While Mrs May is loyal to the party, I suspect that she’ll enjoy her revenge cold. Johnson was an embarrassing disaster yesterday - though that shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone.
I'm not sure a People vs Parliament election really works. It's a very powerful narrative now, but once you dissolve parliament, there's no more parliament to run against.
I think the campaign just turns into either a regular Con vs Lab vs LD intra-party food fight or a de-facto second Brexit referendum.
One thing I don't think has been extensively commented on is how many other Conservative MPs backed the Government last night but had secret sympathies with the rebels. MPs like Theresa May and Damian Hinds. They kept their powder dry because they didn't need to do anything else - the rebels had the numbers.
If they are re-elected post a new GE (as they haven't lost the whip) I would necessarily count on them as lobby fodder under all scenarios either. That matters if the result of the next GE is also indecisive.
Which i think it will be.
While Mrs May is loyal to the party, I suspect that she’ll enjoy her revenge cold. Johnson was an embarrassing disaster yesterday - though that shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone.
I personally wonder whether BJ has blown his leadership credentials out of the water...even if he leads them into a GE I cant see him surviving as a PM or even as a leader - the Tory grandees have either been kicked out (Heseltine, Hammond,Clarke, Soames), are taking legal action (Major) or are extremely quiet (May, Cameron, Hague)....have the men in grey (or white) suits already made up their minds?
Boris has to make clear he will not ask for an extension, law or no law
He already said he'll follow the law, if he keeps telling blatant lies then Farage is going to run on "this guy lies all the time, how can we trust him to deliver a real brexit?"
RAF training cock-ups lead to shortage of pilots. It is leaving the RAF short of 125 new pilots a year while in July 145 students had been waiting 90 weeks to be trained.
The situation is exposed today in a report by the National Audit Office. It blames the backlog on defence reviews cutting — then increasing — how many pilots the RAF might need.
The car crash of Bozo Johnson is compelling yet painful to watch. What were the Tories thinking when choosing a man who make Corbyn look Prime Ministerial?
In my insomnia been doing some Corbyn GNU calcs following a VONC 293 Tory plus 10 dup are NO =303 Leaves 650 - 303 - speakers- sinn fein = 336, majority 33, Assuming the ex Tory rebels abstain majority 12, he only needs to lose 7 and it's no go for a Corbyn GNU. So basically change UK, Ian Austin and one other, there's probably 10 more that would not accept him Hed struggle I think even with active support from a batch of the 21. Snp plus LD plus Lucas plus Plaid is not enough
The car crash of Bozo Johnson is compelling yet painful to watch. What were the Tories thinking when choosing a man who make Corbyn look Prime Ministerial?
Before we get too smug, bear in mind that the next opinion poll may well show Boris on 40% and Labour on 24%. All the other candidates would have had a variation on the same problem, only they wouldn't have had the "have an election and win a humongous majority" card to play.
In my insomnia been doing some Corbyn GNU calcs following a VONC 293 Tory plus 10 dup are NO =303 Leaves 650 - 303 - speakers- sinn fein = 336, majority 33, Assuming the ex Tory rebels abstain majority 12, he only needs to lose 7 and it's no go for a Corbyn GNU. So basically change UK, Ian Austin and one other, there's probably 10 more that would not accept him Hed struggle I think even with active support from a batch of the 21. Snp plus LD plus Lucas plus Plaid is not enough
I wouldn't be surprised if the ex-Cons vote for Corbyn, since the alternative would be losing their jobs. They're probably actually an easier nut to crack than the LibDems.
BTW mad props to @AlistairMeeks for calling how this would all play out, particularly the part where Boris demands an election and Labour just leave him hanging there.
In my insomnia been doing some Corbyn GNU calcs following a VONC 293 Tory plus 10 dup are NO =303 Leaves 650 - 303 - speakers- sinn fein = 336, majority 33, Assuming the ex Tory rebels abstain majority 12, he only needs to lose 7 and it's no go for a Corbyn GNU. So basically change UK, Ian Austin and one other, there's probably 10 more that would not accept him Hed struggle I think even with active support from a batch of the 21. Snp plus LD plus Lucas plus Plaid is not enough
I wouldn't be surprised if the Tory rebels vote for Corbyn, since the alternative would be losing their jobs. They're probably actually an easier nut to crack than the LibDems.
Unlikely, they are profoundly at odds with him on everything except delaying Brexit and supporting him would frankly validate their expulsion wouldn't it? If Benn passes what good is a Corbyn government to them? Even if all 21 have a Damasccene conversion to Marxism he could still fall short. Change UK plus another 12 not prepared to have him in number 10 - o'mara, elphicke, hoey, Austin, field, hermon, mann..... 5 more and its game over..... Berger and the other indies that were change and are back as indies, Shuker and the other one. 2 to go........
RAF training cock-ups lead to shortage of pilots. It is leaving the RAF short of 125 new pilots a year while in July 145 students had been waiting 90 weeks to be trained.
The situation is exposed today in a report by the National Audit Office. It blames the backlog on defence reviews cutting — then increasing — how many pilots the RAF might need.
Privatisation under Labour and Tory defence cuts are to blame, from the Sun story.
Cameron made 100+ student pilots redundant in the 2010 SDR which started the problem then when the privatised MFTS proved to be a complete disaster the fiasco was complete.
Things are actually going to get worse as MFTS (as bad as it is) relies on ex service QFI/QWI/QHI for instructors. As we're not making many of those any longer it's not going to be sustainable.
The other massive problem that's brewing is that pilots aren't reaching a front line squadron until they are pushing 30. That's when they have families that make long deployments and exchange postings difficult to fill.
BTW mad props to @AlistairMeeks for calling how this would all play out, particularly the part where Boris demands an election and Labour just leave him hanging there.
If we set aside imaginative interpretations of the British constitution, which of these would Boris rather do?
a) Sign an extension request letter, albeit he would also draw a picture of a cock on it b) Resign and recommend to The Queen that she call Jeremy Corbyn
The way I see this is that the Conservative party very recently had an election according to its rules and constitution. In that election both the majority of MPs and a substantial majority of members supported Boris and made him leader. It is also telling that Hunt was completely loyal, if silent, yesterday. In short, according to the party's constitution and rules Boris is leader, the party's candidate for PM and able and entitled to set the direction of the party.
As I said last night within a party you are entitled to your own views and to argue for them but once a decision has been made you need to follow the decision of the overwhelming majority. Last night 95% of the PCP did. 21 did not and they must face the consequences of that which will include the withdrawal of the whip and the loss of the right to stand as candidates again unless they regain it. What Boris did was entirely consistent with good party management. May's failure to do the same was when she completely lost control of the situation and her leadership foundered.
Today is another day but those 21 need to reflect. Most of them have decided that this is more important than their party or effective government and have indicated a willingness to stand down. Will some of them have second thoughts? it looks unlikely and it would need 14 of them even if some of Labour's missing didn't show up again.
We desperately need an election. We have no government at a critical point in our history where clear and decisive action is required. If the Commons passes this bill today, which it will, the government need to decide if not further impeding it is a price worth paying. It can always be repealed after an election if the Tories win.
