It would be wrong to blame Johnson for the Tory misfortune. His plumage may be exotic but this bird is a scavenger.
No, the blame should rest on the shoulders of the Conservative Party, the whole Conservative Party and only the Conservative Party. They alone brought this Brexit trouble upon us. Our age rightly disapproves of the careless use of mental disorder as a metaphor for wrongheadedness but I am serious. Something mad has taken root in our party, and our internal defences — our immune system — seem to have been too feeble to identify this new jihadism, stand up to it and repel it.
Almost in tears, a friend said to me this week: “All those years we argued about withdrawing the whip and throwing these madcaps out of the party and draining the poison but we murmured ‘broad church’ and ‘tolerance’ and ‘due process’. We were wrong.”
One red flag pointed out here was the Conservative Party membership rising by a third in a year. That smacks of entryism. But it is too recent to explain current events. Boris won a landslide in the Commons before these entryists were sent their ballot papers.
The Conservative Party has long been prone to ideological takeover. Mrs Thatcher did it. The Cameroons did it. Worse, the Cameroons also brought oppositionist tactics from America, but that is not what got us here either.
The problem is that an awful lot of MPs are dead wood, especially from the neck up. Remember the 1922 banging the desks in support of Theresa May after the GE2017 debacle? Supporting her in a vote of confidence? Those same MPs then voted overwhelmingly for Boris even after they'd seen his shambolic reign at the Foreign Office and his reluctance to debate. Even the ERG consists mainly of Bufton Tuftons who hate the EU but had given no thought at all in the past 20 years as to what they wanted to happen on day one after Brexit.
That is how we got here. Thick MPs grasping at straws.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
Constitutionally the Queen could just continue as Head of State with Parliament as the legislature.
There is no constitutional requirement to have a prime minister beyond convention though the Queen would want to appoint a new PM as soon as the Commons agrees to one so the executive branch can properly function
The Queen will have to ask Corbyn otherwise it would be obvious that she was ignoring the Labour Party. Regarding show of confidence, that would happen after appointment. You cannot prove confidence before you are appointed.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
For any constitutional lawyers is there anything to stop Boris saying he will continue to serve as First Lord of the Treasury but is resigning as Prime Minister?
Yes. There is in law no post of Prime Minister. He would have to hold another office as well to be in cabinet.
That was my point. What if there was no Prime Minister [since the title isn't to my knowledge technically required] but Boris continued as First Lord of the Treasury which is the actual job set in law? As I recall Prime Minister is more a title, it doesn't really exist.
As for Cabinet, Cleverly sit in Cabinet as Minister without Portfolio
Boris currently sits in Cabinet with 4 titles: Prime Minister, First Lord of the Treasury, Minister for the Civil Service and Minister for the Union. I don't see why he couldn't sit in Cabinet with just the latter 3 portfolios [and add without Portfolio if required].
Sadly, a court would see through it. If you are Head of Government in this country then it is clear that the Bill is meant to apply to you.
I do, however, think his mate the Lord Chancellor could pardon him. Though I’d have to defer to our learned friends on whether that gets him off the hook for any civil penalty or liability.
I had assumed that when Boris resigned so did the Government. So the question still stands.
It would be wrong to blame Johnson for the Tory misfortune. His plumage may be exotic but this bird is a scavenger.
No, the blame should rest on the shoulders of the Conservative Party, the whole Conservative Party and only the Conservative Party. They alone brought this Brexit trouble upon us. Our age rightly disapproves of the careless use of mental disorder as a metaphor for wrongheadedness but I am serious. Something mad has taken root in our party, and our internal defences — our immune system — seem to have been too feeble to identify this new jihadism, stand up to it and repel it.
Almost in tears, a friend said to me this week: “All those years we argued about withdrawing the whip and throwing these madcaps out of the party and draining the poison but we murmured ‘broad church’ and ‘tolerance’ and ‘due process’. We were wrong.”
Only a friend of Matthew Parris could be brought to the edge of tears because the Tory Party disappointed them but nonetheless a very powerful article by the Times premier columnist.
It's worth recalling Johnson's key pledges when campaigning for the Tory leadership: Deliver Brexit, Unite Country, Defeat Corbyn. DUD.
If Corbyn becomes Prime Minister to extend Article 50 after Johnson failed to keep the Conservative Party united (let alone the country) then he would be the clearest failure on his own terms that you could imagine.
No he would have a big poll lead as the Labour Leave vote collapses to the Brexit Party and Tories and at the next general election (which would occur as Corbyn would lose a VONC straight after extension even in the unlikely event the LDs put him in) Boris would then win a majority, beat Corbyn and then deliver Brexit
It would be wrong to blame Johnson for the Tory misfortune. His plumage may be exotic but this bird is a scavenger.
No, the blame should rest on the shoulders of the Conservative Party, the whole Conservative Party and only the Conservative Party. They alone brought this Brexit trouble upon us. Our age rightly disapproves of the careless use of mental disorder as a metaphor for wrongheadedness but I am serious. Something mad has taken root in our party, and our internal defences — our immune system — seem to have been too feeble to identify this new jihadism, stand up to it and repel it.
Almost in tears, a friend said to me this week: “All those years we argued about withdrawing the whip and throwing these madcaps out of the party and draining the poison but we murmured ‘broad church’ and ‘tolerance’ and ‘due process’. We were wrong.”
Where the Conservative Party got it wrong historically is by pretending to be anti-Eu whilst it’s elected representatives were anything but. Don’t forget Charles Tannock was elected as a eurosceptic then acquired an Irish passport after the referendum. Those in charge of the party, including most spectacularly Mr. Cameron, fed their members on this diet and then all of the pro-eu Parliamentarians profess to be shocked when their party members believed it. It is all their own fault for their dishonesty over decades.
Spot on. This is why Matthew Parris is such a disingenuous dick.
Though the same must be said of europhile leaders of Labour, as well. Who can forget Gordon Brown signing the Lisbon Treaty ‘late’, as if that somehow made up for him signing it, in the first place, without the promised referendum.
We have been grievously failed by 2 generations of pro-EU leaders, who were always too frit to make the honest and simple case for the EU.
Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge, suggests the courts could impose an injunction requiring Boris to commit to an extension or get a civil servant to sign it instead if he refuses.
I've been busy living my life for the last few days but when I see threads with 1000+ replies you know it's a frantic time.
As so much has been said by so many so often, I can't add anything much of import so just a thought or two:
1) MPs are representatives not delegates. That's not me, that's one Winston Spencer Churchill who was an MP for a while. The Conservatives tried to de-select him as well of course.
2) Churchill also said an MP's first duty was to their "fair and impartial judgement" to protect the "honour and safety" of the country. I suspect those MPs opposed to leaving without a WA (as distinct from those who are happy to leave with one) are following that guidance.
3) A referendum is NOT an election. Treating it as though it were one or conflating it into one has been the big problem. Given point one above, there was an understandable but avoidable conclusion between elections where we choose representatives who only have the manifesto on which they were elected and that isn't a formal mandate but a statement of intent and a referendum which can't create a mandate (see above) and can therefore only be advisory.
Had Labour won in 1983 we would have left the then EEC without a referendum. Introducing the referendum concept has been a retrograde step. If a party wins a parliamentary majority and has within its manifesto a commitment to leave the EU, change the voting system to STV or re-introduce capital punishment (as examples), fine.
The democratic process means at the next GE we can judge the governing party on what it's done (or hasn't done). There's nothing stopping a party winning an election and reneging on its commitments apart from the fact the other parties will use it as a stick with which they can be beaten.
By the way, I have a spare ditch if anyone needs one.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
Why would no-one take his place? Someone would take his place. That person would follow the law to avoid jail and unlimited civil damages.
Why? There is no means to compel anyone to be PM. I assume that if he resigned then it would need a clear indication of a successor that has the support of Parliament for them to be appointed by the Queen. At this moment there is no sign at all of that happening.
I would suggest Boris' best route to avoid this manipulation is to resign on 18th October and let the opposition try and fight it out to get someone they can show has support to recommend to the Queen. If not I assume that after 14 days we have a GE called.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
Constitutionally the Queen could just continue as Head of State with Parliament as the legislature.
