Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A Government of Laws

135678

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152
    edited September 2019
    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead
  • Scott_P said:
    Yes, Rory's right. They're starting to sound scary.
    Tbf if there were secret talks between the EU and the rebels and action agreed to subvert the UK government's position then it is collusion with a foreign power. The government are the only people that can negotiate with the EU.
    The language is of course deliberately provocative and not necessary
    The EU have been discussing Brexit with all the parties since 2016. This is nothing new.

    I would expect UK officials have regular discussions with Nancy Pelosi. It does not make Pelosi a traitor or the UK trying to collude against the US govt.
    Well that's the point, its discussion on unofficial levels which are irrelevant versus negotiation and agreed actions. If the EU just want to know what the rebels position is thats fine, but they can't agree they will offer x y and z in return for the rebels ensuring the Benn Bill passes, for example.
    What do you think the UK govt will be doing with Pelosi? They will be saying can we get x, y and z through congress in a trade deal.
    Separation of powers is different in the States. But they wont be negotiating with Pelosii they will be discussing their respective positions, Pelosi has no authority to conclude a trade deal
    Separation of powers exists in the UK as well, parliament makes laws and before making laws they check the impact of laws with other lawyers, it is the most unremarkable thing to get worked up about.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    nunuone said:

    Mr. Observer, and yet MPs standing for parties opposed to no deal refused to support a deal on multiple occasions.

    Yep, so we need another deal.

    There is no other deal.

    As you well know. Parliament voted agai8 the only deal 3 times, so now the only option left is no deal.

    EEA/EFTA would get through the Commons and be acceptable to a majority in the country.

    Brexit is tough. No Deal is no solution.

    How can you say that when EEA/EFTA was voted down in the indicative votes?
    Because the indicative votes where a sham. They were whipped.
    Didn't May give a free vote? Who whipped against EEA/EFTA in the Commons and why didn't MPs break the whip if they cared so much?
    No it was not a free vote for payroll MPs.
    LMFAO! EEA/EFTA was called Common Market 2.0

    Labour MPs were whipped to support Common Market 2.0

    Conservatives were given a free vote [except cabinet abstaining] on Common Market 2.0

    Considering the opposition whipped to support it and the government gave a free vote, tell me again how the Commons supports it?
    Tell me how that shows the Commons would not support it now?
    The Commons had their chance to support it. The Commons rule it out and every other deal out.
    Well fine. The Commons has also voted convincingly to rule ‘No Deal’ illegal. What is your point?
    The Commons should do its job, or the executive should do its to bring this to a conclusion.
    The Commons are legislating pretty damn effectively in my opinion.
    And if they aren’t then they will be replaced at the next election.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268

    Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.

    Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.

    He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
    That's not true. It was denied in 1707.

    Everything is a formality until it isn't.
    It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
    Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    Who.did he get itbfrom? The Fonz?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    How’s that going to work when the bill says that the extension must be requested by the 19th October unless Parliament votes for no deal or a new Brexit deal?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    A guarantee tonight . The Daily Telegraph will make sure it’s managed to bring out a poll showing the public love Bozo .
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Gabs2 said:

    Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.

    Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.

    He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
    That's not true. It was denied in 1707.

    Everything is a formality until it isn't.
    It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
    Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
    You’re comparing procedural shenanigans in Parliament (which are clearly supported by Parliament) to not giving royal assent to a bill that has passed both houses of Parliament with clear majorities?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,133
    edited September 2019
    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    'Victorious leave vote' - you do amuse so many on here

    Oh, and what happened to Boris 'nailed on' majority

    Why not be honest and at least admit he has had a bad week
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    Gabs2 said:

    Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.

    Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.

    He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
    That's not true. It was denied in 1707.

    Everything is a formality until it isn't.
    It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
    Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
    I'm really tired of hearing this idiotic statement. The role of the Speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members. He can conform to precedent or move forward as he interprets the will of the House.
  • Gabs2 said:

    Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.

    Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.

    He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
    That's not true. It was denied in 1707.

    Everything is a formality until it isn't.
    It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
    Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
    You’re comparing procedural shenanigans in Parliament (which are clearly supported by Parliament) to not giving royal assent to a bill that has passed both houses of Parliament with clear majorities?
    Yes.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    edited September 2019
    @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    Gabs2 said:

    Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.

    Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.

    He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
    That's not true. It was denied in 1707.

    Everything is a formality until it isn't.
    It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
    Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
    You’re comparing procedural shenanigans in Parliament (which are clearly supported by Parliament) to not giving royal assent to a bill that has passed both houses of Parliament with clear majorities?
    Yes.
    Loopy.
  • Fenman said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.

    Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.

    He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
    That's not true. It was denied in 1707.

    Everything is a formality until it isn't.
    It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
    Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
    I'm really tired of hearing this idiotic statement. The role of the Speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members. He can conform to precedent or move forward as he interprets the will of the House.
    But two can play at that game.

    The role of the speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members.

    The role of the monarch is to act on the advice of her ministers, as chosen and given confidence by Parliament.

    If her ministers advise to refuse consent then why should the Queen not follow her minister's advise?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152

    RobD said:

    Refusing royal assent would be outrageous. The Parliament has passed a law, you can't just ignore it because it is inconvenient.

    Parliament can change the PM if its not happy with the veto.
    The Queen can also change the PM if they refuse to obey Parliament.

    I expect Boris would resign before extending and become Leader of the Opposition but the Queen could ask Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman to form a Government and dismiss Boris if it is clear he has lost the confidence of the Commons and refuses to leave office and implement extension and in such circumstances she may have no choice but to do so.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Changes with May.

    Only a 3 point lead over Labour. Oosh.