If we set aside imaginative interpretations of the British constitution, which of these would Boris rather do?
a) Sign an extension request letter, albeit he would also draw a picture of a cock on it b) Resign and recommend to The Queen that she call Jeremy Corbyn
He would be best to do (b) but he does not have the cullions.
By the way, no one has remarked yet on the schoolboy chortling emanating from Boris and Gove et al when the Opposition Leaders spoke after the vote.
Literally chortling as they destroyed their own party and sent many of their colleagues into exile.
If we set aside imaginative interpretations of the British constitution, which of these would Boris rather do?
a) Sign an extension request letter, albeit he would also draw a picture of a cock on it b) Resign and recommend to The Queen that she call Jeremy Corbyn
Might he get someone else in the cabinet to do it? He has been very clear he wouldnt do it himself, not that his government wouldnt do it. Probably that is because he is very self centred, but it seems possible Cox or Barclay write the extension letter instead of him so he can claim he stood by his principles, whilst having engineered the whole election and extension with Cummings.
Obviously its also a bit different after an election, then she has her subjects decision to go on
Nope, it's the same, the Prime Minister is chosen by Parliament and the subjects have nothing to do with it.
Neither the Queen's Subjects nor parliament has anything to do with it. The Queen chooses the PM based on the number of MPs elected to support him/her.
If we set aside imaginative interpretations of the British constitution, which of these would Boris rather do?
a) Sign an extension request letter, albeit he would also draw a picture of a cock on it b) Resign and recommend to The Queen that she call Jeremy Corbyn
B, but I'd imagine hed engineer a situation that a VONC had to pass and rely on no candidate being acceptable to all, or if they are, a very unpopular shitshow
The way I see this is that the Conservative party very recently had an election according to its rules and constitution. In that election both the majority of MPs and a substantial majority of members supported Boris and made him leader. It is also telling that Hunt was completely loyal, if silent, yesterday. In short, according to the party's constitution and rules Boris is leader, the party's candidate for PM and able and entitled to set the direction of the party.
As I said last night within a party you are entitled to your own views and to argue for them but once a decision has been made you need to follow the decision of the overwhelming majority. Last night 95% of the PCP did. 21 did not and they must face the consequences of that which will include the withdrawal of the whip and the loss of the right to stand as candidates again unless they regain it. What Boris did was entirely consistent with good party management. May's failure to do the same was when she completely lost control of the situation and her leadership foundered.
Today is another day but those 21 need to reflect. Most of them have decided that this is more important than their party or effective government and have indicated a willingness to stand down. Will some of them have second thoughts? it looks unlikely and it would need 14 of them even if some of Labour's missing didn't show up again.
We desperately need an election. We have no government at a critical point in our history where clear and decisive action is required. If the Commons passes this bill today, which it will, the government need to decide if not further impeding it is a price worth paying. It can always be repealed after an election if the Tories win.
Isn’t the rebellion quite likely to be higher today? You might object constitutionally to MPs taking control of the agenda but once done you presumably take the votes on their merits.
If Benn passes what good is a Corbyn government to them?
Negotiate Norway, legislate for a second referendum on it, buy some time during which the parties might realign to the point where there's one they could stand for and win somewhere.
The alternative is an election with the result that: a) Boris wins a majority and everybody laughs at them b) Corbyn becomes Prime Minster anyway, possibly with a majority so they can't reign him in c) Basically the same situation as now, except they no longer have jobs
In my insomnia been doing some Corbyn GNU calcs following a VONC 293 Tory plus 10 dup are NO =303 Leaves 650 - 303 - speakers- sinn fein = 336, majority 33, Assuming the ex Tory rebels abstain majority 12, he only needs to lose 7 and it's no go for a Corbyn GNU. So basically change UK, Ian Austin and one other, there's probably 10 more that would not accept him Hed struggle I think even with active support from a batch of the 21. Snp plus LD plus Lucas plus Plaid is not enough
I wouldn't be surprised if the Tory rebels vote for Corbyn, since the alternative would be losing their jobs. They're probably actually an easier nut to crack than the LibDems.
Unlikely, they are profoundly at odds with him on everything except delaying Brexit and supporting him would frankly validate their expulsion wouldn't it? If Benn passes what good is a Corbyn government to them? Even if all 21 have a Damasccene conversion to Marxism he could still fall short. Change UK plus another 12 not prepared to have him in number 10 - o'mara, elphicke, hoey, Austin, field, hermon, mann..... 5 more and its game over..... Berger and the other indies that were change and are back as indies, Shuker and the other one. 2 to go........
The resistnace to Corbyn being PM has gone. The Bluekips have over played their hand and the real conservatives probably prefer a Corbyn minority govt reliant on their votes (and LD/SNP/Plaid etc) to the chance of a Bluekip election win and no deal.
Remember the real conservative wing thought UKIP were swivel eyed loons. They will think Bluekip are swivel eyed loons without honour or respect.
If we set aside imaginative interpretations of the British constitution, which of these would Boris rather do?
a) Sign an extension request letter, albeit he would also draw a picture of a cock on it b) Resign and recommend to The Queen that she call Jeremy Corbyn
Might he get someone else in the cabinet to do it? He has been very clear he wouldnt do it himself, not that his government wouldnt do it. Probably that is because he is very self centred, but it seems possible Cox or Barclay write the extension letter instead of him so he can claim he stood by his principles, whilst having engineered the whole election and extension with Cummings.
PM has to agree the extension using the royal prerogative powers iro treaties
RAF training cock-ups lead to shortage of pilots. It is leaving the RAF short of 125 new pilots a year while in July 145 students had been waiting 90 weeks to be trained.
The situation is exposed today in a report by the National Audit Office. It blames the backlog on defence reviews cutting — then increasing — how many pilots the RAF might need.
Privatisation under Labour and Tory defence cuts are to blame, from the Sun story.
Cameron made 100+ student pilots redundant in the 2010 SDR which started the problem then when the privatised MFTS proved to be a complete disaster the fiasco was complete.
Things are actually going to get worse as MFTS (as bad as it is) relies on ex service QFI/QWI/QHI for instructors. As we're not making many of those any longer it's not going to be sustainable.
The other massive problem that's brewing is that pilots aren't reaching a front line squadron until they are pushing 30. That's when they have families that make long deployments and exchange postings difficult to fill.
Surely as combat pilots they are already past their best by then? Does this not need the lightning reactions of the young and super fit? What a mess.
The way I see this is that the Conservative party very recently had an election according to its rules and constitution. In that election both the majority of MPs and a substantial majority of members supported Boris and made him leader. It is also telling that Hunt was completely loyal, if silent, yesterday. In short, according to the party's constitution and rules Boris is leader, the party's candidate for PM and able and entitled to set the direction of the party.
As I said last night within a party you are entitled to your own views and to argue for them but once a decision has been made you need to follow the decision of the overwhelming majority. Last night 95% of the PCP did. 21 did not and they must face the consequences of that which will include the withdrawal of the whip and the loss of the right to stand as candidates again unless they regain it. What Boris did was entirely consistent with good party management. May's failure to do the same was when she completely lost control of the situation and her leadership foundered.
