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.
It's /less/ confrontational. Westminster is an embarrassment with all the baying. It's like a zoo. Who thrives in that kind of environment? Pyschos, that's who.
If the Lords talk out the extension bill - as looks likely - we are back to there being a No Deal Brexit on 31st October, aren't we? But now without Johnson being able to call an election in advance of it. I am not sure that is an ideal outcome for his chances of winning an election when one does come.
Why not?
He would have kept his promise. The brexit party vote will all go to him.
An election after No Deal has kicked in will be very different to one when it is an abstract concept. Peopl ewill be living the consequences. And if no election is called in the next few days, it will be takiing place well into November at the earliest, but most likely in 2020.
Rubbish. There will be no recession due to no deal.
Just for a short time, things seemed to be making a bit of sense. Johnson's way out was an election, and if he won it on a "Do or Die" policy that would give him some political cover if things turned out badly. And of course, he could repeal whatever bill was passed now in good time to leave on 31 October.
But if this bill is filibustered, he won't get the election, and most likely next month parliament will prevent him from leaving on 31 October, but will enforce an extension. Difficult to make sense of.
Boris does not want no deal on 31 October.
If you look at his actions there is no other rational explanation beyond extreme incompetence.
1. We have not done any serious preparations for no deal 2. He is willing to break any constitutional rules 3. He could have chosen to prorogue parliament without announcement mid October to mid November, that would have actually delivered no deal 4. He chose to prorogue parliament, giving time both before and after for his opponents to strike. He knew this would still be unpalatable and push some to the edge. The only explanation for that is to provoke. 5. He organised, then cancelled meetings at short notice with the rebel Tories. The only explanation for that is to provoke. 6. JRM was sent out to provoke yesterday. 7. The point of the provocation must be to get an election and extension, he is losing capital with one nation tory MPs for something important 8. They have not negotiated anything with the EU
Points 3 & 4 are most important, he could have delivered no deal given his willingness to break constitutional norms. He chose not to. But then chose to still do a half hearted prorgogation that achieves nothing bar provocation and dates that make it easy for parliament to extend. What possible reason is there for that?
So do you mean that he wants parliament to force an extension in October, and then he wants to have an election?
I just can't understand the filibuster, because that means he won't get an election before 31 October. Will he?
If the Lords talk out the extension bill - as looks likely - we are back to there being a No Deal Brexit on 31st October, aren't we? But now without Johnson being able to call an election in advance of it. I am not sure that is an ideal outcome for his chances of winning an election when one does come.
Why not?
He would have kept his promise. The brexit party vote will all go to him.
An election after No Deal has kicked in will be very different to one when it is an abstract concept. Peopl ewill be living the consequences. And if no election is called in the next few days, it will be takiing place well into November at the earliest, but most likely in 2020.
Rubbish. There will be no recession due to no deal.
Anecdote alert: my parents (hard Leavers) have both said tonight, reluctantly, that staying in the EU would be better than letting Jeremy Corbyn anywhere near Downing Street. Might be because they are lifelong Tories and anti-socialists.
You know how this week's Markit numbers were bad in the US. The ISM numbers are even worse:
"But the details of Tuesday's ISM report were ugly, with new orders, production and employment sub-indices all contracting last month. New export orders shrunk for the second consecutive month and fell to their lowest since April 2009, when global trade was hit following the financial crisis."
And the figures from the UK, Japan and the Eurozone aren't any better.
Time to sell equities?
If so what currencies to hold the cash in?
Gold?
Difficult to buy real gold and difficult to hold. Also conversion costs and liable to fluctuation. Buy at wrong time and you lose a lot. ...
It's not difficult to buy it and have it held in a vault. The price is certainly very volatile though.
Indeed, hence my qualification "buy real gold and difficult to hold". Serious goldbugs prefer to have it in their physical possession rather than by proxy.. The route you suggest is open to fraud but I acknowledge it is the way many in practice buy and sell gold. Consider my original advice amended.
Anecdote alert: my parents (hard Leavers) have both said tonight, reluctantly, that staying in the EU would be better than letting Jeremy Corbyn anywhere near Downing Street. Might be because they are lifelong Tories and anti-socialists.
I told them I hoped it wouldn’t come to that.
you're parents are anti-social? you need to keep them under control before they get an ASBO...
