The better Joanne Swinson does in taking votes from Labour, the greater the chance the Tories have of an overall majority which will be all the better to destroy a few Liberal shibboleths. Every cloud, etc
Is that right though?
I have my punting hat on this morning and my first reaction was that if this is a genuine move forward by the Peril, it might make Tory Most Seats more likely but a Tory Overall Majority less likely.
Today should be like a hits compilation in the SC.
Various interventions and crucially Lord Pannick is the last speaker .
At this point I’d say its impossible to call re the lawfulness of the decision however in terms of justiciable I’d put that as a much better chance as it’s hard to see the court giving a blank check to a future PM .
Unpopular view: the barristers matter much less than most people imagine. The idea that a Supreme Court judge is going to be persuaded by oratory or skilful argument is rather hopeful. These are extremely clever people who know all the tricks and who will have been thinking very deeply about this for themselves. The barristers’ most valuable function is poking holes in their opponents’ arguments.
I agree the judges will be basing most of their decision on the written arguments and are likely already to be very close to a decision of have made it already .
However Pannick is a superb QC . I’m sure he’ll come up with a great closing argument .
This is good for Jo Swinson but (depending on the dates) might be more about being on telly at the conference than the policy: Bollocks to Brexit was not coined last week. Labour's attack on private schools might also be a factor. Let us see if it outlasts the conference season.
Boris, Cummings and CCHQ will no doubt be commissioning more detailed private polls to work out where the LibDem resurgence threatens Tory or Labour constituencies. This might be crucial in a snap election.
Can somebody please give me a moral reasoning for the existence of private schools?
They seem to be the polar opposite of meritocratic, same as inheritance tax I guess.
... if someone wants to send their children to private school for whatever reason that is their choice...
But those schools should be fully self-financing an not relying on handouts tax breaks and other forms of subsidy from the public sector.
A bit of current anecdotal information. In our area, we are seeing a lot of previously committed Tory members leaving and joining the Liberal Democrats, but their vote is down maybe only a quarter on 2017. With Labour, no active members have defected locally, but their vote has collapsed, and each time it is Corbyn given as the reason. The SNP are slightly down overall, and support for independence is down quite a bit. Implication is Labour hurt more than Tories and unless Kier Starmer replaces Corbyn very soon, the will take a whipping. The Tory vote is fragile, but still just about holding on
LOL, Cicero lives in Tallinn, Estonia.
That is why he posts such nonsense about Wales & Scotland.
A bit of current anecdotal information. In our area, we are seeing a lot of previously committed Tory members leaving and joining the Liberal Democrats, but their vote is down maybe only a quarter on 2017. With Labour, no active members have defected locally, but their vote has collapsed, and each time it is Corbyn given as the reason. The SNP are slightly down overall, and support for independence is down quite a bit. Implication is Labour hurt more than Tories and unless Kier Starmer replaces Corbyn very soon, the will take a whipping. The Tory vote is fragile, but still just about holding on
That's one heck of a lot of detailed inferences from anecdotal evidence.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
the DUP are trying to get out of a cul de sac of their own making
You’ll note that Foster’s apparent move is hedged around with a number of conditions. It might be significant, but I’m not sure how much more wiggle room it gives the government.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
This is the way forward. But the DUP has still a distance to travel. As I’ve argued for a while, the solution is to make the backstop NI only and subject to ratification by referendum - and also something that can be withdrawn from if a majority in NI want that.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
This is the way forward. But the DUP has still a distance to travel. As I’ve argued for a while, the solution is to make the backstop NI only and subject to ratification by referendum - and also something that can be withdrawn from if a majority in NI want that.
I am pretty sure that this will prove a temporary state of affairs and not be reflected in other polling (which also tends to have the Tories somewhat lower) but at what point do Labour really start to panic? 70+ of their MPs are in serious danger of having their careers cut short on these numbers and they could find themselves a longer way from power than they have been for a very long time having not only lost an election but got themselves in a situation where its very difficult to win the election after that.
The Tories will be looking at the 14% for TBP and thinking, push comes to shove, we'll have some of that, but where do Labour look?
David, I agree, you can only dress up a pig with lipstick for a very short spell.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
Few doubt that she's buyable. It's only ever been a question of how much and Boris can provide riches beyond her wildest dreams.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
Perhaps she should form a Stormont powersharing government to find out what support exists...
Off topic, I had one of my best meals of the year last night, in a small restaurant in Szeged called Tiszavirag. Should any reader find themselves in the area, I strongly recommend it.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
the DUP are trying to get out of a cul de sac of their own making
They’re now desperate to avoid a no deal in which they’ll own the consequences . I hope they get humiliated which they totally deserve . Just rename the backstop the safety net and tell the DUP to like it or lump it.
This is good for Jo Swinson but (depending on the dates) might be more about being on telly at the conference than the policy: Bollocks to Brexit was not coined last week. Labour's attack on private schools might also be a factor. Let us see if it outlasts the conference season.
Boris, Cummings and CCHQ will no doubt be commissioning more detailed private polls to work out where the LibDem resurgence threatens Tory or Labour constituencies. This might be crucial in a snap election.
Can somebody please give me a moral reasoning for the existence of private schools?
They seem to be the polar opposite of meritocratic, same as inheritance tax I guess.
... if someone wants to send their children to private school for whatever reason that is their choice...
But those schools should be fully self-financing an not relying on handouts tax breaks and other forms of subsidy from the public sector.
They save the public a fortune , so debatable. They also provide lots of scholarships etc so they give plenty back for the charity status and majority are not actually making a fortune. It is the very few at the top that have all the cash and have no need of any subsidy.
Off topic, I had one of my best meals of the year last night, in a small restaurant in Szeged called Tiszavirag. Should any reader find themselves in the area, I strongly recommend it.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
This is the way forward. But the DUP has still a distance to travel. As I’ve argued for a while, the solution is to make the backstop NI only and subject to ratification by referendum - and also something that can be withdrawn from if a majority in NI want that.
Today should be like a hits compilation in the SC.
