over 50% of the votes.
It's very amusing that the proponents of PR are often the same people who hated the coalition.
I hope you are not including me in your statement. I am very pro both. I am though of the opinion that Mr Clegg *#%$-ed up the coalition in a pretty major way. And I accept that not eveyone agrees with me on that.
I wasn't addressing it at you or anyone else specifically, just making a general point.
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
HYUFD is Squealer from Animal Farm
if you cant cope with contrary opinions why do you come on a politcal chatroom ?
I've no problem with well-reasoned arguments that contradict my views. But it's tedious to constantly read post after post of embarrassingly facile attempts at statistical manipulation of poll results
So you don't like contrary views which YOU judge to be badly argued. Handy let out clause.
Cummings works for the PM and has been authorised by the PM to take responsibility for stopping SPADs from leaking and authorised by the PM to fire any SPADs who are doing so.
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
I doubt Boris's input was even sought. Boris is looking increasingly like Cummings's puppet.
Cummings works for the PM and has been authorised by the PM to take responsibility for stopping SPADs from leaking and authorised by the PM to fire any SPADs who are doing so.
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
I'd have been VERY cross if someone in Cummings position had fired one of my staff, even if for a serious offence, without telling me first. Suspended yes, no problem.
No 10 SPADs having authority above that of Ministers has been the case since Alastair Campbell. It is the premise behind the Thick Of It.
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
I did a bit of Googling and found this quote by Goebbels (1941)
"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous"
It is almost like he could peer 78 years into the future and see Boris
Dear Diary, today the Remainers were happily quoting the insight of Goebbels.....
Yup - and they really did crush the saboteurs. The hypocricy on display is epic.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
What about a free trade zone. What if NI was made one of those? Would that be ok?
If the EU agreed to ditch the backstop in return. From your insight on NI, are the naughty boys going to be taking up arms to stop a free trade zone?
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
HYUFD is Squealer from Animal Farm
if you cant cope with contrary opinions why do you come on a politcal chatroom ?
I've no problem with well-reasoned arguments that contradict my views. But it's tedious to constantly read post after post of embarrassingly facile attempts at statistical manipulation of poll results
So you don't like contrary views which YOU judge to be badly argued. Handy let out clause.
Misuse of statistics is a clear cut case. No subjectivity required.
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
Nonsense! Epping is linked to civilisation by the Central line
Has anyone picked up that in Shetland last night BOTH Labour and the Tories lost their deposits? Indeed they got such a hammering that they wouldn't have saved one adding their votes together.
That must be pretty rare.
But it does feel that the people of Shetland may be speaking for the country on how they view the Westminster performance of the 'big two'
SNP still below the 37% they got in Orkney and Shetland in 2015
It's a tedious game, but how did the SCon candidate's performance in Shetland last night compare to O&S in 2015, or indeed 2017?
This was a Tory seat (although the Libs had held it pre-war) until the late Jo Grimond won it in 1950, the only Liberal gain from anyone anywhere, in a three way fight until the Orpington by-election in 1962.
Also Torrington in 1958! And North Devon at 1959 GE.
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
The remainer mindset at its finest.....
I really hate this mentality that certain parts of the country are less legitimate voices than others. Whether you live in Islington or Essex, we live in a democracy and everybody's voice is as legitimate as anyone else's.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
What about a free trade zone. What if NI was made one of those? Would that be ok?
If the EU agreed to ditch the backstop in return. From your insight on NI, are the naughty boys going to be taking up arms to stop a free trade zone?
Is Dublin?
As I mentioned on the previous thread I think it is a go-er. It is of course the backstop by another name and puts a border in the Irish Sea so it is the DUP who would be upset not the boyos.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
What about a free trade zone. What if NI was made one of those? Would that be ok?
Better than that, make it a British Trade Zone. A special territory that is able to freely trade with the EU with no barriers.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
So you would be OK with an NI-only backstop if the people of NI could remove it should they so wish? This has not been suggested by anyone. I think it’s the best solution.
Isn’t that the case anyway? The Good Friday agreement means that a majority leads to a united Ireland and in such a circumstance the Backstop ceases to be an issue.
Wasn't this suggested but vetoed by TMay due to it being a NI-only arrangement, which upset the DUP?
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
HYUFD is Squealer from Animal Farm
if you cant cope with contrary opinions why do you come on a politcal chatroom ?
I've no problem with well-reasoned arguments that contradict my views. But it's tedious to constantly read post after post of embarrassingly facile attempts at statistical manipulation of poll results
So you don't like contrary views which YOU judge to be badly argued. Handy let out clause.
Misuse of statistics is a clear cut case. No subjectivity required.