Just for a short time, things seemed to be making a bit of sense. Johnson's way out was an election, and if he won it on a "Do or Die" policy that would give him some political cover if things turned out badly. And of course, he could repeal whatever bill was passed now in good time to leave on 31 October.
But if this bill is filibustered, he won't get the election, and most likely next month parliament will prevent him from leaving on 31 October, but will enforce an extension. Difficult to make sense of.
Boris does not want no deal on 31 October.
If you look at his actions there is no other rational explanation beyond extreme incompetence....
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.
I don't. I think their ideas, plans and policies should be challenged. The dirty little secret of politics is that you get good and bad ideas coming from all sides. The purpose of a political process ought to be to sift the good ones from the bad. That means not being afraid to vote with your "rivals" a fair amount of the time.
Labour only need to delay polling day by a few weeks to maximise the student vote in university seats. Final registration for a 15/10 polling day is 29/9 which is slightly too early to get all students in place and through Freshers which is peak organising week. They should should offer Boris early November. I can't see the Tories getting traction on " Corbyn will give us an election but 3 eweks later than we want ".
Labour only need to delay polling day by a few weeks to maximise the student vote in university seats. Final registration for a 15/10 polling day is 29/9 which is slightly too early to get all students in place and through Freshers which is peak organising week. They should should offer Boris early November. I can't see the Tories getting traction on " Corbyn will give us an election but 3 eweks later than we want ".
But Labour are likely to win university towns anyway...
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
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.
It's /less/ confrontational. Westminster is an embarrassment with all the baying. It's like a zoo. Who thrives in that kind of environment? Pyschos, that's who.
I don’t know a Chamber that is not like that
There are plenty that don't have the baying noise, I am sure. I just don't see how that is a feature of the parallel benches, there is definitely intensely partisan and bitter politics in places with semi circular chambers. It's a part of the culture of Westminster, it isn't built into the fabric of the place.
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.
Anecdote alert: my parents (hard Leavers) have both said tonight, reluctantly, that staying in the EU would be better than letting Jeremy Corbyn anywhere near Downing Street. Might be because they are lifelong Tories and anti-socialists.
I told them I hoped it wouldn’t come to that.
you're parents are anti-social? you need to keep them under control before they get an ASBO...
There are plenty that don't have the baying noise, I am sure. I just don't see how that is a feature of the parallel benches, there is definitely intensely partisan and bitter politics in places with semi circular chambers. It's a part of the culture of Westminster, it isn't built into the fabric of the place.
I think there was a recent Economist article about this that talks about studies that have show that yes, the seating arrangements make the world of difference.
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.
He is a lifelong supporter of the EU but he did vote for the WDA.
He wants brexit to happen but not no deal.
And at last mps have voted to bring back the WDA in this no deal legislation and maybe, just maybe, TM deal will go through as many on here will confirm I have always supported
Labour only need to delay polling day by a few weeks to maximise the student vote in university seats. Final registration for a 15/10 polling day is 29/9 which is slightly too early to get all students in place and through Freshers which is peak organising week. They should should offer Boris early November. I can't see the Tories getting traction on " Corbyn will give us an election but 3 eweks later than we want ".
Students don't suddenly appear out of thin air though do they ? If the vote is outside of term time won't their vote be adding to the tallies in other constituencies ?
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.
It's /less/ confrontational. Westminster is an embarrassment with all the baying. It's like a zoo. Who thrives in that kind of environment? Pyschos, that's who.
It’s the politics that’s the issue here. Not the acoustics of the chamber.
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
Corbyn has not said he will back Johnson's timetable for an election has he?
There are plenty that don't have the baying noise, I am sure. I just don't see how that is a feature of the parallel benches, there is definitely intensely partisan and bitter politics in places with semi circular chambers. It's a part of the culture of Westminster, it isn't built into the fabric of the place.
I think there was a recent Economist article about this that talks about studies that have show that yes, the seating arrangements make the world of difference.
And it guarantees that does it, given the awfulness of plenty of chambers around the world?
Proponents may well find that Westminster with a semi circular arrangement would, gasp, still be Westminster.
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
He doesn't have a choice. When Nicola said she was up for it it shot Labours fox.
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
Corbyn has not said he will back Johnson's timetable for an election has he?
Not really. He said he’d give Boris an election after Royal Assent of the Benn bill but he hasn’t said how long after.
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
Corbyn has not said he will back Johnson's timetable for an election has he?