Today is another day but those 21 need to reflect. Most of them have decided that this is more important than their party or effective government and have indicated a willingness to stand down. Will some of them have second thoughts? it looks unlikely and it would need 14 of them even if some of Labour's missing didn't show up again.
We desperately need an election. We have no government at a critical point in our history where clear and decisive action is required. If the Commons passes this bill today, which it will, the government need to decide if not further impeding it is a price worth paying. It can always be repealed after an election if the Tories win.
Isn’t the rebellion quite likely to be higher today? You might object constitutionally to MPs taking control of the agenda but once done you presumably take the votes on their merits.
It may be. Obviously removing the whip last night was intended to forestall that but whether that is successful or not remains to be seen. We have no government.
Although I am hardly the biggest fan of Johnson(!) I have to say I think Corbyn will be committing a major error if Labour vote against a general election today.
While I agree that most Labour Leave voters are probably not terribly exercised one way or another about Brexit, I'm confident they'll care a great deal about the chance of getting the Tories out of power. If he refuses a chance to do that, however good his reasons, it will look rather bad.
It wouldn't see a lot of direct switching to the Tories, of course. But there are plenty of seats in the north where a seepage to the Liberal Democrats or Greens might leave Labour vulnerable.
Obviously its also a bit different after an election, then she has her subjects decision to go on
Nope, it's the same, the Prime Minister is chosen by Parliament and the subjects have nothing to do with it.
Neither the Queen's Subjects nor parliament has anything to do with it. The Queen chooses the PM based on the number of MPs elected to support him/her.
Fairy nuff, see my subsequent post beginning "fairy nuff"
It was typical Bercow pettiness, wanting to be centre of attention. I didn't realise it was Gove he was chiding for rudeness, but he made a very long comment about him being more polite at the school gates. He can call people to order without that sort of thing.
The way I see this is that the Conservative party very recently had an election according to its rules and constitution. In that election both the majority of MPs and a substantial majority of members supported Boris and made him leader. It is also telling that Hunt was completely loyal, if silent, yesterday. In short, according to the party's constitution and rules Boris is leader, the party's candidate for PM and able and entitled to set the direction of the party.
As I said last night within a party you are entitled to your own views and to argue for them but once a decision has been made you need to follow the decision of the overwhelming majority. Last night 95% of the PCP did. 21 did not and they must face the consequences of that which will include the withdrawal of the whip and the loss of the right to stand as candidates again unless they regain it. What Boris did was entirely consistent with good party management. May's failure to do the same was when she completely lost control of the situation and her leadership foundered.
Today is another day but those 21 need to reflect. Most of them have decided that this is more important than their party or effective government and have indicated a willingness to stand down. Will some of them have second thoughts? it looks unlikely and it would need 14 of them even if some of Labour's missing didn't show up again.
We desperately need an election. We have no government at a critical point in our history where clear and decisive action is required. If the Commons passes this bill today, which it will, the government need to decide if not further impeding it is a price worth paying. It can always be repealed after an election if the Tories win.
Very fair summary. I agree we need a GE (once we know for sure Boris can't get No Deal by delaying an election once called).
I don't understand those who think we can get a referendum without a GE, I don't see where the numbers in parliament are for that.
The way I see this is that the Conservative party very recently had an election according to its rules and constitution. In that election both the majority of MPs and a substantial majority of members supported Boris and made him leader. It is also telling that Hunt was completely loyal, if silent, yesterday. In short, according to the party's constitution and rules Boris is leader, the party's candidate for PM and able and entitled to set the direction of the party.
As I said last night within a party you are entitled to your own views and to argue for them but once a decision has been made you need to follow the decision of the overwhelming majority. Last night 95% of the PCP did. 21 did not and they must face the consequences of that which will include the withdrawal of the whip and the loss of the right to stand as candidates again unless they regain it. What Boris did was entirely consistent with good party management. May's failure to do the same was when she completely lost control of the situation and her leadership foundered.
Today is another day but those 21 need to reflect. Most of them have decided that this is more important than their party or effective government and have indicated a willingness to stand down. Will some of them have second thoughts? it looks unlikely and it would need 14 of them even if some of Labour's missing didn't show up again.
We desperately need an election. We have no government at a critical point in our history where clear and decisive action is required. If the Commons passes this bill today, which it will, the government need to decide if not further impeding it is a price worth paying. It can always be repealed after an election if the Tories win.
Isn’t the rebellion quite likely to be higher today? You might object constitutionally to MPs taking control of the agenda but once done you presumably take the votes on their merits.
It may be. Obviously removing the whip last night was intended to forestall that but whether that is successful or not remains to be seen. We have no government.
I'm completely against debating this but I'll vote for it?! Ridiculous
Obviously its also a bit different after an election, then she has her subjects decision to go on
Nope, it's the same, the Prime Minister is chosen by Parliament and the subjects have nothing to do with it.
Neither the Queen's Subjects nor parliament has anything to do with it. The Queen chooses the PM based on the number of MPs elected to support him/her.
Slight amendment maybe needed in these strange days: The Queen chooses the PM based on the number of MPs that, at that time, support him/her.
If we set aside imaginative interpretations of the British constitution, which of these would Boris rather do?
a) Sign an extension request letter, albeit he would also draw a picture of a cock on it b) Resign and recommend to The Queen that she call Jeremy Corbyn
Might he get someone else in the cabinet to do it? He has been very clear he wouldnt do it himself, not that his government wouldnt do it. Probably that is because he is very self centred, but it seems possible Cox or Barclay write the extension letter instead of him so he can claim he stood by his principles, whilst having engineered the whole election and extension with Cummings.
PM has to agree the extension using the royal prerogative powers iro treaties
This suggests he doesnt have to sign it personally.
Unless the treaty provides that it enters into force on signature, by signing a treaty a State shows that it is in agreement with the text, but it is not bound by it until the treaty has been ratified and has entered into force. The state is not obliged to ratify it. The UK, however, does not sign a treaty unless it has a reasonably firm intention of ratifying.
In international law a head of state, head of government or foreign minister may sign a treaty in his or her own right. Anyone else needs to produce "Full Powers" from one of those three. Full Powers are the grant to another person of authority to sign a treaty on behalf of the State. In UK practice, the Queen does not sign treaties, but the Prime Minister sometimes does. Full Powers are normally signed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary except for certain EU treaties which are drawn up between heads of state and therefore require a Queen's Full Power. FCO ministers and certain UK Representatives hold general Full Powers giving them authority to sign any treaty (subject to the approval of the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary in each case). Anyone else signing a treaty on behalf of the UK requires a special Full Power enabling them to sign the specific treaty."
If we set aside imaginative interpretations of the British constitution, which of these would Boris rather do?
a) Sign an extension request letter, albeit he would also draw a picture of a cock on it b) Resign and recommend to The Queen that she call Jeremy Corbyn
Might he get someone else in the cabinet to do it? He has been very clear he wouldnt do it himself, not that his government wouldnt do it. Probably that is because he is very self centred, but it seems possible Cox or Barclay write the extension letter instead of him so he can claim he stood by his principles, whilst having engineered the whole election and extension with Cummings.
