Someone should send him a first class cricket bat as a thankyou. I said a few months ago he has played everything with a remarkably straight bat and his been true to his word at all times. He has been the Geoffrey Boycott of politics.
It's a busy news day, but it's important to note that new abortion laws and gay marriage are being imposed on Northern Ireland tonight by Westminster. While I'm all in favour of both, it's hardly going to improve the mood of the DUP when dealing with what they no doubt regard as a treacherous government.
Yebbut the DUP want NI to be treated just like the rest of the UK so it surely can't be a problem, surely ...?
I imagine they cannot see the disconnect between their outrage and their supposed principles. Nor that they are a huge reason why it is happening because, with the others, they have had no interest in getting the Assembly up and running. If they did, it would by now - I'm to believe people committed to peace and cooperation could not have worked something out by now?
**Narrator** "Six months later, they were on MV8 and Letwin/Griever were negotiating their latest wrecking amendment with Leader of the Opposition John Bercow."
The aim is clearly to limit the chance anyone gets to read, understand and grasp the nasties within the bill.
Three days? Three days?!
You get fourteen to think about a mobile phone contract.
They have discussed the principles for years bar a few new details, they probably don't need that much time to go over legislative detail. But it is taking the piss again.
Agreed about general principles, but the devil of this is in the details- what has to happen to make it legally watertight. We saw a bit of an example today with the NI to GB export paperwork. What else is in there?
Which is why it is taking the piss. I'm just unclear how long would be reasonable, to know how much piss is being taken, and how much piss the opposition would be taking by stretching it out.
The days, but not over the months - that would demonstrate that the Letwin amendment was being used purely to delay passage, not scrutinise. 24/7 sittings to see it through, and 4 weeks total - a compromise.
24/7 sittings are completely counter to effective scrutiny! Clarity of thought requires a normal amount of sleep.
For the sake of argument, let's say he stayed on until now. Do you really think that talk of a second referendum wouldn't figure in the contest to replace him?
Who knows. What is clear is that without a GE there is no way Parliament itself would in any way be considering a second referendum. Making people vote again when you don't like the result is a Remainer disease.
A referendum commitment would have been highly likely to be in the Tory 2020 manifesto, with Farage breathing down their neck about "unfinished business".
It might have been but what we were discussing was the original point that Parliament would not have spent the last 3 years trying to overturn the referendum result which is what in reality it has been trying to do.
And many of us would not have agreed with reopening the question. Unlike the current bunch of fuckwits in Parliament we have principles.
No, the original question was "would we be discussing a second referendum?" It seems you now are now conceding that we would be.
The question was based on the premise that Leave lost the referendum and the only party arguing for a second go got 7% in the subsequent GE, whilst those committed to Remain in their manifesto's got 80%+
**Narrator** "Six months later, they were on MV8 and Letwin/Griever were negotiating their latest wrecking amendment with Leader of the Opposition John Bercow."
The aim is clearly to limit the chance anyone gets to read, understand and grasp the nasties within the bill.
Three days? Three days?!
You get fourteen to think about a mobile phone contract.
They have discussed the principles for years bar a few new details, they probably don't need that much time to go over legislative detail. But it is taking the piss again.
Agreed about general principles, but the devil of this is in the details- what has to happen to make it legally watertight. We saw a bit of an example today with the NI to GB export paperwork. What else is in there?
Which is why it is taking the piss. I'm just unclear how long would be reasonable, to know how much piss is being taken, and how much piss the opposition would be taking by stretching it out.
The days, but not over the months - that would demonstrate that the Letwin amendment was being used purely to delay passage, not scrutinise. 24/7 sittings to see it through, and 4 weeks total - a compromise.
24/7 sittings are completely counter to effective scrutiny! Clarity of thought requires a normal amount of sleep.
Gove is explaining why further £millions of our money is going to be wasted on No Deal propaganda in a bid to frighten MPs into quickly agreeing the WAIB. A big expensive bluff.