There is no constitutional requirement to have a prime minister beyond convention though the Queen would want to appoint a new PM as soon as the Commons agrees to one so the executive branch can properly function
The Queen will have to ask Corbyn otherwise it would be obvious that she was ignoring the Labour Party. Regarding show of confidence, that would happen after appointment. You cannot prove confidence before you are appointed.
That’s not clear to me. The Palace is allowed to read the news, and if Swinson repeats what she’s said about Corbyn, and Hammond recruits a few more to the “I’d rather boil my own head” club, then together with the likes of Woodcock it’s obvious Corbyn has no majority. I think if Boris resigned, absent any changes to those factors, she’d struggle to call for Corbyn. And presumably the outgoing PM (and less partial staff) would advise her not to.
But we’ve not been here before. At least not for over a century, when we were busily inventing the conventions FTPA killed.
Hilarious to see the loony No Dealers are now reduced to speculating that Johnson will resign and the Queen - against all precedent - won't bother to appoint a prime minister. In other words, that the Queen's government - won't be carried on??
Only a few days ago, supposedly Johnson held all the cards and No Deal was "nailed on."
Now - to quote the Brexit Party's latest standard-bearer - the extreme Brexiteers are deep, deep within "the land of make believe."!
Stop being a twat for 5 minutes Chris. I know it is hard for you but do try. I am not a No Dealer. I want a deal, preferably very soft. I raised the issue as a point of interest and because I do wonder if this is what Boris has in mind.
Rather than making twatish comments try answering the question. What happens if Boris resigns and no one is shown to have the support of Parliament?
Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge, suggests the courts could impose an injunction requiring Boris to commit to an extension or get a civil servant to sign it instead if he refuses.
So Boris might get away without extending himself
What a shock. Judge suggests people need to obey the law.
Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge, suggests the courts could impose an injunction requiring Boris to commit to an extension or get a civil servant to sign it instead if he refuses.
So Boris might get away without extending himself
In terms of jobs and hours put in, he's always worked hard to avoid over-extending himself in the past.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
Why would no-one take his place? Someone would take his place. That person would follow the law to avoid jail and unlimited civil damages.
Why? There is no means to compel anyone to be PM. I assume that if he resigned then it would need a clear indication of a successor that has the support of Parliament for them to be appointed by the Queen. At this moment there is no sign at all of that happening.
I would suggest Boris' best route to avoid this manipulation is to resign on 18th October and let the opposition try and fight it out to get someone they can show has support to recommend to the Queen. If not I assume that after 14 days we have a GE called.
I agree, Boris would have leavers and the vast majority of Tories united behind him as a strong opposition with most seats in Parliament committed to Brexit.
Better that than staying in a weak Government agreeing the extension, seeing mass Tory defections to the Brexit Party and facing 1997 style meltdown and probably worse
No, Swinson has made clear she will support a Harman or Clarke Government (to ask for extension and push for EUref2) but she would vote against a Corbyn government.
Clarke is out of the question as he wants to run an actual government, which would irredeemably split the Conservative Party but also raise questions of how he'd fill the Cabinet. John McDonnell for Treasurer? Ian Blackford to the Scottish Office? It is just implausible.
Harman is at least possible but why would Corbyn step aside for her. If you want to bet on next PM on this basis, then look for a left-winger like RLB, Pidcock or Dawn Butler, to whom Corbyn might hand over the reins in the long term.
But Corbyn is the natural choice. He's already offered a splash-and-dash, extension and election, regime with purdah to ensure nothing else is enacted. The reason a month of inactivity is attractive to Corbyn is, as previously stated, and as identified from the Conservative point of view by @Philip_Thompson here as undesirable, is that it normalises Corbyn as PM just before an election.
Jo Swinson, and the Con and ex-Con grandees, need to grow up, hold their noses and support Corbyn, or admit that Brexit is not that bad after all.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Hmmmm, then maybe making an extension a poisoned pawn would be his plan? Make the EU desperate not to extend? That's one problem they have with trying to ensure BJ is doing the asking, he might piss off the EU enough to make extension offer impossible for them
Are there any controversial veto-applicable decisions coming up? When is the budget due to be agreed?
A threat to veto everything until we're out could be interesting. An actual veto just before the decision could do it too.
Coming up with wheezes to avoid things doesnt work.
The first rule of democratic politics is counting. The numbers in parliament, which the last 12 months should surely have taught us by now is sovereign, block no deal.
No deal is not happening.
The problem with the argument is that there are numbers against every definite course of action.
But, something has to happen.
The thing that happens is extension.
For another 3 months. And then what happens....
I would expect the EU to offer an extension to the end of the current budget period - December 2020 - which was to be the end of the transition period.
Three months is no good to them.
I’d expect at least until the end of June 2020.
The EU are now perfectly clear that Brexit cannot be resolved by this Parliament. It is capable of only kicking the can. They’ll therefore offer enough time for a further General Election, which I expect to be in March or April 2020, and an EU summit to seal a new deal, if required, plus sufficient time for parliamentary ratification on both sides of the channel.
If there is no election next year, still possible, the can will be kicked. Again and again, until this one expires in 2022.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
Constitutionally the Queen could just continue as Head of State with Parliament as the legislature.
There is no constitutional requirement to have a prime minister beyond convention though the Queen would want to appoint a new PM as soon as the Commons agrees to one so the executive branch can properly function
The Queen will have to ask Corbyn otherwise it would be obvious that she was ignoring the Labour Party. Regarding show of confidence, that would happen after appointment. You cannot prove confidence before you are appointed.
I se what you are getting it but I thought the point was that a candidate has to show they have a clear support of Parliament before they are appointed. Otherwise you could have a succession of Candidates being appointed and then immediately being VoNC. It makes no sense.
Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge, suggests the courts could impose an injunction requiring Boris to commit to an extension or get a civil servant to sign it instead if he refuses.
So Boris might get away without extending himself
That’s my view. The UK Government will end up signing it, but not Boris himself.
Someone else (brave) will be the fall guy and suffer all the opprobrium. Not Boris.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge, suggests the courts could impose an injunction requiring Boris to commit to an extension or get a civil servant to sign it instead if he refuses.
So Boris might get away without extending himself
That would place a civil servant in an impossible position. To do would be inexcusable. Of course, as a civil servant you’d have to obey the law, but that would go against the grain of serving the wishes of the Gvt of day (many having worked for Governments of all colours and priding themselves on being loyal to wherever is in power). Then, still caught within that personal conflict, you’d be a hate figure in the country to those who assumed you’d relished the task.
Any politician putting a civil servant in that position, or even contemplating it, deserves a slap.
Clarke is out of the question as he wants to run an actual government, which would irredeemably split the Conservative Party but also raise questions of how he'd fill the Cabinet. John McDonnell for Treasurer? Ian Blackford to the Scottish Office? It is just implausible.
Nominate the current Select Committee chairs to run their respective departments, if they decline then pick someone willing from the same party (or in the Con case, formerly of the same party).
Hilarious to see the loony No Dealers are now reduced to speculating that Johnson will resign and the Queen - against all precedent - won't bother to appoint a prime minister. In other words, that the Queen's government - won't be carried on??
Only a few days ago, supposedly Johnson held all the cards and No Deal was "nailed on."
Now - to quote the Brexit Party's latest standard-bearer - the extreme Brexiteers are deep, deep within "the land of make believe."!
Stop being a twat for 5 minutes Chris. I know it is hard for you but do try. I am not a No Dealer. I want a deal, preferably very soft. I raised the issue as a point of interest and because I do wonder if this is what Boris has in mind.
Rather than making twatish comments try answering the question. What happens if Boris resigns and no one is shown to have the support of Parliament?
Please stop being so stupidly abusive.
It's perfectly simple, and it's been explained any number of times.
The Queen's government must be carried on. If the prime minister is so irresponsible as to resign without arrangements having been made for a successor, then the Queen will ask someone else to form a government - of course.
From the time they are asked, they are prime minister. If they don't obtain the support of parliament, they will still be prime minister.
How anyone of average intelligence who shows any interest in politics could not understand this, is beyond me.
But the loony Brexiteers seem to think they are in a contest to prove who is the most stupid of them.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
What's wrong with finding out what the other big player in the situation will do before deciding on your own course of action? If this, and Chicken Jezza, is the apogee of Cummings's master plan (and I'm starting to think that it is) then Boris should demand a refund.