Various interventions and crucially Lord Pannick is the last speaker .
At this point I’d say its impossible to call re the lawfulness of the decision however in terms of justiciable I’d put that as a much better chance as it’s hard to see the court giving a blank check to a future PM .
Unpopular view: the barristers matter much less than most people imagine. The idea that a Supreme Court judge is going to be persuaded by oratory or skilful argument is rather hopeful. These are extremely clever people who know all the tricks and who will have been thinking very deeply about this for themselves. The barristers’ most valuable function is poking holes in their opponents’ arguments.
I would agree with this. Also in the SC written advocacy in advance of the hearing is at least as important as oral advocacy, probably more so. In my cases there the written case took huge amounts of work and angst. My seniors spent a long time on their speech but the main purpose of standing up was so that the Justices could ask their questions arising from the written case and address their concerns. They didn't really need to hear what they had already read.
FWIW, the questions seemed to me to tend to come from a place favourable to the idea of justiciability, but I agree that predicting the verdict is a crapshoot.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
the DUP are trying to get out of a cul de sac of their own making
You’ll note that Foster’s apparent move is hedged around with a number of conditions. It might be significant, but I’m not sure how much more wiggle room it gives the government.
The DUP dont open doors just for the sake of it. Their aim of no hard border and a leaving deal sits at odds with their current political positioning. It could be they now see the Brexit end game is in sight and its time to make some moves. They wont want to be on the losing side when the deed is done.
Today should be like a hits compilation in the SC.
Various interventions and crucially Lord Pannick is the last speaker .
At this point I’d say its impossible to call re the lawfulness of the decision however in terms of justiciable I’d put that as a much better chance as it’s hard to see the court giving a blank check to a future PM .
Unpopular view: the barristers matter much less than most people imagine. The idea that a Supreme Court judge is going to be persuaded by oratory or skilful argument is rather hopeful. These are extremely clever people who know all the tricks and who will have been thinking very deeply about this for themselves. The barristers’ most valuable function is poking holes in their opponents’ arguments.
I agree the judges will be basing most of their decision on the written arguments and are likely already to be very close to a decision of have made it already .
However Pannick is a superb QC . I’m sure he’ll come up with a great closing argument .
I am pretty sure that this will prove a temporary state of affairs and not be reflected in other polling (which also tends to have the Tories somewhat lower) but at what point do Labour really start to panic? 70+ of their MPs are in serious danger of having their careers cut short on these numbers and they could find themselves a longer way from power than they have been for a very long time having not only lost an election but got themselves in a situation where its very difficult to win the election after that.
The Tories will be looking at the 14% for TBP and thinking, push comes to shove, we'll have some of that, but where do Labour look?
David, I agree, you can only dress up a pig with lipstick for a very short spell.
In Scotland I don't see the SNP making much progress at the moment but they look like that they will be facing a much more fragmented Unionist vote than they did in 2017 which seems likely to have them regain a number of seats. All bar 1 of Labour's for a start. And if 5k Tories decide not to vote tactically for Swinson this time to keep the SNP out, she is in trouble.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
This is the way forward. But the DUP has still a distance to travel. As I’ve argued for a while, the solution is to make the backstop NI only and subject to ratification by referendum - and also something that can be withdrawn from if a majority in NI want that.
She has rejected that idea afresh.
Yep - that’s why there is still a way to go. But once you’ve blinked, there’s no going back. The DUP will need the ERG to save them, but I suspect they’re about to find out that all those English Tory MPs promising to die in a ditch for loyalist Ulster are only too happy to forget everything they said!
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
the DUP are trying to get out of a cul de sac of their own making
I thought their chosen method of attempting to avoid a dead end was to floor it, and try to smash through the dead end. The dead end doesn't believe in the uk like they do
This is good for Jo Swinson but (depending on the dates) might be more about being on telly at the conference than the policy: Bollocks to Brexit was not coined last week. Labour's attack on private schools might also be a factor. Let us see if it outlasts the conference season.
Boris, Cummings and CCHQ will no doubt be commissioning more detailed private polls to work out where the LibDem resurgence threatens Tory or Labour constituencies. This might be crucial in a snap election.
Can somebody please give me a moral reasoning for the existence of private schools?
They seem to be the polar opposite of meritocratic, same as inheritance tax I guess.
Because people have the right to free association and to determine (within limits prescribed by the state) how they want their children to be educated
We’re not pawns to be allocated to Tractor Factory No5 by some faceless man in Whitehall
When I moved back to Scotland as a single dad I decided to put my son in boarding school and work like crazy. As a result he has a great degree and career and I have a successful company. My choice. Who did I hurt by my choice. My 50 or so staff who have a good job? No only the jealous non entities who prefer to criticise than do. Oh and as a result my son and I have a great relationship.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
Few doubt that she's buyable. It's only ever been a question of how much and Boris can provide riches beyond her wildest dreams.
Stuff their mouths with gold.
One of the biggest problems for Corbyn is that in spite of his Brexit fence sitting, his ratings amongst leave voters are terrible. A lifetime of euroscepticism and his call to invoke Article 50 on 24th June 2016 don't seem to be helping him.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
Perhaps she should form a Stormont powersharing government to find out what support exists...
last time I looked it wasnt her stopping it.
maybe SF should take their seats again and give their electorate some political representation. Who knows, it might even justify them taking their salaries ?
Sir John is obviously not happy with Boris.. frankly its hard to support Boris if you have a sensible hat on...
Rank hypocrisy from the man who prorogued Parliament for two weeks to avoid his own political embarrassment and being held to account for corruption in his party.
It will be interesting to see how their Lordships weigh that in the balance.
Will they agree with you Richard, or will yours be a dissenting verdict? PB holds its breath.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
the DUP are trying to get out of a cul de sac of their own making
They’re now desperate to avoid a no deal in which they’ll own the consequences . I hope they get humiliated which they totally deserve . Just rename the backstop the safety net and tell the DUP to like it or lump it.
they dont sound anywhere near as desperate as yourself.