**Narrator** "Six months later, they were on MV8 and Letwin/Griever were negotiating their latest wrecking amendment with Leader of the Opposition John Bercow."
The aim is clearly to limit the chance anyone gets to read, understand and grasp the nasties within the bill.
Three days? Three days?!
You get fourteen to think about a mobile phone contract.
They have discussed the principles for years bar a few new details, they probably don't need that much time to go over legislative detail. But it is taking the piss again.
Agreed about general principles, but the devil of this is in the details- what has to happen to make it legally watertight. We saw a bit of an example today with the NI to GB export paperwork. What else is in there?
Which is why it is taking the piss. I'm just unclear how long would be reasonable, to know how much piss is being taken, and how much piss the opposition would be taking by stretching it out.
The days, but not over the months - that would demonstrate that the Letwin amendment was being used purely to delay passage, not scrutinise. 24/7 sittings to see it through, and 4 weeks total - a compromise.
24/7 sittings are completely counter to effective scrutiny! Clarity of thought requires a normal amount of sleep.
It was not a completely serious suggestion, but the point was one side wants to rush it through in days to meet a deadline that only matters because of a stupid political pledge that doesn't matter, and the other side want to delay it as long as humanly possible if they cannot defeat it (and will kick the can as long as possible if they think losing is a risk), and would try thousands of amendments and debate it endlessly to do so. I'm not convinced either side are not taking the piss, frankly.
Nigel has been one of the most influential politicians of our generation if not the most. Some of the things he has fronted have been disgustingly racist (eg. *that* poster) but (huge but) if the country honours its major politicians then it is not impossible that he should be considered for one such.
I don't think there is any basis at all for honouring a politician who campaigns on the basis of disgustingly racist posters. That is to debase what "honour" means.
IMO.
Given the same charge has been laid at the PM and the LOTO, it becomes difficult to apply your criteria with anything that would be broadly considered fair across our society.
In practice, "Honours" are not given to those who are honourable, but mostly politicians, civil servants, judges, entertainers and sports people who are near the top of their profession.
As obnoxious as he is, Farage meets that criteria with ease, and I wouldnt see a problem with him getting one.
Nigel has been one of the most influential politicians of our generation if not the most. Some of the things he has fronted have been disgustingly racist (eg. *that* poster) but (huge but) if the country honours its major politicians then it is not impossible that he should be considered for one such.
I don't think there is any basis at all for honouring a politician who campaigns on the basis of disgustingly racist posters. That is to debase what "honour" means.
IMO.
I agree but the same standard should exist for Labour politicians that have aided anti-Semitism.
**Narrator** "Six months later, they were on MV8 and Letwin/Griever were negotiating their latest wrecking amendment with Leader of the Opposition John Bercow."
The aim is clearly to limit the chance anyone gets to read, understand and grasp the nasties within the bill.
Three days? Three days?!
You get fourteen to think about a mobile phone contract.
They have discussed the principles for years bar a few new details, they probably don't need that much time to go over legislative detail. But it is taking the piss again.
Agreed about general principles, but the devil of this is in the details- what has to happen to make it legally watertight. We saw a bit of an example today with the NI to GB export paperwork. What else is in there?
Which is why it is taking the piss. I'm just unclear how long would be reasonable, to know how much piss is being taken, and how much piss the opposition would be taking by stretching it out.
The days, but not over the months - that would demonstrate that the Letwin amendment was being used purely to delay passage, not scrutinise. 24/7 sittings to see it through, and 4 weeks total - a compromise.
24/7 sittings are completely counter to effective scrutiny! Clarity of thought requires a normal amount of sleep.
Gove is explaining why further £millions of our money is going to be wasted on No Deal propaganda in a bid to frighten MPs into quickly agreeing the WAIB. A big expensive bluff.
That might have worked if MPs had passed the MV if it had been allowed.
