First. Seeing Johnson going cap in hand in abject humiliation to the EU Council to ask for an extension is such an enjoyable prospect who wouldn't support it.
The optics of Remainers in Parliament obstructing our exit more than 3 years after the referendum and even denying an election are . . . interesting to say the least.
The opposition rejecting an election is what Sir Humphrey may have called a "brave" decision.
I think we can drop the 'unelected PM' bit. We all know how our PMs work, and that they don't require leading their party into an election, why imply there's something untoward about that?
It does look like MPs who appreciate how bad Brexit is going to be are declining the opportunity to have to explain it to their constituents after the fact.
Out there in the country which actually voted Leave beyond central London Remainerville the images of Parliament continually refusing to implement the Leave vote and now refusing to even give the voters the final say on Brexit led by Corbyn Labour, the LDs and SNP in cahoots with a few Tory rebels will I am sure cement if not increase the Tory poll lead yet further
Slightly surprised to see that the petition against proroguing sort of petered out. I guess events kind of overtook it.
On latest events, the major Boris fans will still be happy, on the basis that the more parliament hinders him the more they have evidence for an election centred around Boris needing help to overcome those dastardly remainers. But obviously he has preferred dates, so if one is granted at a time he doesn't want, how bad must he think that will be for him?
I think we can drop the 'unelected PM' bit. We all know how our PMs work, and that they don't require leading their party into an election, why imply there's something untoward about that?
Calling a PM "unelected" after he has literally tabled a motion and voted for an early election is absurd.
The optics of Remainers in Parliament obstructing our exit more than 3 years after the referendum and even denying an election are . . . interesting to say the least.
The opposition rejecting an election is what Sir Humphrey may have called a "brave" decision.
I think we can drop the 'unelected PM' bit. We all know how our PMs work, and that they don't require leading their party into an election, why imply there's something untoward about that?
I think it is to do with the fact he cannot win a Parliamentary vote that is that makes it untoward.
IIRC he is the PM with the fewest MPs since Ramsay MacDonald which did not turn out well for MacDonald.
I think we can drop the 'unelected PM' bit. We all know how our PMs work, and that they don't require leading their party into an election, why imply there's something untoward about that?
Yes, we can drop that bit for the moment - he tried to get a vote on himself but the opposition didn't vote for it, perhaps Phillips should study a copy of Erskine May or some such ? If Johnson lost an election does the current opposition seriously think the EU would chuck us out on the 31st ? Of course they wouldn't - they'd await new discussions with Corbyn, Swinson or whoever won.
I think we can drop the 'unelected PM' bit. We all know how our PMs work, and that they don't require leading their party into an election, why imply there's something untoward about that?
Calling a PM "unelected" after he has literally tabled a motion and voted for an early election is absurd.
He's just been elected by Jeremy Corbyn!
Yesterday he told us he didn't want an election. He's got his wish and he's crying like the spoilt child he is. Johnson wouldn't know the truth if it hit in the face. He is an out and out liar.
I think we can drop the 'unelected PM' bit. We all know how our PMs work, and that they don't require leading their party into an election, why imply there's something untoward about that?
I think it is to do with the fact he cannot win a Parliamentary vote that is that makes it untoward.
IIRC he is the PM with the fewest MPs since Ramsay MacDonald which did not turn out well for MacDonald.
Forgive me if I struggle to believe that is the reason the 'unelected' tag gets thrown around given every time we have a PM who takes over midterm, rain or shine, Conservative or Labour, it happens.
Boris may be more deserving of the question of whether he deserves to be PM as so far he cannot demonstrate the confidence of the House (except implicitly, in that they are not seeking, yet, to bring down his government), but the unelected bit (as a reference to not leading them into an election, as it is usually used) is an irrelevance that political people persist in dragging out. Particularly when he is offering to let himself become an elected PM, and they said no.
I think we can drop the 'unelected PM' bit. We all know how our PMs work, and that they don't require leading their party into an election, why imply there's something untoward about that?
Isn’t it boring? The fact there’s been 3 in 12 years means it’s part of the way our politics works, and completely uncontroversial.
One thing that doesn’t have a mandate is still being in the EU 3 years and 2.5 months after we voted to leave it
We all know the correct technical solution to the border. There have been papers published, including by the European Commission, on the solution.
The issue is not "is there a technical solution which removes the need for a hard border", it is "what happens between the end of the transition period and the implementation of the technical solution"?