Hilarious to see the loony No Dealers are now reduced to speculating that Johnson will resign and the Queen - against all precedent - won't bother to appoint a prime minister. In other words, that the Queen's government - won't be carried on??
Only a few days ago, supposedly Johnson held all the cards and No Deal was "nailed on."
Now - to quote the Brexit Party's latest standard-bearer - the extreme Brexiteers are deep, deep within "the land of make believe."!
Stop being a twat for 5 minutes Chris. I know it is hard for you but do try. I am not a No Dealer. I want a deal, preferably very soft. I raised the issue as a point of interest and because I do wonder if this is what Boris has in mind.
Rather than making twatish comments try answering the question. What happens if Boris resigns and no one is shown to have the support of Parliament?
Please stop being so stupidly abusive.
It's perfectly simple, and it's been explained any number of times.
The Queen's government must be carried on. If the prime minister is so irresponsible as to resign without arrangements having been made for a successor, then the Queen will ask someone else to form a government - of course.
From the time they are asked, they are prime minister. If they don't obtain the support of parliament, they will still be prime minister.
How anyone of average intelligence who shows any interest in politics could not understand this, is beyond me.
But the loony Brexiteers seem to think they are in a contest to prove who is the most stupid of them.
You are ignoring the fact that anyone she appoints has to have the support of the Commons. If no one can be shown to have that support then there will be a GE. Both the old procedure and the FTPA are clear on this. If no one can show they have support there will be an election. The Queen does not have to pick anyone.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
You're right. It is more than Boris has done. If Boris did his job and got his backside over to Brussels and actually negotiated something rather than posturing and plotting we might not be in this mess.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
What's wrong with finding out what the other big player in the situation will do before deciding on your own course of action? If this, and Chicken Jezza, is the apogee of Cummings's master plan (and I'm starting to think that it is) then Boris should demand a refund.
You don’t get it. As expected.
I’ll try and make it simple for you.
Imagine that Scotland voted Yes to independence. Imagine that after the vote there was a prolonged and tortuous negotiation with England and rUK, to work out how Scotland would become independent (not hard to imagine - that’s what would have happened)
Now imagine, that at a crucial stage in Scotland’s independence negotiations, it was revealed that a bunch of Scottish MSPs has been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence, and hopefully get the referendum result overturned. By whatever means necessary.
Those MSPs would be lynched from the modernist eaves of Holyrood.
Clarke is out of the question as he wants to run an actual government, which would irredeemably split the Conservative Party but also raise questions of how he'd fill the Cabinet. John McDonnell for Treasurer? Ian Blackford to the Scottish Office? It is just implausible.
Nominate the current Select Committee chairs to run their respective departments, if they decline then pick someone willing from the same party (or in the Con case, formerly of the same party).
Come to think of it, wasn't Clarke discovered to be not actually a member of the Conservative Party in a previous leadership election or maybe while in the Cabinet?
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
Why would no-one take his place? Someone would take his place. That person would follow the law to avoid jail and unlimited civil damages.
Why? There is no means to compel anyone to be PM. I assume that if he resigned then it would need a clear indication of a successor that has the support of Parliament for them to be appointed by the Queen. At this moment there is no sign at all of that happening.
I would suggest Boris' best route to avoid this manipulation is to resign on 18th October and let the opposition try and fight it out to get someone they can show has support to recommend to the Queen. If not I assume that after 14 days we have a GE called.
It is remarkable how many people think Clarke, Hammond et al have sacrificed their careers but are willing to let Boris win. If they were they would just have abstained or voted with the govt. They will not let no deal win.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
You're right. It is more than Boris has done. If Boris did his job and got his backside over to Brussels and actually negotiated something rather than posturing and plotting we might not be in this mess.
Actually, you’re right. I take back what I said. These rebel MPs aren’t ‘maybe’ traitors. They ARE traitors. Remainers must pray very very hard that this story disappears
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Hilarious to see the loony No Dealers are now reduced to speculating that Johnson will resign and the Queen - against all precedent - won't bother to appoint a prime minister. In other words, that the Queen's government - won't be carried on??
Only a few days ago, supposedly Johnson held all the cards and No Deal was "nailed on."
Now - to quote the Brexit Party's latest standard-bearer - the extreme Brexiteers are deep, deep within "the land of make believe."!
Stop being a twat for 5 minutes Chris. I know it is hard for you but do try. I am not a No Dealer. I want a deal, preferably very soft. I raised the issue as a point of interest and because I do wonder if this is what Boris has in mind.
Rather than making twatish comments try answering the question. What happens if Boris resigns and no one is shown to have the support of Parliament?
If he resigns and recommends ano to the Queen then together with her advisors they would consider that. If they believed that ano would not be able to form a government she would invite corbyn to do so at which point he would be PM no head for confidence votes. He sends the letter and we wait and see what happens next.
No, Swinson has made clear she will support a Harman or Clarke Government (to ask for extension and push for EUref2) but she would vote against a Corbyn government.
Clarke is out of the question as he wants to run an actual government, which would irredeemably split the Conservative Party but also raise questions of how he'd fill the Cabinet. John McDonnell for Treasurer? Ian Blackford to the Scottish Office? It is just implausible.
Harman is at least possible but why would Corbyn step aside for her. If you want to bet on next PM on this basis, then look for a left-winger like RLB, Pidcock or Dawn Butler, to whom Corbyn might hand over the reins in the long term.
But Corbyn is the natural choice. He's already offered a splash-and-dash, extension and election, regime with purdah to ensure nothing else is enacted. The reason a month of inactivity is attractive to Corbyn is, as previously stated, and as identified from the Conservative point of view by @Philip_Thompson here as undesirable, is that it normalises Corbyn as PM just before an election.
Jo Swinson, and the Con and ex-Con grandees, need to grow up, hold their noses and support Corbyn, or admit that Brexit is not that bad after all.
Corbyn as PM purely to extend is great for Tories as he becomes Neville Chamberlain to Labour Leave voters who would flock to Boris as Winston Churchill or Farage but the LDs would not do it as Tory Remainers would not trust them to not do it again for Corbyn or another leftwinger even if they VONC him straight after extension
This is turning into a bunker mentality with Bozo and his advisers trying to come up with yet another ruse .
Ignoring the law however seems even a stretch too far given the Tories would completely implode .
It says much for how low standards have become that some Leavers are almost salivating at the thought of a PM ignoring a law .
Where does this end , if a PM can simply ignore the law why bother having a Parliament . And Leavers should realize that once a precedent has been set it can then be used by others who might be trying to do something they disagree with .
Even worse Johnson is trying to force through something that has no mandate. I accept that Leave has a mandate but it was sold as an orderly departure with a deal .
Some Leavers seem intent on revising history . And in their desperation they now want to trash the conventions that by and large have sustained democracy in the UK .
They seem willing to trash anything and everything on the altar of Brexit .
Ironically, CCHQ could then use this against Labour, claiming that since Prime Ministers are now above the law, it is too dangerous to let Corbyn in to nationalise allotments and send all our manhole covers to Venezuela.
More pertinently, you only have to consider how Conservatives would be reacting if a Corbyn minority government were contemplating even half of the things being touted for Bozo right now to see the hypocrisy steaming from the Tories’ every orifice.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
You're right. It is more than Boris has done. If Boris did his job and got his backside over to Brussels and actually negotiated something rather than posturing and plotting we might not be in this mess.
Actually, you’re right. I take back what I said. These rebel MPs aren’t ‘maybe’ traitors. They ARE traitors. Remainers must pray very very hard that this story disappears
I don't have a problem with people talking to one another, it's a good thing. You need to dial it down a notch or three hundred.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
You're right. It is more than Boris has done. If Boris did his job and got his backside over to Brussels and actually negotiated something rather than posturing and plotting we might not be in this mess.
Actually, you’re right. I take back what I said. These rebel MPs aren’t ‘maybe’ traitors. They ARE traitors. Remainers must pray very very hard that this story disappears
I don't have a problem with people talking to one another, it's a good thing. You need to dial it down a notch or three hundred.
If Boris had done this, in reverse, you’d have been the first woman by the guillotine with your knitting. Pathetic.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
You're right. It is more than Boris has done. If Boris did his job and got his backside over to Brussels and actually negotiated something rather than posturing and plotting we might not be in this mess.