Nope - your misuse of stats is another person's psephological skill. It's a forum for debatibg opinions.
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
The remainer mindset at its finest.....
I really hate this mentality that certain parts of the country are less legitimate voices than others. Whether you live in Islington or Essex, we live in a democracy and everybody's voice is as legitimate as anyone else's.
I have lived in both in the last twelve months and absolutely everyone seems to consider my voice illegitimate. So I suppose that's a sort of equality.
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
The remainer mindset at its finest.....
I really hate this mentality that certain parts of the country are less legitimate voices than others. Whether you live in Islington or Essex, we live in a democracy and everybody's voice is as legitimate as anyone else's.
Its not that. @HYUFD claims to speak for the working class of Midlands and North from this wealthy Essex suburb yet I grew up in the West Midlands, a child of immigrants and now live in the North East. The very person he’s talking about.
Kamala Harris has inextricably moved back into 8.4/8.8 in the Democrat nominee market.
Tulsa Gabbard 110/120 and Michelle Obama 120/130 and Clinton 48/60 also worth noting. Two are non runners and I have no idea how Gabbard is going to get traction without being part of the 10 on the debate stage.
Yang 23/24 when Klobuchar, O 'Rourke and Castro are all (correctly) in the low 100s too also still worth laying.
Cummings works for the PM and has been authorised by the PM to take responsibility for stopping SPADs from leaking and authorised by the PM to fire any SPADs who are doing so.
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
Surely there would need to be disciplinary procedures to be followed - including the possibility of an appeal etc? She might be well placed at an Employment Tribunal.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
What about a free trade zone. What if NI was made one of those? Would that be ok?
If the EU agreed to ditch the backstop in return. From your insight on NI, are the naughty boys going to be taking up arms to stop a free trade zone?
Is Dublin?
As I mentioned on the previous thread I think it is a go-er. It is of course the backstop by another name and puts a border in the Irish Sea so it is the DUP who would be upset not the boyos.
The trick to me was always giving NI something it could tout as a "special economic status" which would help bring in much-needed commercial activity.
The DUP should be able sell that to their supporters. Especially if Boris throws in a feasability study for a tunnel/bridge combo to Scotland and so on to England --> Europe.
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
The remainer mindset at its finest.....
I really hate this mentality that certain parts of the country are less legitimate voices than others. Whether you live in Islington or Essex, we live in a democracy and everybody's voice is as legitimate as anyone else's.
Its not that. @HYUFD claims to speak for the working class of Midlands and North from this wealthy Essex suburb yet I grew up in the West Midlands, a child of immigrants and now live in the North East. The very person he’s talking about.
Don't be a fool. He knows a lot more about you than you do. Just look at the crosstabs.
Roger Mortimore, Director of Political Analysis at Ipsos MORI, said:
The majority of the public are unhappy with the way the Prime Minister is handling the Brexit issue and oppose his decision to shut down Parliament for a month – but it is playing well with the group that it is intended to please, Conservatives and Leave voters. What is more, the other party leaders do not seem to be well enough regarded to unite opponents of the PM behind them.
That's odd Johnson getting overstated. You'd have thought it would be the opposite. For example I am far more likely to vote for him than ever admit to anyone that I am even considering it. I'd be too embarrassed and would be risking social exclusion.
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
I did a bit of Googling and found this quote by Goebbels (1941)
"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous"
It is almost like he could peer 78 years into the future and see Boris
Dear Diary, today the Remainers were happily quoting the insight of Goebbels.....
Yup - and they really did crush the saboteurs. The hypocricy on display is epic.
I will just remind you that "Crush the Saboteurs" came from a Brexit supporting newspaper with a picture of a PM negotiating our exit from the EU.
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
I disagree with almost everything Mr B posts, but I'm not having Essex traduced!
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
The remainer mindset at its finest.....
Is that supposed to be an insult?
I think he is suggesting that you are suggesting that that leavers are generally simplistic pariochials and it is not PC for you to remind them so, or to remind them perhaps that they are complicit in doing the bidding of Vladimir Putin perhaps? Maybe he thinks that those with a "Remainer mindset" think Leavers are generally gullible fools whose fantasies are responsible for wrecking our system of democracy? He would be right.
The trick to me was always giving NI something it could tout as a "special economic status" which would help bring in much-needed commercial activity.
The DUP should be able sell that to their supporters. Especially if Boris throws in a feasability study for a tunnel/bridge combo to Scotland and so on to England --> Europe.
Agree. Everyone needs to find a way to climb down with honour. If Boris can point to Teeside and other regions and say - as with them, so with NI, then absolutely. SEZ sounds positively positive.