There is also the - very reasonable - fear that the EU or Ireland will drag their feet once we're in the backstop, and that's why binding international arbitration was added to the WA backstop text.
I'm not being obtuse at all.
If there is a correct technical solution to the border then lets drop the vile backstop, enter a transition [during which the backstop doesn't apply anyway], avoid the risk of no deal and work on the solution.
I don't care if the EU or Ireland don't drag their feet once in the backstop. I object to being in the backstop full stop. And if there is an [imperfect] solution that can be done immediately in the event of no deal, it should be a reasonable fallback at the end of a transition.
The answer to "what happens between the end of the transition period and the implementation of the technical solution" should not be the backstop IMO it should be "unless an agreement otherwise is reached at the time, then the same as would occur in a no deal scenario".
Hmm, it's going to be tough for Labour to use the unelected insult against Boris any more.
I think them turning down an election will play very poorly with the public, they do look scared and on the run.
The public doesn’t want an election. Boris told us that remember?
Instead of cheap point scoring, could you actually make a worthwhile contribution for once?
Also, I don't know who you're trying to score points against.
Why would the public hold it against Jezza for not voting for an election if they don’t want one?
Or was Boris mistaken? He seems to be mistaken a lot.
Mate, people talk, but ultimately they want to have their say. In 2017 turnout was up and I'm almost certain it will be up again this year. One ignorant woman called Brenda doesn't speak for the whole country.
Is this significant? The 1922 committee cheering the rebels seems a bit odd if they were truly behind the PM's approach to Brexit.
I think they were expecting it to be like 1994 when John Major removed the whip from the rebels, he gave it back a year later.
Johnson and Cumming are saying this is permanent which is annoying people like Edward Leigh.
The optics also look bad, kicking out the likes of Soames and Clarke looks bad when only a few months ago the PM and most of the cabinet were rebelling like Soames and Clarke.
I think we can drop the 'unelected PM' bit. We all know how our PMs work, and that they don't require leading their party into an election, why imply there's something untoward about that?
Calling a PM "unelected" after he has literally tabled a motion and voted for an early election is absurd.
He's just been elected by Jeremy Corbyn!
Yesterday he told us he didn't want an election. He's got his wish and he's crying like the spoilt child he is. Johnson wouldn't know the truth if it hit in the face. He is an out and out liar.
I was listening to Parliament not watching it but it sounded like he was laughing at Corbyn, not crying.
Corbyn/Milne at least do want an election I think, they just want the Benn bill to be watertight before granting it.
But the Starmer/others strategy isn't about preventing a "No Deal" Brexit. It's entirely about attempting to humiliate Johnson by making him sign Corbyn's surrender letter in order to gain narrow political advantage before a GE begins. It's too clever by half !
Johnson is becoming the totem for leave, Farage has barely been on the airwaves. He's drowned out right now and I expect polls to show further collapse into the Tories of the leave vote.
Hmm, it's going to be tough for Labour to use the unelected insult against Boris any more.
I think them turning down an election will play very poorly with the public, they do look scared and on the run.
The public doesn’t want an election. Boris told us that remember?
Instead of cheap point scoring, could you actually make a worthwhile contribution for once?
Also, I don't know who you're trying to score points against.
Why would the public hold it against Jezza for not voting for an election if they don’t want one?
Or was Boris mistaken? He seems to be mistaken a lot.
Mate, people talk, but ultimately they want to have their say. In 2017 turnout was up and I'm almost certain it will be up again this year. One ignorant woman called Brenda doesn't speak for the whole country.
I know you know I’m being an arse on purpose.
What you are saying is right, I just want to highlight his hypocrisy. Words have meaning.
Unelected PM Boris Johnson, oh for goodness sake, what was Gordon Brown, Theresa May in 2016?
First.
I repeatedly called them unelected or mandateless.
However unlike Boris Johnson May and Brown actually could win a Parliamentary vote.
So far Boris Johnson has been in a class of his own when it comes to not winning Parliamentary votes.
With respect the same logic on mandates applies to Winston Churchill, Neville Chamberlain in 1940 and 1937, just like Anthony Eden in April 1955 and Harold MacMillan in 1957.
Is this significant? The 1922 committee cheering the rebels seems a bit odd if they were truly behind the PM's approach to Brexit.