Actually, you’re right. I take back what I said. These rebel MPs aren’t ‘maybe’ traitors. They ARE traitors. Remainers must pray very very hard that this story disappears
Why? We are now at the Sarajevo '91 stage of proceedings. Nobody is going to change their mind over this or anything else.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
Why would no-one take his place? Someone would take his place. That person would follow the law to avoid jail and unlimited civil damages.
Why? There is no means to compel anyone to be PM. I assume that if he resigned then it would need a clear indication of a successor that has the support of Parliament for them to be appointed by the Queen. At this moment there is no sign at all of that happening.
I would suggest Boris' best route to avoid this manipulation is to resign on 18th October and let the opposition try and fight it out to get someone they can show has support to recommend to the Queen. If not I assume that after 14 days we have a GE called.
I agree, Boris would have leavers and the vast majority of Tories united behind him as a strong opposition with most seats in Parliament committed to Brexit.
Better that than staying in a weak Government agreeing the extension, seeing mass Tory defections to the Brexit Party and facing 1997 style meltdown and probably worse
If he resigns it’s not an issue of confidence no 14 days just Corbyn invited to try and form a government no need to have anybody show support until his queens speech is voted on.
Interestingly in the past it looks like there used to often be 4-5 days between one PM resigning and a new one taking the post. A full fortnight between Gladstone leaving the post and the 3rd Marquess of Salisbury taking it in 1885.
So having the position vacant probably won't work or be accepted nowadays but it has precedent.
In practice I think the pressure on HMQ to call for the leader of the opposition - Corbyn - to take the post would be irresistible. Johnson can then table a VONC, putting all the members of the Rebel Alliance on the spot - but I don't see how he recovers from enabling Corbyn to enter Number 10.
Again in the past it was not unusual for PM and LOTO to alternate repeatedly.
Johnson's idol Churchill famously came back from opposition to regain governance.
Disraeli and Gladstone alternated frequently. In fact Gladstone had 4 terms.
Even in the modern era Wilson did it.
I see no reason why Boris can't, with an election upcoming, say he will fight the election from opposition. If he loses the election then it will be game over, but if he wins it then it will be job done.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
I think we all need to remember that what looks sensible to one side may look treasonous to another, but not to everyone.
To me, talking to relevant lawyers before drafting law is entirely sensible, I would be disappointed if they had not done so.
On the other hand refusing to obey the law when PM, or appointing someone who has rebelled against the party over a hundred times to the cabinet whilst kicking out someone who has only ever voted against his party 3 times, are big issues of character.
I can see that others view them as complete opposite and Byronics view will gain traction with no dealers.
I would imagine the swing votes probably couldnt care less though.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
You're right. It is more than Boris has done. If Boris did his job and got his backside over to Brussels and actually negotiated something rather than posturing and plotting we might not be in this mess.
Actually, you’re right. I take back what I said. These rebel MPs aren’t ‘maybe’ traitors. They ARE traitors. Remainers must pray very very hard that this story disappears
I don't have a problem with people talking to one another, it's a good thing. You need to dial it down a notch or three hundred.
If Boris had done this, in reverse, you’d have been the first person by the guillotine with your knitting. Pathetic.
Time to step away from the keyboard, you're really wound up. I wish I could knit though.
That is how we got here. Thick MPs grasping at straws.
It looks like there will be a lot of new MPs after the next election. I am not hopeful that they will have a greater calibre than those they replace.
Backbenchers are not well paid (as one put it in the 1980s, it is all very well for Mrs Thatcher to keep turning down pay rises on our behalf but she married a millionaire). They are badly staffed, especially the ones who employ their own spouses. They are untrained. They are treated with contempt by their own front bench. And the seats, as Jacob Rees-Mogg reminds us, are uncomfortable.
Isabel Hardman's book explores things in greater depth, and there was the Paxo documentary recently, but at root it comes down to money and leaders wanting cannon fodder not an awkward squad.
Hilarious to see the loony No Dealers are now reduced to speculating that Johnson will resign and the Queen - against all precedent - won't bother to appoint a prime minister. In other words, that the Queen's government - won't be carried on??
Only a few days ago, supposedly Johnson held all the cards and No Deal was "nailed on."
Now - to quote the Brexit Party's latest standard-bearer - the extreme Brexiteers are deep, deep within "the land of make believe."!
Stop being a twat for 5 minutes Chris. I know it is hard for you but do try. I am not a No Dealer. I want a deal, preferably very soft. I raised the issue as a point of interest and because I do wonder if this is what Boris has in mind.
Rather than making twatish comments try answering the question. What happens if Boris resigns and no one is shown to have the support of Parliament?
Please stop being so stupidly abusive.
It's perfectly simple, and it's been explained any number of times.
The Queen's government must be carried on. If the prime minister is so irresponsible as to resign without arrangements having been made for a successor, then the Queen will ask someone else to form a government - of course.
From the time they are asked, they are prime minister. If they don't obtain the support of parliament, they will still be prime minister.
How anyone of average intelligence who shows any interest in politics could not understand this, is beyond me.
But the loony Brexiteers seem to think they are in a contest to prove who is the most stupid of them.
You are ignoring the fact that anyone she appoints has to have the support of the Commons. If no one can be shown to have that support then there will be a GE. Both the old procedure and the FTPA are clear on this. If no one can show they have support there will be an election. The Queen does not have to pick anyone.
I honestly don't know how it is that people are inacapable of understanding the basics.
Google "the Queen's government must be carried on."
Look at the FTPA. An election is the consequence of a vote of no-confidence. It's not the consequence of an irresponsible prime ministerial resignation. If that happens and another prime minister is appointed, no vote of confidence is necessary. Even if there is a vote of no confidence and as a result there is an election, unless someone else is appointed, that person will remain prime minister until the election.
Learn some basic facts, and for God's sake stop wasting everyone's time!
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
Why would no-one take his place? Someone would take his place. That person would follow the law to avoid jail and unlimited civil damages.
Why? There is no means to compel anyone to be PM. I assume that if he resigned then it would need a clear indication of a successor that has the support of Parliament for them to be appointed by the Queen. At this moment there is no sign at all of that happening.
I would suggest Boris' best route to avoid this manipulation is to resign on 18th October and let the opposition try and fight it out to get someone they can show has support to recommend to the Queen. If not I assume that after 14 days we have a GE called.
I agree, Boris would have leavers and the vast majority of Tories united behind him as a strong opposition with most seats in Parliament committed to Brexit.
Better that than staying in a weak Government agreeing the extension, seeing mass Tory defections to the Brexit Party and facing 1997 style meltdown and probably worse
If he resigns it’s not an issue of confidence no 14 days just Corbyn invited to try and form a government no need to have anybody show support until his queens speech is voted on.
That Queen's Speech immediately voted down as soon as Corbyn has led the Government through the extension, then Corbyn loses a VONC, then a general election
Interestingly in the past it looks like there used to often be 4-5 days between one PM resigning and a new one taking the post. A full fortnight between Gladstone leaving the post and the 3rd Marquess of Salisbury taking it in 1885.
So having the position vacant probably won't work or be accepted nowadays but it has precedent.
In practice I think the pressure on HMQ to call for the leader of the opposition - Corbyn - to take the post would be irresistible. Johnson can then table a VONC, putting all the members of the Rebel Alliance on the spot - but I don't see how he recovers from enabling Corbyn to enter Number 10.
Again in the past it was not unusual for PM and LOTO to alternate repeatedly.
Johnson's idol Churchill famously came back from opposition to regain governance.
Disraeli and Gladstone alternated frequently. In fact Gladstone had 4 terms.
Even in the modern era Wilson did it.
I see no reason why Boris can't, with an election upcoming, say he will fight the election from opposition. If he loses the election then it will be game over, but if he wins it then it will be job done.
Agreed. In fact, Boris might do best to lend support, like he is said to have done in the leadership campaign, to Corbyn to get an election which he (Boris) can then fight as an insurgent on behalf of the people.
It would be wrong to blame Johnson for the Tory misfortune. His plumage may be exotic but this bird is a scavenger.
No, the blame should rest on the shoulders of the Conservative Party, the whole Conservative Party and only the Conservative Party.
Almost in tears, a friend said to me this week: “All those years we argued about withdrawing the whip and throwing these madcaps out of the party and draining the poison but we murmured ‘broad church’ and ‘tolerance’ and ‘due process’. We were wrong.”
