As a practical question, couldn't anyone have provided tellers? I assume Labour were against it too.
I think that's where the skullduggery comes in. The government said they would provide tellers and by the time they didn't it was too late for anyone else to do so.
Deeply dishonest if so.
Those who live by testing of arcane procedures and creation of new precedent can hardly object to loudly to a legal if shitty move. And it doesn't seem like it matters all that much.
Voting one way or another is one thing, but sabotaging a vote so that votes aren't counted is qualitatively different.
Do they have much scope for leverage? Boris has already lost his majority and can't get votes through. More rebels just allows him to get more loyal recruits in the next GE.
No leverage needed. They just have to look lever-like.
I'm so old I remeber when May had skillfully turned the situation around and was poised to deliver a blow that would cause the Labour Party to split and ensure a thousand unbroken years of Tory government.
I am at a loss as to know what is going on with this amendment.
"Kinnock amdmt attaches a purpose to the extension bill, that purpose being to debate and pass the WA. Technically thfr, Govt could reintro WA, debate it, defeat it, say purpose was fulfilled, and extension Act no longer applies. Result: no deal Brexit 31 Oct."
I can’t remember a PM being treated with such little respect by the HoC in my lifetime.
It is truly remarkable, the sheer scale of disregard, dislike, and disrespect he attracts from all sides of the house.
If he’d acted with a degree of magnanimity following his election as Tory party leader (rather than ultra partisan to those who’d backed him alone), not tried to “game” Parliament through proroguement, and put a clearer strategy forward for the WA/PD modifications, this vote for No Deal might have been very close indeed.
If it had still gone against him (it probably would have) he’d be in a better position to call a General Election.
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
+3
If I was a Unionist.
Which I’m not.
If there was a (more) proportional system of allocating seats which meant that parties would have to negotiate with the other side more often, not only would we get better laws we would also get less of this mess.
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
Yes, because a semi circle solves it all.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
Yes, because a semi circle solves it all.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
I don’t see any evidence that the geometric seating arrangements in a parliamentary chamber affect the quality of its politics.
It’s a myth.
There’s possibly a placebo effect from simply “resetting” an old institution into a new one, somewhere else, but that would be a temporary effect and the seating layout is peripheral to it.
Just as every appeal to stop Punch and Judy politics is, it’s something people say that makes no difference.
I think Westminster is almost designed to be a bear pit. Holyrood is definitely a less confrontational place. I agree parliament design is only part of that. The Scottish electoral system encourages collaboration as does the committee system. Most of all the political class is much smaller in Scotland and everyone is at least a friend of a friend of everyone else. Finally Scotland is much less formal than England in its governance, and has been for centuries.
I can’t remember a PM being treated with such little respect by the HoC in my lifetime.
It is truly remarkable, the sheer scale of disregard, dislike, and disrespect he attracts from all sides of the house.
If he’d acted with a degree of magnanimity following his election as Tory party leader (rather than ultra partisan to those who’d backed him alone), not tried to “game” Parliament through proroguement, and put a clearer strategy forward for the WA/PD modifications, this vote for No Deal might have been very close indeed.
If it had still gone against him (it probably would have) he’d be in a better position to call a General Election.
Enough of your diehard remainer talk.
It’s no secret that I favour a Deal and felt Theresa May’s Deal was a good one.
Failing that another compromise is needed, which means a bit of give and take each way.
You sort of think the politics around Brexit can't get any more fucked up.
And then you realise, no, no I was wrong, they can.
TM will have a huge smile on her face tonight
Her deal is nearer today than it has been, especially in view of Cummings disregard for the ERG
If Cummings was the architect of getting the Kinnock amendment through tonight that is where Boris is going in mid October
Forgive me for ignorance, but why is May's deal more likely than ever? I can't follow what is going on.
Regardless of political implications, it would be a good thing though.
It is difficult to follow but Kinnocks amendment to bring back the WDA to the HOC was voted for and became integral to the bill on third reading. The consequence is that on RA the government are required to re- introduce the WDA as agreed by TM with the labour working group before she resigned
On a point of order Kinnock asked the PM when would the bill be brought forward
It is sensational and is the key to unlock no deal if mps have any common sense
Do they have much scope for leverage? Boris has already lost his majority and can't get votes through. More rebels just allows him to get more loyal recruits in the next GE.