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170373770487500800?s=21
  • @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047

    Scott_P said:
    Yes, Rory's right. They're starting to sound scary.
    Tbf if there were secret talks between the EU and the rebels and action agreed to subvert the UK government's position then it is collusion with a foreign power. The government are the only people that can negotiate with the EU.
    The language is of course deliberately provocative and not necessary
    Weren't they just checking that the EU would indeed grant an extension if one was requested? If anything they were being helpful to Boris - no point losing him his majority if No Deal was nailed on anyway. Boris and Cummings should be thanking them for injecting a bit of clarity and thoroughness.
    The EU is not a foreign power. We are members.
  • Fenman said:

    Scott_P said:
    Yes, Rory's right. They're starting to sound scary.
    Tbf if there were secret talks between the EU and the rebels and action agreed to subvert the UK government's position then it is collusion with a foreign power. The government are the only people that can negotiate with the EU.
    The language is of course deliberately provocative and not necessary
    Weren't they just checking that the EU would indeed grant an extension if one was requested? If anything they were being helpful to Boris - no point losing him his majority if No Deal was nailed on anyway. Boris and Cummings should be thanking them for injecting a bit of clarity and thoroughness.
    The EU is not a foreign power. We are members.
    The EU is a foreign power for these purposes, the EU's constitution makes this clear. We are not a part of the 27.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
    You should believe in Britain instead of talking us down.
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138

    nunuone said:

    Let's be honest here, if Boris refuses to ask for an extension under dubious interpertation of the no deal law, what exactly can Parliament do about it?

    VONC him and install a PM who will ask for the extension.
    Yeah the rebel tories and libdems are not voting for Corbyn as PM, the only alternative
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Panelbase 31con 28lab 19ld 15bxp
  • @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
    You should believe in Britain instead of talking us down.
    I do believe in Britain. I want our MPs to believe in Britain too.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    Given everything that's happened it would be ironic if we leave with No Deal after the courts grant permission
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,900
    Evening all :)

    While we await the polls and the inevitable Conservative ratings of 40% or higher (apparently), where might we be going?

    1) Boris Johnson seems in a trap to this observer. He cannot ask for another extension (I have a ditch if he needs one) from the EU as that will finish him politically. Yet he doesn't have the numbers for a GE so it seems he must either jump or be pushed via a VoNC.

    2) Could an alternative Government with a limited mandate be formed? Perhaps but as none of the other parties can afford to be seen to empower Corbyn, the leader of that caretaker Government will be the one who has to ask the EU for an extension because the EU deals with the Government, not the Commons.

    If Johnson cannot accept the will of Parliament, he has to step aside if someone else can command a majority.

    3) The problem for the alternative Government is once extension has been achieved, what then? There may be a temptation to make it work - it would be fascinating to see such a n arrangement last until 2022. All those involved would have the common objectives of keeping out both Corbyn and Johnson (both of whom will have their own problems) and a pragmatic technocratic Government might not be the most unsuccessful or unpopular Government ever.

    4) By 2022, 2016 will look a long way off and arguing the point will seem like fighting old battles especially if the new Government is somehow able to achieve a period of relative stability.

    5) The truth though is once extension is achieved, it seems likely Labour will want an election but the Conservatives will still be angry and it's not easy to fight anger so it may be Johnson will be back after an election but will he stick to the agreed extension or simply walk out the week after he is elected?

    All this because some people thought a referendum was an election and MPs were delegates rather than representatives.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    Fenman said:

    Scott_P said:
    Yes, Rory's right. They're starting to sound scary.
    Tbf if there were secret talks between the EU and the rebels and action agreed to subvert the UK government's position then it is collusion with a foreign power. The government are the only people that can negotiate with the EU.
    The language is of course deliberately provocative and not necessary
    Weren't they just checking that the EU would indeed grant an extension if one was requested? If anything they were being helpful to Boris - no point losing him his majority if No Deal was nailed on anyway. Boris and Cummings should be thanking them for injecting a bit of clarity and thoroughness.
    The EU is not a foreign power. We are members.
    The EU is a foreign power for these purposes, the EU's constitution makes this clear. We are not a part of the 27.
    We’re all citizens of that ‘foreign power’.
  • Changes with May.

    Only a 3 point lead over Labour. Oosh.

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170373770487500800?s=21

    That is some turn round
  • nunuone said:

    Mr. Observer, and yet MPs standing for parties opposed to no deal refused to support a deal on multiple occasions.

    Yep, so we need another deal.

    There is no other deal.

    As you well know. Parliament voted agai8 the only deal 3 times, so now the only option left is no deal.

    EEA/EFTA would get through the Commons and be acceptable to a majority in the country.

    Brexit is tough. No Deal is no solution.

    How can you say that when EEA/EFTA was voted down in the indicative votes?
    Because the indicative votes where a sham. They were whipped.
    Didn't May give a free vote? Who whipped against EEA/EFTA in the Commons and why didn't MPs break the whip if they cared so much?
    No it was not a free vote for payroll MPs.
    LMFAO! EEA/EFTA was called Common Market 2.0

    Labour MPs were whipped to support Common Market 2.0

    Conservatives were given a free vote [except cabinet abstaining] on Common Market 2.0

    Considering the opposition whipped to support it and the government gave a free vote, tell me again how the Commons supports it?

    So, close to 100 MPs did not vote, while others clearly preferred other options back then. I do not believe it would be tough to add another 60-70 votes to the Common Market 2.0 column given where we are now.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152
    edited September 2019

    Changes with May.

    Only a 3 point lead over Labour. Oosh.

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170373770487500800?s=21

    Tories up 10% on May, Labour down 3%, LDs up 6%, Brexit Party down 4%.

    3% Tory lead as opposed to a 10% Labour lead in the last poll
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293

    Changes with May.

    Only a 3 point lead over Labour. Oosh.

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170373770487500800?s=21

    Con +10 :open_mouth:
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
    You should believe in Britain instead of talking us down.
    I do believe in Britain. I want our MPs to believe in Britain too.
    Clearly you don’t. All I’m hearing is “can’t” and “wont”
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,936

    nunuone said:

    Mr. Observer, and yet MPs standing for parties opposed to no deal refused to support a deal on multiple occasions.