Fair point, they don't know, it's possible. I just think they've learnt the wrong lesson from coalition. The problem is not that there was a coalition, it's that their voters felt misled. They thought they'd voted for PR, against trident, against tuition fees. Actually they'd voted for a softer Tory govt. I'm probably just being irritable though it's true.
Tuition fees hurt the LDs so much because it was a major manifesto point. Then in the coalition agreement, they just ripped it up and accepted the Conservative's 9000 Pounds per year, the complete opposite.
A softer tory government was certainly better then a full tory government. Unfortunately the LDs in government started to actively support Conservative policies in the name of "collective agreement".
By comparison with Brexit, Tuition Fees is pretty small potatoes, isn't it?
Hmm, this feels like the beginning of a banking system failure. Question for those of you who were in the middle of it last time, how long did it take to find out which banks weren't to be trusted with overnight funding?
It does feel like all of the banks are about to give each other a very wide berth.
Anything in particular?
I had dinner last night who went out of his way to emphasis that his firm always made sure it had a lot of liquidity
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
the DUP are trying to get out of a cul de sac of their own making
Yes, but at least they have realised it. And only 12 months after everyone else!
"Speaking to reporters Wednesday night, following TIME’s publication of the photo, Trudeau apologized: “I shouldn’t have done that. I should have known better and I didn’t. I’m really sorry.” When asked if he thought the photograph was racist, he said, “Yes it was. I didn’t consider it racist at the time, but now we know better.”
This happened 18 years ago, before Trudeau was even an MP and involved him blacking up as a genie for an Aladdin show.
There are many things to criticise Trudeau for but this is not one of them and indeed the Muslim Council of Canada has accepted his apology
This is good for Jo Swinson but (depending on the dates) might be more about being on telly at the conference than the policy: Bollocks to Brexit was not coined last week. Labour's attack on private schools might also be a factor. Let us see if it outlasts the conference season.
Boris, Cummings and CCHQ will no doubt be commissioning more detailed private polls to work out where the LibDem resurgence threatens Tory or Labour constituencies. This might be crucial in a snap election.
Can somebody please give me a moral reasoning for the existence of private schools?
They seem to be the polar opposite of meritocratic, same as inheritance tax I guess.
Because people have the right to free association and to determine (within limits prescribed by the state) how they want their children to be educated
We’re not pawns to be allocated to Tractor Factory No5 by some faceless man in Whitehall
Another reason is many state schools don't provide the expertise, tuition and facilities that many students need to make any progress. Small class sizes does help as well, providing a better, quieter, more soothing helpful environment for learning. Many of the students I taught at a "3rd division" private school managed to get to university with their clutch of much better expected school exam results. Granted we weren't Eton/Harrow so we weren't contributing to the government/civil service/top brass, but most of the students were able to enter the job market and get a good career.
Yes absolutely. You think David Allen Green is anything more than extreme partisan hack who hates Brexit and the government?
The father Tweeted his POV and LauraK quoted and retweeted what he had to say. To call that irresponsible is bizarre. LauraK didn't "out" the father he put it out himself!
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
the DUP are trying to get out of a cul de sac of their own making
Yes, but at least they have realised it. And only 12 months after everyone else!
I suspect not, with May Id guess they saw nothing would pass so why move, now things have changed theyll reposition accordingly.
Women being given bodyguards to attend the Labour Party conference is not something I will easily forget.
The attacks on her will have little impact as its on twitter and everyone on twitter just exists in their own echo chamber.. What will stick is female reporters needing body guards to attend a conference, something which will be more widely reported and just adds to the narrative (along with the antisemitism) that Labour are the new nasty party.. Now whether that is fair of not doesn't really matter its the perception..
The LDs have a shiny new leader, Boris is successfully maintaining his grip on the leave vote and Labour just seem to be in a downward spiral.. They really need to have a good conference focusing on policies other than brexit, the problem is the likes of Tom Watson will stir enough Brexit drama up that once again all focus will end up being about how they can't decide on a coherent strategy
Is the centre still a relevant term? It is used again and again without definition.
As John Curtice has pointed out Leave vs Remain cuts right across the left/right economic divide. It doesn't tell you much about where people stand on the NHS, taxes, privatisation, capitalism.
This is good for Jo Swinson but (depending on the dates) might be more about being on telly at the conference than the policy: Bollocks to Brexit was not coined last week. Labour's attack on private schools might also be a factor. Let us see if it outlasts the conference season.
Boris, Cummings and CCHQ will no doubt be commissioning more detailed private polls to work out where the LibDem resurgence threatens Tory or Labour constituencies. This might be crucial in a snap election.
Can somebody please give me a moral reasoning for the existence of private schools?
They seem to be the polar opposite of meritocratic, same as inheritance tax I guess.
There is more to morality than class envy socialism or classical liberalism.
Private schools offer choice and raise standards and offer scholarships and bursaries, we need more private schools not less.
There is also nothing at all wrong with passing on family wealth and assets and the best achievement of the Cameron Government in my view was raising the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
Perhaps she should form a Stormont powersharing government to find out what support exists...
She’d be delighted to
My understanding is that Sinn Fein don't want Stormont to sit while she is leader and she doesn’t want to stand down?
Agree with OGH that Labour is currently getting squeezed on Brexit between the Leave Deal or No Deal position of Boris and the Tories and the revoke position of Swinson and the LDs as the new Yougov shows
I think a lot of people criticising the Lib Dem’s policy are doing so for party political reasons (obviously) and because they are annoyed that their own parties aren’t in a position to replicate. Suggesting that the LibDems would struggle to justify their position in an election is, I think, unjustified, and is anyway arguably far easier than their previous (sham) “referendum to remain” policy. They never supported the idea of the original referendum in the first place, argued against the result’s legitimacy, pointed out it was only anyway “advisory”, voted against triggering article 50, and have previously implied that they wouldn’t be inclined to implement Brexit even if it followed from a second referendum. Given all the above I think their current position is far easier to justify, and one they and their activists are more comfortable with (which is important).