I think they were expecting it to be like 1994 when John Major removed the whip from the rebels, he gave it back a year later.
Johnson and Cumming are saying this is permanent which is annoying people like Edward Leigh.
The optics also look bad, kicking out the likes of Soames and Clarke looks bad when only a few months ago the PM and most of the cabinet were rebelling like Soames and Clarke.
Wasn't the only "rebel" in 1994 an abstention by a solitary MP who was already out of the country before the vote was called and so missed the vote and apologised to the whips for having done so?
Not an MP who literally walked through the opposite lobby!
Hmm, it's going to be tough for Labour to use the unelected insult against Boris any more.
I think them turning down an election will play very poorly with the public, they do look scared and on the run.
The public doesn’t want an election. Boris told us that remember?
Instead of cheap point scoring, could you actually make a worthwhile contribution for once?
Also, I don't know who you're trying to score points against.
Why would the public hold it against Jezza for not voting for an election if they don’t want one?
Or was Boris mistaken? He seems to be mistaken a lot.
Mate, people talk, but ultimately they want to have their say. In 2017 turnout was up and I'm almost certain it will be up again this year. One ignorant woman called Brenda doesn't speak for the whole country.
I know you know I’m being an arse on purpose.
What you are saying is right, I just want to highlight his hypocrisy. Words have meaning.
Highlight the hypocrisy to who? I think anyone who doesn't already can count their brain cells with their fingers.
So, if Corbyn is content for Labour to vote for a GE once the bill outlawing no deal has received Royal Assent, he needs to whip together 136 Labour MPs to get a GE over the line by the 2/3rds route, or less if the SNP etc share his view. That seems do-able.
The optics of Remainers in Parliament obstructing our exit more than 3 years after the referendum and even denying an election are . . . interesting to say the least.
The opposition rejecting an election is what Sir Humphrey may have called a "brave" decision.
I just watched PMQs. Dire performance from Johnson, but he's a lot more on message than Corbyn or any other opposition leader except Blackford. It's "election on October 15th", "Leave the European Union on October 31", "Jeremy corbyn's surrender bill" on repeat dial.
'Eventually' will be when it is to their advantage, not before. He's banking on Brexit fervour being enough to win the day no matter when he is granted an election, but he is not coming across as strong by losing all the time.
Is this significant? The 1922 committee cheering the rebels seems a bit odd if they were truly behind the PM's approach to Brexit.
I think they were expecting it to be like 1994 when John Major removed the whip from the rebels, he gave it back a year later.
Johnson and Cumming are saying this is permanent which is annoying people like Edward Leigh.
The optics also look bad, kicking out the likes of Soames and Clarke looks bad when only a few months ago the PM and most of the cabinet were rebelling like Soames and Clarke.
Wasn't the only "rebel" in 1994 an abstention by a solitary MP who was already out of the country before the vote was called and so missed the vote and apologised to the whips for having done so?
Not an MP who literally walked through the opposite lobby!
No, there were about 8 or so rebels on the EU Finance Bill which the government treated as a vote of confidence.
The likes of Teddy Taylor, Nick Budgen, and Teresa Gorman either voted against it or abstained, which led to the whip being removed.
Hmm, it's going to be tough for Labour to use the unelected insult against Boris any more.
I think them turning down an election will play very poorly with the public, they do look scared and on the run.
After speaking to someone I know, they ventured their opinion on Brexit. They still don't understand why the 2016 vote did not mean we instantly left the EU! I tried explaining it is a bit more complicated than that but did not want to cause offence by outlining how things work or do not work. By the same token, the average person probably does not understand the FTPA and why Boris cannot have an election, so far. People think what they want to think and the sheer level of ignorance on democratic institutions and the processes involved seem to pass many citizens.
The optics of Remainers in Parliament obstructing our exit more than 3 years after the referendum and even denying an election are . . . interesting to say the least.
The opposition rejecting an election is what Sir Humphrey may have called a "brave" decision.
I just watched PMQs. Dire performance from Johnson, but he's a lot more on message than Corbyn or any other opposition leader except Blackford. It's "election on October 15th", "Leave the European Union on October 31", "Jeremy corbyn's surrender bill" on repeat dial.
Well, he is going to have to drop that first line now, how long will the second last?
Hmm, it's going to be tough for Labour to use the unelected insult against Boris any more.