If the bill gets RA he said he will support the election
He is a lifelong supporter of the EU but he did vote for the WDA.
He wants brexit to happen but not no deal.
And at last mps have voted to bring back the WDA in this no deal legislation and maybe, just maybe, TM deal will go through as many on here will confirm I have always supported
Of course he voted for the WDA, it was what Brussels wanted.
Yet Remainers opposite chose to go through the ERGs lobby instead of the pro-Brussels Clarke lobby.
I've consistently been against the Lords, I trust the #FBPE who were previously cheering on its every move did so out of a principled love for the institution:
by Pulpstar · August 27 I hope the pro HoL lot are borne out of a genuine love of it as an upper chamber with all its imperfections rather than anything to do with political current convenience.
Gardenwalker by Gardenwalker · July 11 I like the HoL, and I get annoyed at the idea of its abolition or its replacement by an elected body
Yes, I support the House of Lords as an institution by principle.
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
Corbyn has not said he will back Johnson's timetable for an election has he?
Pretty much, I think. It may just be that the words did not come out right. It is hard to imagine Labour giving Johnson what he wants now.
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
Corbyn has not said he will back Johnson's timetable for an election has he?
If the bill gets RA he said he will support the election
Just for a short time, things seemed to be making a bit of sense. Johnson's way out was an election, and if he won it on a "Do or Die" policy that would give him some political cover if things turned out badly. And of course, he could repeal whatever bill was passed now in good time to leave on 31 October.
But if this bill is filibustered, he won't get the election, and most likely next month parliament will prevent him from leaving on 31 October, but will enforce an extension. Difficult to make sense of.
Boris does not want no deal on 31 October.
If you look at his actions there is no other rational explanation beyond extreme incompetence.
1. We have not done any serious preparations for no deal 2. He is willing to break any constitutional rules 3. He could have chosen to prorogue parliament without announcement mid October to mid November, that would have actually delivered no deal 4. He chose to prorogue parliament, giving time both before and after for his opponents to strike. He knew this would still be unpalatable and push some to the edge. The only explanation for that is to provoke. 5. He organised, then cancelled meetings at short notice with the rebel Tories. The only explanation for that is to provoke. 6. JRM was sent out to provoke yesterday. 7. The point of the provocation must be to get an election and extension, he is losing capital with one nation tory MPs for something important 8. They have not negotiated anything with the EU
Points 3 & 4 are most important, he could have delivered no deal given his willingness to break constitutional norms. He chose not to. But then chose to still do a half hearted prorgogation that achieves nothing bar provocation and dates that make it easy for parliament to extend. What possible reason is there for that?
So do you mean that he wants parliament to force an extension in October, and then he wants to have an election?
I just can't understand the filibuster, because that means he won't get an election before 31 October. Will he?
Yes, he wants parliament to force the extension and an election.
The filibuster will fail I'd imagine, they usually do. I am not sure it is essential the election has to be in October, early November would still give him the people vs the elite politicians election (despite a third of the cabinet coming from the most elite school in the country!).
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
Cummings's on the ERG's attitude to May's efforts :
"Those of you who think you can get away with promising to respect the referendum result then abandoning this promise are in the ‘pirate’ category. Those of you in the narcissist-delusional subset of the ERG, who have spent the last three years scrambling for the 8.10am Today slot while spouting gibberish about trade and the law across SW1 — i.e. exactly the contemptible behaviour that led to your enforced marginalisation during the referendum and your attempt to destroy Vote Leave — you are also in the pirate category. You were useful idiots for Remain during the campaign and with every piece of bullshit from Bill Cash et al you have helped only Remain for three years."
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
He doesn't have a choice. When Nicola said she was up for it it shot Labours fox.
God only knows. Come Monday this is going to look really weird if Labour splits.
It’s an embarrassment on all counts from all parties who have spoken so far who do they think they are talking to or representing. I don’t know who the prat speaking now is but he’s an embarrassment some right wing tory
Then you realise there are now an absolubte truckload of independents ! Looks very odd to see a Brexit bill with barely a Tory rebel.
Current state of the parties, adapted from HOC website:
Conservative 289 (includes 1 Deputy Speaker) Labour 247 (includes 2 Deputy Speakers) Independent 36 Scottish National Party 35 Liberal Democrat 15 Democratic Unionist Party 10 Sinn Féin 7 Independent Group for Change 5 Plaid Cymru 4 Green Party 1 Speaker 1
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
Corbyn wants no deal. Don't forget that.