Yes, I'm not sure if he can have someone else sign the letter but maybe he resigns and recommends that The Queen call Theresa May, leave her to do the dirty work.
Anyway, while there is nothing much happening in the world of politics, we have the fourth Ashes test.
I'd leave BBC Parliament on. It's going to rain an awful lot for the first three days. 3.5 for the draw seems like good value.
There is every chance that England will lose the Ashes on the back of 2 no results. Ashes matches in September in England. What were they thinking?
There was little option because of the World Cup.
Then we should have waited a year and had them next year. Our weather is just too dodgy after mid August. This series is or should be the apex of the sport, not an after thought.
The way I see this is that the Conservative party very recently had an election according to its rules and constitution. In that election both the majority of MPs and a substantial majority of members supported Boris and made him leader. It is also telling that Hunt was completely loyal, if silent, yesterday. In short, according to the party's constitution and rules Boris is leader, the party's candidate for PM and able and entitled to set the direction of the party.
As I said last night within a party you are entitled to your own views and to argue for them but once a decision has been made you need to follow the decision of the overwhelming majority. Last night 95% of the PCP did. 21 did not and they must face the consequences of that which will include the withdrawal of the whip and the loss of the right to stand as candidates again unless they regain it. What Boris did was entirely consistent with good party management. May's failure to do the same was when she completely lost control of the situation and her leadership foundered.
Today is another day but those 21 need to reflect. Most of them have decided that this is more important than their party or effective government and have indicated a willingness to stand down. Will some of them have second thoughts? it looks unlikely and it would need 14 of them even if some of Labour's missing didn't show up again.
We desperately need an election. We have no government at a critical point in our history where clear and decisive action is required. If the Commons passes this bill today, which it will, the government need to decide if not further impeding it is a price worth paying. It can always be repealed after an election if the Tories win.
Isn’t the rebellion quite likely to be higher today? You might object constitutionally to MPs taking control of the agenda but once done you presumably take the votes on their merits.
It may be. Obviously removing the whip last night was intended to forestall that but whether that is successful or not remains to be seen. We have no government.
I'm completely against debating this but I'll vote for it?! Ridiculous
Rationality died a long time ago. We are dealing with obsessives on both sides of the argument. Has Boris been clear that this is also a matter of confidence today?
Basically, we now nothing until Corbyn speaks later, but he seemed quite supportive of an election last night.
I remain unconvinced the 21 ex-Tories would support (or fail to oppose) a Corbyn ministry now they know the Bill has passed. Losing the whip is one thing, but you’d presume doing that would start to hit them amongst their friends (I do think being looked down on my their mates will matter).
It also feels like Swinson is getting what she wanted without the need for Corbyn. That being the case, some sort of agreement over an election seems likely in the next two days.
However, like everyone on here I’m prone to expecting what I want to happen, and sometimes have a blind spot for the other point of view. I’m guessing it’ll all be clearer after PMQs, once Milne has a chance to brief.
BTW mad props to @AlistairMeeks for calling how this would all play out, particularly the part where Boris demands an election and Labour just leave him hanging there.
You can still lay an election this year at 1.18 this morning.
If we set aside imaginative interpretations of the British constitution, which of these would Boris rather do?
a) Sign an extension request letter, albeit he would also draw a picture of a cock on it b) Resign and recommend to The Queen that she call Jeremy Corbyn
Might he get someone else in the cabinet to do it? He has been very clear he wouldnt do it himself, not that his government wouldnt do it. Probably that is because he is very self centred, but it seems possible Cox or Barclay write the extension letter instead of him so he can claim he stood by his principles, whilst having engineered the whole election and extension with Cummings.
PM has to agree the extension using the royal prerogative powers iro treaties
This suggests he doesnt have to sign it personally.
Unless the treaty provides that it enters into force on signature, by signing a treaty a State shows that it is in agreement with the text, but it is not bound by it until the treaty has been ratified and has entered into force. The state is not obliged to ratify it. The UK, however, does not sign a treaty unless it has a reasonably firm intention of ratifying.
In international law a head of state, head of government or foreign minister may sign a treaty in his or her own right. Anyone else needs to produce "Full Powers" from one of those three. Full Powers are the grant to another person of authority to sign a treaty on behalf of the State. In UK practice, the Queen does not sign treaties, but the Prime Minister sometimes does. Full Powers are normally signed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary except for certain EU treaties which are drawn up between heads of state and therefore require a Queen's Full Power. FCO ministers and certain UK Representatives hold general Full Powers giving them authority to sign any treaty (subject to the approval of the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary in each case). Anyone else signing a treaty on behalf of the UK requires a special Full Power enabling them to sign the specific treaty."
EU treaties include article 50 require a queens full powers I think. Ie the PM?
The way I see this is that the Conservative party very recently had an election according to its rules and constitution. In that election both the majority of MPs and a substantial majority of members supported Boris and made him leader. It is also telling that Hunt was completely loyal, if silent, yesterday. In short, according to the party's constitution and rules Boris is leader, the party's candidate for PM and able and entitled to set the direction of the party.
As I said last night within a party you are entitled to your own views and to argue for them but once a decision has been made you need to follow the decision of the overwhelming majority. Last night 95% of the PCP did. 21 did not and they must face the consequences of that which will include the withdrawal of the whip and the loss of the right to stand as candidates again unless they regain it. What Boris did was entirely consistent with good party management. May's failure to do the same was when she completely lost control of the situation and her leadership foundered.
Today is another day but those 21 need to reflect. Most of them have decided that this is more important than their party or effective government and have indicated a willingness to stand down. Will some of them have second thoughts? it looks unlikely and it would need 14 of them even if some of Labour's missing didn't show up again.
We desperately need an election. We have no government at a critical point in our history where clear and decisive action is required. If the Commons passes this bill today, which it will, the government need to decide if not further impeding it is a price worth paying. It can always be repealed after an election if the Tories win.
Very fair summary. I agree we need a GE (once we know for sure Boris can't get No Deal by delaying an election once called).
I don't understand those who think we can get a referendum without a GE, I don't see where the numbers in parliament are for that.
The old numbers are now part of history. The govt has no more votes than Lab/LD/SNP combined.
The various independents can choose an election which likely limits their power and loses them their jobs, or help a govt that achieves something that they have just sacrificed their careers for.
The new numbers are unknown but it is very plausible we now have a Corbyn govt for 6 months.
That is what Bluekip have just done by disgracefully treating the likes of Hammond, Clarke and Gauke with utter contempt.
The next election will see the Canterbury 2017 outcome replicated across neighbouring shires - patches of red and yellow (maybe even green) popping up in a sea of blue. The Tories are not going to be swept out of the south but they will lose Hastings, St Albans and a maybe a few Canterbury- esq shocks in college towns that will offset any gains they may or may not make in the north of England.
“I’m taking an awful risk Lord Cummings, this had better work”
Anyway, while there is nothing much happening in the world of politics, we have the fourth Ashes test.
I'd leave BBC Parliament on. It's going to rain an awful lot for the first three days. 3.5 for the draw seems like good value.