And I think it’s pretty clear it’s a policy which could be easily pivoted to a referendum if the circumstances in which it is pledged (a majority after an election) isn’t achieved. The responsibility for producing the “leave” option on the ballot paper (the major problem for anyone advocating a referendum) and implementing it if it came to pass, would then be down to others.
Sir John is obviously not happy with Boris.. frankly its hard to support Boris if you have a sensible hat on...
Rank hypocrisy from the man who prorogued Parliament for two weeks to avoid his own political embarrassment and being held to account for corruption in his party.
Except he was held to account - in the general election which immediately followed.
Boris wanted a general election and was denied it.
At the time of the prorogation, BoZo was saying that he didn't want an election. Of course we know that he is a habitual liar, but the timeline is in that order.
Why can't he just be honest and respect the rules?
He did
He played to the letter of the rules rather than some sportsmanlike interpretation (taking his inspiration from Grieve and Bercow)
There has been an appeal and the umpire is currently assessing the situation
Why should the LibDems not stand against these people? Surely they would hope to exploit the TIGgers splitting the votes for their old parties.
I agree and I am certainly no LD.. Why do them any favours by standing aside.. even if Greive stands as an independent he has zero chance of holding his seat and the same goes for Soubry in hers. I don't know about Grapes seat so can't comment but I would think it unlikely he holds on..
Why would the LDs risk the chance of having their own true candidate be victorious in order to support people who by their very actions can be guaranteed to be loyal and who haven't even joined the LDs like some of the others have
Well...as someone with an interest in Labour winning Broxtowe, I'm pleased to see the LibDems splitting Soubry's vote - not because I thought that either of them have any realistic chance of winning, but because it'll make it easier to argue on the doorstep that you clearly need to vote Labour to evict the Tories and prevent No Deal. If the LibDems had stood aside for her and declared it to be a priority seat for them, that would be harder, and avoid the creeping suspicion that they are more about maximimising their vote than stopping Brexit. I wonder if that's in their long-term interest?
Yes absolutely. You think David Allen Green is anything more than extreme partisan hack who hates Brexit and the government?
The father Tweeted his POV and LauraK quoted and retweeted what he had to say. To call that irresponsible is bizarre. LauraK didn't "out" the father he put it out himself!
This is the tweet that many are objecting to. The fact that it's subsequently been removed from LK's current twitter timeline tells you all you need to know.
This SC case is super interesting for our constitutional norms. Listening to the "Talking Politics" podcast this morning really brought that to light to me.
One of the contributors, Helen Thompson, was arguing the only reason this is an issue for the SC is because both the executive and parliament are not acting as they should. The executive seems to be being purposefully provocative in an attempt to shape a political argument (Johnson vs elites) whilst it is obvious the government doesn't have the confidence of the commons. Yet the House is refusing to VoNC the government or to call an election. This is building tension in our constitutional norms which would have usually been relieved by the PM calling an election. This release valve was blocked by the FTPA. The only other options are the crown or the court. The crown does not want to refuse the advice of the PM, leaving only the court.
This leaves the court in strange territory. It is obviously unacceptable for a PM to prorogue a parliament for, say, 6 months. And since prorogation is a prerogative power, any legislation affecting it needs royal assent, which relies on the crown taking advice from the PM. So you have this circular process where a PM could ask the crown to prorogue, the legislature tries to block it, the PM advises the crown to not give assent, and therefore the government would have unlimited power to block parliament from sitting. The court cannot accept that, so they need to find some remedy.
This is where I feel Lord Pannick and O'Neill are going. They are pointing the judges in the direction of a problem they cannot ignore, and asking them to search for their reasoning to deal with this problem. They are presenting them with options, but I think they also recognise that just presenting this massive Gordian Knot demands an answer; considering the new political reality they cannot be seen to accept that prorogation is a legally unstoppable undefinable absolute power.
Where Keen and Eadie are starting is problematic. They argue this is not an issue for the courts because, if parliament really cared, they could have VoNCd or called an election. But this doesn't confront the power of prorogation itself. Let us say that parliament does have the confidence in a government, and doesn't want a GE. Does that mean they are consenting to the government proroguing them whenever it wants? I would say obviously not. So they are not even political remedies to the problem. Parliament cannot, without the consent of the crown and therefore the PM, pass legislation limiting the power of prorogation. So there is no political solution there. That doesn't seem reasonable either; if a PM wanted to prorogue for years, only sitting to pass the minimum necessary, and never allow Parliament to sit, should they just have to wait that out for 5 years before it can be challenged? Should the crown refuse such a prorogation, despite the advice of her PM? No. So the only recourse is the courts.
On whether THIS prorogation therefore falls within the unacceptability window, I think the government are on stronger footing, but the difficulty is that this is also such an inherently political consideration that the SC may say "we feel this must be justiciable, but on this occasion we view it as maybe provocative, maybe even underhanded, but not illegal or unconstitutional". That would please neither side, but be a reasonable judgement in my view. It would still pressure Johnson, but say "well, the government did do the bare minimum of ass covering, so we can't actually say it is illegal".
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
the DUP are trying to get out of a cul de sac of their own making
Yes, but at least they have realised it. And only 12 months after everyone else!
I suspect not, with May Id guess they saw nothing would pass so why move, now things have changed theyll reposition accordingly.
I was just been mean 😉
The DUP are the only ones who come close to US trade negotiators in their ability to squeeze the pips of the other side
Trudeau. Lol. I think by the millennium we knew the black and white minstrels were racist bucko. I wonder if he put on a funny accent too, the naughty little noodle. I love it when these super woke pricks turn out to be full of wind and piss
Women being given bodyguards to attend the Labour Party conference is not something I will easily forget.
Who were they being protected from?
I don't know but the fact it was the LABOUR conference is some guide. It is of course very difficult to assess whether a threat is real or not. They probably face threats all the time. The ones at Labour party conference must feel more credible.
Yes absolutely. You think David Allen Green is anything more than extreme partisan hack who hates Brexit and the government?