Right now, though, he is at the mercy of the PLP. They do not want No Deal.
Kinnock amendment sticks. That means MV4 is on, unless the whole bill is killed. As the kids say, SCENES.
Dont see how either front bench can vote for the bill now, especially Labour who whipped against previous versions of MV.
As mentioned - Corbyn/Labour forced to vote against a deal - whilst banging on about avoiding no deal - clowns.
But that isn’t what it means at all. See above.
TGOHF has been living in his hard-right wing bed wetting cloud cuckoo land for several years now. The ultra confident predictions that turn out to be utterly wrong a day or so later are a joy to behold.
This was the man who insisted that Rory Stewart would fold and vote with the government.
Labour only need to delay polling day by a few weeks to maximise the student vote in university seats. Final registration for a 15/10 polling day is 29/9 which is slightly too early to get all students in place and through Freshers which is peak organising week. They should should offer Boris early November. I can't see the Tories getting traction on " Corbyn will give us an election but 3 eweks later than we want ".
Students don't suddenly appear out of thin air though do they ? If the vote is outside of term time won't their vote be adding to the tallies in other constituencies ?
Am I missing something here ?
Yes, because our system rewards any ‘bloc’ of voters when they are geographically concentrated.
Just for a short time, things seemed to be making a bit of sense. Johnson's way out was an election, and if he won it on a "Do or Die" policy that would give him some political cover if things turned out badly. And of course, he could repeal whatever bill was passed now in good time to leave on 31 October.
But if this bill is filibustered, he won't get the election, and most likely next month parliament will prevent him from leaving on 31 October, but will enforce an extension. Difficult to make sense of.
Boris does not want no deal on 31 October.
If you look at his actions there is no other rational explanation beyond extreme incompetence.
1. We have not done any serious preparations for no deal 2. He is willing to break any constitutional rules 3. He could have chosen to prorogue parliament without announcement mid October to mid November, that would have actually delivered no deal 4. He chose to prorogue parliament, giving time both before and after for his opponents to strike. He knew this would still be unpalatable and push some to the edge. The only explanation for that is to provoke. 5. He organised, then cancelled meetings at short notice with the rebel Tories. The only explanation for that is to provoke. 6. JRM was sent out to provoke yesterday. 7. The point of the provocation must be to get an election and extension, he is losing capital with one nation tory MPs for something important 8. They have not negotiated anything with the EU
Points 3 & 4 are most important, he could have delivered no deal given his willingness to break constitutional norms. He chose not to. But then chose to still do a half hearted prorgogation that achieves nothing bar provocation and dates that make it easy for parliament to extend. What possible reason is there for that?
So do you mean that he wants parliament to force an extension in October, and then he wants to have an election?
I just can't understand the filibuster, because that means he won't get an election before 31 October. Will he?
Yes, he wants parliament to force the extension and an election.
The filibuster will fail I'd imagine, they usually do. I am not sure it is essential the election has to be in October, early November would still give him the people vs the elite politicians election (despite a third of the cabinet coming from the most elite school in the country!).
It would make sense if the filibuster were down to an excess of zeal among Tory Lords, which Johnson secretly wished to fail. I still find that a bit difficult to believe somehow.
Most overpredicted events in politics - The WA might have a chance after all, and Labour could split in a major way.
One can scarcely believe that the denouement of this saga would be Boris Johnson steering Theresa May's Deal through Parliament.
Labour could just as easily end up as the largest party under such circumstances. The ERG wing could just combust and drop off in the same fashion as the expelled rebels. Not to mention the fact that most of the Tory party membership opposes the Deal. And the DUP.
Labour only need to delay polling day by a few weeks to maximise the student vote in university seats. Final registration for a 15/10 polling day is 29/9 which is slightly too early to get all students in place and through Freshers which is peak organising week. They should should offer Boris early November. I can't see the Tories getting traction on " Corbyn will give us an election but 3 eweks later than we want ".
It would also allow time for the issues to be debated properly and the party leaders could have debates. If I were the opposition party I would insist it is a November election and that debates would be part of the campaign. Lets see how keen Boris is to have an election!
Just for a short time, things seemed to be making a bit of sense. Johnson's way out was an election, and if he won it on a "Do or Die" policy that would give him some political cover if things turned out badly. And of course, he could repeal whatever bill was passed now in good time to leave on 31 October.