There is every chance that England will lose the Ashes on the back of 2 no results. Ashes matches in September in England. What were they thinking?
There was little option because of the World Cup.
Then we should have waited a year and had them next year. Our weather is just too dodgy after mid August. This series is or should be the apex of the sport, not an after thought.
Not long ago we had back-to-back Ashes series so that we would avoid having a World Cup and Ashes series in the same year. What went wrong?
It was typical Bercow pettiness, wanting to be centre of attention. I didn't realise it was Gove he was chiding for rudeness, but he made a very long comment about him being more polite at the school gates. He can call people to order without that sort of thing.
Wonder what happens when Boris and his supporters go wobbly. The cabinet faces yesterday were dire, Javid especially appeared to be wondering why he’d tied is career to the man standing next to him. If the ship sinks further, we might see some deeper fractures from genuine conservatives.
Anyway, while there is nothing much happening in the world of politics, we have the fourth Ashes test.
I'd leave BBC Parliament on. It's going to rain an awful lot for the first three days. 3.5 for the draw seems like good value.
There is every chance that England will lose the Ashes on the back of 2 no results. Ashes matches in September in England. What were they thinking?
There was little option because of the World Cup.
Then we should have waited a year and had them next year. Our weather is just too dodgy after mid August. This series is or should be the apex of the sport, not an after thought.
In the current ICC Test table England are ranked 4th and Australia 5th. It is quite hard to claim this series is the apex of the sport worldwide.
Anyway, while there is nothing much happening in the world of politics, we have the fourth Ashes test.
I'd leave BBC Parliament on. It's going to rain an awful lot for the first three days. 3.5 for the draw seems like good value.
There is every chance that England will lose the Ashes on the back of 2 no results. Ashes matches in September in England. What were they thinking?
They were thinking, 'let's hold the World Cup in the early summer so there aren't many washouts.' Although that didn't quite work.
Incidentally, it's not 'lose' the Ashes. In a draw, they are retained by the holder (Australia) but that's not the same as a series defeat.
Australia keeping the Ashes is a defeat to me, maybe not for this new league thing but for every other purpose. To be honest with Smith back and Australia finally playing their best bowler in Starc I am not sure I fancy England's chances anyway but I would like it to be resolved on the field not in the dressing room.
It was typical Bercow pettiness, wanting to be centre of attention. I didn't realise it was Gove he was chiding for rudeness, but he made a very long comment about him being more polite at the school gates. He can call people to order without that sort of thing.
Gove is a nasty little creep, well done Bercow.
Hi Malcolm
I saw that job. Looks idyllic but for family reasons I can't apply!
Morning all and quite clear that if the Remoaners pass their Surrender Bill today, Boris has to make clear he will not ask for an extension, law or no law. Lots of safe Tory seats now up for grabs to aspiring anti-EU candidates as we see the party axe those who think their opinions matter more than the 17.4 million. A people v parliament election is clearly looming and ordinary people will not appreciate Corbyn preventing a GE having called for one since 2017. The Tory manifesto could contain a clause stating that a re-elected Boris government will revoke today's Remoaners Surrender Act.
16.1 million people definitely did not want No Deal. I suspect that a maximum of only 5% of the 17.4 million wanted it.
Anyway, while there is nothing much happening in the world of politics, we have the fourth Ashes test.
I'd leave BBC Parliament on. It's going to rain an awful lot for the first three days. 3.5 for the draw seems like good value.
There is every chance that England will lose the Ashes on the back of 2 no results. Ashes matches in September in England. What were they thinking?
There was little option because of the World Cup.
Then we should have waited a year and had them next year. Our weather is just too dodgy after mid August. This series is or should be the apex of the sport, not an after thought.
The ECB is, one way and another, about as competent as the present 'Government'! There was no real need to have the Ashes series and the World Cup in the same year. And I won't start on the second class rubbish which is The Hundred.
RAF training cock-ups lead to shortage of pilots. It is leaving the RAF short of 125 new pilots a year while in July 145 students had been waiting 90 weeks to be trained.
The situation is exposed today in a report by the National Audit Office. It blames the backlog on defence reviews cutting — then increasing — how many pilots the RAF might need.
Privatisation under Labour and Tory defence cuts are to blame, from the Sun story.
Cameron made 100+ student pilots redundant in the 2010 SDR which started the problem then when the privatised MFTS proved to be a complete disaster the fiasco was complete.
Things are actually going to get worse as MFTS (as bad as it is) relies on ex service QFI/QWI/QHI for instructors. As we're not making many of those any longer it's not going to be sustainable.
The other massive problem that's brewing is that pilots aren't reaching a front line squadron until they are pushing 30. That's when they have families that make long deployments and exchange postings difficult to fill.
Surely as combat pilots they are already past their best by then? Does this not need the lightning reactions of the young and super fit? What a mess.
Not really... experience counts for a lot. People are (generally) physically capable of fast jet ops until well into their 40s. However, it is a mess.
Morning all and quite clear that if the Remoaners pass their Surrender Bill today, Boris has to make clear he will not ask for an extension, law or no law. Lots of safe Tory seats now up for grabs to aspiring anti-EU candidates as we see the party axe those who think their opinions matter more than the 17.4 million. A people v parliament election is clearly looming and ordinary people will not appreciate Corbyn preventing a GE having called for one since 2017. The Tory manifesto could contain a clause stating that a re-elected Boris government will revoke today's Remoaners Surrender Act.
16.1 million people definitely did not want No Deal. I suspect that a maximum of only 5% of the 17.4 million wanted it.
That's wishful thinking. There's no reason to think a large number of the 17.4 million didn't want it. Whether they fully understood what the possible consequences are is another question.
Basically, we now nothing until Corbyn speaks later, but he seemed quite supportive of an election last night.
I remain unconvinced the 21 ex-Tories would support (or fail to oppose) a Corbyn ministry now they know the Bill has passed. Losing the whip is one thing, but you’d presume doing that would start to hit them amongst their friends (I do think being looked down on my their mates will matter).
It also feels like Swinson is getting what she wanted without the need for Corbyn. That being the case, some sort of agreement over an election seems likely in the next two days.
However, like everyone on here I’m prone to expecting what I want to happen, and sometimes have a blind spot for the other point of view. I’m guessing it’ll all be clearer after PMQs, once Milne has a chance to brief.
The bill passing is not enough. At a minimum it needs to be effective in law which requires unambiguous commitments from the executive to comply with it, which is incompatible with the PMs election spin. That tension is what creates the likelihood for Corbyn shortly becoming PM - the rebel alliance have control and wont give it up, will the PM find a way to back down and implement the law?
The way I see this is that the Conservative party very recently had an election according to its rules and constitution. In that election both the majority of MPs and a substantial majority of members supported Boris and made him leader. It is also telling that Hunt was completely loyal, if silent, yesterday. In short, according to the party's constitution and rules Boris is leader, the party's candidate for PM and able and entitled to set the direction of the party.
As I said last night within a party you are entitled to your own views and to argue for them but once a decision has been made you need to follow the decision of the overwhelming majority. Last night 95% of the PCP did. 21 did not and they must face the consequences of that which will include the withdrawal of the whip and the loss of the right to stand as candidates again unless they regain it. What Boris did was entirely consistent with good party management. May's failure to do the same was when she completely lost control of the situation and her leadership foundered.