    Yep, so we need another deal.

    There is no other deal.

    As you well know. Parliament voted agai8 the only deal 3 times, so now the only option left is no deal.

    EEA/EFTA would get through the Commons and be acceptable to a majority in the country.

    Brexit is tough. No Deal is no solution.

    How can you say that when EEA/EFTA was voted down in the indicative votes?
    Because the indicative votes where a sham. They were whipped.
    Didn't May give a free vote? Who whipped against EEA/EFTA in the Commons and why didn't MPs break the whip if they cared so much?
    No it was not a free vote for payroll MPs.
    LMFAO! EEA/EFTA was called Common Market 2.0

    Labour MPs were whipped to support Common Market 2.0

    Conservatives were given a free vote [except cabinet abstaining] on Common Market 2.0

    Considering the opposition whipped to support it and the government gave a free vote, tell me again how the Commons supports it?
    Tell me how that shows the Commons would not support it now?
    The Commons had their chance to support it. The Commons rule it out and every other deal out.
    Well fine. The Commons has also voted convincingly to rule ‘No Deal’ illegal. What is your point?
    The Commons should do its job, or the executive should do its to bring this to a conclusion.
    The Commons are legislating pretty damn effectively in my opinion.
    They really aren't. They are good at saying what shouldn't be done, but have no clue as to what should be done.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Food for thought for Con Remainers - Boris adds 10 points..
  • HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    'Victorious leave vote' - you do amuse so many on here

    Oh, and what happened to Boris 'nailed on' majority

    Why not be honest and at least admit he has had a bad week
    The opposition is refusing to have an election because they're panicking that Boris would get a majority on Oct 15.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    HYUFD said:

    Changes with May.

    Only a 3 point lead over Labour. Oosh.

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170373770487500800?s=21

    Tories up 10% on May, Labour down 3%, LDs up 6%, Brexit Party down 4%
    You going to take Battersea on those figures?
    Con majority?
  • Fenman said:

    Scott_P said:
    Yes, Rory's right. They're starting to sound scary.
    Tbf if there were secret talks between the EU and the rebels and action agreed to subvert the UK government's position then it is collusion with a foreign power. The government are the only people that can negotiate with the EU.
    The language is of course deliberately provocative and not necessary
    Weren't they just checking that the EU would indeed grant an extension if one was requested? If anything they were being helpful to Boris - no point losing him his majority if No Deal was nailed on anyway. Boris and Cummings should be thanking them for injecting a bit of clarity and thoroughness.
    The EU is not a foreign power. We are members.
    The EU is a foreign power for these purposes, the EU's constitution makes this clear. We are not a part of the 27.
    We’re all citizens of that ‘foreign power’.
    Not by choice. Many of us consider their position little different to that of an occupying power.
  • @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
    You should believe in Britain instead of talking us down.
    I do believe in Britain. I want our MPs to believe in Britain too.
    Clearly you don’t. All I’m hearing is “can’t” and “wont”
    As far as the EU are concerned, not as far as Britain is concerned.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    Fenman said:

    Scott_P said:
    Yes, Rory's right. They're starting to sound scary.
    Tbf if there were secret talks between the EU and the rebels and action agreed to subvert the UK government's position then it is collusion with a foreign power. The government are the only people that can negotiate with the EU.
    The language is of course deliberately provocative and not necessary
    Weren't they just checking that the EU would indeed grant an extension if one was requested? If anything they were being helpful to Boris - no point losing him his majority if No Deal was nailed on anyway. Boris and Cummings should be thanking them for injecting a bit of clarity and thoroughness.
    The EU is not a foreign power. We are members.
    The EU is a foreign power for these purposes, the EU's constitution makes this clear. We are not a part of the 27.
    We’re all citizens of that ‘foreign power’.
    Not by choice. Many of us consider their position little different to that of an occupying power.
    Not sure what relevance that has.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,291
    Jonathan said:

    JohnO said:

    C’mon, ye pollsters......

    Well, well, well, JohnO. Are you still a member?
    For sure.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
    You should believe in Britain instead of talking us down.
    I do believe in Britain. I want our MPs to believe in Britain too.
    Clearly you don’t. All I’m hearing is “can’t” and “wont”
    As far as the EU are concerned, not as far as Britain is concerned.
    You’re saying that the EU *wont* compromise unless they think the UK will so Boris cant even be bothered to try.

    He should do his job the lazy good for nothing.
  • Fenman said:

    Scott_P said:
    Yes, Rory's right. They're starting to sound scary.
    Tbf if there were secret talks between the EU and the rebels and action agreed to subvert the UK government's position then it is collusion with a foreign power. The government are the only people that can negotiate with the EU.
    The language is of course deliberately provocative and not necessary
    Weren't they just checking that the EU would indeed grant an extension if one was requested? If anything they were being helpful to Boris - no point losing him his majority if No Deal was nailed on anyway. Boris and Cummings should be thanking them for injecting a bit of clarity and thoroughness.
    The EU is not a foreign power. We are members.
    The EU is a foreign power for these purposes, the EU's constitution makes this clear. We are not a part of the 27.
    We’re all citizens of that ‘foreign power’.
    Which of the 27 foreign powers are we citizens of? France? Germany? Ireland? Belgium?
  • Changes with May.

    Only a 3 point lead over Labour. Oosh.

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170373770487500800?s=21

    The anti-No Deal/pro-No Deal split in the same band as the other pollsters.