But if this bill is filibustered, he won't get the election, and most likely next month parliament will prevent him from leaving on 31 October, but will enforce an extension. Difficult to make sense of.
Boris does not want no deal on 31 October.
If you look at his actions there is no other rational explanation beyond extreme incompetence.
1. We have not done any serious preparations for no deal 2. He is willing to break any constitutional rules 3. He could have chosen to prorogue parliament without announcement mid October to mid November, that would have actually delivered no deal 4. He chose to prorogue parliament, giving time both before and after for his opponents to strike. He knew this would still be unpalatable and push some to the edge. The only explanation for that is to provoke. 5. He organised, then cancelled meetings at short notice with the rebel Tories. The only explanation for that is to provoke. 6. JRM was sent out to provoke yesterday. 7. The point of the provocation must be to get an election and extension, he is losing capital with one nation tory MPs for something important 8. They have not negotiated anything with the EU
Points 3 & 4 are most important, he could have delivered no deal given his willingness to break constitutional norms. He chose not to. But then chose to still do a half hearted prorgogation that achieves nothing bar provocation and dates that make it easy for parliament to extend. What possible reason is there for that?
So do you mean that he wants parliament to force an extension in October, and then he wants to have an election?
I just can't understand the filibuster, because that means he won't get an election before 31 October. Will he?
A key aspect of having a strategy of being seen to try but being stopped is that you can’t tell your colleagues that this is the plan.
I'd be happy for the withdrawal agreement to pass but can't see it. Both remainers and no dealers have their end goal in sight, they're not going to let it up now.
Most overpredicted events in politics - The WA might have a chance after all, and Labour could split in a major way.
One can scarcely believe that the denouement of this saga would be Boris Johnson steering Theresa May's Deal through Parliament.
Labour could just as easily end up as the largest party under such circumstances. The ERG wing could just combust and drop off in the same fashion as the expelled rebels. Not to mention the fact that most of the Tory party membership opposes the Deal. And the DUP.
That seems, well, inconceivable?!?!?!?!
The WA is a non-starter. The Kinnock amendment was designed for voter consumption in the relevant MPs' constituencies.
All the pressure is on Johnson now. He has to find a way to get an election that takes place in advance of 31st October. If he doesn't, he is done for.
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've consistently been against the Lords, I trust the #FBPE who were previously cheering on its every move did so out of a principled love for the institution:
by Pulpstar · August 27 I hope the pro HoL lot are borne out of a genuine love of it as an upper chamber with all its imperfections rather than anything to do with political current convenience.
Gardenwalker by Gardenwalker · July 11 I like the HoL, and I get annoyed at the idea of its abolition or its replacement by an elected body
Yes, I support the House of Lords as an institution by principle.
I’m a Conservative and value our institutions.
I rather worry about the Lords. It's become such a dumping ground for half-achievers that their purpose seems lost. The Lord's isn't the place to try to solve inequality. There are mostly ludicrous appointments for that purpose only.
Just for a short time, things seemed to be making a bit of sense. Johnson's way out was an election, and if he won it on a "Do or Die" policy that would give him some political cover if things turned out badly. And of course, he could repeal whatever bill was passed now in good time to leave on 31 October.
But if this bill is filibustered, he won't get the election, and most likely next month parliament will prevent him from leaving on 31 October, but will enforce an extension. Difficult to make sense of.
Boris does not want no deal on 31 October.
If you look at his actions there is no other rational explanation beyond extreme incompetence.
1. We have not done any serious preparations for no deal 2. He is willing to break any constitutional rules 3. He could have chosen to prorogue parliament without announcement mid October to mid November, that would have actually delivered no deal 4. He chose to prorogue parliament, giving time both before and after for his opponents to strike. He knew this would still be unpalatable and push some to the edge. The only explanation for that is to provoke. 5. He organised, then cancelled meetings at short notice with the rebel Tories. The only explanation for that is to provoke. 6. JRM was sent out to provoke yesterday. 7. The point of the provocation must be to get an election and extension, he is losing capital with one nation tory MPs for something important 8. They have not negotiated anything with the EU
Points 3 & 4 are most important, he could have delivered no deal given his willingness to break constitutional norms. He chose not to. But then chose to still do a half hearted prorgogation that achieves nothing bar provocation and dates that make it easy for parliament to extend. What possible reason is there for that?