Will such practicality come to pass? Not sure. Would Francois, et al be equally persuaded? Hope so.
I guess there's a fairly reasonable argument for people like musicians, who (hopefully) bring pleasure to a whole bunch of people, to travel to their fans. Rather than staying in one place and encouraging all their fans to travel from around the world...After all music is one of the things that we can enjoy that doesn't have a massive carbon footprint.
This particular MP is anyway definitely a colossal knob.
He has hit the nail on the head, a bunch of hypocrites, fine for them to make millions and pollute the world but hey don't you peasants think about going anywhere.
I dunno, if you have to travel because of the work you do, it's different to choosing to fly around the world on holiday. (I know nothing at all about this band, maybe they are hypocrites, it doesn't really matter, it's not as important as a legislator like David Davies using them as a pathetic excuse for his shitty failure to take any action on the climate crisis.)
As for making millions, it's funny how it's usually the people who demand tougher action on the climate crisis are the same people who demand action to reduce inequality. Whereas knobs like David Davies who pretend that the '"climate crisis"' doesn't exist, are usually the same people demanding tax breaks for the rich and more inequality. But totally agree with you, inequality is a massive problem.
They aren’t supposed to. It was a signal of intent. Everyone knows what it’s really for, it just can’t be easily proven. Even if it’s found to be unlawful, that’s useful for positioning Boris where he wants to be.
A separate question is whether being so clearly identified with Brexit at all costs can win a majority in the end. I think it probably can, but I can see the case against.
Too early to have universal name recognition Johnson has been around for years as has farage and corbyn has been leader for over three years. So your comment verges on spiteful
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls.
Once again he and his fellow Tory cultists have shown that democracy does not matter and the only thing that does matter is beating Jeremy Corbyn.
There is no majority in any poll for Remain or any Brexit Option.
Most Remainers back Revoke, most Leavers now back No Deal and the only compromise on the table, the Withdrawal Agreement, was rejected by MPs 3 times.
So tough
We arent going to no deal, so indeed it is tough on leavers.
I'm increasingly of the view that we are not going to leave at all. Johnson is going to crash and burn and he will take Brexit down with him.
You may well be right. After the extension and election expect another hung parliament with a majority for nothing bar blocking no deal, so another year or two of staying on the roundabout, then who knows what, but quite possibly no Brexit at all.
Is the Court going to say how many days the prorogation can last? Or ban it completely?
The court would declare the PM's advice illegal, but can't do anything about the prorogation itself, since that power belongs to the monarch.
Would be a difficult situation then for the Queen - she could revoke the prorogation, although it'd be embarrassing. Perhaps more likely, she'd get new advice from the PM to reduce the period by a few days. That'd satisfy everyone.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
What about a free trade zone. What if NI was made one of those? Would that be ok?
So long as their voters were happy with that, could change that and got to vote on laws that apply to them then yes of course.
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
I did a bit of Googling and found this quote by Goebbels (1941)
"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous"
It is almost like he could peer 78 years into the future and see Boris
Dear Diary, today the Remainers were happily quoting the insight of Goebbels.....
Yup - and they really did crush the saboteurs. The hypocricy on display is epic.
I will just remind you that "Crush the Saboteurs" came from a Brexit supporting newspaper with a picture of a PM negotiating our exit from the EU.
Nothing to do with Remainers.
OMG You miss the point spectacularly. It was rightly condemned at the time for the tone by lots of remainers. and let's not forget yesterday's suggestion by Philip Pullman that he'd like Boris to be strung up.
@Alanbrooke I’m happy to discuss political theory however it is tiresome to debate what the will of the people is with someone who’s whole view of the will of the people is shaped in an insular Essex backwater.
The remainer mindset at its finest.....
I really hate this mentality that certain parts of the country are less legitimate voices than others. Whether you live in Islington or Essex, we live in a democracy and everybody's voice is as legitimate as anyone else's.
I have lived in both in the last twelve months and absolutely everyone seems to consider my voice illegitimate. So I suppose that's a sort of equality.
When you say your "voice", do you mean what you have to say, or do you speak like Jacob Rees-Mogg, for example, or perhaps Janet Street Porter, neither of whom have very appealing voices?
Cummings works for the PM and has been authorised by the PM to take responsibility for stopping SPADs from leaking and authorised by the PM to fire any SPADs who are doing so.
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
Surely there would need to be disciplinary procedures to be followed - including the possibility of an appeal etc? She might be well placed at an Employment Tribunal.
It depends upon job security doesn't it? Not all jobs have the same level of security.
EG in general if someone has been employed for less than 2 years then unless dismissal is due to discrimination or contractual obligations haven't been followed then Employment Tribunals won't normally hear the case.