  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    Fenman said:

    Scott_P said:
    Yes, Rory's right. They're starting to sound scary.
    Tbf if there were secret talks between the EU and the rebels and action agreed to subvert the UK government's position then it is collusion with a foreign power. The government are the only people that can negotiate with the EU.
    The language is of course deliberately provocative and not necessary
    Weren't they just checking that the EU would indeed grant an extension if one was requested? If anything they were being helpful to Boris - no point losing him his majority if No Deal was nailed on anyway. Boris and Cummings should be thanking them for injecting a bit of clarity and thoroughness.
    The EU is not a foreign power. We are members.
    The EU is a foreign power for these purposes, the EU's constitution makes this clear. We are not a part of the 27.
    We’re all citizens of that ‘foreign power’.
    Which of the 27 foreign powers are we citizens of? France? Germany? Ireland? Belgium?
    The EU.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869

    nunuone said:

    Mr. Observer, and yet MPs standing for parties opposed to no deal refused to support a deal on multiple occasions.

    Yep, so we need another deal.

    There is no other deal.

    As you well know. Parliament voted agai8 the only deal 3 times, so now the only option left is no deal.

    EEA/EFTA would get through the Commons and be acceptable to a majority in the country.

    Brexit is tough. No Deal is no solution.

    How can you say that when EEA/EFTA was voted down in the indicative votes?
    Because the indicative votes where a sham. They were whipped.
    Didn't May give a free vote? Who whipped against EEA/EFTA in the Commons and why didn't MPs break the whip if they cared so much?
    No it was not a free vote for payroll MPs.
    LMFAO! EEA/EFTA was called Common Market 2.0

    Labour MPs were whipped to support Common Market 2.0

    Conservatives were given a free vote [except cabinet abstaining] on Common Market 2.0

    Considering the opposition whipped to support it and the government gave a free vote, tell me again how the Commons supports it?
    Proving that the Tories' refusal to engage in exploring compromise options is why we are where we are
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152

    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    How’s that going to work when the bill says that the extension must be requested by the 19th October unless Parliament votes for no deal or a new Brexit deal?
    The Commons could vote for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop
    a day or two before and Boris can tell the EU to either take it and his technical solution for the Irish border or leave it
  • HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    'Victorious leave vote' - you do amuse so many on here

    Oh, and what happened to Boris 'nailed on' majority

    Why not be honest and at least admit he has had a bad week
    The opposition is refusing to have an election because they're panicking that Boris would get a majority on Oct 15.
    I agree entirely and have said so on many occassions.

    But it does not change my comments to be fair
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited September 2019
    HYUFD said:

    RobD said:

    Refusing royal assent would be outrageous. The Parliament has passed a law, you can't just ignore it because it is inconvenient.

    Parliament can change the PM if its not happy with the veto.
    The Queen can also change the PM if they refuse to obey Parliament.

    I expect Boris would resign before extending and become Leader of the Opposition but the Queen could ask Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman to form a Government and dismiss Boris if it is clear he has lost the confidence of the Commons and refuses to leave office and implement extension and in such circumstances she may have no choice but to do so.
    How does the Palace get to Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman? Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the Opposition; if Boris falls under a bus, there will be whichever minister takes over from him. It will not be a random backbencher (or the bus driver: old joke).
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    Changes with May.

    Only a 3 point lead over Labour. Oosh.

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170373770487500800?s=21

    The anti-No Deal/pro-No Deal split in the same band as the other pollsters.

    There is some significant churn there. Where is the +10 coming from? Some Labour and Brexit Party I guess but where else?
  • @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
    You should believe in Britain instead of talking us down.
    I do believe in Britain. I want our MPs to believe in Britain too.
    Clearly you don’t. All I’m hearing is “can’t” and “wont”
    As far as the EU are concerned, not as far as Britain is concerned.
    You’re saying that the EU *wont* compromise unless they think the UK will so Boris cant even be bothered to try.

    He should do his job the lazy good for nothing.
    I'm saying the EU have no reason to compromise if they think the UK will give them what they want if they don't.

    Its like working for a bad employer who keeps you on minimum wage despite you being one of the biggest contributers for the employer - so you say "I think you should give me a pay rise but if you say no I 100% definitely won't quit".
  • nunuone said:

    Mr. Observer, and yet MPs standing for parties opposed to no deal refused to support a deal on multiple occasions.

    Yep, so we need another deal.

    There is no other deal.

    As you well know. Parliament voted agai8 the only deal 3 times, so now the only option left is no deal.

    EEA/EFTA would get through the Commons and be acceptable to a majority in the country.

    Brexit is tough. No Deal is no solution.

    How can you say that when EEA/EFTA was voted down in the indicative votes?
    Because the indicative votes where a sham. They were whipped.
    Didn't May give a free vote? Who whipped against EEA/EFTA in the Commons and why didn't MPs break the whip if they cared so much?
    No it was not a free vote for payroll MPs.
    LMFAO! EEA/EFTA was called Common Market 2.0

    Labour MPs were whipped to support Common Market 2.0

    Conservatives were given a free vote [except cabinet abstaining] on Common Market 2.0

    Considering the opposition whipped to support it and the government gave a free vote, tell me again how the Commons supports it?
    Ok so it was cabinet rather than payroll, but the point still applies, it wasnt a free vote and the indicative votes had mass abstentions. Ken Clarkes Custom Union failed by 3 votes, the May cabinet would have been in favour if allowed to vote.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    How’s that going to work when the bill says that the extension must be requested by the 19th October unless Parliament votes for no deal or a new Brexit deal?
    The Commons could vote for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop
    a day or two before and Boris can tell the EU to either take it and his technical solution for the Irish border or leave it
    No he can’t because “leave it” has been made illegal. The EU will quite rightly simply ignore him.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,900
    GIN1138 said:



    Con +10 :open_mouth:

    A disappointing opening for the pro-Johnson brigade suggesting the week's events have had no real impact. Con+BP 46% Lab+LD+Green 49%.

    It's also worth noting the Con and LD rises at 16% don't quite match the Lab/BP/Green declines at 10% so where were the other 6% and where have they come from?

    https://opinionbee.uk/poll/4073/panelbase-sunday-times-14-21-may-2019-westminster-voting-intention

    The previous Panelbase numbers from May so it seems probable both CUK and UKIP have disappeared into oblivion as their combined 7% vote share has collapsed to just 1%.

  • HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    'Victorious leave vote' - you do amuse so many on here

    Oh, and what happened to Boris 'nailed on' majority

    Why not be honest and at least admit he has had a bad week
    The opposition is refusing to have an election because they're panicking that Boris would get a majority on Oct 15.
    I agree entirely and have said so on many occassions.

    But it does not change my comments to be fair
    Sure it does. You said "what happened to Boris 'nailed on' majority" - nothing has happened, the opposition are running scared of the election.

    I don't see how Boris has had a bad week. I think the opposition have walked into his trap.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
    You should believe in Britain instead of talking us down.
    I do believe in Britain. I want our MPs to believe in Britain too.
    Clearly you don’t. All I’m hearing is “can’t” and “wont”
    As far as the EU are concerned, not as far as Britain is concerned.
    You’re saying that the EU *wont* compromise unless they think the UK will so Boris cant even be bothered to try.

    He should do his job the lazy good for nothing.
    I'm saying the EU have no reason to compromise if they think the UK will give them what they want if they don't.

    Its like working for a bad employer who keeps you on minimum wage despite you being one of the biggest contributers for the employer - so you say "I think you should give me a pay rise but if you say no I 100% definitely won't quit".
    So you quit and suddenly you can’t pay your mortgage however the employer continues just as they did before with a little inconvenience.
  • Changes with May.

    Only a 3 point lead over Labour. Oosh.

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170373770487500800?s=21

    The anti-No Deal/pro-No Deal split in the same band as the other pollsters.

    There is some significant churn there. Where is the +10 coming from? Some Labour and Brexit Party I guess but where else?
    That occured to me
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    How’s that going to work when the bill says that the extension must be requested by the 19th October unless Parliament votes for no deal or a new Brexit deal?
    The Commons could vote for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop
    a day or two before and Boris can tell the EU to either take it and his technical solution for the Irish border or leave it
    No he can’t because “leave it” has been made illegal. The EU will quite rightly simply ignore him.
    Thank you for making my point. This is why Boris can't negotiate with the EU.
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    While we await the polls and the inevitable Conservative ratings of 40% or higher (apparently), where might we be going?

    1) Boris Johnson seems in a trap to this observer. He cannot ask for another extension (I have a ditch if he needs one) from the EU as that will finish him politically. Yet he doesn't have the numbers for a GE so it seems he must either jump or be pushed via a VoNC.

    2) Could an alternative Government with a limited mandate be formed? Perhaps but as none of the other parties can afford to be seen to empower Corbyn, the leader of that caretaker Government will be the one who has to ask the EU for an extension because the EU deals with the Government, not the Commons.

    If Johnson cannot accept the will of Parliament, he has to step aside if someone else can command a majority.

    3) The problem for the alternative Government is once extension has been achieved, what then? There may be a temptation to make it work - it would be fascinating to see such a n arrangement last until 2022. All those involved would have the common objectives of keeping out both Corbyn and Johnson (both of whom will have their own problems) and a pragmatic technocratic Government might not be the most unsuccessful or unpopular Government ever.

    4) By 2022, 2016 will look a long way off and arguing the point will seem like fighting old battles especially if the new Government is somehow able to achieve a period of relative stability.

    5) The truth though is once extension is achieved, it seems likely Labour will want an election but the Conservatives will still be angry and it's not easy to fight anger so it may be Johnson will be back after an election but will he stick to the agreed extension or simply walk out the week after he is elected?

    All this because some people thought a referendum was an election and MPs were delegates rather than representatives.

    No. All this because MPs forgot they were delegated to represent their constituents and not their own personal wishes and desires.

    I know you all love to quote Burke on this as if he is some sort of prophet but it is worth remembering that Burke's actions based on his own philosophy ruined the businesses and lives of many of those he represented and led to him being thrown out of office 2 years later.

    In the end you can make all these claims about 'delegates' rather than 'representatives' but most of the time it is just a smoke screen for MPs doing what they want and sod their constituents.
  • If other weekend polls are similar to the Panelbase and Survation ones, Johnson is in deep, deep trouble. Big if, though.
  • @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
    You should believe in Britain instead of talking us down.
    I do believe in Britain. I want our MPs to believe in Britain too.
    Clearly you don’t. All I’m hearing is “can’t” and “wont”
    As far as the EU are concerned, not as far as Britain is concerned.
    You’re saying that the EU *wont* compromise unless they think the UK will so Boris cant even be bothered to try.

    He should do his job the lazy good for nothing.
    I'm saying the EU have no reason to compromise if they think the UK will give them what they want if they don't.

    Its like working for a bad employer who keeps you on minimum wage despite you being one of the biggest contributers for the employer - so you say "I think you should give me a pay rise but if you say no I 100% definitely won't quit".
    So you quit and suddenly you can’t pay your mortgage however the employer continues just as they did before with a little inconvenience.
    So be it.

    And if you work hard, you will find a new employer [or could even start your own business] - whereas a bad employer who loses all their good employees won't be competitive for long.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,675

    Changes with May.

    Only a 3 point lead over Labour. Oosh.

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170373770487500800?s=21

    The anti-No Deal/pro-No Deal split in the same band as the other pollsters.

    Are the changes wrt to May (the month) or May (the PM)?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    How’s that going to work when the bill says that the extension must be requested by the 19th October unless Parliament votes for no deal or a new Brexit deal?
    The Commons could vote for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop
    a day or two before and Boris can tell the EU to either take it and his technical solution for the Irish border or leave it
    No he can’t because “leave it” has been made illegal. The EU will quite rightly simply ignore him.
    Thank you for making my point. This is why Boris can't negotiate with the EU.
    You do realise negotiations can still happen without the ultimate leverage?