I think Boris will say, 'The buggers in parliament stopped me from getting any further concessions from the EU so Theresa's Deal it is then.' Even if parliament then rejects it he will have passed the blame for No Deal onto others. What a masterstroke!
Do they have much scope for leverage? Boris has already lost his majority and can't get votes through. More rebels just allows him to get more loyal recruits in the next GE.
Depends on how many of the ejected Tories are prepared to contest their seats as independents.
Do they have much scope for leverage? Boris has already lost his majority and can't get votes through. More rebels just allows him to get more loyal recruits in the next GE.
Depends on how many of the ejected Tories are prepared to contest their seats as independents.
And evnif they don’t, is a hard Brexiteer really going to get elected in seats like Wimbledon (S Hammond)?
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
Yes, because a semi circle solves it all.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
Yes, because a semi circle solves it all.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
I don’t see any evidence that the geometric seating arrangements in a parliamentary chamber affect the quality of its politics.
It’s a myth.
There’s possibly a placebo effect from simply “resetting” an old institution into a new one, somewhere else, but that would be a temporary effect and the seating layout is peripheral to it.
Just as every appeal to stop Punch and Judy politics is, it’s something people say that makes no difference.
I think Westminster is almost designed to be a bear pit. Holyrood is definitely a less confrontational place. I agree parliament design is only part of that. The Scottish electoral system encourages collaboration as does the committee system. Most of all the political class is much smaller in Scotland and everyone is at least a friend of a friend of everyone else. Finally Scotland is much less formal than England in its governance, and has been for centuries.
I think people are overthinking the government allowing the Kinnock amendment through. They just wanted to avoid a vote that would have split the party further.
I think Boris will say, 'The buggers in parliament stopped me from getting any further concessions from the EU so Theresa's Deal it is then.' Even if parliament then rejects it he will have passed the blame for No Deal onto others. What a masterstroke!
I think Boris will say, 'The buggers in parliament stopped me from getting any further concessions from the EU so Theresa's Deal it is then.' Even if parliament then rejects it he will have passed the blame for No Deal onto others. What a masterstroke!
This bears some relation to what I was thinking. If the amendment isnt struck down in the Lords, Johnson gets either potentially some of the 21 back on board and May's WA through, or a no-deal that the right of the party would be happy with, but blamed on Labour. Either way the party may stay intact, as it can claim to have supported both the pragmatic or radical Leave causes.
We might be over-attributing Cumming's cunnings, ofcourse.
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
Yes, because a semi circle solves it all.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
Yes, because a semi circle solves it all.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
I don’t see any evidence that the geometric seating arrangements in a parliamentary chamber affect the quality of its politics.
It’s a myth.
There’s possibly a placebo effect from simply “resetting” an old institution into a new one, somewhere else, but that would be a temporary effect and the seating layout is peripheral to it.
Just as every appeal to stop Punch and Judy politics is, it’s something people say that makes no difference.
I think Westminster is almost designed to be a bear pit. Holyrood is definitely a less confrontational place. I agree parliament design is only part of that. The Scottish electoral system encourages collaboration as does the committee system. Most of all the political class is much smaller in Scotland and everyone is at least a friend of a friend of everyone else. Finally Scotland is much less formal than England in its governance, and has been for centuries.
I can’t remember a PM being treated with such little respect by the HoC in my lifetime.
It is truly remarkable, the sheer scale of disregard, dislike, and disrespect he attracts from all sides of the house.
If he’d acted with a degree of magnanimity following his election as Tory party leader (rather than ultra partisan to those who’d backed him alone), not tried to “game” Parliament through proroguement, and put a clearer strategy forward for the WA/PD modifications, this vote for No Deal might have been very close indeed.
If it had still gone against him (it probably would have) he’d be in a better position to call a General Election.
Enough of your diehard remainer talk.
It’s no secret that I favour a Deal and felt Theresa May’s Deal was a good one.
Failing that another compromise is needed, which means a bit of give and take each way.
The Deal wasn’t my ideal scenario but - as I said on here at the time - I would have voted for it when presented.
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
Yes, because a semi circle solves it all.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
Yes, because a semi circle solves it all.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
I don’t see any evidence that the geometric seating arrangements in a parliamentary chamber affect the quality of its politics.
It’s a myth.
There’s possibly a placebo effect from simply “resetting” an old institution into a new one, somewhere else, but that would be a temporary effect and the seating layout is peripheral to it.