Cummings works for the PM and has been authorised by the PM to take responsibility for stopping SPADs from leaking and authorised by the PM to fire any SPADs who are doing so.
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
I doubt Boris's input was even sought. Boris is looking increasingly like Cummings's puppet.
If Boris has said "get this done" then he may not want input to be sought. He keeps his hands clean and the leaking ends.
Cummings works for the PM and has been authorised by the PM to take responsibility for stopping SPADs from leaking and authorised by the PM to fire any SPADs who are doing so.
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
I'd have been VERY cross if someone in Cummings position had fired one of my staff, even if for a serious offence, without telling me first. Suspended yes, no problem.
Indeed. OTOH if you'd been told by your boss that there was a serious case of gross misconduct of leaking that is damaging your organisation and that any staff who continue to it will be instantly dismissed if caught . . . would that change things?
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
I did a bit of Googling and found this quote by Goebbels (1941)
"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous"
It is almost like he could peer 78 years into the future and see Boris
Dear Diary, today the Remainers were happily quoting the insight of Goebbels.....
Yup - and they really did crush the saboteurs. The hypocricy on display is epic.
I will just remind you that "Crush the Saboteurs" came from a Brexit supporting newspaper with a picture of a PM negotiating our exit from the EU.
Nothing to do with Remainers.
OMG You miss the point spectacularly. It was rightly condemned at the time for the tone by lots of remainers. and let's not forget yesterday's suggestion by Philip Pull-on that he'd like Boris to be strung up.
Phoney outrage. ( I say that in the patronising style of Jacob Rees-Mogg)
Had I been treated like that by Cummings, I would not have taken it lightly. I would have replied - apparently in front of other Spads - 'You are due to undergo surgery in November - and I hope something Terminal is found. This world would be better off without vermin like you!'. I would also have made myself available to Broadcasters whilst also taking the matter to Court.
So, YouGov shows a small overall swing to anti-No Deal parties since Johnson decided to close down Parliament. And IPSOS-Mori shows that the biggest contribution Jeremy Corbyn could make to preventing a No Deal Brexit would be to stand down as Labour leader.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
What about a free trade zone. What if NI was made one of those? Would that be ok?
So long as their voters were happy with that, could change that and got to vote on laws that apply to them then yes of course.
They wouldn't be able to vote on it, it would be Westminster.
@HYUFD constantly tells us that Boris is representing the ‘silent majority’ and then just ignores any evidence to the contrary. If Boris was delivering the Brexit the majority wanted then that would clearly show in the polls
Was it Mao or Stalin that said "Repeat a lie often enough and it will become the truth"?
Maybe that explains the Brexiteer strategy?
@HYUFD is certainly apt in repeating lies and misleading statements ad nauseam.
I did a bit of Googling and found this quote by Goebbels (1941)
"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous"
It is almost like he could peer 78 years into the future and see Boris
Dear Diary, today the Remainers were happily quoting the insight of Goebbels.....
Yup - and they really did crush the saboteurs. The hypocricy on display is epic.
I will just remind you that "Crush the Saboteurs" came from a Brexit supporting newspaper with a picture of a PM negotiating our exit from the EU.
Nothing to do with Remainers.
OMG You miss the point spectacularly. It was rightly condemned at the time for the tone by lots of remainers. and let's not forget yesterday's suggestion by Philip Pull-on that he'd like Boris to be strung up.
Phoney outrage. ( I say that in the patronising style of Jacob Rees-Mogg)
There's an awful lot of it about on both sides. People prefer it to compromise at the moment.
So, YouGov shows a small overall swing to anti-No Deal parties since Johnson decided to close down Parliament. And IPSOS-Mori shows that the biggest contribution Jeremy Corbyn could make to preventing a No Deal Brexit would be to stand down as Labour leader.
Mostly margin of error though maybe not for Jeremy.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
What about a free trade zone. What if NI was made one of those? Would that be ok?
So long as their voters were happy with that, could change that and got to vote on laws that apply to them then yes of course.
They wouldn't be able to vote on it, it would be Westminster.
Said this before but the LibDems made a big mistake voting in a lightweight leader. Ed Davey would be much more credible. They made exactly the same mistake with choosing Farron over Lamb.
So you do not believe that all those who make the law should be elected. Neither you nor I have any say whatsoever in, for example, the selection of the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (a non-EU body) who can decide on what can and cannot be patented in the UK, whatever the UK government might think.
The European Parliament ratifies and rejects proposed laws. It cannot make them.
No I do believe that all those who make the law should be elected.