So do you mean that he wants parliament to force an extension in October, and then he wants to have an election?
I just can't understand the filibuster, because that means he won't get an election before 31 October. Will he?
A key aspect of having a strategy of being seen to try but being stopped is that you can’t tell your colleagues that this is the plan.
In which case there's a danger that you will fail to be stopped, and succeed without really trying?
If Corbyn ignores, Starmer, McDonnell and co, and backs Johnson's timetable for an election which Labour then loses, it is game over for him. My guess is that when the people with brains get to him again we'll find things change.
I notice Thornberry made a public and very sharp intervention this afternoon backing the Starmer, McDonnell position. Corbyn will be reined in if need be.
Kinnock amendment sticks. That means MV4 is on, unless the whole bill is killed. As the kids say, SCENES.
Dont see how either front bench can vote for the bill now, especially Labour who whipped against previous versions of MV.
As mentioned - Corbyn/Labour forced to vote against a deal - whilst banging on about avoiding no deal - clowns.
But that isn’t what it means at all. See above.
TGOHF has been living in his hard-right wing bed wetting cloud cuckoo land for several years now. The ultra confident predictions that turn out to be utterly wrong a day or so later are a joy to behold.
This was the man who insisted that Rory Stewart would fold and vote with the government.
I'd be happy for the withdrawal agreement to pass but can't see it. Both remainers and no dealers have their end goal in sight, they're not going to let it up now.
But it passed the vote tonight 327 to 299 and Kinnocks amendment was integral to it
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 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.
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."
Comments
It looks deeply sensible to me.
Rubbish. There will be no recession due to no deal.
I just can't understand the filibuster, because that means he won't get an election before 31 October. Will he?
I told them I hoped it wouldn’t come to that.
For the past three years.
Deeply dishonest if so.
The dirty little secret of politics is that you get good and bad ideas coming from all sides. The purpose of a political process ought to be to sift the good ones from the bad. That means not being afraid to vote with your "rivals" a fair amount of the time.
https://commonsvotes.digiminster.com/Divisions/Details/714?byMember=false
Then you realise there are now an absolubte truckload of independents ! Looks very odd to see a Brexit bill with barely a Tory rebel.
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.
He wants brexit to happen but not no deal.
And at last mps have voted to bring back the WDA in this no deal legislation and maybe, just maybe, TM deal will go through as many on here will confirm I have always supported
"Sack your adviser Dominic Cummings," he says.
He also tells the PM to "accept your duty as prime minister and go to the EU and negotiate the extension you have been told to deliver."
Jumping the gun a bit isn't he? The PM has not been told to do that until the bill is passed by both houses and becomes law?
Am I missing something here ?
Proponents may well find that Westminster with a semi circular arrangement would, gasp, still be Westminster.
Exactly why it has no chance.
Yet Remainers opposite chose to go through the ERGs lobby instead of the pro-Brussels Clarke lobby.
Yes, I support the House of Lords as an institution by principle.
I’m a Conservative and value our institutions.
The filibuster will fail I'd imagine, they usually do. I am not sure it is essential the election has to be in October, early November would still give him the people vs the elite politicians election (despite a third of the cabinet coming from the most elite school in the country!).
Conservative 289 (includes 1 Deputy Speaker)
Labour 247 (includes 2 Deputy Speakers)
Independent 36
Scottish National Party 35
Liberal Democrat 15
Democratic Unionist Party 10
Sinn Féin 7
Independent Group for Change 5
Plaid Cymru 4
Green Party 1
Speaker 1
This was the man who insisted that Rory Stewart would fold and vote with the government.
And then you realise, no, no I was wrong, they can.
Labour could just as easily end up as the largest party under such circumstances. The ERG wing could just combust and drop off in the same fashion as the expelled rebels. Not to mention the fact that most of the Tory party membership opposes the Deal. And the DUP.
That seems, well, inconceivable?!?!?!?!
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
Regardless of political implications, it would be a good thing though.
All the pressure is on Johnson now. He has to find a way to get an election that takes place in advance of 31st October. If he doesn't, he is done for.
Brexit + No Deal + Horror Show
Brexit + WA + Nigel's displeasure
And concluded:
Brexit + No Deal + Horror Show < Brexit + WA + Nigel's displeasure
But he has a majority - until he faced the voters.
Then they told him to sling his hook.
If it had still gone against him (it probably would have) he’d be in a better position to call a General Election.
"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."