Just as every appeal to stop Punch and Judy politics is, it’s something people say that makes no difference.
I think Westminster is almost designed to be a bear pit. Holyrood is definitely a less confrontational place. I agree parliament design is only part of that. The Scottish electoral system encourages collaboration as does the committee system. Most of all the political class is much smaller in Scotland and everyone is at least a friend of a friend of everyone else. Finally Scotland is much less formal than England in its governance, and has been for centuries.
I don’t see the evidence for that collaboration in Scotland that’s distinctly better. It happens in the UK too by select committees which sit in committee rooms within the Palace of Westminster where genuine cross-party dialogue and collaborative work does take place.
But politics done along party lines is, by its very nature, adversarial.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
Yes, because a semi circle solves it all.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
I don’t see any evidence that the geometric seating arrangements in a parliamentary chamber affect the quality of its politics.
It’s a myth.
There’s possibly a placebo effect from simply “resetting” an old institution into a new one, somewhere else, but that would be a temporary effect and the seating layout is peripheral to it.
Just as every appeal to stop Punch and Judy politics is, it’s something people say that makes no difference.
I think Westminster is almost designed to be a bear pit. Holyrood is definitely a less confrontational place. I agree parliament design is only part of that. The Scottish electoral system encourages collaboration as does the committee system. Most of all the political class is much smaller in Scotland and everyone is at least a friend of a friend of everyone else. Finally Scotland is much less formal than England in its governance, and has been for centuries.
I don’t see the evidence for that collaboration in Scotland that’s distinctly better. It happens in the UK too by select committees which sit in committee rooms within the Palace of Westminster where genuine cross-party dialogue and collaborative work does take place.
But politics done along party lines is, by its very nature, adversarial.
Just look at Westminster tonight. The Scots got their agreed view on Brexit together at Holyrood very quickly along cross-party lines, years ago - two or three? - the Tories apart.
Whether this had anything to do with Senor Miralles' architecture is perhaps another matter.
I think Westminster is almost designed to be a bear pit. Holyrood is definitely a less confrontational place. I agree parliament design is only part of that. The Scottish electoral system encourages collaboration as does the committee system. Most of all the political class is much smaller in Scotland and everyone is at least a friend of a friend of everyone else. Finally Scotland is much less formal than England in its governance, and has been for centuries.
On that I really do agree
What is required as an English equivalent of Holyrood, with Westminster getting cut right down to size. It's not only right in principle, but it could aid good governance in practice. The UK Parliament (and Government) might actually perform better if they didn't have such a vast array of responsibilities.
She hates you just as much as she hates Boris. It's just that it's Boris that is in her sights at the moment.
To be fair, I think the key thing is that respect for and trust in Boris is in very short supply amongst his fellow Parliamentarians.
I said this on here not that long ago, but I find it hard to get worked up about all this. All my life Labour politicians have been outraged by Tory politicians. It's their default position. Is Boris a total shit? Yes. Does the House of Commons deserve him? Absolutely.
His stuttering wiffle waffle delivery has always made me think he couldnt possibly be a vote winner, right from the time I had a grand on Ken Livingstone to beat him to the 2008 Mayoralty
Jess Phillips faux working class hero act is as annoying
I think Westminster is almost designed to be a bear pit. Holyrood is definitely a less confrontational place. I agree parliament design is only part of that. The Scottish electoral system encourages collaboration as does the committee system. Most of all the political class is much smaller in Scotland and everyone is at least a friend of a friend of everyone else. Finally Scotland is much less formal than England in its governance, and has been for centuries.
On that I really do agree
What is required as an English equivalent of Holyrood, with Westminster getting cut right down to size. It's not only right in principle, but it could aid good governance in practice. The UK Parliament (and Government) might actually perform better if they didn't have such a vast array of responsibilities.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
Blow the place up build a new one in Birmingham with all mod cons in a non confrontational semi circle this is bloody ridiculous
+1
no, fuck it, +2
Yes, because a semi circle solves it all.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
I don’t see any evidence that the geometric seating arrangements in a parliamentary chamber affect the quality of its politics.
It’s a myth.
There’s possibly a placebo effect from simply “resetting” an old institution into a new one, somewhere else, but that would be a temporary effect and the seating layout is peripheral to it.
Just as every appeal to stop Punch and Judy politics is, it’s something people say that makes no difference.