    Going back to your employment analogy, you would never threaten to leave an employer if you want a good outcome. They would just tell you to f*ck off.

    You would propose a pay increase and give reasons why and they might offer something slightly less than you proposed.

    You must lead a very sad life if you think every negotiation must be done with a gun to the head.
  • If other weekend polls are similar to the Panelbase and Survation ones, Johnson is in deep, deep trouble. Big if, though.

    Be amusing if Corbyn reads these polls and thinks "I'd like a vote now afterall".
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
    You should believe in Britain instead of talking us down.
    I do believe in Britain. I want our MPs to believe in Britain too.
    Clearly you don’t. All I’m hearing is “can’t” and “wont”
    As far as the EU are concerned, not as far as Britain is concerned.
    You’re saying that the EU *wont* compromise unless they think the UK will so Boris cant even be bothered to try.

    He should do his job the lazy good for nothing.
    I'm saying the EU have no reason to compromise if they think the UK will give them what they want if they don't.

    Its like working for a bad employer who keeps you on minimum wage despite you being one of the biggest contributers for the employer - so you say "I think you should give me a pay rise but if you say no I 100% definitely won't quit".
    So you quit and suddenly you can’t pay your mortgage however the employer continues just as they did before with a little inconvenience.
    So be it.

    And if you work hard, you will find a new employer [or could even start your own business] - whereas a bad employer who loses all their good employees won't be competitive for long.
    Not giving into blackmail does not a bad employer make.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152
    edited September 2019

    If other weekend polls are similar to the Panelbase and Survation ones, Johnson is in deep, deep trouble. Big if, though.

    No he isn't, Tories plus DUP have a majority with Survation and even with Panelbase the Tories would still comfortably be largest party.

    However both pollsters tend to have higher Labour voteshare and lower LD voteshares than Yougov or Ipsos Mori for example yet even Panelbase has Labour losing 8 seats more than the Tories.

    It is Corbyn in more trouble than Boris albeit Swinson has most to cheer for now.
    https://twitter.com/Adam_IoM/status/1170374866056417280?s=20
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,414
    edited September 2019
    The nation is going down the rabbit hole. And 31% is no basis for going to the country confidently.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    How’s that going to work when the bill says that the extension must be requested by the 19th October unless Parliament votes for no deal or a new Brexit deal?
    The Commons could vote for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop
    a day or two before and Boris can tell the EU to either take it and his technical solution for the Irish border or leave it
    No he can’t because “leave it” has been made illegal. The EU will quite rightly simply ignore him.
    If the EU ignores a Commons majority for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop then Boris rightly goes into Opposition on a No Deal platform until they change their mind
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    HYUFD said:

    If other weekend polls are similar to the Panelbase and Survation ones, Johnson is in deep, deep trouble. Big if, though.

    No he isn't, Tories plus DUP have a majority with Survation and even with Panelbase the Tories would still comfortably be largest party.

    However both pollsters tend to have higher Labour voteshare and lower LD voteshares than Yougov or Ipsos Mori for example

    https://twitter.com/Adam_IoM/status/1170374866056417280?s=20
    What is going to happen to that majority if a few of the heroic 21 retain their seats?
  • You do realise negotiations can still happen without the ultimate leverage?

    Going back to your employment analogy, you would never threaten to leave an employer if you want a good outcome. They would just tell you to f*ck off.

    You would propose a pay increase and give reasons why and they might offer something slightly less than you proposed.

    You must lead a very sad life if you think every negotiation must be done with a gun to the head.

    Actually as both an employee and as an employer I've had discussions escalate to the point where a threat to leave was made. As an employee when I threatened to the first time I got what I wanted, when I did the second time I was told "OK thanks for all your help".

    As an employer I've done the same thing. I've had people threaten to leave and I've felt no choice but to give them what they wanted, I've also had people threaten to leave and I've said 'goodbye'. It happens.

    I don't feel every negotiation has to have a gun to the head but I have always felt that you should never metaphorically put a gun to the head if you're not prepared to pull the trigger. To do so and not pull the trigger leaves you impotent.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,675
    HYUFD said:

    If other weekend polls are similar to the Panelbase and Survation ones, Johnson is in deep, deep trouble. Big if, though.

    No he isn't, Tories plus DUP have a majority with Survation and even with Panelbase the Tories would still comfortably be largest party.

    However both pollsters tend to have higher Labour voteshare and lower LD voteshares than Yougov or Ipsos Mori for example

    https://twitter.com/Adam_IoM/status/1170374866056417280?s=20
    SNP +1? Nope. Doubt that.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,362
    RobD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    RobD said:

    Refusing royal assent would be outrageous. The Parliament has passed a law, you can't just ignore it because it is inconvenient.

    It would be... But we've long gone past the point where Parliamentary conventions actually count for anything.
    I dunno about you, but I quite like conventions, it's part of what being a Tory is all about.
    It is all bollox so they can control the plebs, rotten to the core.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    How’s that going to work when the bill says that the extension must be requested by the 19th October unless Parliament votes for no deal or a new Brexit deal?
    The Commons could vote for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop
    a day or two before and Boris can tell the EU to either take it and his technical solution for the Irish border or leave it
    No he can’t because “leave it” has been made illegal. The EU will quite rightly simply ignore him.
    If the EU ignores a Commons majority for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop then Boris rightly goes into Opposition on a No Deal platform until they change their mind
    They have already rejected the WA minus the backstop.

    This is like smashing your head against the wall repeatedly and expecting it to not hurt the 3rd time.
  • @HYUFD why isn’t BoZo *already* trying to get the EU to agree to a technical solution for the Irish border instead of parading around the country pretending he’s on an election campaign?

    Maybe he should do his job instead of lecturing MPs about doing theres?