Where the Conservative Party got it wrong historically is by pretending to be anti-Eu whilst it’s elected representatives were anything but. Don’t forget Charles Tannock was elected as a eurosceptic then acquired an Irish passport after the referendum. Those in charge of the party, including most spectacularly Mr. Cameron, fed their members on this diet and then all of the pro-eu Parliamentarians profess to be shocked when their party members believed it. It is all their own fault for their dishonesty over decades.
Spot on. This is why Matthew Parris is such a disingenuous dick.
Though the same must be said of europhile leaders of Labour, as well. Who can forget Gordon Brown signing the Lisbon Treaty ‘late’, as if that somehow made up for him signing it, in the first place, without the promised referendum.
We have been grievously failed by 2 generations of pro-EU leaders, who were always too frit to make the honest and simple case for the EU.
This is what has so thoroughly annoyed me all my life. Politicians of all the three major parties have failed to put forward an, as you say, honest and simple case for the EU. If they had, we would never have been in this predicament. This is not generally the position on mainland Europe. The people there are told, generally more honestly, what the Eu means. It is, as it says in the treaties, ever closer union. It is not a grab bag of stuff from which we can pick and choose. It is a political nation building project. Whether you like that or not is entirely your choice but that is what it is and it is entirely the fault of our politicians from Edward Heaths self admitted lying about what entry meant, through Nick Cleggs refusal to admit in the tv debate about plans for an EU army, right up to today. There are no words to describe adequately the cowardice and dishonesty of our political class over 50 years.
We would be in or out and we would have been able to make an honest and informed decision and that would have been the end of it.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
You're right. It is more than Boris has done. If Boris did his job and got his backside over to Brussels and actually negotiated something rather than posturing and plotting we might not be in this mess.
Actually, you’re right. I take back what I said. These rebel MPs aren’t ‘maybe’ traitors. They ARE traitors. Remainers must pray very very hard that this story disappears
I don't have a problem with people talking to one another, it's a good thing. You need to dial it down a notch or three hundred.
If Boris had done this, in reverse, you’d have been the first woman by the guillotine with your knitting. Pathetic.
I've knitted this pattern, inspired by Madame Defarge (though I encoded the Litany Against Fear into mine) but I'd expect Scottish Unionists to speak to the British government directly following a successful vote for Scottish independence and I wouldn't regard it as traitorous.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
A hostile foreign power -listen to yourself.
They are the lawyers of the club we are currently a member of albeit a club some of us are trying to leave.
The EU is on record, via Barnier and others, in saying that it wants Britain to suffer because of Brexit. That’s quite hostile enough for me.
I note you don’t try really and defend what they did, because it is indefensible. If it was defensible then Grieve and Co would and should have done this, openly and transparently. But they didn’t. They kept it quiet and did it secretly, because it just looks so very very bad.
Byronic - hostile foreign power is one we are having to commit military/security resources to opposing - cyber attacks, using chemical weapons, blocking our ships, doing aggressive military fly-bys.
Equating hostile foreign power with 'people who won't give me what I want' is just childish. Given Boris' obscene sense of entitlement I would be unsurprised if he agreed.
The trouble with Boris, for trying to predict and bet on his next move, is that it has never been clear what Boris wants. What is the philosophical basis of Borisism? Does Boris believe anything at all? Was he ever really ambitious or just addicted to the thrill of conquest?
On Any Questions which is on now the Tory guest Antoinette Sandbach is more powerful in her denunciation of Johnson-accusing him of disloyalty sexism lying-in a beautifully modulated tone than anyone I've so far heard. If she's left the party and Johnson is their new face God help them.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
Why would no-one take his place? Someone would take his place. That person would follow the law to avoid jail and unlimited civil damages.
Why? There is no means to compel anyone to be PM. I assume that if he resigned then it would need a clear indication of a successor that has the support of Parliament for them to be appointed by the Queen. At this moment there is no sign at all of that happening.
I would suggest Boris' best route to avoid this manipulation is to resign on 18th October and let the opposition try and fight it out to get someone they can show has support to recommend to the Queen. If not I assume that after 14 days we have a GE called.
I agree, Boris would have leavers and the vast majority of Tories united behind him as a strong opposition with most seats in Parliament committed to Brexit.
Better that than staying in a weak Government agreeing the extension, seeing mass Tory defections to the Brexit Party and facing 1997 style meltdown and probably worse
If he resigns it’s not an issue of confidence no 14 days just Corbyn invited to try and form a government no need to have anybody show support until his queens speech is voted on.
That Queen's Speech immediately voted down as soon as Corbyn has led the Government through the extension, then Corbyn loses a VONC, then a general election
Yes that’s the way it would play out but there is always the possibility he signs up to a much longer extension before he gos
I'm now reasonably sure that Boris Johnson will resign. The exact timing depends on whether the Palace has been consulted yet, and whether or not the intention is to drag the Queen back from Balmoral, but I reckon he'll be off no later than Tuesday afternoon.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
You're right. It is more than Boris has done. If Boris did his job and got his backside over to Brussels and actually negotiated something rather than posturing and plotting we might not be in this mess.
Actually, you’re right. I take back what I said. These rebel MPs aren’t ‘maybe’ traitors. They ARE traitors. Remainers must pray very very hard that this story disappears
I don't have a problem with people talking to one another, it's a good thing. You need to dial it down a notch or three hundred.
If Boris had done this, in reverse, you’d have been the first woman by the guillotine with your knitting. Pathetic.
I've knitted this pattern, inspired by Madame Defarge (though I encoded the Litany Against Fear into mine) but I'd expect Scottish Unionists to speak to the British government directly following a successful vote for Scottish independence and I wouldn't regard it as traitorous.
Agreed. And I’d expect unionists to do it openly, and tell everyone beforehand. And be transparent about their discussions.
If you do it secretly, and then get found out - well, that looks conspiratorial and treasonous. Perhaps because it is.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
What's wrong with finding out what the other big player in the situation will do before deciding on your own course of action? If this, and Chicken Jezza, is the apogee of Cummings's master plan (and I'm starting to think that it is) then Boris should demand a refund.
You don’t get it. As expected.
I’ll try and make it simple for you.
Imagine that Scotland voted Yes to independence. Imagine that after the vote there was a prolonged and tortuous negotiation with England and rUK, to work out how Scotland would become independent (not hard to imagine - that’s what would have happened)
Now imagine, that at a crucial stage in Scotland’s independence negotiations, it was revealed that a bunch of Scottish MSPs has been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence, and hopefully get the referendum result overturned. By whatever means necessary.
Those MSPs would be lynched from the modernist eaves of Holyrood.
In any putative independence negotiations no one would be remotely surprised if a bunch of SCon MSPs had been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence. It's pretty much their current mo.
I see no reason why Boris can't, with an election upcoming, say he will fight the election from opposition. If he loses the election then it will be game over, but if he wins it then it will be job done.
It may end up that way.
However it's remarkable that one of the core things that Johnson campaigned on to become Conservatives leader - keeping Corbyn out of Number 10 - is now being normalised as a step in the critical path of his ultimate victory.
Legal challenge an option for Johnson? Try something along the lines of the executive must have the legal option to exercise the royal prerogative as it sees fit but the legislature should have a way to force their removal should that go against its will?
The legal challenge, if it's possible, is against Bercow's ruling that Queen's Consent wasn't required, thereby denying the government a legitimate, if controversial, veto.
But while the law is the law, it has to be followed.
Serious question. What if Boris resigns as PM on18th October and no one takes his place? In that instance if there is no PM then no one can break the law. It is a stupid situation and would be gaming the rules but since that is what the Remain side have been doing for months it would, I assume be legal.
How do we go about getting a new PM if the current one resigns and Parliament is unwilling to allow an election?
Why would no-one take his place? Someone would take his place. That person would follow the law to avoid jail and unlimited civil damages.
Why? There is no means to compel anyone to be PM. I assume that if he resigned then it would need a clear indication of a successor that has the support of Parliament for them to be appointed by the Queen. At this moment there is no sign at all of that happening.
I would suggest Boris' best route to avoid this manipulation is to resign on 18th October and let the opposition try and fight it out to get someone they can show has support to recommend to the Queen. If not I assume that after 14 days we have a GE called.