I think Westminster is almost designed to be a bear pit. Holyrood is definitely a less confrontational place. I agree parliament design is only part of that. The Scottish electoral system encourages collaboration as does the committee system. Most of all the political class is much smaller in Scotland and everyone is at least a friend of a friend of everyone else. Finally Scotland is much less formal than England in its governance, and has been for centuries.
I don’t see the evidence for that collaboration in Scotland that’s distinctly better. It happens in the UK too by select committees which sit in committee rooms within the Palace of Westminster where genuine cross-party dialogue and collaborative work does take place.
But politics done along party lines is, by its very nature, adversarial.
Just look at Westminster tonight. The Scots got their agreed view on Brexit together at Holyrood very quickly along cross-party lines, years ago - two or three? - the Tories apart.
Whether this had anything to do with Senor Miralles' architecture is perhaps another matter.
That’s a reflection of party politics in Scotland, IMHO.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
I mean, politics is so collaborative and non-confrontational in Edinburgh. Getting that extra 60 degrees of angle on your opponents and a slightly sore neck makes all the difference.
Actually it is. The problem in Scotland is that the governance is very cosy. Everyone is a pal of everyone else. While I'm not keen on confrontation for the sake of it, I think people should be challenged.
I don’t see any evidence that the geometric seating arrangements in a parliamentary chamber affect the quality of its politics.
It’s a myth.
There’s possibly a placebo effect from simply “resetting” an old institution into a new one, somewhere else, but that would be a temporary effect and the seating layout is peripheral to it.
Just as every appeal to stop Punch and Judy politics is, it’s something people say that makes no difference.
I think Westminster is almost designed to be a bear pit. Holyrood is definitely a less confrontational place. I agree parliament design is only part of that. The Scottish electoral system encourages collaboration as does the committee system. Most of all the political class is much smaller in Scotland and everyone is at least a friend of a friend of everyone else. Finally Scotland is much less formal than England in its governance, and has been for centuries.
I don’t see the evidence for that collaboration in Scotland that’s distinctly better. It happens in the UK too by select committees which sit in committee rooms within the Palace of Westminster where genuine cross-party dialogue and collaborative work does take place.
But politics done along party lines is, by its very nature, adversarial.
Just look at Westminster tonight. The Scots got their agreed view on Brexit together at Holyrood very quickly along cross-party lines, years ago - two or three? - the Tories apart.
Whether this had anything to do with Senor Miralles' architecture is perhaps another matter.
That’s a reflection of party politics in Scotland, IMHO.
To some extent admittedly - but also the voting system designed to be the opposite of FPTP and enforce minority governments (not always successfully).
She hates you just as much as she hates Boris. It's just that it's Boris that is in her sights at the moment.
To be fair, I think the key thing is that respect for and trust in Boris is in very short supply amongst his fellow Parliamentarians.
And it was always so - for example the frosty reception he got when he spoke after his cabinet resignation - with the striking exception of the brief period of the Tory leadership campaign.
Conservative MPs arguing for an election, other MPs don't want one. It's a bit difficult to accuse the Tories of being anti-democratic in those circumstances.
Conservative MPs arguing for an election, other MPs don't want one. It's a bit difficult to accuse the Tories of being anti-democratic in those circumstances.
Why? Boris told us the people don’t want an election.
As a practical question, couldn't anyone have provided tellers? I assume Labour were against it too.
I think that's where the skullduggery comes in. The government said they would provide tellers and by the time they didn't it was too late for anyone else to do so.
Deeply dishonest if so.
Those who live by testing of arcane procedures and creation of new precedent can hardly object to loudly to a legal if shitty move. And it doesn't seem like it matters all that much.
Voting one way or another is one thing, but sabotaging a vote so that votes aren't counted is qualitatively different.
I thought they didn't trust the government even to follow a law which said the date of an election would be X? But they trusted them to follow normal procedures when its life is on the line?
Conservative MPs arguing for an election, other MPs don't want one. It's a bit difficult to accuse the Tories of being anti-democratic in those circumstances.
I think Corbyn’s poisoned apple analogy pretty much nails it TBH.
Boris needs an election before 31 Oct or he’s in a bit of trouble I think.
Are there any Johnson fans on here who'd like to argue that he has been anything other than woeful over the past couple of days?
Me. And I am an interesting example. Let me explain.