    Because the EU won't compromise if they think the UK will.
    You should believe in Britain instead of talking us down.
    I do believe in Britain. I want our MPs to believe in Britain too.
    Clearly you don’t. All I’m hearing is “can’t” and “wont”
    As far as the EU are concerned, not as far as Britain is concerned.
    You’re saying that the EU *wont* compromise unless they think the UK will so Boris cant even be bothered to try.

    He should do his job the lazy good for nothing.
    I'm saying the EU have no reason to compromise if they think the UK will give them what they want if they don't.

    Its like working for a bad employer who keeps you on minimum wage despite you being one of the biggest contributers for the employer - so you say "I think you should give me a pay rise but if you say no I 100% definitely won't quit".
    So you quit and suddenly you can’t pay your mortgage however the employer continues just as they did before with a little inconvenience.
    So be it.

    And if you work hard, you will find a new employer [or could even start your own business] - whereas a bad employer who loses all their good employees won't be competitive for long.
    Not giving into blackmail does not a bad employer make.
    The analogy started with "Its like working for a bad employer ..."
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    You do realise negotiations can still happen without the ultimate leverage?

    Going back to your employment analogy, you would never threaten to leave an employer if you want a good outcome. They would just tell you to f*ck off.

    You would propose a pay increase and give reasons why and they might offer something slightly less than you proposed.

    You must lead a very sad life if you think every negotiation must be done with a gun to the head.

    Actually as both an employee and as an employer I've had discussions escalate to the point where a threat to leave was made. As an employee when I threatened to the first time I got what I wanted, when I did the second time I was told "OK thanks for all your help".

    As an employer I've done the same thing. I've had people threaten to leave and I've felt no choice but to give them what they wanted, I've also had people threaten to leave and I've said 'goodbye'. It happens.

    I don't feel every negotiation has to have a gun to the head but I have always felt that you should never metaphorically put a gun to the head if you're not prepared to pull the trigger. To do so and not pull the trigger leaves you impotent.
    Thank you for proving my point.
  • HYUFD said:

    If other weekend polls are similar to the Panelbase and Survation ones, Johnson is in deep, deep trouble. Big if, though.

    No he isn't, Tories plus DUP have a majority with Survation and even with Panelbase the Tories would still comfortably be largest party.

    However both pollsters tend to have higher Labour voteshare and lower LD voteshares than Yougov or Ipsos Mori for example

    https://twitter.com/Adam_IoM/status/1170374866056417280?s=20

    One net gain for the SNP strongly suggests Electoral Calculus is predicting Tory gains in Scotland. Hmmm.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Smith is in ridiculous form. Reminds me of Gooch in the 1990s.
  • You do realise negotiations can still happen without the ultimate leverage?

    Going back to your employment analogy, you would never threaten to leave an employer if you want a good outcome. They would just tell you to f*ck off.

    You would propose a pay increase and give reasons why and they might offer something slightly less than you proposed.

    You must lead a very sad life if you think every negotiation must be done with a gun to the head.

    Actually as both an employee and as an employer I've had discussions escalate to the point where a threat to leave was made. As an employee when I threatened to the first time I got what I wanted, when I did the second time I was told "OK thanks for all your help".

    As an employer I've done the same thing. I've had people threaten to leave and I've felt no choice but to give them what they wanted, I've also had people threaten to leave and I've said 'goodbye'. It happens.

    I don't feel every negotiation has to have a gun to the head but I have always felt that you should never metaphorically put a gun to the head if you're not prepared to pull the trigger. To do so and not pull the trigger leaves you impotent.
    Thank you for proving my point.
    What point?

    Making the threat to leave [and meaning it] changes things. Taking that off the table leaves you relatively impotent.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    HYUFD said:

    If other weekend polls are similar to the Panelbase and Survation ones, Johnson is in deep, deep trouble. Big if, though.

    No he isn't, Tories plus DUP have a majority with Survation and even with Panelbase the Tories would still comfortably be largest party.

    However both pollsters tend to have higher Labour voteshare and lower LD voteshares than Yougov or Ipsos Mori for example

    https://twitter.com/Adam_IoM/status/1170374866056417280?s=20

    One net gain for the SNP strongly suggests Electoral Calculus is predicting Tory gains in Scotland. Hmmm.

    Yeah ignore the Scottish results it's got con gain Lanark and Hamilton.
    Take 10 off the blue seat total
  • Quick question....what if PM resigns at the very last minute when the letter is due to be signed/delivered and there’s no time to find anyone else to sign/deliver?
  • HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    'Victorious leave vote' - you do amuse so many on here

    Oh, and what happened to Boris 'nailed on' majority

    Why not be honest and at least admit he has had a bad week
    The opposition is refusing to have an election because they're panicking that Boris would get a majority on Oct 15.
    I agree entirely and have said so on many occassions.

    But it does not change my comments to be fair
    Sure it does. You said "what happened to Boris 'nailed on' majority" - nothing has happened, the opposition are running scared of the election.

    I don't see how Boris has had a bad week. I think the opposition have walked into his trap.
    That is the problem when you become too tribal. Boris has had a dreadful week with the ill thought out rambling speech in front of the police and his brother walking out on him. He does not inspire confidence and is in a big mess

    Now, whether this is bad for him, and many on here attack him from their own tribal standpoint, time will tell. I do think the only way he can dig himself out of this is by some agreement with Farage to fight the remainers together, as brexit is seriously threatened

    He does run the risk of losing more moderate conservatives like me but what must be remembered, as bad as Boris is, I would never vote to enable a Corbyn government
  • Jonathan said:

    Changes with May.

    Only a 3 point lead over Labour. Oosh.

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170373770487500800?s=21

    The anti-No Deal/pro-No Deal split in the same band as the other pollsters.

    Are the changes wrt to May (the month) or May (the PM)?

    The month. PanelBase don’t do many UK-wide polls, I don’t think.