I agree, Boris would have leavers and the vast majority of Tories united behind him as a strong opposition with most seats in Parliament committed to Brexit.
Better that than staying in a weak Government agreeing the extension, seeing mass Tory defections to the Brexit Party and facing 1997 style meltdown and probably worse
If he resigns it’s not an issue of confidence no 14 days just Corbyn invited to try and form a government no need to have anybody show support until his queens speech is voted on.
That Queen's Speech immediately voted down as soon as Corbyn has led the Government through the extension, then Corbyn loses a VONC, then a general election
Yes that’s the way it would play out but there is always the possibility he signs up to a much longer extension before he gos
Any betting market movement from the 11/10 this morning on 2019
And says that Johnson would not only be potentially liable to life imprisonment, but would also potentially be liable for losses suffered as a result of the unlawful action.
I think Johnson is stupid, but not so stupid that he can't be made to undertand that.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
What's wrong with finding out what the other big player in the situation will do before deciding on your own course of action? If this, and Chicken Jezza, is the apogee of Cummings's master plan (and I'm starting to think that it is) then Boris should demand a refund.
You don’t get it. As expected.
I’ll try and make it simple for you.
Imagine that Scotland voted Yes to independence. Imagine that after the vote there was a prolonged and tortuous negotiation with England and rUK, to work out how Scotland would become independent (not hard to imagine - that’s what would have happened)
Now imagine, that at a crucial stage in Scotland’s independence negotiations, it was revealed that a bunch of Scottish MSPs has been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence, and hopefully get the referendum result overturned. By whatever means necessary.
Those MSPs would be lynched from the modernist eaves of Holyrood.
In any putative independence negotiations no one would be remotely surprised if a bunch of SCon MSPs had been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence. It's pretty much their current mo.
I'm now reasonably sure that Boris Johnson will resign. The exact timing depends on whether the Palace has been consulted yet, and whether or not the intention is to drag the Queen back from Balmoral, but I reckon he'll be off no later than Tuesday afternoon.
Making Boris a martyr I(If he really is willing to go all the way) I don't think is going to play well for remainers. Dragging him before the courts for refusing to sign a letter and obey a law designed by his enemies to force him to break his word to the British people would be the 21st century equivalent of Luther at the Diet of Worms.
On Any Questions which is on now the Tory guest Antoinette Sandbach is more powerful in her denunciation of Johnson-accusing him of disloyalty sexism lying-in a beautifully modulated tone than anyone I've so far heard. If she's left the party and Johnson is their new face God help them.
Making Boris a martyr I(If he really is willing to go all the way) I don't think is going to play well for remainers. Dragging him before the courts for refusing to sign a letter and obey a law designed by his enemies to force him to break his word to the British people would be the 21st century equivalent of Luther at the Diet of Worms.
Go and read David’s blog article. While the jail time may be bad the multi-billion court cases will be a very different matter.
In the last week alone remainers have claimed there is a coup taking place - despite the PM offering an election, have called for the monarch to overrule the prime minister, who they are now threatening to lock up. And they call leavers hysterical!
If a coup is taking place, its taking place in the wilful conspiracy of remainers to subvert democracy in the form of the referendum they seek to undermine and the election they refuse to allow. All while conducting unofficial communications with a foreign power. And they can't even see what a bad look this all is. Remain is going to get obliterated when the electorate finally gets a say.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
Lmao ! Wow checking to see if something would be accepted before pursuing it . Personally I have more faith in the EU looking after my interests than my own government . Please spare us the faux outrage !
I'm now reasonably sure that Boris Johnson will resign. The exact timing depends on whether the Palace has been consulted yet, and whether or not the intention is to drag the Queen back from Balmoral, but I reckon he'll be off no later than Tuesday afternoon.
I thought he was at Balmoral this weekend? Pity that HMTQ and staff don't have a leaky What's App group.
Making Boris a martyr I(If he really is willing to go all the way) I don't think is going to play well for remainers. Dragging him before the courts for refusing to sign a letter and obey a law designed by his enemies to force him to break his word to the British people would be the 21st century equivalent of Luther at the Diet of Worms.
This isn't a game. If Johnson defied the law and a No Deal Brexit were the result, it could be at the cost of thousands of lives and millions - if not billions - of pounds.
I don't think that will happen, because the bill has been drafted in such a way as to allow time for the courts to intervene.
But the reason people are so much opposed to no deal is the damage it could cause, and it's stupid to try to minimise that when you don't know what will happen.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
What's wrong with finding out what the other big player in the situation will do before deciding on your own course of action? If this, and Chicken Jezza, is the apogee of Cummings's master plan (and I'm starting to think that it is) then Boris should demand a refund.
You don’t get it. As expected.
I’ll try and make it simple for you.
Imagine that Scotland voted Yes to independence. Imagine that after the vote there was a prolonged and tortuous negotiation with England and rUK, to work out how Scotland would become independent (not hard to imagine - that’s what would have happened)
Now imagine, that at a crucial stage in Scotland’s independence negotiations, it was revealed that a bunch of Scottish MSPs has been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence, and hopefully get the referendum result overturned. By whatever means necessary.
Those MSPs would be lynched from the modernist eaves of Holyrood.
Imagine if they hadn't taken soundings from the EU, and the EU had then failed to grant an extension (which they still might do for all I know). We would have had wall-to-wall 'Ner ner ner ner ner ... Stupid Remainers .. Didn't even check with the EU ... lost the whip for nothing ... ha ha ha ...' They made some checks before destroying their own careers for the national interest, Good for them.
I'm now reasonably sure that Boris Johnson will resign. The exact timing depends on whether the Palace has been consulted yet, and whether or not the intention is to drag the Queen back from Balmoral, but I reckon he'll be off no later than Tuesday afternoon.
Wild hunch, or insider info?
Gracious, I don't have insider info about anything! It's not a wild hunch either, it's what the logic of his position suggests. The man can't openly defy the law without bringing the Tory Party down around his ears - and failing to apply for the extension won't have the desired effect anyway, because the ploy will be defeated in the courts.
Once you come to the conclusion that resignation is necessary, there's no point in his sitting in Downing Street for umpteen weeks as a lame duck. Best to get it out of the way, and then make his opponents own the A50 extension that they're insisting upon.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
Lmao ! Wow checking to see if something would be accepted before pursuing it . Personally I have more faith in the EU looking after my interests than my own government . Please spare us the faux outrage !
I can tell you one thing for sure: my outrage is not faux, it’s the real deal
I see no reason why Boris can't, with an election upcoming, say he will fight the election from opposition. If he loses the election then it will be game over, but if he wins it then it will be job done.
It may end up that way.
However it's remarkable that one of the core things that Johnson campaigned on to become Conservatives leader - keeping Corbyn out of Number 10 - is now being normalised as a step in the critical path of his ultimate victory.
That's a massive change.
True.
Its a real shame that on a vote of confidence 22 traitors chose to side with the opposition rather than their own government. Something no "bastard" did over Maastricht.
I'm now reasonably sure that Boris Johnson will resign. The exact timing depends on whether the Palace has been consulted yet, and whether or not the intention is to drag the Queen back from Balmoral, but I reckon he'll be off no later than Tuesday afternoon.
I think he will wait until the last possible minute. Which is why I think it will be 18th October
The EU is definitely a hostile foreign power. Anyone who has been there is clearly a traitor and should be imprisoned whilst Good Old Boris does the patriotic thing and invades France
I'm now reasonably sure that Boris Johnson will resign. The exact timing depends on whether the Palace has been consulted yet, and whether or not the intention is to drag the Queen back from Balmoral, but I reckon he'll be off no later than Tuesday afternoon.
Wild hunch, or insider info?
Gracious, I don't have insider info about anything! It's not a wild hunch either, it's what the logic of his position suggests. The man can't openly defy the law without bringing the Tory Party down around his ears - and failing to apply for the extension won't have the desired effect anyway, because the ploy will be defeated in the courts.
Once you come to the conclusion that resignation is necessary, there's no point in his sitting in Downing Street for umpteen weeks as a lame duck. Best to get it out of the way, and then make his opponents own the A50 extension that they're insisting upon.
There is every point him sitting in Downing Street. In Downing Street he has the bully pulpit, he can make speeches from Downing Street, he has authority.