That would have allowed the government to be able to withdraw the extension request .
Nigel has been one of the most influential politicians of our generation if not the most. Some of the things he has fronted have been disgustingly racist (eg. *that* poster) but (huge but) if the country honours its major politicians then it is not impossible that he should be considered for one such.
I don't think there is any basis at all for honouring a politician who campaigns on the basis of disgustingly racist posters. That is to debase what "honour" means.
IMO.
Given the same charge has been laid at the PM and the LOTO, it becomes difficult to apply your criteria with anything that would be broadly considered fair across our society.
In practice, "Honours" are not given to those who are honourable, but mostly politicians, civil servants, judges, entertainers and sports people who are near the top of their profession.
As obnoxious as he is, Farage meets that criteria with ease, and I wouldnt see a problem with him getting one.
His personality and policies aren’t ones I agree with, but it’s very hard to see how he can be denied a place in the Lords given the strand of public opinion he represents.
Also, it’s the one thing that might tone him down a bit. All he’s ever really wanted is to be accepted by the Establishment.
MarqueeMark: "Do you want this Deal? Or do you want Hard Brexit?
No, that is your choice, MPs."
I actually think that Corbyn wants a Hard Brexit so that 1) Boris misses 31/10 date and 2) to maximise the chaos which (he thinks) Tories will be blamed for.
Someone should send him a first class cricket bat as a thankyou. I said a few months ago he has played everything with a remarkably straight bat and his been true to his word at all times. He has been the Geoffrey Boycott of politics.
Barnier's a wife beater? Knew he was a wrong 'un.
Yep I could see that one coming. But I hope people understand the spirit of what I was trying to say.
Nigel has been one of the most influential politicians of our generation if not the most. Some of the things he has fronted have been disgustingly racist (eg. *that* poster) but (huge but) if the country honours its major politicians then it is not impossible that he should be considered for one such.
I don't think there is any basis at all for honouring a politician who campaigns on the basis of disgustingly racist posters. That is to debase what "honour" means.
IMO.
Given the same charge has been laid at the PM and the LOTO, it becomes difficult to apply your criteria with anything that would be broadly considered fair across our society.
In practice, "Honours" are not given to those who are honourable, but mostly politicians, civil servants, judges, entertainers and sports people who are near the top of their profession.
As obnoxious as he is, Farage meets that criteria with ease, and I wouldnt see a problem with him getting one.
Well, I disagree - and if that means that far fewer politicians get honours - that's absolutely fine by me. Honours should be for people who contribute to society over and above their job and who behave honourably. They should not be a reward for simple celebrity or notoriety. Acting dishonourably - and promulgating racism is dishonourable in my book - should be a bar to receiving rewards such as these.
And in answer to @Gabs2, yes that should include those who promulgate anti-semitism too or prejudice against other minority groups.
Trying to compare the Benn Act with the WAIB is ridiculous.
The Benn Act was one page . The WAIB is 96 pages long with a host of additional material .
And yet Ken Clarke proudly said he voted for the Maastricht treaty without ever having read it. And Caroline Flint as Europe Minister said the same about the Lisbon Treaty.
If they are not even going to bother reading the things why do they need more time?
It's a busy news day, but it's important to note that new abortion laws and gay marriage are being imposed on Northern Ireland tonight by Westminster. While I'm all in favour of both, it's hardly going to improve the mood of the DUP when dealing with what they no doubt regard as a treacherous government.
The DUP are clueless, within a decade there will be more Catholics than Protestants in Northern Ireland (with the exception of Antrim) and imposing a hard border with the Republic of Ireland will just increase their case for a united Ireland and reduce to near zero the number of Catholic Unionists.
The growing secular population in Northern Ireland will also not take kindly to having no gay marriage and abortion banned when they could unite with the Republic of Ireland and have both.
