One thing the existing House of Commons can agree on (it can’t on anything else) is that it doesn’t want No Deal. It’s now voted several times to this effect and, in fact, it’s as determined to prevent No Deal as the Government is to deliver Brexit by 31st October at all costs. It has been trying to do everything it can to stop it: delaying a General Election, challenging the proroguing of Parliament, and, now, passing the Hillary Benn Bill into law.
Comments
Hmmmm..... Not seeing it myself.
https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/1170602085102084096?s=20
https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/1170603831119482880?s=20
https://twitter.com/toadmeister/status/1170816229885599746?s=20
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1170919954692096000?s=20
The details I would quibble with are the possibility of EUCO kicking us out - why shut down free entertainment ? - and the positioning of the minor parties. The SNP, LDs, Plaid et al won't abstain on the WA now. They'll stand by revocation for the historical record and narrative purposes. Now that it's confirmed Bercow will be challenged by the Conservatives in the GE he's little to gain by moderation on SO24. As long as the majority for extension exists it will get its way.
And would they really vote for a WA they have consistently voted against, in preference to trying for some other hail Mary solution ?
One thing you are almost certainly right about us that a lot of talk will be going on during prorogation about an alternate PM, since, only that might provide the ‘change of circumstances’ required by the French to agree to an extension.
That would, of course, need to come with a more or less off the shelf plan, too. Norway style solution rather than May’s WA ?
Norway, of course, would make a great deal more sense from the POV of both the SNP and the Lib Dems.
And what ridiculousness that it might take until late October 2019 before MPs decide its the last chance saloon and no other options remain but to take down the government. Its herculean levels of indecision and over caution.
https://twitter.com/harrydcarr/status/1170727036916260866?s=20
Hunt is young enough to have long term leadership elections, leading an administration largely compromised of Labour mps (Corbyn as Deputy Pm, Abbot as Home Sec, Jo Swainson at Education ?) would end them for ever.
Sure, he might throw away his career in the interests of the country, but I wouldn't bet on it......
The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.
So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.
Is it possible that all the MPs who oppose it won’t be able to see that their only chance to stop it is to pull together as one, and organise themselves to form an administration, yet alone make it work?
Yes, absolutely. But they do now have several weeks during prorogation where the smarter ones will work this out.
They aren’t going to spend much time at Conference Party fringe events this year.
Better Hunt than Johnson. MPs were morons to put the buffoon through to the final two.
His first thought there is to position himself as a unity candidate if (huge if) Boris were to resign or to be forced to resign as Tory party leader, but in this emergency case scenario that I’ve outlined that could also be offered -to use his words, generously and magnanimously - across party lines in the national interest, and he’d be able to say he was the one that finally delivered Brexit too.
The deal that has failed to gain support for two reasons, political advantage and questions over the content. Adopting it now will open lots of politicians up to negative messages.
If we want to be in, go for the Euro and full fat membership. If we don't, then leave, and look at EEA / EFTA at leisure.
In the short term the extremes could be the best options.
The attraction of Revoke is that it is purely in our hands and can be done expeditiously, unlike the other options, and doesn't preclude those at a later stage. Not likely though.
More shenanigans today no doubt.
Lol - this group of MPs will never pass a deal.
The more obvious solution is to change our MPs.
There are plenty of anti No Dealers who want Brexit, just not at any price.
I expect it would have support from Labour Leavers, Tories who previously voted for May’s Deal and some moderate Tory Leavers too.
Thank God a coalition of wealthy tax avoiders are on hand to rescue us from the liberal metropolitan elite and their fiendish European ways.
And that's it, really.
Personally, I don't see any of these scenarios playing out in the time scale indicated. If Parliament is determined to stop no deal there would have to be a VoNC today, not in October. The view has been expressed that even if Parliament is prorogued it can be recalled and an application to recall it so that an alternative administration with a clear majority can have a resolution passed in terms of the FTPA allowing it to take office would clearly be granted.
Whether the opposition has been sufficiently galvanised by Boris remains to be seen. Rats in a sack probably have more common purpose than we have seen to date.
For some others (mainly within the Conservative Party), it was about power and personal ambition.