Today is another day but those 21 need to reflect. Most of them have decided that this is more important than their party or effective government and have indicated a willingness to stand down. Will some of them have second thoughts? it looks unlikely and it would need 14 of them even if some of Labour's missing didn't show up again.
We desperately need an election. We have no government at a critical point in our history where clear and decisive action is required. If the Commons passes this bill today, which it will, the government need to decide if not further impeding it is a price worth paying. It can always be repealed after an election if the Tories win.
Isn’t the rebellion quite likely to be higher today? You might object constitutionally to MPs taking control of the agenda but once done you presumably take the votes on their merits.
I would have thought so. Surely that dwindling number of Tory loyalists that believe in ongoing negotiations are going to wake up shortly?
No I'm not. HMQ requires stable government, shes not going to appoint someone who does not have a stable coalition agreement (see the 2010 debate post election) and she will not appoint someone simply to enact one thing (extension) then go to the country when an election is the default after a VONC anyway
Historically minority governments are also a thing
We now have a minority government even with the DUP on the government side.
Anyway, while there is nothing much happening in the world of politics, we have the fourth Ashes test.
I'd leave BBC Parliament on. It's going to rain an awful lot for the first three days. 3.5 for the draw seems like good value.
There is every chance that England will lose the Ashes on the back of 2 no results. Ashes matches in September in England. What were they thinking?
There was little option because of the World Cup.
Then we should have waited a year and had them next year. Our weather is just too dodgy after mid August. This series is or should be the apex of the sport, not an after thought.
The ECB is, one way and another, about as competent as the present 'Government'! There was no real need to have the Ashes series and the World Cup in the same year. And I won't start on the second class rubbish which is The Hundred.
That's unfair, your Venerable Cheerful Majesty.
Even Boris Johnson has never come up with something as daft as the Hundred.
Basically, we now nothing until Corbyn speaks later, but he seemed quite supportive of an election last night.
I remain unconvinced the 21 ex-Tories would support (or fail to oppose) a Corbyn ministry now they know the Bill has passed. Losing the whip is one thing, but you’d presume doing that would start to hit them amongst their friends (I do think being looked down on my their mates will matter).
It also feels like Swinson is getting what she wanted without the need for Corbyn. That being the case, some sort of agreement over an election seems likely in the next two days.
However, like everyone on here I’m prone to expecting what I want to happen, and sometimes have a blind spot for the other point of view. I’m guessing it’ll all be clearer after PMQs, once Milne has a chance to brief.
Oh I dont know, we live in strange times. The funniest thing I saw yesterday was
Anyway, while there is nothing much happening in the world of politics, we have the fourth Ashes test.
I'd leave BBC Parliament on. It's going to rain an awful lot for the first three days. 3.5 for the draw seems like good value.
There is every chance that England will lose the Ashes on the back of 2 no results. Ashes matches in September in England. What were they thinking?
There was little option because of the World Cup.
Then we should have waited a year and had them next year. Our weather is just too dodgy after mid August. This series is or should be the apex of the sport, not an after thought.
In the current ICC Test table England are ranked 4th and Australia 5th. It is quite hard to claim this series is the apex of the sport worldwide.
It is in terms of interest. No other series captures the imagination that the Ashes does. Look at the attendances at other series.. derisory..
Morning all and quite clear that if the Remoaners pass their Surrender Bill today, Boris has to make clear he will not ask for an extension, law or no law. Lots of safe Tory seats now up for grabs to aspiring anti-EU candidates as we see the party axe those who think their opinions matter more than the 17.4 million. A people v parliament election is clearly looming and ordinary people will not appreciate Corbyn preventing a GE having called for one since 2017. The Tory manifesto could contain a clause stating that a re-elected Boris government will revoke today's Remoaners Surrender Act.
16.1 million people definitely did not want No Deal. I suspect that a maximum of only 5% of the 17.4 million wanted it.
That's wishful thinking. There's no reason to think a large number of the 17.4 million didn't want it. Whether they fully understood what the possible consequences are is another question.
RAF training cock-ups lead to shortage of pilots. It is leaving the RAF short of 125 new pilots a year while in July 145 students had been waiting 90 weeks to be trained.
The situation is exposed today in a report by the National Audit Office. It blames the backlog on defence reviews cutting — then increasing — how many pilots the RAF might need.
Privatisation under Labour and Tory defence cuts are to blame, from the Sun story.
Cameron made 100+ student pilots redundant in the 2010 SDR which started the problem then when the privatised MFTS proved to be a complete disaster the fiasco was complete.
Things are actually going to get worse as MFTS (as bad as it is) relies on ex service QFI/QWI/QHI for instructors. As we're not making many of those any longer it's not going to be sustainable.
The other massive problem that's brewing is that pilots aren't reaching a front line squadron until they are pushing 30. That's when they have families that make long deployments and exchange postings difficult to fill.
Surely as combat pilots they are already past their best by then? Does this not need the lightning reactions of the young and super fit? What a mess.
Not really... experience counts for a lot. People are (generally) physically capable of fast jet ops until well into their 40s. However, it is a mess.
You'll be cheering on the new geriatric Top Gun film then.
Morning all and quite clear that if the Remoaners pass their Surrender Bill today, Boris has to make clear he will not ask for an extension, law or no law. Lots of safe Tory seats now up for grabs to aspiring anti-EU candidates as we see the party axe those who think their opinions matter more than the 17.4 million. A people v parliament election is clearly looming and ordinary people will not appreciate Corbyn preventing a GE having called for one since 2017. The Tory manifesto could contain a clause stating that a re-elected Boris government will revoke today's Remoaners Surrender Act.
16.1 million people definitely did not want No Deal. I suspect that a maximum of only 5% of the 17.4 million wanted it.
That's wishful thinking. There's no reason to think a large number of the 17.4 million didn't want it. Whether they fully understood what the possible consequences are is another question.
Unknowable, I think, because nobody foresaw it as a seriously possible outcome back in those heady days (Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive).
CBA to investigate whether this differs if you consider just the cricketing bits of England.
The temperatures in September are on average a bit cooler than in August, but you can also argue that fielding in under 20 degree temperatures is an advantage to England when playing against Australia.
The biggest problem with september is the catch up time if there has been any rain. The sun is lower on the horizon at 6pm and so bad light is more likely.
I would wish everyone a good morning, but that may be improbable. So I will wish everyone a morning in which they are able to avoid homicidal thoughts so this board doesn't become a Justinfest.
You'll be cheering on the new geriatric Top Gun film then.
It will be absolute garbage. There is no way Maverick could still be a Captain at his age anyway as the USN has a ruthless "up or out" policy that we would do well to emulate.
That’s a very good article indeed and should be required reading, no matter what your worldview.
Agreed.
Interesting he offers EEA as a possible compromise if Boris's current strategy doesn't work.
Well that’s clearly not going to fly with the headbangers until they’ve had buckets of cold sick poured over them by the electorate, and maybe not even then. A bit like those Labour MPs who have just proposed Theresa May’s deal, the likelihood is that Leavers will realise too late their best option.