That is why Unionists with a brain like Lord Trimble back the Boris Deal
Someone should send him a first class cricket bat as a thankyou. I said a few months ago he has played everything with a remarkably straight bat and his been true to his word at all times. He has been the Geoffrey Boycott of politics.
Barnier's a wife beater? Knew he was a wrong 'un.
Yep I could see that one coming. But I hope people understand the spirit of what I was trying to say.
Of course. I agree that Barnier's behaviour has been impeccable, and he's acted with transparency and integrity throughout. And like Boycott, he's been a true grinder.
It is a great pity he was batting for the other side.
We’ve moved from the Opposition hoping to vote down the WA (again) to it now hoping to drag out the process as long as possible in the hope something turns up.
That suggests that they too know they’ve already lost on the MV numbers.
Letwin will fall into line if WAIB comes before MV4 and he will I suspect be critical in getting it over the line.
It's what he said after all. His one remaining spanner would be to say that he introduced his amendment for proper scrutiny and three days is not proper scrutiny.
Yes, that’s possible.
I think the real scrutiny will come over the full FTA. It’s right and proper that a GE tests all parties plans for that.
Imo that is the crux of the matter. How important is the WA?
Take as an example Labour unhappy workers rights moved by Boris out the WA to the PD. Is watering down pay and conditions in order to be competitive post brexit really secured never to happen by being in the WA? Or is there always potential for us to diverge post brexit regardless of it being in the WA?
How much of a lock on future post brexit government is the WA? How important or not to get this right?
Nigel has been one of the most influential politicians of our generation if not the most. Some of the things he has fronted have been disgustingly racist (eg. *that* poster) but (huge but) if the country honours its major politicians then it is not impossible that he should be considered for one such.
I don't think there is any basis at all for honouring a politician who campaigns on the basis of disgustingly racist posters. That is to debase what "honour" means.
IMO.
Given the same charge has been laid at the PM and the LOTO, it becomes difficult to apply your criteria with anything that would be broadly considered fair across our society.
In practice, "Honours" are not given to those who are honourable, but mostly politicians, civil servants, judges, entertainers and sports people who are near the top of their profession.
As obnoxious as he is, Farage meets that criteria with ease, and I wouldnt see a problem with him getting one.
His personality and policies aren’t ones I agree with, but it’s very hard to see how he can be denied a place in the Lords given the strand of public opinion he represents.
Also, it’s the one thing that might tone him down a bit. All he’s ever really wanted is to be accepted by the Establishment.
Oh diddums! He has failed to get elected to Parliament 8 times, or is it 9. That's the way to represent people. He doesn't get to be a legislator as compensation for his hurt feelings or his failures or to massage his ego.
Nigel has been one of the most influential politicians of our generation if not the most. Some of the things he has fronted have been disgustingly racist (eg. *that* poster) but (huge but) if the country honours its major politicians then it is not impossible that he should be considered for one such.
I don't think there is any basis at all for honouring a politician who campaigns on the basis of disgustingly racist posters. That is to debase what "honour" means.
IMO.
Given the same charge has been laid at the PM and the LOTO, it becomes difficult to apply your criteria with anything that would be broadly considered fair across our society.
In practice, "Honours" are not given to those who are honourable, but mostly politicians, civil servants, judges, entertainers and sports people who are near the top of their profession.
As obnoxious as he is, Farage meets that criteria with ease, and I wouldnt see a problem with him getting one.
Well, I disagree - and if that means that far fewer politicians get honours - that's absolutely fine by me. Honours should be for people who contribute to society over and above their job and who behave honourably. They should not be a reward for simple celebrity or notoriety. Acting dishonourably - and promulgating racism is dishonourable in my book - should be a bar to receiving rewards such as these.
And in answer to @Gabs2, yes that should include those who promulgate anti-semitism too or prejudice against other minority groups.