The father Tweeted his POV and LauraK quoted and retweeted what he had to say. To call that irresponsible is bizarre. LauraK didn't "out" the father he put it out himself!
This is the tweet that many are objecting to. The fact that it's subsequently been removed from LK's current twitter timeline tells you all you need to know.
Yes absolutely. You think David Allen Green is anything more than extreme partisan hack who hates Brexit and the government?
The father Tweeted his POV and LauraK quoted and retweeted what he had to say. To call that irresponsible is bizarre. LauraK didn't "out" the father he put it out himself!
This is the tweet that many are objecting to. The fact that it's subsequently been removed from LK's current twitter timeline tells you all you need to know.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
the DUP are trying to get out of a cul de sac of their own making
Yes, but at least they have realised it. And only 12 months after everyone else!
I suspect not, with May Id guess they saw nothing would pass so why move, now things have changed theyll reposition accordingly.
I was just been mean 😉
The DUP are the only ones who come close to US trade negotiators in their ability to squeeze the pips of the other side
if we had put Dodds on the Brexit negotiations we;d be in better shape
Yes absolutely. You think David Allen Green is anything more than extreme partisan hack who hates Brexit and the government?
The father Tweeted his POV and LauraK quoted and retweeted what he had to say. To call that irresponsible is bizarre. LauraK didn't "out" the father he put it out himself!
This is the tweet that many are objecting to. The fact that it's subsequently been removed from LK's current twitter timeline tells you all you need to know.
The NI only backstop makes no sense to me if there's an all UK alternative available. Operationally it's extremely messy for NI and it doesn't offer anything for mainland Britain. Which is why May's team pushed for an all UK backstop. If May's Deal was a turd (Johnson's word for it), his own proto deal is two turds. It has all the disadvantages of May's Deal with two big ones in addition.
Sennheiser, not Senheisser (or I've been buying knockoff headphones) and the key point for Labour's people clipping the video of Boris lying will be Boris lying.
Yes absolutely. You think David Allen Green is anything more than extreme partisan hack who hates Brexit and the government?
The father Tweeted his POV and LauraK quoted and retweeted what he had to say. To call that irresponsible is bizarre. LauraK didn't "out" the father he put it out himself!
This is the tweet that many are objecting to. The fact that it's subsequently been removed from LK's current twitter timeline tells you all you need to know.
An angle I hadn't considered to the Revoke pledge is that the LibDems can reasonably get an estimate of how much extra growth and tax revenue they can get from not wreaking havoc on the economy in general and the financial sector in particular, and promise to spend that money in all kinds of fabulous ways.
These are pretty immense sums, and they couldn't really promise to spend them if they were planning on leaving things up to the voters, especially if they're hoping to pick up some fiscal-prudence-motivated ex-Cons made homeless by the Tories turning to fuck-everything don't-tax-just-spend Trumpism.
You are not suggesting a BIG RED BUS with BIG BOLD ££££ Signs on the side are you?
"Brexit costs us* £400 million a week. Let's fund the NHS instead"
For the giggles.
* A random but impressive number.
They should have it standing by outside the Midland Hotel Manchester hooting its horn just before the Tory leader speaks. I wonder whether they could get his ex to drive the bus....
Talking of Manchester. I was in the city centre yesterday and it was teeming with young stylish Chinese.. I asked someone what was goig on and they said it has been like that for ages. Anyone know why? Has Manchester twinned with the Couture centre of Bejing?
Yes absolutely. You think David Allen Green is anything more than extreme partisan hack who hates Brexit and the government?
The father Tweeted his POV and LauraK quoted and retweeted what he had to say. To call that irresponsible is bizarre. LauraK didn't "out" the father he put it out himself!
This is the tweet that many are objecting to. The fact that it's subsequently been removed from LK's current twitter timeline tells you all you need to know.
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
Perhaps she should form a Stormont powersharing government to find out what support exists...
She’d be delighted to
My understanding is that Sinn Fein don't want Stormont to sit while she is leader and she doesn’t want to stand down?
In other words her position is not supported across communities in NI.
Yes absolutely. You think David Allen Green is anything more than extreme partisan hack who hates Brexit and the government?
The father Tweeted his POV and LauraK quoted and retweeted what he had to say. To call that irresponsible is bizarre. LauraK didn't "out" the father he put it out himself!
This is the tweet that many are objecting to. The fact that it's subsequently been removed from LK's current twitter timeline tells you all you need to know.
Women being given bodyguards to attend the Labour Party conference is not something I will easily forget.
Who were they being protected from?
I don't know but the fact it was the LABOUR conference is some guide. It is of course very difficult to assess whether a threat is real or not. They probably face threats all the time. The ones at Labour party conference must feel more credible.
On a totally different subject, I just had what I assume was an interesting scam. Someone called my landline to say "This is BT to inform you that your line will be cancelled today. Press 1 to discuss the issue or 2 to continue the termination process." Probably if one presses anything one signs into some premium line costing £10 a minute...
There is more to morality than class envy socialism or classical liberalism.
Private schools offer choice and raise standards and offer scholarships and bursaries, we need more private schools not less.
There is also nothing at all wrong with passing on family wealth and assets and the best achievement of the Cameron Government in my view was raising the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million
Let's take your assertions in turn: "There is more to morality than class envy socialism or classical liberalism." TRUE, but that doesn't answer the question, it's merely a slogan. Not worth spending any time discussing.
"Private schools offer choice..." only to some
"...and raise standards..." Evidence please? From where I'm sat they appear to concentrate quality. The can easily be coterminous with an overall decrease in quality.
"...and offer scholarships and bursaries" So there is a redistributive aspect to this world of privilege. But so what? Cui bono? This is merely more of the same. A concentration of quality happens, and a clutch of lucky smart kids are let through the gate to help enjoy it. In other words, of those who are not rich enough to pay, all the surplus goes to a tiny percentage. It's the same inequality but on a different basis. A critic would say this is the most just way of administering systemic injustice.