The EP is a legislature. It ratifies, rejects and I believe amends proposed laws. It absolutely should be elected.
Quangos should be kept to a minimum but don't make the law they operate within the confines of the laws the legislature has passed and can be overriden or even abolished by a change of the law if the electorate so demand. If the UK government chooses to leave the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office then it should have the right to do so.
The judiciary implements and interprets the laws the legislature has passed but if a subsequent Parliament passes a law overriding the judiciaries decision then judiciary should and must let the subsequent law take precedence.
In the same way with, say, EFTA membership if the UK no longer wishes to be part of the single market and customs union it could withdraw. It could also pull out of the backstop if it so wished - or it could agree with the EU that the people of Northern Ireland would have the right to pull out of the backstop if it were NI only.
"If"
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
What about a free trade zone. What if NI was made one of those? Would that be ok?
So long as their voters were happy with that, could change that and got to vote on laws that apply to them then yes of course.
They wouldn't be able to vote on it, it would be Westminster.
Javid has been emasculated and humiliated. I genuinely cannot believe he has not resigned.
LOL!
The PM has always had the right to fire all SPADs. Firing a SPAD who committed Gross Misconduct after being warned what the consequences would be if they continued to commit Gross Misconduct is anything but emasculation and humiliation.
The leaking culture needs to end and this may do it.
Tories losing two to Lib Dems for every one gained from Brexit Party?
You will send HYUFD (aka Comical Ali) into melt down
Of course, what we don't know is the propensity for further moves in polling. You might expect Lib Dem leaning Tories to be paying more attention than Brexit Party leaning Tories. And I know it will take a lot for some people to go back to the Tories from the Brexit Party.
Comments
Cummings doesn't need to discuss with Javid firing one of his SPADs prior to doing so, since Cummings authority derives from the PMs instructions. If Javid has an issue he should take it up with the PM not Cummings.
If the EU agreed that the backstop could be unilaterally removed then that would be fine with me I've said that. They haven't and are vehemently against that, so no.
It's the continous circle of rebbuttal using another untruth which has already been retutted 24 hours ago which is very tiresome.
That's one of your best yet
How come it's "Sir" John Major, but "Lord" Lilley? Major was PM after all.
“The English are a very base people. I did not know this, living as I do. Now I know them through and through, and they disgust me.”
Is Dublin?
Is the Court going to say how many days the prorogation can last? Or ban it completely?
The latter would seem a bit extreme and would prevent a Queens Speech.
Yang 23/24 when Klobuchar, O 'Rourke and Castro are all (correctly) in the low 100s too also still worth laying.
The DUP should be able sell that to their supporters. Especially if Boris throws in a feasability study for a tunnel/bridge combo to Scotland and so on to England --> Europe.
Roger Mortimore, Director of Political Analysis at Ipsos MORI, said:
The majority of the public are unhappy with the way the Prime Minister is handling the Brexit issue and oppose his decision to shut down Parliament for a month – but it is playing well with the group that it is intended to please, Conservatives and Leave voters. What is more, the other party leaders do not seem to be well enough regarded to unite opponents of the PM behind them.
Nothing to do with Remainers.
Faintly ridiculous.
Will such practicality come to pass? Not sure. Would Francois, et al be equally persuaded? Hope so.
As for making millions, it's funny how it's usually the people who demand tougher action on the climate crisis are the same people who demand action to reduce inequality. Whereas knobs like David Davies who pretend that the '"climate crisis"' doesn't exist, are usually the same people demanding tax breaks for the rich and more inequality. But totally agree with you, inequality is a massive problem.
A separate question is whether being so clearly identified with Brexit at all costs can win a majority in the end. I think it probably can, but I can see the case against.
Boris -15%
Corbyn -55%
Swinson - 29%
Farage - 27%
Boris playing a blinder......
The court would declare the PM's advice illegal, but can't do anything about the prorogation itself, since that power belongs to the monarch.
Would be a difficult situation then for the Queen - she could revoke the prorogation, although it'd be embarrassing. Perhaps more likely, she'd get new advice from the PM to reduce the period by a few days. That'd satisfy everyone.
Swinson has dissatisfied all leavers
Johnson and Farage pretty much all remainers I assume
Then out of nowhere Corbyn manages 70% !!
He's pissed everyone off.
EG in general if someone has been employed for less than 2 years then unless dismissal is due to discrimination or contractual obligations haven't been followed then Employment Tribunals won't normally hear the case.
The PM has always had the right to fire all SPADs. Firing a SPAD who committed Gross Misconduct after being warned what the consequences would be if they continued to commit Gross Misconduct is anything but emasculation and humiliation.
The leaking culture needs to end and this may do it.