For others (mainly in opposition), it was not to give the Conservatives the advantage of saying that they'd delivered Brexit.
In other words, not much: but people are playing games with our futures and f**king up the country. And that's just the leavers ...
I felt when it was offered that it was as good as we could get, and would give us the chance of Returning once we had, collectively, come to our senses.
Also is there any significance in the piece of paper that Barclay signed a week or so ago, which the Brexiteers were making a lot of (claiming it made Oct 31st departure 'irreversible' - or something close to?)
Spartans rejected it because any agreement that the EU would agree to must be a bad deal. QED.
Labour rejected it because any agreement that the Tories would agree must be a bad deal. QED.
And thanks to the FTPA an election is not in the Government control.
Why? Because they all rely on important negotiations in good faith. And sadly, we as a country have shown f-all good faith throughout this mess. The EU countries cannot trust that anything they negotiate with us will be able to get through own own parliament.
There'll be a time when they just say: "sod you, just go."
And who could blame them?
Personally a May's Deal or Remain referendum is just about the only way out of this mess.Although as you point out May's Deal actually only delays the final decision 2 more years.
Leave would be too stupid to argue for May's deal so we would probably end up remaining due to a boycott.
Besides, it's just another scenario where too much could have gone wrong. For one thing, it would have done nothing to staunch the ERGers or BXPers hatred of any deal that is not the EU surrendering to us and giving us Spain and France.
We really do need a GE ASAP.
It obviously couldn’t work without the bulk of the Labour Party also behind it too.
If you read my thread header again you’ll see i expressly said the Lib Dems wouldn’t be in it.
I note that McDonnell was interviewed over the weekend as saying Labour would seek to bring back the WA ‘with minor tweaks’ as there isn’t time for a renegotiation (Corbyn’s views are a little more opaque), so that gives support to your proposition.
I’m still not quite seeing how the SNP and LibDems come on board with that, though nothing is impossible.
I am not sure that we have shown bad faith. We have just been totally incoherent and unable to show any consistency of purpose which makes negotiating with us a bit of a nightmare.
The country is split down the middle, and while there might be overall differences in social class, wealth, average age, or education, it is absurd to pretend a monopoly of vice or virtue on either.
Meanwhile Rory continues to try and make his elevator pitch - And Lord Sumption shreds all the various idiotic ideas put forward by some of the Borisites to undermine the extension law.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33625612
1) EU not to agree extension (20%? and that feels toppy)
2) SNP & LD to abstain in that scenario (10%)
3) Hunt chosen ahead of Clarke, Hammond, Stewart of similar standing and more acceptable to other parties having stood up against the tory leadership (5%)
So as scripted a negligible chance, however the bet could win in other ways, most likely Tories get a small majority and leadership challenge within a couple of years allows Hunt to campaign as the unifying and competent tory leader not tainted by the failed Johnson era. I think that is more likely than the scenario described and also enough to make him value at 66/1.
What is the significance of the Kinnock Amendment that slipped through?
Must be trolling 🙄
Leaver: you think we're all stupid don't you?
Remainer: not at all!
Leaver: [says something stupid]
Remainer: actually, that was kind of stupid.
Leaver: Gotcha!
[Repeat as infinitum]
If Parliament doesn’t want No Deal it should sack the Executive
It’s a clear an unambiguous right of Parliament
And yet they bend and break the rules because they are afraid of the consequences
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/israeli-pm-wrongly-refers-to-boris-johnson-as-boris-yeltsin/ar-AAGZZuo?ocid=spartanntp
https://youtu.be/AFOe_b0PIvM
An interesting point is whether not obeying the law while in public office disqualifies people from seeking public office. Does anyone know? If so, quite a few political careers could be ending quite soon.
On vanilla I can only see.headline and first para on my phone
Tomfoolery doesn't belong to one side alone.
Given that she failed to do that why should any other party vote for a deal created by a party that won't accept it.
If push comes to shove they will replace the executive but it will be a last resort.
Without party ties we would surely have left on a soft brexit by now, 70% of the country would accept it (even if not delighted by it) and our relationship with Europe would slip back in importance to a top 5/10 issue rather than the only thing that matters.
It has no legal force but it could be politically significant
Remember people remember bad things that happen to them..