Anyway, while there is nothing much happening in the world of politics, we have the fourth Ashes test.
I'd leave BBC Parliament on. It's going to rain an awful lot for the first three days. 3.5 for the draw seems like good value.
There is every chance that England will lose the Ashes on the back of 2 no results. Ashes matches in September in England. What were they thinking?
There was little option because of the World Cup.
Then we should have waited a year and had them next year. Our weather is just too dodgy after mid August. This series is or should be the apex of the sport, not an after thought.
All that needed to happen was to move the 2014-15 Ashes to 2015-16, and leave our home Ashes as they were (2013, 2017, 2021, etc.). But oh no, they saw a chance to make some money and didn't want to pass it up.
Basically, we now nothing until Corbyn speaks later, but he seemed quite supportive of an election last night.
I remain unconvinced the 21 ex-Tories would support (or fail to oppose) a Corbyn ministry now they know the Bill has passed. Losing the whip is one thing, but you’d presume doing that would start to hit them amongst their friends (I do think being looked down on my their mates will matter).
It also feels like Swinson is getting what she wanted without the need for Corbyn. That being the case, some sort of agreement over an election seems likely in the next two days.
However, like everyone on here I’m prone to expecting what I want to happen, and sometimes have a blind spot for the other point of view. I’m guessing it’ll all be clearer after PMQs, once Milne has a chance to brief.
The bill passing is not enough. At a minimum it needs to be effective in law which requires unambiguous commitments from the executive to comply with it, which is incompatible with the PMs election spin. That tension is what creates the likelihood for Corbyn shortly becoming PM - the rebel alliance have control and wont give it up, will the PM find a way to back down and implement the law?
But take the numbers a few posts up. Given what we know of Woodcock and co, noting that Hoey and Mann have nailed colours to the mast, and assuming you accept that at least half of the former Tories would never countenance Corbyn (I think higher); there is no way Corbyn makes headway without an election. And he has about 48 hours to decide. After that the Gvt will look more powerful than it is because of prorogation. I think he’ll find a way to support an election.
But as I say I’m acutely aware I (like the rest of us) am biased by what I’d like to see here so I wouldn’t bet on it (literally - I closed out my October election bet the other night).
A cynical person might think this govt wants no responsibility for delivering Brexit so is self sabotaging in order to hand the torch over to the opposition to sort out the mess. This allows the PM and his merry elites to cry treason and blame everyone else but themselves.
You can still lay an election this year at 1.18 this morning.
And Oct still as short as 1.7. That surprises me slightly. Looks no more than 50/50 to me.
Corbyns position is support GE once Benn has royal assent
and what difference does it make ?
If Corbyn wins he will have tied his own hands . If BoJo wins hell just reverse the decision. If its a hung Parlt theyll just waste the time and go off on conferences and their Christmas holidays. Its a nonsense.
The way I see this is that the Conservative party very recently had an election according to its rules and constitution. In that election both the majority of MPs and a substantial majority of members supported Boris and made him leader. It is also telling that Hunt was completely loyal, if silent, yesterday. In short, according to the party's constitution and rules Boris is leader, the party's candidate for PM and able and entitled to set the direction of the party.
As I said last night within a party you are entitled to your own views and to argue for them but once a decision has been made you need to follow the decision of the overwhelming majority. Last night 95% of the PCP did. 21 did not and they must face the consequences of that which will include the withdrawal of the whip and the loss of the right to stand as candidates again unless they regain it. What Boris did was entirely consistent with good party management. May's failure to do the same was when she completely lost control of the situation and her leadership foundered.
Today is another day but those 21 need to reflect. Most of them have decided that this is more important than their party or effective government and have indicated a willingness to stand down. Will some of them have second thoughts? it looks unlikely and it would need 14 of them even if some of Labour's missing didn't show up again.
We desperately need an election. We have no government at a critical point in our history where clear and decisive action is required. If the Commons passes this bill today, which it will, the government need to decide if not further impeding it is a price worth paying. It can always be repealed after an election if the Tories win.
Isn’t the rebellion quite likely to be higher today? You might object constitutionally to MPs taking control of the agenda but once done you presumably take the votes on their merits.
Yes I think the motion was more egregious than the bill. It disapplied a standing order, was uninterruptible, ignored the rules on tabling amendments, guillotined a crucial bill into two or three hours of scrutiny In Lords, Commons and Committee, hands over the ministerial role in considering Lots amendments to the backbench sponsors, and bound the next session of Parliament too. And it was supposed to be in neutral terms to be an SO#24 debate!
That said, there may be one or two rebel Tory MPs who get the whip back if they go through the nay lobby tonight...
Anyway, while there is nothing much happening in the world of politics, we have the fourth Ashes test.
I'd leave BBC Parliament on. It's going to rain an awful lot for the first three days. 3.5 for the draw seems like good value.
There is every chance that England will lose the Ashes on the back of 2 no results. Ashes matches in September in England. What were they thinking?
There was little option because of the World Cup.
Then we should have waited a year and had them next year. Our weather is just too dodgy after mid August. This series is or should be the apex of the sport, not an after thought.
In the current ICC Test table England are ranked 4th and Australia 5th. It is quite hard to claim this series is the apex of the sport worldwide.
It is in terms of interest. No other series captures the imagination that the Ashes does. Look at the attendances at other series.. derisory..
But "imagination" does not define the "apex of the sport".
Anyway if you are talking about cricket attendances, ODIs in India blow the ashes attendances away.
Comments
I think the campaign just turns into either a regular Con vs Lab vs LD intra-party food fight or a de-facto second Brexit referendum.
Not on for long, but yesterday's News at Ten was more interesting than most.
I see the PM's got off to a flying start.
It is leaving the RAF short of 125 new pilots a year while in July 145 students had been waiting 90 weeks to be trained.
The situation is exposed today in a report by the National Audit Office. It blames the backlog on defence reviews cutting — then increasing — how many pilots the RAF might need.
On average, it is taking more than seven years for RAF fast-jet aces to be trained against the MoD’s aim of under four years.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9857404/raf-short-pilots-training-bungle-report/
ETA: hat-tip ConHome.
Privatisation under Labour and Tory defence cuts are to blame, from the Sun story.
The car crash of Bozo Johnson is compelling yet painful to watch. What were the Tories thinking when choosing a man who make Corbyn look Prime Ministerial?
293 Tory plus 10 dup are NO =303
Leaves 650 - 303 - speakers- sinn fein = 336, majority 33,
Assuming the ex Tory rebels abstain majority 12, he only needs to lose 7 and it's no go for a Corbyn GNU. So basically change UK, Ian Austin and one other, there's probably 10 more that would not accept him
Hed struggle I think even with active support from a batch of the 21. Snp plus LD plus Lucas plus Plaid is not enough
*clears diary*
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news
Even if all 21 have a Damasccene conversion to Marxism he could still fall short. Change UK plus another 12 not prepared to have him in number 10 - o'mara, elphicke, hoey, Austin, field, hermon, mann..... 5 more and its game over..... Berger and the other indies that were change and are back as indies, Shuker and the other one. 2 to go........