I am in provincial Greece. Thanks to time differences and lack of TV I am generally unable to follow the Commons live. So I dip in and out and catch the major sound bites on the BBC/Sky news etc
In other words, I absorb the news like a normal person, rather than a PB geek.
And seen through the prism of normal news, Boris is doing fine. I keep reading the hysteria on PB and then I check with the iPlayer to see Boris publicly soil himself in front of the Dalai Lama’s great aunt, as promised, but it never happens. I see Boris being Boris, I see Corbyn being Corbyn, I see a lot of MPs shouting, for obscure reasons.
This is what most British voters will see. At most. I expect the ructions of the last week will barely budge the polls, and if they do, it could easily be in Boris’ favour, because everyone is bored of seeing MPs shouting for obscure reasons.
People aren’t interested in detail like this unfortunately.
It's a detail that Johnson thinks he would be going to the meeting a fortnight before Brexit day to negotiate, when he wouldn't?
What kind of thing would you consider not to be a detail?
We know that before he was elected leader he thought there would still be a transition period after No Deal. I had assumed that at least some information would have been drilled into his thick head by now somehow.
Given the fact that he's still clueless about how the process works, perhaps not.
Are there any Johnson fans on here who'd like to argue that he has been anything other than woeful over the past couple of days?
Me. And I am an interesting example. Let me explain.
I am in provincial Greece. Thanks to time differences and lack of TV I am generally unable to follow the Commons live. So I dip in and out and catch the major sound bites on the BBC/Sky news etc
In other words, I absorb the news like a normal person, rather than a PB geek.
And seen through the prism of normal news, Boris is doing fine. I keep reading the hysteria on PB and then I check with the iPlayer to see Boris publicly soil himself in front of the Dalai Lama’s great aunt, as promised, but it never happens. I see Boris being Boris, I see Corbyn being Corbyn, I see a lot of MPs shouting, for obscure reasons.
This is what most British voters will see. At most. I expect the ructions of the last week will barely budge the polls, and if they do, it could easily be in Boris’ favour, because everyone is bored of seeing MPs shouting for obscure reasons.
Comments
Very very angry.
Corrected for you
Failing that another compromise is needed, which means a bit of give and take each way.
I'm currently in my safe space so has anything major happened in the last few hours?
On a point of order Kinnock asked the PM when would the bill be brought forward
It is sensational and is the key to unlock no deal if mps have any common sense
A Scottish one that sounds Welsh.
Click the link if you dare.
Try Henry Dundas for starters.
What's sauce for the goose . . .
Has she been in the bar with Soubry ?
Did you come up with trials by drowning in a previous life perhaps?
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1169334674763800576
To the opposition anyway.
We might be over-attributing Cumming's cunnings, ofcourse.
Good evening, everyone.
He’s a Gael.
But politics done along party lines is, by its very nature, adversarial.
He totally fluffed PMQs
To be fair, I think the key thing is that respect for and trust in Boris is in very short supply amongst his fellow Parliamentarians.
Whether this had anything to do with Senor Miralles' architecture is perhaps another matter.
What are the roots of your late gothic superiority complex?
Jess Phillips faux working class hero act is as annoying
https://twitter.com/dngbbc/status/1169328487980830721
Boris needs an election before 31 Oct or he’s in a bit of trouble I think.
Res ipsa loquitur...
I am in provincial Greece. Thanks to time differences and lack of TV I am generally unable to follow the Commons live. So I dip in and out and catch the major sound bites on the BBC/Sky news etc
In other words, I absorb the news like a normal person, rather than a PB geek.
And seen through the prism of normal news, Boris is doing fine. I keep reading the hysteria on PB and then I check with the iPlayer to see Boris publicly soil himself in front of the Dalai Lama’s great aunt, as promised, but it never happens. I see Boris being Boris, I see Corbyn being Corbyn, I see a lot of MPs shouting, for obscure reasons.
This is what most British voters will see. At most. I expect the ructions of the last week will barely budge the polls, and if they do, it could easily be in Boris’ favour, because everyone is bored of seeing MPs shouting for obscure reasons.
What kind of thing would you consider not to be a detail?
We know that before he was elected leader he thought there would still be a transition period after No Deal. I had assumed that at least some information would have been drilled into his thick head by now somehow.
Given the fact that he's still clueless about how the process works, perhaps not.