If there were a proposal to radically change the system to the one you suggest, I would be in favour. I think it is wrong to pretend that honour is a requirement within the current system, it is merely a reward for reaching the top of selected careers which happens to have the name honours.
BigG: "I do get daily mail on line mainly as my wife loves the puzzles"
Brilliant.
It's a variation on a much-loved, much-repeated, Kenneth Horne joke. "As I was perusing PVC and Rubber Monthly, which I mostly read for the knitting pattern..."
**Narrator** "Six months later, they were on MV8 and Letwin/Griever were negotiating their latest wrecking amendment with Leader of the Opposition John Bercow."
The aim is clearly to limit the chance anyone gets to read, understand and grasp the nasties within the bill.
Three days? Three days?!
You get fourteen to think about a mobile phone contract.
Given the Remainers rushed through their law to take charge of Parliament - setting a precedent that will have massive far reaching implications in the future - in less than one day, they are hardly in a position to complain.
We now know that a second referendum can be achieved quickly.
Nope because that is outside the control of Parliament. They might be able to rush through the legislation but the Electoral Commission sets the timetable for the choosing of the question, the testing of the question, the choosing of the official campaigns and then the campaign itself.
22 weeks is the minimum time for your losers revote. And that is without the court challenges.
It's a busy news day, but it's important to note that new abortion laws and gay marriage are being imposed on Northern Ireland tonight by Westminster. While I'm all in favour of both, it's hardly going to improve the mood of the DUP when dealing with what they no doubt regard as a treacherous government.
The DUP are clueless, within a decade there will be more Catholics than Protestants in Northern Ireland (with the exception of Antrim) and imposing a hard border with the Republic of Ireland will just increase their case for a united Ireland and reduce to near zero the number of Catholic Unionists.
The growing secular population in Northern Ireland will also not take kindly to having no gay marriage and abortion banned when they could unite with the Republic of Ireland and have both.
That is why Unionists with a brain like Lord Trimble back the Boris Deal
Has anyone got a link to these demographic trends?
Until recently my understanding was that the non-aligned NI population was the fastest growing, and new migrants to NI (few as they are) weren’t that keen on a United Ireland.
Someone should send him a first class cricket bat as a thankyou. I said a few months ago he has played everything with a remarkably straight bat and his been true to his word at all times. He has been the Geoffrey Boycott of politics.
Barnier's a wife beater? Knew he was a wrong 'un.
Yep I could see that one coming. But I hope people understand the spirit of what I was trying to say.
He is rather more charming, elegant and better dressed than Geoffrey Boycott. And has never lost his temper though, God knows, he must have had enough reason to when dealing with berks like David Davis.
Trying to compare the Benn Act with the WAIB is ridiculous.
The Benn Act was one page . The WAIB is 96 pages long with a host of additional material .
And yet Ken Clarke proudly said he voted for the Maastricht treaty without ever having read it. And Caroline Flint as Europe Minister said the same about the Lisbon Treaty.
If they are not even going to bother reading the things why do they need more time?
Well on both of those occasions, the bill had had a LOT of scrutiny, and the government of the day hadn't been caught lying on an hourly basis, and hadn't constantly being trying to subvert procedure and protocol for its own ends.
Nigel has been one of the most influential politicians of our generation if not the most. Some of the things he has fronted have been disgustingly racist (eg. *that* poster) but (huge but) if the country honours its major politicians then it is not impossible that he should be considered for one such.
I don't think there is any basis at all for honouring a politician who campaigns on the basis of disgustingly racist posters. That is to debase what "honour" means.
IMO.
Given the same charge has been laid at the PM and the LOTO, it becomes difficult to apply your criteria with anything that would be broadly considered fair across our society.
In practice, "Honours" are not given to those who are honourable, but mostly politicians, civil servants, judges, entertainers and sports people who are near the top of their profession.
As obnoxious as he is, Farage meets that criteria with ease, and I wouldnt see a problem with him getting one.