"There is also nothing at all wrong with passing on family wealth and assets" Well, what if there is? What if the multigenerational stratification of society means that we are no longer rewarding talent and hard work? What does this say about the theory behind the workings of our economy? Patrimonial elites are antithetical to capitalism. With income from wealth rising, we are creating a divide between the haves and have nots. If that gulf becomes so wide that even talent and hard work make it uncrossable, what incentives are left for the innovator? Have you seen the decline in numbers of new businesses over the past few decades? Do you understand why that is worrying?
"the best achievement of the Cameron Government" that might be damning through faint praise, albeit unintentionally.
Today should be like a hits compilation in the SC.
Various interventions and crucially Lord Pannick is the last speaker .
At this point I’d say its impossible to call re the lawfulness of the decision however in terms of justiciable I’d put that as a much better chance as it’s hard to see the court giving a blank check to a future PM .
Unpopular view: the barristers matter much less than most people imagine. The idea that a Supreme Court judge is going to be persuaded by oratory or skilful argument is rather hopeful. These are extremely clever people who know all the tricks and who will have been thinking very deeply about this for themselves. The barristers’ most valuable function is poking holes in their opponents’ arguments.
I would agree with this. Also in the SC written advocacy in advance of the hearing is at least as important as oral advocacy, probably more so. In my cases there the written case took huge amounts of work and angst. My seniors spent a long time on their speech but the main purpose of standing up was so that the Justices could ask their questions arising from the written case and address their concerns. They didn't really need to hear what they had already read.
One something like this, where a constitutional question has arisen, can the Judges consider things not in the evidence presented? If makes sense here might not feel right if it was an appeal for a criminal charge.
Why should the LibDems not stand against these people? Surely they would hope to exploit the TIGgers splitting the votes for their old parties.
I agree and I am certainly no LD.. Why do them any favours by standing aside.. even if Greive stands as an independent he has zero chance of holding his seat and the same goes for Soubry in hers. I don't know about Grapes seat so can't comment but I would think it unlikely he holds on..
Why would the LDs risk the chance of having their own true candidate be victorious in order to support people who by their very actions can be guaranteed to be loyal and who haven't even joined the LDs like some of the others have
Well...as someone with an interest in Labour winning Broxtowe, I'm pleased to see the LibDems splitting Soubry's vote - not because I thought that either of them have any realistic chance of winning, but because it'll make it easier to argue on the doorstep that you clearly need to vote Labour to evict the Tories and prevent No Deal. If the LibDems had stood aside for her and declared it to be a priority seat for them, that would be harder, and avoid the creeping suspicion that they are more about maximimising their vote than stopping Brexit. I wonder if that's in their long-term interest?
OT one of our lecturers, just before finals, warned us against puking on the exam paper, with one subtype being psychoanalytic puking: word association based on each word in the question.
Ignoring that, Anna Soubry has an interesting anecdote in the PMQs book about how she made some notes on one of the health bills, that was passed to and used by David Cameron at PMQs, and that she was shortly made a minister on the basis she was the only MP who understood that bill.
Sir John is obviously not happy with Boris.. frankly its hard to support Boris if you have a sensible hat on...
Rank hypocrisy from the man who prorogued Parliament for two weeks to avoid his own political embarrassment and being held to account for corruption in his party.
Except he was held to account - in the general election which immediately followed.
Boris wanted a general election and was denied it.
How many General elections can they have ? That would be their 3rd in 4 years. Pity they're not as chilled about referendums.
Trudeau. Lol. I think by the millennium we knew the black and white minstrels were racist bucko. I wonder if he put on a funny accent too, the naughty little noodle. I love it when these super woke pricks turn out to be full of wind and piss
His apology seems to show that at the time he was in a pre-woke state of unaware ness. A bit like Harry was. Some personal moral growth is a good thing surely?
It may have been discussed used previously but it seems as if the DUP has made a big move
Arlene Foster told the Dublin chamber of commerce yesterday that the DUP would consider supporting “Northern Ireland specific” clauses in a Brexit deal “if it has the consent of the residents of Northern Ireland”
Perhaps she should form a Stormont powersharing government to find out what support exists...
She’d be delighted to
My understanding is that Sinn Fein don't want Stormont to sit while she is leader and she doesn’t want to stand down?
In other words her position is not supported across communities in NI.
lol
nobody in NI has a majority of votes, but you cant actually claim Foster is the one stopping Stormont sitting. That started with Marty, and his successor hasnt got the brains to work out how to get her arse back in to government. Meanwhile most of the electorate sway between being pissed off nobody is representing them and resignation that at least we dont have to listen to the twats on BBC NI news.
Yes absolutely. You think David Allen Green is anything more than extreme partisan hack who hates Brexit and the government?
The father Tweeted his POV and LauraK quoted and retweeted what he had to say. To call that irresponsible is bizarre. LauraK didn't "out" the father he put it out himself!
This is the tweet that many are objecting to. The fact that it's subsequently been removed from LK's current twitter timeline tells you all you need to know.
On a totally different subject, I just had what I assume was an interesting scam. Someone called my landline to say "This is BT to inform you that your line will be cancelled today. Press 1 to discuss the issue or 2 to continue the termination process." Probably if one presses anything one signs into some premium line costing £10 a minute...
Correct, a scam. There is also one purporting to be HMRC who the recording says are issuing court proceedings against you, press 1 etc etc
On a totally different subject, I just had what I assume was an interesting scam. Someone called my landline to say "This is BT to inform you that your line will be cancelled today. Press 1 to discuss the issue or 2 to continue the termination process." Probably if one presses anything one signs into some premium line costing £10 a minute...
Can someone pressing a button on an incoming call lead you to being charged?
I'd assume if you pressed one they'd identify you as a mug who will be told by someone in a call centre that the line is being disconnected due to an outstanding bill but termination can be halted by giving them your bank or card details.
Why should the LibDems not stand against these people? Surely they would hope to exploit the TIGgers splitting the votes for their old parties.
I agree and I am certainly no LD.. Why do them any favours by standing aside.. even if Greive stands as an independent he has zero chance of holding his seat and the same goes for Soubry in hers. I don't know about Grapes seat so can't comment but I would think it unlikely he holds on..