  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    How’s that going to work when the bill says that the extension must be requested by the 19th October unless Parliament votes for no deal or a new Brexit deal?
    The Commons could vote for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop
    a day or two before and Boris can tell the EU to either take it and his technical solution for the Irish border or leave it
    No he can’t because “leave it” has been made illegal. The EU will quite rightly simply ignore him.
    If the EU ignores a Commons majority for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop then Boris rightly goes into Opposition on a No Deal platform until they change their mind
    They have already rejected the WA minus the backstop.

    This is like smashing your head against the wall repeatedly and expecting it to not hurt the 3rd time.
    They rejected it when rejecting it means we remain with an extension.

    They never rejected it when rejecting it means we leave and they have an immediate hard border.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152

    If other weekend polls are similar to the Panelbase and Survation ones, Johnson is in deep, deep trouble. Big if, though.

    Be amusing if Corbyn reads these polls and thinks "I'd like a vote now afterall".
    Not if he is going to lose at least 21 Labour seats as Panelbase predicts
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Problem with seat calculators are they assume the Brexit party will stand in every seats - that’s far from a given.
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    Opinium is out..
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    HYUFD said:

    The Commons could vote for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop
    a day or two before and Boris can tell the EU to either take it and his technical solution for the Irish border or leave it

    Even if Johnson was so inclined to bring it back, it wouldn't pass now.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    The Tories and Brexit Party ought to make a pact since they're on about 46% combined. But they probably won't since Cummings apparently can't stand Farage.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152

    HYUFD said:

    If other weekend polls are similar to the Panelbase and Survation ones, Johnson is in deep, deep trouble. Big if, though.

    No he isn't, Tories plus DUP have a majority with Survation and even with Panelbase the Tories would still comfortably be largest party.

    However both pollsters tend to have higher Labour voteshare and lower LD voteshares than Yougov or Ipsos Mori for example

    https://twitter.com/Adam_IoM/status/1170374866056417280?s=20

    One net gain for the SNP strongly suggests Electoral Calculus is predicting Tory gains in Scotland. Hmmm.

    It also ignores the Labour losses in Scotland to the SNP too though
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Artist said:

    Opinium is out..

    Lol its hilarious
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138

    If other weekend polls are similar to the Panelbase and Survation ones, Johnson is in deep, deep trouble. Big if, though.

    Boris needs that Brwxiy Party share to be below 12ish %
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    How’s that going to work when the bill says that the extension must be requested by the 19th October unless Parliament votes for no deal or a new Brexit deal?
    The Commons could vote for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop
    a day or two before and Boris can tell the EU to either take it and his technical solution for the Irish border or leave it
    No he can’t because “leave it” has been made illegal. The EU will quite rightly simply ignore him.
    If the EU ignores a Commons majority for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop then Boris rightly goes into Opposition on a No Deal platform until they change their mind
    They have already rejected the WA minus the backstop.

    This is like smashing your head against the wall repeatedly and expecting it to not hurt the 3rd time.
    And the Commons has already rejected the WA with the backstop 3 times
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    10% Tory lead in Opinium
  • That is the problem when you become too tribal. Boris has had a dreadful week with the ill thought out rambling speech in front of the police and his brother walking out on him. He does not inspire confidence and is in a big mess

    Now, whether this is bad for him, and many on here attack him from their own tribal standpoint, time will tell. I do think the only way he can dig himself out of this is by some agreement with Farage to fight the remainers together, as brexit is seriously threatened

    He does run the risk of losing more moderate conservatives like me but what must be remembered, as bad as Boris is, I would never vote to enable a Corbyn government

    The one dreadful element you mentioned I agree with was his brother walking out. He made a foolish mistake offering his brother a job given his brother was an extreme remainer, one of the few to leave May's cabinet on the remain side of the fence. Silly mistake that came back to bite him.
  • nunuone said:

    nunuone said:

    Let's be honest here, if Boris refuses to ask for an extension under dubious interpertation of the no deal law, what exactly can Parliament do about it?

    VONC him and install a PM who will ask for the extension.
    Yeah the rebel tories and libdems are not voting for Corbyn as PM, the only alternative
    FWIW I think the LDs might be persuaded to swallow their objections to Corbyn in return for a commitment that a GONU will legislate for a second referendum. We are not there yet but things could move very fast if Johnson threatens not to obey the law. A week ago nobody would have expected the opposition parties to have shown the unity and coherence that have enabled them take control of the parliamentary agenda as they have done.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Given the current Parliament clearly has no interest in respecting the victorious Leave vote of 2016 I can certainly understand Boris in his determination to stand his ground and refuse to extend even if defying an Act of Parliament to do so.

    However assuming the anti No Deal Bill gets Royal Assent next week rather than disobey the law Boris should shift course to try and get the EU to agree a technical solution for the Irish border as an alternative to the backstop in the EU Council of October 17th and then get an amended Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons (which the Brady amendment suggested it would).


    If the EU does not agree to remove the backstop from the Withdrawal Agreement then Boris should resign as PM by October 31st and take the Tories into opposition on a No Deal platform until the backstop is removed and let the Commons elect someone else as PM to extend. If they have not done so by the 31st as Lord Sumption, a Supreme Court judge said today a civil servant can sign the extension on behalf of the Government instead

    How’s that going to work when the bill says that the extension must be requested by the 19th October unless Parliament votes for no deal or a new Brexit deal?
    The Commons could vote for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop
    a day or two before and Boris can tell the EU to either take it and his technical solution for the Irish border or leave it
    No he can’t because “leave it” has been made illegal. The EU will quite rightly simply ignore him.
    If the EU ignores a Commons majority for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop then Boris rightly goes into Opposition on a No Deal platform until they change their mind
    They have already rejected the WA minus the backstop.

    This is like smashing your head against the wall repeatedly and expecting it to not hurt the 3rd time.
    And the Commons has already rejected the WA with the backstop 3 times
    and?
  • SMITH OUT!
This discussion has been closed.