He would and should keep hold of that at least until after Tory Party Conference which would be a pre-election rally.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
It’s a terrible story for Remainers. Absolutely explosive. Beyond anything Boris has done
Lmao ! Wow checking to see if something would be accepted before pursuing it . Personally I have more faith in the EU looking after my interests than my own government . Please spare us the faux outrage !
I can tell you one thing for sure: my outrage is not faux, it’s the real deal
The EU is definitely a hostile foreign power. Anyone who has been there is clearly a traitor and should be imprisoned whilst Good Old Boris does the patriotic thing and invades France
In their own words, the EU is trying to force us to sign a deal “so bad, in the end, the British will prefer to stay”
I'm now reasonably sure that Boris Johnson will resign. The exact timing depends on whether the Palace has been consulted yet, and whether or not the intention is to drag the Queen back from Balmoral, but I reckon he'll be off no later than Tuesday afternoon.
Wild hunch, or insider info?
Gracious, I don't have insider info about anything! It's not a wild hunch either, it's what the logic of his position suggests. The man can't openly defy the law without bringing the Tory Party down around his ears - and failing to apply for the extension won't have the desired effect anyway, because the ploy will be defeated in the courts.
Once you come to the conclusion that resignation is necessary, there's no point in his sitting in Downing Street for umpteen weeks as a lame duck. Best to get it out of the way, and then make his opponents own the A50 extension that they're insisting upon.
Plus if you do it early you force the opposition to select a PM to avoid an election on October 29th / October 31st.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
What's wrong with finding out what the other big player in the situation will do before deciding on your own course of action? If this, and Chicken Jezza, is the apogee of Cummings's master plan (and I'm starting to think that it is) then Boris should demand a refund.
You don’t get it. As expected.
I’ll try and make it simple for you.
Imagine that Scotland voted Yes to independence. Imagine that after the vote there was a prolonged and tortuous negotiation with England and rUK, to work out how Scotland would become independent (not hard to imagine - that’s what would have happened)
Now imagine, that at a crucial stage in Scotland’s independence negotiations, it was revealed that a bunch of Scottish MSPs has been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence, and hopefully get the referendum result overturned. By whatever means necessary.
Those MSPs would be lynched from the modernist eaves of Holyrood.
In any putative independence negotiations no one would be remotely surprised if a bunch of SCon MSPs had been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence. It's pretty much their current mo.
And you’d be very angered by it. Rightfully.
I don't think I would actually. As I say it's in their genetic code to do that sort of thing, and bathed in the warm glow of not having to care what these lads get up to any more, I'd satisfy myself with a bit of gentle mockery.
I'm now reasonably sure that Boris Johnson will resign. The exact timing depends on whether the Palace has been consulted yet, and whether or not the intention is to drag the Queen back from Balmoral, but I reckon he'll be off no later than Tuesday afternoon.
Wild hunch, or insider info?
Gracious, I don't have insider info about anything! It's not a wild hunch either, it's what the logic of his position suggests. The man can't openly defy the law without bringing the Tory Party down around his ears - and failing to apply for the extension won't have the desired effect anyway, because the ploy will be defeated in the courts.
Once you come to the conclusion that resignation is necessary, there's no point in his sitting in Downing Street for umpteen weeks as a lame duck. Best to get it out of the way, and then make his opponents own the A50 extension that they're insisting upon.
But he will still have failed do or die to be out on 31st. Johnson can’t be trusted, he still wants a deal, he’s not pure enough so unless he deals with farage they will come after him and if he does deal with him then he will lose any self respecting tories left.
Whoah. So Cummings was right. The rebel alliance consulted with EU lawyers - lawyers of a hostile foreign power - before launching their attack on the government.
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
What's wrong with finding out what the other big player in the situation will do before deciding on your own course of action? If this, and Chicken Jezza, is the apogee of Cummings's master plan (and I'm starting to think that it is) then Boris should demand a refund.
You don’t get it. As expected.
I’ll try and make it simple for you.
Imagine that Scotland voted Yes to independence. Imagine that after the vote there was a prolonged and tortuous negotiation with England and rUK, to work out how Scotland would become independent (not hard to imagine - that’s what would have happened)
Now imagine, that at a crucial stage in Scotland’s independence negotiations, it was revealed that a bunch of Scottish MSPs has been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence, and hopefully get the referendum result overturned. By whatever means necessary.
Those MSPs would be lynched from the modernist eaves of Holyrood.
In any putative independence negotiations no one would be remotely surprised if a bunch of SCon MSPs had been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence. It's pretty much their current mo.
And you’d be very angered by it. Rightfully.
I don't think I would actually. As I say it's in their genetic code to do that sort of thing, and bathed in the warm glow of not having to carew hat these lads get up to any more, I'd satisfy myself with a bit of gentle mockery.
No, you wouldn’t, not if it looked like these guys had a real chance of overturning the Yes vote. Use your brain.
I see no reason why Boris can't, with an election upcoming, say he will fight the election from opposition. If he loses the election then it will be game over, but if he wins it then it will be job done.
It may end up that way.
However it's remarkable that one of the core things that Johnson campaigned on to become Conservatives leader - keeping Corbyn out of Number 10 - is now being normalised as a step in the critical path of his ultimate victory.
That's a massive change.
I seem to remember DUD. Deliver Brexit...no closer, may get there, not easy to see how. Unite the country. Bob Hope. We've gone backwards. Defeat Corbyn. Only by putting him in to bat?
I'm now reasonably sure that Boris Johnson will resign. The exact timing depends on whether the Palace has been consulted yet, and whether or not the intention is to drag the Queen back from Balmoral, but I reckon he'll be off no later than Tuesday afternoon.
Wild hunch, or insider info?
Gracious, I don't have insider info about anything! It's not a wild hunch either, it's what the logic of his position suggests. The man can't openly defy the law without bringing the Tory Party down around his ears - and failing to apply for the extension won't have the desired effect anyway, because the ploy will be defeated in the courts.
Once you come to the conclusion that resignation is necessary, there's no point in his sitting in Downing Street for umpteen weeks as a lame duck. Best to get it out of the way, and then make his opponents own the A50 extension that they're insisting upon.
Plus if you do it early you force the opposition to select a PM to avoid an election on October 29th / October 31st.
The queen will select the next pm by inviting him/her to form a government no automatic GE
The EU is definitely a hostile foreign power. Anyone who has been there is clearly a traitor and should be imprisoned whilst Good Old Boris does the patriotic thing and invades France
In their own words, the EU is trying to force us to sign a deal “so bad, in the end, the British will prefer to stay”
Which part of that strikes you as non-hostile?
The UK voted to leave . It’s not upto the EU to give it everything it wants . Mays red lines mean that’s the only deal on offer .
Change the red lines and the EU will offer a better deal .
Making Boris a martyr I(If he really is willing to go all the way) I don't think is going to play well for remainers. Dragging him before the courts for refusing to sign a letter and obey a law designed by his enemies to force him to break his word to the British people would be the 21st century equivalent of Luther at the Diet of Worms.
What are you saying? The Prime minister should be allowed to break the law. And by enemies you presumably mean a majority of MPs in our 'sovereign' parliament.
Comments
One red flag pointed out here was the Conservative Party membership rising by a third in a year. That smacks of entryism. But it is too recent to explain current events. Boris won a landslide in the Commons before these entryists were sent their ballot papers.
The Conservative Party has long been prone to ideological takeover. Mrs Thatcher did it. The Cameroons did it. Worse, the Cameroons also brought oppositionist tactics from America, but that is not what got us here either.
The problem is that an awful lot of MPs are dead wood, especially from the neck up. Remember the 1922 banging the desks in support of Theresa May after the GE2017 debacle? Supporting her in a vote of confidence? Those same MPs then voted overwhelmingly for Boris even after they'd seen his shambolic reign at the Foreign Office and his reluctance to debate. Even the ERG consists mainly of Bufton Tuftons who hate the EU but had given no thought at all in the past 20 years as to what they wanted to happen on day one after Brexit.
That is how we got here. Thick MPs grasping at straws.
Though the same must be said of europhile leaders of Labour, as well. Who can forget Gordon Brown signing the Lisbon Treaty ‘late’, as if that somehow made up for him signing it, in the first place, without the promised referendum.
We have been grievously failed by 2 generations of pro-EU leaders, who were always too frit to make the honest and simple case for the EU.