Why would the LDs risk the chance of having their own true candidate be victorious in order to support people who by their very actions can be guaranteed to be loyal and who haven't even joined the LDs like some of the others have
They'd do it because being selfless and crossparty in a couple of dozen seats pays dividends in the other 600 or so.
I think you make a good analysis. My own view is that this exposes a contradiction in our model of government - that you can have a sovereign parliament and the royal prerogative simultaneously. It seems we need to either:
a) Reform the prerogative b) A Monarch who does not simply 'act on the advice' of her Prime minister in all situations.
Her Majesty's desire to be above politics could be seen as a weakness by the wrong sort of people.
There is more to morality than class envy socialism or classical liberalism.
Private schools offer choice and raise standards and offer scholarships and bursaries, we need more private schools not less.
There is also nothing at all wrong with passing on family wealth and assets and the best achievement of the Cameron Government in my view was raising the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million
Let's take your assertions in turn: "There is more to morality than class envy socialism or classical liberalism." TRUE, but that doesn't answer the question, it's merely a slogan. Not worth spending any time discussing.
"Private schools offer choice..." only to some
"...and raise standards..." Evidence please? From where I'm sat they appear to concentrate quality. The can easily be coterminous with an overall decrease in quality.
"...and offer scholarships and bursaries" So there is a redistributive aspect to this world of privilege. But so what? Cui bono? This is merely more of the same. A concentration of quality happens, and a clutch of lucky smart kids are let through the gate to help enjoy it. In other words, of those who are not rich enough to pay, all the surplus goes to a tiny percentage. It's the same inequality but on a different basis. A critic would say this is the most just way of administering systemic injustice.
"There is also nothing at all wrong with passing on family wealth and assets" Well, what if there is? What if the multigenerational stratification of society means that we are no longer rewarding talent and hard work? What does this say about the theory behind the workings of our economy? Patrimonial elites are antithetical to capitalism. With income from wealth rising, we are creating a divide between the haves and have nots. If that gulf becomes so wide that even talent and hard work make it uncrossable, what incentives are left for the innovator? Have you seen the decline in numbers of new businesses over the past few decades? Do you understand why that is worrying?
"the best achievement of the Cameron Government" that might be damning through faint praise, albeit unintentionally.
Trudeau. Lol. I think by the millennium we knew the black and white minstrels were racist bucko. I wonder if he put on a funny accent too, the naughty little noodle. I love it when these super woke pricks turn out to be full of wind and piss
His apology seems to show that at the time he was in a pre-woke state of unaware ness. A bit like Harry was. Some personal moral growth is a good thing surely?
If it were simply a case of a little moral growth then sure, but it's not. It's the usual hypocrisy and the oh so earnest apology when they get caught. And his 'we know better now' shtick is so much bilge, the world's moral centre doesn't evolve with St Justin. Not all superheroes wear capes, but none of them brown up.
This has already happened. We had the TIG false start which has quickly collapsed and been replaced by the remergence of the LibDems.
I get the LibDems. I am a pragmatist who now hates the absolutists on the left as much as I hate the absolutists on the right. I've said some bad things about the party in the past as they have done bad things, but pragmatism draws a line and moves on. I'd rather work with sane people like Swinson who can draw in other sane people from across the spectrum than have to self apologise for clinging to sane people like Starmer and Phillips against the scourge of people like Jezziah.
Not joining them. But definitely listening to them.
On a totally different subject, I just had what I assume was an interesting scam. Someone called my landline to say "This is BT to inform you that your line will be cancelled today. Press 1 to discuss the issue or 2 to continue the termination process." Probably if one presses anything one signs into some premium line costing £10 a minute...
Can someone pressing a button on an incoming call lead you to being charged?
I'd assume if you pressed one they'd identify you as a mug who will be told by someone in a call centre that the line is being disconnected due to an outstanding bill but termination can be halted by giving them your bank or card details.
Both are true. Pressing a button can transfer the call to a premium line, but there's also the 'pay us xxx with your card and you're good' and then clean you out
Comments
I have my punting hat on this morning and my first reaction was that if this is a genuine move forward by the Peril, it might make Tory Most Seats more likely but a Tory Overall Majority less likely.
However Pannick is a superb QC . I’m sure he’ll come up with a great closing argument .
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1174409107681492992
That is why he posts such nonsense about Wales & Scotland.
What's the nearest Tube stop?
One of the biggest problems for Corbyn is that in spite of his Brexit fence sitting, his ratings amongst leave voters are terrible. A lifetime of euroscepticism and his call to invoke Article 50 on 24th June 2016 don't seem to be helping him.
maybe SF should take their seats again and give their electorate some political representation. Who knows, it might even justify them taking their salaries ?
Will they agree with you Richard, or will yours be a dissenting verdict? PB holds its breath.
I had dinner last night who went out of his way to emphasis that his firm always made sure it had a lot of liquidity
Dare you.....
There are many things to criticise Trudeau for but this is not one of them and indeed the Muslim Council of Canada has accepted his apology
https://twitter.com/nccm/status/1174480597332500480?s=20
The father Tweeted his POV and LauraK quoted and retweeted what he had to say. To call that irresponsible is bizarre. LauraK didn't "out" the father he put it out himself!
The LDs have a shiny new leader, Boris is successfully maintaining his grip on the leave vote and Labour just seem to be in a downward spiral.. They really need to have a good conference focusing on policies other than brexit, the problem is the likes of Tom Watson will stir enough Brexit drama up that once again all focus will end up being about how they can't decide on a coherent strategy
As John Curtice has pointed out Leave vs Remain cuts right across the left/right economic divide. It doesn't tell you much about where people stand on the NHS, taxes, privatisation, capitalism.
What is this centre of which people speak?
Private schools offer choice and raise standards and offer scholarships and bursaries, we need more private schools not less.
There is also nothing at all wrong with passing on family wealth and assets and the best achievement of the Cameron Government in my view was raising the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million
My understanding is that Sinn Fein don't want Stormont to sit while she is leader and she doesn’t want to stand down?