Well, I disagree - and if that means that far fewer politicians get honours - that's absolutely fine by me. Honours should be for people who contribute to society over and above their job and who behave honourably. They should not be a reward for simple celebrity or notoriety. Acting dishonourably - and promulgating racism is dishonourable in my book - should be a bar to receiving rewards such as these.
And in answer to @Gabs2, yes that should include those who promulgate anti-semitism too or prejudice against other minority groups.
If there were a proposal to radically change the system to the one you suggest, I would be in favour. I think it is wrong to pretend that honour is a requirement within the current system, it is merely a reward for reaching the top of selected careers which happens to have the name honours.
Let's change it then. Let's make "honour" mean something real. For a change.
Gove is explaining why further £millions of our money is going to be wasted on No Deal propaganda in a bid to frighten MPs into quickly agreeing the WAIB. A big expensive bluff.
That might have worked if MPs had passed the MV if it had been allowed.
That would have allowed the government to be able to withdraw the extension request .
Withdrawing the extension request increases the chance of No Deal if the WAB overruns as it probably will. Hence Letwin's amendment.
Gove is pretending there is still a risk of No Deal. There isn't. An extension will be offered and accepted. Gove is playing games with our money. £millions.
Yes, but the reason was that they wanted the letter to be sent. That it now has been is a material change of circumstances.
To be clear, I think Bercow was right, but I can see the argument on the other side.
They wanted the letter sent AND the WAIB passed. If the MV passed today, Johnson could withdraw the letter, hence reopening the No Deal loophole. So the same amendment would have been needed to close it - Groundhog Day.
Its not a loophole, it was an explicit option in the Benn Act that if Parliament agreed a deal no letter was needed, so deciding not to vote on the deal does not close a loophole it goes against what was passed in the Benn Act.
The Benn Act was badly drafted to be in this mess. Perhaps it should have said that a letter would need to be sent unless Parliament had passed a Withdrawal Act but it didn't.
Probably the trouble was that, given the timing of the European Council meeting, that would have put the deadline too close to 31 October.
Then why the hell did the Benn Act give Saturday as an acceptable date to accept a deal then?
To say you have until 19 Oct to get a deal then say on 19 Oct "sorry too late" is bad faith at the very least.
MarqueeMark: "Do you want this Deal? Or do you want Hard Brexit?
No, that is your choice, MPs."
I actually think that Corbyn wants a Hard Brexit so that 1) Boris misses 31/10 date and 2) to maximise the chaos which (he thinks) Tories will be blamed for.
There is now no chance of a No Deal on 31st October.
It's a busy news day, but it's important to note that new abortion laws and gay marriage are being imposed on Northern Ireland tonight by Westminster. While I'm all in favour of both, it's hardly going to improve the mood of the DUP when dealing with what they no doubt regard as a treacherous government.
The DUP are clueless, within a decade there will be more Catholics than Protestants in Northern Ireland (with the exception of Antrim) and imposing a hard border with the Republic of Ireland will just increase their case for a united Ireland and reduce to near zero the number of Catholic Unionists.
The growing secular population in Northern Ireland will also not take kindly to having no gay marriage and abortion banned when they could unite with the Republic of Ireland and have both.
That is why Unionists with a brain like Lord Trimble back the Boris Deal
Has anyone got a link to these demographic trends?
Until recently my understanding was that the non-aligned NI population was the fastest growing, and new migrants to NI (few as they are) weren’t that keen on a United Ireland.
Well the non aligned are hardly going to be sympathetic to a ban on gay marriage and abortion unless they are very religious either
**Narrator** "Six months later, they were on MV8 and Letwin/Griever were negotiating their latest wrecking amendment with Leader of the Opposition John Bercow."
The aim is clearly to limit the chance anyone gets to read, understand and grasp the nasties within the bill.
Three days? Three days?!
You get fourteen to think about a mobile phone contract.