Things are actually going to get worse as MFTS (as bad as it is) relies on ex service QFI/QWI/QHI for instructors. As we're not making many of those any longer it's not going to be sustainable.
The other massive problem that's brewing is that pilots aren't reaching a front line squadron until they are pushing 30. That's when they have families that make long deployments and exchange postings difficult to fill.
https://twitter.com/LaylaMoran/status/1169007381063372801?s=19
Anyone know what happens next? GE after a Brexir extension?
a) Sign an extension request letter, albeit he would also draw a picture of a cock on it
b) Resign and recommend to The Queen that she call Jeremy Corbyn
As I said last night within a party you are entitled to your own views and to argue for them but once a decision has been made you need to follow the decision of the overwhelming majority. Last night 95% of the PCP did. 21 did not and they must face the consequences of that which will include the withdrawal of the whip and the loss of the right to stand as candidates again unless they regain it. What Boris did was entirely consistent with good party management. May's failure to do the same was when she completely lost control of the situation and her leadership foundered.
Today is another day but those 21 need to reflect. Most of them have decided that this is more important than their party or effective government and have indicated a willingness to stand down. Will some of them have second thoughts? it looks unlikely and it would need 14 of them even if some of Labour's missing didn't show up again.
We desperately need an election. We have no government at a critical point in our history where clear and decisive action is required. If the Commons passes this bill today, which it will, the government need to decide if not further impeding it is a price worth paying. It can always be repealed after an election if the Tories win.
By the way, no one has remarked yet on the schoolboy chortling emanating from Boris and Gove et al when the Opposition Leaders spoke after the vote.
Literally chortling as they destroyed their own party and sent many of their colleagues into exile.
The Queen chooses the PM based on the number of MPs elected to support him/her.
The alternative is an election with the result that:
a) Boris wins a majority and everybody laughs at them
b) Corbyn becomes Prime Minster anyway, possibly with a majority so they can't reign him in
c) Basically the same situation as now, except they no longer have jobs
Remember the real conservative wing thought UKIP were swivel eyed loons. They will think Bluekip are swivel eyed loons without honour or respect.
While I agree that most Labour Leave voters are probably not terribly exercised one way or another about Brexit, I'm confident they'll care a great deal about the chance of getting the Tories out of power. If he refuses a chance to do that, however good his reasons, it will look rather bad.
It wouldn't see a lot of direct switching to the Tories, of course. But there are plenty of seats in the north where a seepage to the Liberal Democrats or Greens might leave Labour vulnerable.
I don't understand those who think we can get a referendum without a GE, I don't see where the numbers in parliament are for that.
The Queen chooses the PM based on the number of MPs that, at that time, support him/her.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/293976/Treaties_and_MoU_Guidance.pdf
"SIGNATURE OF TREATIES
Unless the treaty provides that it enters into force on signature, by signing a treaty a State shows that it is in agreement with the text, but it is not bound by it until the treaty has been ratified and has entered into force. The state is not obliged to ratify it. The UK, however, does not sign a treaty unless it has a reasonably firm intention of ratifying.
In international law a head of state, head of government or foreign minister may sign a treaty in his or her own right. Anyone else needs to produce "Full Powers" from one of those three. Full Powers are the grant to another person of authority to sign a treaty on behalf of the State. In UK practice, the Queen does not sign treaties, but the Prime Minister sometimes does. Full Powers are normally signed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary except for certain EU treaties which are drawn up between heads of state and therefore require a Queen's Full Power. FCO ministers and certain UK Representatives hold general Full Powers giving them authority to sign any treaty (subject to the approval of the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary in each case). Anyone else signing a treaty on behalf of the UK requires a special Full Power enabling them to sign the specific treaty."
Incidentally, it's not 'lose' the Ashes. In a draw, they are retained by the holder (Australia) but that's not the same as a series defeat.
I remain unconvinced the 21 ex-Tories would support (or fail to oppose) a Corbyn ministry now they know the Bill has passed. Losing the whip is one thing, but you’d presume doing that would start to hit them amongst their friends (I do think being looked down on my their mates will matter).
It also feels like Swinson is getting what she wanted without the need for Corbyn. That being the case, some sort of agreement over an election seems likely in the next two days.
However, like everyone on here I’m prone to expecting what I want to happen, and sometimes have a blind spot for the other point of view. I’m guessing it’ll all be clearer after PMQs, once Milne has a chance to brief.
The various independents can choose an election which likely limits their power and loses them their jobs, or help a govt that achieves something that they have just sacrificed their careers for.
The new numbers are unknown but it is very plausible we now have a Corbyn govt for 6 months.
That is what Bluekip have just done by disgracefully treating the likes of Hammond, Clarke and Gauke with utter contempt.
“I’m taking an awful risk Lord Cummings, this had better work”
Anyone would think he's trying to stop it.
Sinister and very devious chap.
https://twitter.com/holbornlolz/status/1169114353947283456?s=21
https://twitter.com/KarlTurnerMP/status/1168982921358839814
I saw that job. Looks idyllic but for family reasons I can't apply!
When will whats left of the Tory party realise they have backed the wrong horse!
Ind 36 - y
SNP 35
LD 15
Ind Group For Change 5
PC 4
Greens 1
Speaker 1
z
= 309 - x - y + z
Con 289 - z
DUP 10
x
y
= 299 + x + y - z
Not a slam-dunk but it might pass. z could be quite big if it promises to get Brexit over with one way or another.
Interesting he offers EEA as a possible compromise if Boris's current strategy doesn't work.
CBA to investigate whether this differs if you consider just the cricketing bits of England.
Even Boris Johnson has never come up with something as daft as the Hundred.
Cummings' exam reforms, that's a trickier call.
Bankers for Mcdonnell
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/09/03/corbyn-better-no-deal-brexit-say-investment-banks-anti-capitalist/
when weve got to this point weve gone in to unknown territory
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/how-should-britain-negotiate-its-future-relationship-with-the-eu-now-we-have-voted-to-leave/
Back in 2016 after the referendum, about 10% wanted to leave the EU completely and 55% wanted to do a deal with the EU.
The biggest problem with september is the catch up time if there has been any rain. The sun is lower on the horizon at 6pm and so bad light is more likely.
http://www.thecricketer.com/Topics/banner/who_on_earth_is_the_hundred_for_we_try_to_identify_the_ecb's_mysterious_'new_audience'.html
Many references are made to concussed goldfish.
I would wish everyone a good morning, but that may be improbable. So I will wish everyone a morning in which they are able to avoid homicidal thoughts so this board doesn't become a Justinfest.
But as I say I’m acutely aware I (like the rest of us) am biased by what I’d like to see here so I wouldn’t bet on it (literally - I closed out my October election bet the other night).
If Corbyn wins he will have tied his own hands . If BoJo wins hell just reverse the decision. If its a hung Parlt theyll just waste the time and go off on conferences and their Christmas holidays. Its a nonsense.
That said, there may be one or two rebel Tory MPs who get the whip back if they go through the nay lobby tonight...
Anyway if you are talking about cricket attendances, ODIs in India blow the ashes attendances away.