So Boris might get away without extending himself
I've been busy living my life for the last few days but when I see threads with 1000+ replies you know it's a frantic time.
As so much has been said by so many so often, I can't add anything much of import so just a thought or two:
1) MPs are representatives not delegates. That's not me, that's one Winston Spencer Churchill who was an MP for a while. The Conservatives tried to de-select him as well of course.
2) Churchill also said an MP's first duty was to their "fair and impartial judgement" to protect the "honour and safety" of the country. I suspect those MPs opposed to leaving without a WA (as distinct from those who are happy to leave with one) are following that guidance.
3) A referendum is NOT an election. Treating it as though it were one or conflating it into one has been the big problem. Given point one above, there was an understandable but avoidable conclusion between elections where we choose representatives who only have the manifesto on which they were elected and that isn't a formal mandate but a statement of intent and a referendum which can't create a mandate (see above) and can therefore only be advisory.
Had Labour won in 1983 we would have left the then EEC without a referendum. Introducing the referendum concept has been a retrograde step. If a party wins a parliamentary majority and has within its manifesto a commitment to leave the EU, change the voting system to STV or re-introduce capital punishment (as examples), fine.
The democratic process means at the next GE we can judge the governing party on what it's done (or hasn't done). There's nothing stopping a party winning an election and reneging on its commitments apart from the fact the other parties will use it as a stick with which they can be beaten.
By the way, I have a spare ditch if anyone needs one.
I would suggest Boris' best route to avoid this manipulation is to resign on 18th October and let the opposition try and fight it out to get someone they can show has support to recommend to the Queen. If not I assume that after 14 days we have a GE called.
But we’ve not been here before. At least not for over a century, when we were busily inventing the conventions FTPA killed.
Rather than making twatish comments try answering the question. What happens if Boris resigns and no one is shown to have the support of Parliament?
Better that than staying in a weak Government agreeing the extension, seeing mass Tory defections to the Brexit Party and facing 1997 style meltdown and probably worse
Harman is at least possible but why would Corbyn step aside for her. If you want to bet on next PM on this basis, then look for a left-winger like RLB, Pidcock or Dawn Butler, to whom Corbyn might hand over the reins in the long term.
But Corbyn is the natural choice. He's already offered a splash-and-dash, extension and election, regime with purdah to ensure nothing else is enacted. The reason a month of inactivity is attractive to Corbyn is, as previously stated, and as identified from the Conservative point of view by @Philip_Thompson here as undesirable, is that it normalises Corbyn as PM just before an election.
Jo Swinson, and the Con and ex-Con grandees, need to grow up, hold their noses and support Corbyn, or admit that Brexit is not that bad after all.
The EU are now perfectly clear that Brexit cannot be resolved by this Parliament. It is capable of only kicking the can. They’ll therefore offer enough time for a further General Election, which I expect to be in March or April 2020, and an EU summit to seal a new deal, if required, plus sufficient time for parliamentary ratification on both sides of the channel.
If there is no election next year, still possible, the can will be kicked. Again and again, until this one expires in 2022.
It’s the least worst option for both sides.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/07/mps-checked-with-eu-chiefs-over-brexit-delay-before-passing-bill?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Treasonous? Maybe not. Good look? Definitely not. Ouch.
Someone else (brave) will be the fall guy and suffer all the opprobrium. Not Boris.
Any politician putting a civil servant in that position, or even contemplating it, deserves a slap.
It's perfectly simple, and it's been explained any number of times.
The Queen's government must be carried on. If the prime minister is so irresponsible as to resign without arrangements having been made for a successor, then the Queen will ask someone else to form a government - of course.
From the time they are asked, they are prime minister. If they don't obtain the support of parliament, they will still be prime minister.
How anyone of average intelligence who shows any interest in politics could not understand this, is beyond me.
But the loony Brexiteers seem to think they are in a contest to prove who is the most stupid of them.
I’ll try and make it simple for you.
Imagine that Scotland voted Yes to independence. Imagine that after the vote there was a prolonged and tortuous negotiation with England and rUK, to work out how Scotland would become independent (not hard to imagine - that’s what would have happened)
Now imagine, that at a crucial stage in Scotland’s independence negotiations, it was revealed that a bunch of Scottish MSPs has been secretly consulting with the English government, to find out ways to halt the cause of independence, and hopefully get the referendum result overturned. By whatever means necessary.
Those MSPs would be lynched from the modernist eaves of Holyrood.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1170307754067730432?s=20
Johnson's idol Churchill famously came back from opposition to regain governance.
Disraeli and Gladstone alternated frequently. In fact Gladstone had 4 terms.
Even in the modern era Wilson did it.
I see no reason why Boris can't, with an election upcoming, say he will fight the election from opposition. If he loses the election then it will be game over, but if he wins it then it will be job done.
I have lost track on how many ward branches met in Islington North and South. But Corbyn and Thornberry have won all of them so far.
To me, talking to relevant lawyers before drafting law is entirely sensible, I would be disappointed if they had not done so.
On the other hand refusing to obey the law when PM, or appointing someone who has rebelled against the party over a hundred times to the cabinet whilst kicking out someone who has only ever voted against his party 3 times, are big issues of character.
I can see that others view them as complete opposite and Byronics view will gain traction with no dealers.
I would imagine the swing votes probably couldnt care less though.
https://davidallengreen.com/2019/09/what-if-the-prime-minister-deliberately-broke-the-law-over-extending-article-50/
Isabel Hardman's book explores things in greater depth, and there was the Paxo documentary recently, but at root it comes down to money and leaders wanting cannon fodder not an awkward squad.
Google "the Queen's government must be carried on."
Look at the FTPA. An election is the consequence of a vote of no-confidence. It's not the consequence of an irresponsible prime ministerial resignation. If that happens and another prime minister is appointed, no vote of confidence is necessary. Even if there is a vote of no confidence and as a result there is an election, unless someone else is appointed, that person will remain prime minister until the election.
Learn some basic facts, and for God's sake stop wasting everyone's time!
They are the lawyers of the club we are currently a member of albeit a club some of us are trying to leave.
There are no words to describe adequately the cowardice and dishonesty of our political class over 50 years.
We would be in or out and we would have been able to make an honest and informed decision and that would have been the end of it.
Damn them all.
I note you don’t try really and defend what they did, because it is indefensible. If it was defensible then Grieve and Co would and should have done this, openly and transparently. But they didn’t. They kept it quiet and did it secretly, because it just looks so very very bad.
Equating hostile foreign power with 'people who won't give me what I want' is just childish. Given Boris' obscene sense of entitlement I would be unsurprised if he agreed.
If you do it secretly, and then get found out - well, that looks conspiratorial and treasonous. Perhaps because it is.
However it's remarkable that one of the core things that Johnson campaigned on to become Conservatives leader - keeping Corbyn out of Number 10 - is now being normalised as a step in the critical path of his ultimate victory.
That's a massive change.
I think Johnson is stupid, but not so stupid that he can't be made to undertand that.
Would be daft to decide now - let the opposition bang on about spending £3Bn for nothing for a few weeks.
If a coup is taking place, its taking place in the wilful conspiracy of remainers to subvert democracy in the form of the referendum they seek to undermine and the election they refuse to allow. All while conducting unofficial communications with a foreign power. And they can't even see what a bad look this all is. Remain is going to get obliterated when the electorate finally gets a say.
I don't think that will happen, because the bill has been drafted in such a way as to allow time for the courts to intervene.
But the reason people are so much opposed to no deal is the damage it could cause, and it's stupid to try to minimise that when you don't know what will happen.
Once you come to the conclusion that resignation is necessary, there's no point in his sitting in Downing Street for umpteen weeks as a lame duck. Best to get it out of the way, and then make his opponents own the A50 extension that they're insisting upon.
Its a real shame that on a vote of confidence 22 traitors chose to side with the opposition rather than their own government. Something no "bastard" did over Maastricht.
Oh well, can't cry over spilt milk.
Boris isn’t going to prison - this remainer frothing is hilarious.
He would and should keep hold of that at least until after Tory Party Conference which would be a pre-election rally.
Which part of that strikes you as non-hostile?
Unite the country. Bob Hope. We've gone backwards.
Defeat Corbyn. Only by putting him in to bat?
Change the red lines and the EU will offer a better deal .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMt8qCl5fPk