Given the Remainers rushed through their law to take charge of Parliament - setting a precedent that will have massive far reaching implications in the future - in less than one day, they are hardly in a position to complain.
We now know that a second referendum can be achieved quickly.
Nope because that is outside the control of Parliament. They might be able to rush through the legislation but the Electoral Commission sets the timetable for the choosing of the question, the testing of the question, the choosing of the official campaigns and then the campaign itself.
22 weeks is the minimum time for your losers revote. And that is without the court challenges.
And that the Leave boycott would make it pointless - the General Election would supercede. And not in a way the proponents of the Cheats Charter would like.....
It's a busy news day, but it's important to note that new abortion laws and gay marriage are being imposed on Northern Ireland tonight by Westminster. While I'm all in favour of both, it's hardly going to improve the mood of the DUP when dealing with what they no doubt regard as a treacherous government.
The DUP are clueless, within a decade there will be more Catholics than Protestants in Northern Ireland (with the exception of Antrim) and imposing a hard border with the Republic of Ireland will just increase their case for a united Ireland and reduce to near zero the number of Catholic Unionists.
The growing secular population in Northern Ireland will also not take kindly to having no gay marriage and abortion banned when they could unite with the Republic of Ireland and have both.
That is why Unionists with a brain like Lord Trimble back the Boris Deal
Has anyone got a link to these demographic trends?
Until recently my understanding was that the non-aligned NI population was the fastest growing, and new migrants to NI (few as they are) weren’t that keen on a United Ireland.
Well the non aligned are hardly going to be sympathetic to a ban on gay marriage and abortion unless they are very religious either
I don’t disagree with that bit, I’m just not sure where this projection of a growth in the catholic minority comes from??
MarqueeMark said: "Fascinating afternoon of door-knocking in the Totnes constituency this afternoon.
The public know what is going on. They are locked and loaded and ready to go hunting bare-faced liars....."
I can understand that they are saying that about the Labour Party - but out of interest what are they saying about the LibDems (who at least have been remain all along)?
So what time is the programme motion defeated/amended tomorrow?
I don’t think it’s a given it will be defeated . The problem is MPs can’t just say they want three weeks because they haven’t got an extension yet .
An amendment will have to be creative to allow them to block it but not seem to be assuming that an extension will be granted .
Except we know one will be. They can safely assume it. So it's about whether they think a particular length of extensions assists in defeating the bill/amending it beyond all recognition, or if its just a need to play for as much time as possible and hope something comes up.
Fascinating afternoon of door-knocking in the Totnes constituency this afternoon.
The public know what is going on. They are locked and loaded and ready to go hunting bare-faced liars.....
You sound like a Trump fan from a trailer park in Nebraska! I expected better from you !
Is he wrong though?
By my (admittedly unscientific) soundings I’ve been surprised by just how many Remainers think enough is enough and think it’s time to move on, even if they have grave doubts about the wisdom of the decision.
Fascinating afternoon of door-knocking in the Totnes constituency this afternoon.
The public know what is going on. They are locked and loaded and ready to go hunting bare-faced liars.....
You sound like a Trump fan from a trailer park in Nebraska! I expected better from you !
I'm just relaying the mood on the doorstep. Maybe Totnes is at the sharp end of reactions because Dr Sarah Wollaston - with a Conservative majority of 15k - pledged to implement Brexit, but has since spent two and a half years doing all she can to block it. Maybe other seats are more relaxed. But the mood in Totnes constituency is ferociously unforgiving.
And Jo Swinson isn't exactly going down a storm in the SW either. I had drect switchers from LD --> Con citing her and her Brexit policy.
The one thing Boris has done with his 31st October 'do or die' has brought this whole thing to a head
The fury from remainers is understandable and the timetable very ambitious
However, from the people v parliament narrative developed with some success to today's charade, probably orchestrated by Cummings, to encourage the speaker to fall in a trap he could not avoid, if Brexit happens Cummings will have been the architect of the almost impossible
It is fascinating and compelling but disturbing all at the same time
× When I said I get the mail on line (Mail plus) mainly for my wife's puzzles it is absolutely true.