I think them turning down an election will play very poorly with the public, they do look scared and on the run.
By the time we're into an election campaign, Labour will not have turned down the election offer.
Today's vote will be yesterday's fish and chip paper.
Exactly, half the swing voters may not even know anything in particular has gone on this week bar more squabbling about brexit. In six weeks time other things than who called the election will matter.
Richard Nabavi was one of the first to point out the sheer political stupidity of the 31st October deadline. Although that was more in the context of the clock running out whilst a new deal is being negotiated, rather than BoJo's self-inflicted wounds. If Boris has been just a little bit flexible with the date of exit, even something like "early 2020" would have done, he could have avoided this mess.
The optics of Remainers in Parliament obstructing our exit more than 3 years after the referendum and even denying an election are . . . interesting to say the least.
The opposition rejecting an election is what Sir Humphrey may have called a "brave" decision.
I just watched PMQs. Dire performance from Johnson, but he's a lot more on message than Corbyn or any other opposition leader except Blackford. It's "election on October 15th", "Leave the European Union on October 31", "Jeremy corbyn's surrender bill" on repeat dial.
Well, he is going to have to drop that first line now, how long will the second last?
Unelected PM Boris Johnson, oh for goodness sake, what was Gordon Brown, Theresa May in 2016?
First.
I repeatedly called them unelected or mandateless.
However unlike Boris Johnson May and Brown actually could win a Parliamentary vote.
So far Boris Johnson has been in a class of his own when it comes to not winning Parliamentary votes.
With respect the same logic on mandates applies to Winston Churchill, Neville Chamberlain in 1940 and 1937, just like Anthony Eden in April 1955 and Harold MacMillan in 1957.
I wrote a piece back in 2017 pointing out that the last decade had been bookended by two unelected PMs who trashed their reputations very quickly when they tried to/held a snap election because they were desperate for their own mandate.
As John Major put it between November 1990 and April 1992 he felt like he was living in sin with the electorate.
It will be an interesting time to see the true character of Boris emerge. I've always thought of him as a confidence kind of guy, capable of great wins when flighing high, pushing through in unconventional manner, but when things get tough he'd have the spine of a jellyfish and would flail about unconvincingly. Now we can get to see if he really has outplayed everyone so that even these losses will play into his hands, or if he is just flopping about in panic because he cannot win a vote and may be the shortest serving PM in history.
Either way, some of us are going to look really stupid.
Hmm, it's going to be tough for Labour to use the unelected insult against Boris any more.
I think them turning down an election will play very poorly with the public, they do look scared and on the run.
By the time we're into an election campaign, Labour will not have turned down the election offer.
Today's vote will be yesterday's fish and chip paper.
I'm not so sure on that. Labour having to be dragged into an election will be brought up at every available opportunity.
Meanwhile Labour will be shaking that mighty magic money tree within an inch of its life. It was very thoughtful for Javid to plant it for McDonnell today.
Hmm, it's going to be tough for Labour to use the unelected insult against Boris any more.
I think them turning down an election will play very poorly with the public, they do look scared and on the run.
After speaking to someone I know, they ventured their opinion on Brexit. They still don't understand why the 2016 vote did not mean we instantly left the EU! I tried explaining it is a bit more complicated than that but did not want to cause offence by outlining how things work or do not work. By the same token, the average person probably does not understand the FTPA and why Boris cannot have an election, so far. People think what they want to think and the sheer level of ignorance on democratic institutions and the processes involved seem to pass many citizens.
Well all they will hear tonight and tomorrow (and the next few days) is that Boris wanted to have an election and Labour denied the people a say. As you rightly point out, the detail of whatever no deal blocking stuff will get lost in the small print. The headlines are "Labour vote down election". It's going to play very badly IMO.
Without an election before 31st October Johnson’s entire strategy is in shreds. Tonight he is entirely dependent on the stupidity of Jeremy Corbyn. So the chances are he’ll be fine.
Comments
It's happening, isn't it? Boris will be PM, he won't win a single vote, and we'll not leave the EU for the rest of time
Edit: third damn you vanilla
First.
The optics of Remainers in Parliament obstructing our exit more than 3 years after the referendum and even denying an election are . . . interesting to say the least.
The opposition rejecting an election is what Sir Humphrey may have called a "brave" decision.
However unlike Boris Johnson May and Brown actually could win a Parliamentary vote.