And I think it’s pretty clear it’s a policy which could be easily pivoted to a referendum if the circumstances in which it is pledged (a majority after an election) isn’t achieved. The responsibility for producing the “leave” option on the ballot paper (the major problem for anyone advocating a referendum) and implementing it if it came to pass, would then be down to others.
He played to the letter of the rules rather than some sportsmanlike interpretation (taking his inspiration from Grieve and Bercow)
There has been an appeal and the umpire is currently assessing the situation
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318249460281346?s=20
One of the contributors, Helen Thompson, was arguing the only reason this is an issue for the SC is because both the executive and parliament are not acting as they should. The executive seems to be being purposefully provocative in an attempt to shape a political argument (Johnson vs elites) whilst it is obvious the government doesn't have the confidence of the commons. Yet the House is refusing to VoNC the government or to call an election. This is building tension in our constitutional norms which would have usually been relieved by the PM calling an election. This release valve was blocked by the FTPA. The only other options are the crown or the court. The crown does not want to refuse the advice of the PM, leaving only the court.
This leaves the court in strange territory. It is obviously unacceptable for a PM to prorogue a parliament for, say, 6 months. And since prorogation is a prerogative power, any legislation affecting it needs royal assent, which relies on the crown taking advice from the PM. So you have this circular process where a PM could ask the crown to prorogue, the legislature tries to block it, the PM advises the crown to not give assent, and therefore the government would have unlimited power to block parliament from sitting. The court cannot accept that, so they need to find some remedy.
This is where I feel Lord Pannick and O'Neill are going. They are pointing the judges in the direction of a problem they cannot ignore, and asking them to search for their reasoning to deal with this problem. They are presenting them with options, but I think they also recognise that just presenting this massive Gordian Knot demands an answer; considering the new political reality they cannot be seen to accept that prorogation is a legally unstoppable undefinable absolute power.
1/2
On whether THIS prorogation therefore falls within the unacceptability window, I think the government are on stronger footing, but the difficulty is that this is also such an inherently political consideration that the SC may say "we feel this must be justiciable, but on this occasion we view it as maybe provocative, maybe even underhanded, but not illegal or unconstitutional". That would please neither side, but be a reasonable judgement in my view. It would still pressure Johnson, but say "well, the government did do the bare minimum of ass covering, so we can't actually say it is illegal".
2/2
The DUP are the only ones who come close to US trade negotiators in their ability to squeeze the pips of the other side
I love it when these super woke pricks turn out to be full of wind and piss
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174286478190534658?s=21
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak
Back away from this, for your own good!
I'll put it down to my lack of twitter expertise and move on, as you suggest.
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174318564397985793?s=20
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1174286478190534658?s=20
Talking of Manchester. I was in the city centre yesterday and it was teeming with young stylish Chinese.. I asked someone what was goig on and they said it has been like that for ages. Anyone know why? Has Manchester twinned with the Couture centre of Bejing?
https://twitter.com/HaasF1Team/status/1174578864535871489
Hulkenberg may be out of the sport with this news. A shame, as I've always rated him highly.
"There is more to morality than class envy socialism or classical liberalism."
TRUE, but that doesn't answer the question, it's merely a slogan. Not worth spending any time discussing.
"Private schools offer choice..."
only to some
"...and raise standards..."
Evidence please? From where I'm sat they appear to concentrate quality. The can easily be coterminous with an overall decrease in quality.
"...and offer scholarships and bursaries"
So there is a redistributive aspect to this world of privilege. But so what? Cui bono? This is merely more of the same. A concentration of quality happens, and a clutch of lucky smart kids are let through the gate to help enjoy it. In other words, of those who are not rich enough to pay, all the surplus goes to a tiny percentage. It's the same inequality but on a different basis. A critic would say this is the most just way of administering systemic injustice.
"There is also nothing at all wrong with passing on family wealth and assets"
Well, what if there is? What if the multigenerational stratification of society means that we are no longer rewarding talent and hard work? What does this say about the theory behind the workings of our economy? Patrimonial elites are antithetical to capitalism. With income from wealth rising, we are creating a divide between the haves and have nots. If that gulf becomes so wide that even talent and hard work make it uncrossable, what incentives are left for the innovator? Have you seen the decline in numbers of new businesses over the past few decades? Do you understand why that is worrying?
"the best achievement of the Cameron Government"
that might be damning through faint praise, albeit unintentionally.
Ignoring that, Anna Soubry has an interesting anecdote in the PMQs book about how she made some notes on one of the health bills, that was passed to and used by David Cameron at PMQs, and that she was shortly made a minister on the basis she was the only MP who understood that bill.
nobody in NI has a majority of votes, but you cant actually claim Foster is the one stopping Stormont sitting. That started with Marty, and his successor hasnt got the brains to work out how to get her arse back in to government. Meanwhile most of the electorate sway between being pissed off nobody is representing them and resignation that at least we dont have to listen to the twats on BBC NI news.
I'd assume if you pressed one they'd identify you as a mug who will be told by someone in a call centre that the line is being disconnected due to an outstanding bill but termination can be halted by giving them your bank or card details.
I think you make a good analysis. My own view is that this exposes a contradiction in our model of government - that you can have a sovereign parliament and the royal prerogative simultaneously. It seems we need to either:
a) Reform the prerogative
b) A Monarch who does not simply 'act on the advice' of her Prime minister in all situations.
Her Majesty's desire to be above politics could be seen as a weakness by the wrong sort of people.
Not all superheroes wear capes, but none of them brown up.
I get the LibDems. I am a pragmatist who now hates the absolutists on the left as much as I hate the absolutists on the right. I've said some bad things about the party in the past as they have done bad things, but pragmatism draws a line and moves on. I'd rather work with sane people like Swinson who can draw in other sane people from across the spectrum than have to self apologise for clinging to sane people like Starmer and Phillips against the scourge of people like Jezziah.
Not joining them. But definitely listening to them.