On latest events, the major Boris fans will still be happy, on the basis that the more parliament hinders him the more they have evidence for an election centred around Boris needing help to overcome those dastardly remainers. But obviously he has preferred dates, so if one is granted at a time he doesn't want, how bad must he think that will be for him?
He's just been elected by Jeremy Corbyn!
"OK, how about a general election?"
"Stop the coup. Stop the coup. Stop the coup."
Would have saved a lot of grief...
IIRC he is the PM with the fewest MPs since Ramsay MacDonald which did not turn out well for MacDonald.
I think them turning down an election will play very poorly with the public, they do look scared and on the run.
Also, I don't know who you're trying to score points against.
If Johnson lost an election does the current opposition seriously think the EU would chuck us out on the 31st ? Of course they wouldn't - they'd await new discussions with Corbyn, Swinson or whoever won.
Boris may be more deserving of the question of whether he deserves to be PM as so far he cannot demonstrate the confidence of the House (except implicitly, in that they are not seeking, yet, to bring down his government), but the unelected bit (as a reference to not leading them into an election, as it is usually used) is an irrelevance that political people persist in dragging out. Particularly when he is offering to let himself become an elected PM, and they said no.
One thing that doesn’t have a mandate is still being in the EU 3 years and 2.5 months after we voted to leave it
Or was Boris mistaken? He seems to be mistaken a lot.
If there is a correct technical solution to the border then lets drop the vile backstop, enter a transition [during which the backstop doesn't apply anyway], avoid the risk of no deal and work on the solution.
I don't care if the EU or Ireland don't drag their feet once in the backstop. I object to being in the backstop full stop. And if there is an [imperfect] solution that can be done immediately in the event of no deal, it should be a reasonable fallback at the end of a transition.
The answer to "what happens between the end of the transition period and the implementation of the technical solution" should not be the backstop IMO it should be "unless an agreement otherwise is reached at the time, then the same as would occur in a no deal scenario".
Johnson and Cumming are saying this is permanent which is annoying people like Edward Leigh.
The optics also look bad, kicking out the likes of Soames and Clarke looks bad when only a few months ago the PM and most of the cabinet were rebelling like Soames and Clarke.
On Peston claiming Corbyn had a constitutional duty to fall for his cunning plan...
But the Starmer/others strategy isn't about preventing a "No Deal" Brexit. It's entirely about attempting to humiliate Johnson by making him sign Corbyn's surrender letter in order to gain narrow political advantage before a GE begins.
It's too clever by half !
Johnson is becoming the totem for leave, Farage has barely been on the airwaves. He's drowned out right now and I expect polls to show further collapse into the Tories of the leave vote.
What you are saying is right, I just want to highlight his hypocrisy. Words have meaning.
On Peston tonight we have Dominic Grieve, Jess Phillips and the SPAD sacked by Cummings the other day. Should be interesting
With respect the same logic on mandates applies to Winston Churchill, Neville Chamberlain in 1940 and 1937, just like Anthony Eden in April 1955 and Harold MacMillan in 1957.
Not an MP who literally walked through the opposite lobby!
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1169356849185005568
What you guys need, desperately, are some half-decent politicians, civil servants and journalists.
Senlis
Soissins
Beauvais
Amiens
Chartres
Brechin
Dunblane
St Andrews
Fortrose
"Who voted for and against an early election?
The division list shows 284 Conservative MPs voted for the general election motion along with 10 DUP MPs and independent Charlie Elphicke.
Those who voted against also included 13 Lib Dems, three Plaid Cymru, five Independent Group for Change and seven Independents."
https://news.sky.com/story/live-labour-not-voting-for-an-election-today-says-sir-keir-starmer-11801840
The likes of Teddy Taylor, Nick Budgen, and Teresa Gorman either voted against it or abstained, which led to the whip being removed.
I need to Google this. Weird!
Today's vote will be yesterday's fish and chip paper.
As John Major put it between November 1990 and April 1992 he felt like he was living in sin with the electorate.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/07/13/if-or-when-theresa-may-is-replaced-her-successor-shouldnt-hold-a-snap-election/
Either way, some of us are going to look really stupid.
To think barely a week ago I was giving Boris 8 out of 10 for his first month in the job, even as a soft Remainer...
Probably could have made some money betting if I'd only been to the chippie yesterday.
Fog of war.
Bozo and Cumstain certainly aren't.