I do not have time keeping upto date with everything 'live' and 'on line' and on twitter to peruse the mail
Fascinating afternoon of door-knocking in the Totnes constituency this afternoon.
The public know what is going on. They are locked and loaded and ready to go hunting bare-faced liars.....
You sound like a Trump fan from a trailer park in Nebraska! I expected better from you !
I'm just relaying the mood on the doorstep. Maybe Totnes is at the sharp end of reactions because Dr Sarah Wollaston - with a Conservative majority of 15k - pledged to implement Brexit, but has since spent two and a half years doing all she can to block it. Maybe other seats are more relaxed. But the mood in Totnes constituency is ferociously unforgiving.
And Jo Swinson isn't exactly going down a storm in the SW either. I had drect switchers from LD --> Con citing her and her Brexit policy.
Fascinating afternoon of door-knocking in the Totnes constituency this afternoon.
The public know what is going on. They are locked and loaded and ready to go hunting bare-faced liars.....
You sound like a Trump fan from a trailer park in Nebraska! I expected better from you !
I'm just relaying the mood on the doorstep. Maybe Totnes is at the sharp end of reactions because Dr Sarah Wollaston - with a Conservative majority of 15k - pledged to implement Brexit, but has since spent two and a half years doing all she can to block it. Maybe other seats are more relaxed. But the mood in Totnes constituency is ferociously unforgiving.
And Jo Swinson isn't exactly going down a storm in the SW either. I had drect switchers from LD --> Con citing her and her Brexit policy.
You would find the pope converting to the United Reform church if it suited your completley blinkered incessant narrative.
Fascinating afternoon of door-knocking in the Totnes constituency this afternoon.
The public know what is going on. They are locked and loaded and ready to go hunting bare-faced liars.....
You sound like a Trump fan from a trailer park in Nebraska! I expected better from you !
I'm just relaying the mood on the doorstep. Maybe Totnes is at the sharp end of reactions because Dr Sarah Wollaston - with a Conservative majority of 15k - pledged to implement Brexit, but has since spent two and a half years doing all she can to block it. Maybe other seats are more relaxed. But the mood in Totnes constituency is ferociously unforgiving.
And Jo Swinson isn't exactly going down a storm in the SW either. I had drect switchers from LD --> Con citing her and her Brexit policy.
Once you get outside the hardcore remain/FBPE/Peoples Vote fanbase of 25% or so of the population there is some genuine fury at parliament. I'm not sure they are ready for the electoral reckoning.
There's really no point in another referendum now. The result of the first one has been so thoroughly, thoroughly trashed by the remain side with the (Taken from leavers at first as a quip but now wholly owned by remain) "Parliamentary sovereignty" narrative that as soon as a Tory or Brexit Gov't gets a majority (And I think they would should leave lose) we'll be out and perhaps on even harder terms than now proposed.
Fascinating afternoon of door-knocking in the Totnes constituency this afternoon.
The public know what is going on. They are locked and loaded and ready to go hunting bare-faced liars.....
It's a shame they don't seen bright enough to have identified the only MP I know of to be sacked twice for lying.
Difference is, he hasn't lied to them. Just see a PM trying to do the impossbile, and indeed getting that impossible deal, but with serried ranks of idiots getting in the way of accepting it.
The Boris of the doorsteps is a very different one to that promoted by the Westminster bubble.
The one thing Boris has done with his 31st October 'do or die' has brought this whole thing to a head
The fury from remainers is understandable and the timetable very ambitious
However, from the people v parliament narrative developed with some success to today's charade, probably orchestrated by Cummings, to encourage the speaker to fall in a trap he could not avoid, if Brexit happens Cummings will have been the architect of the almost impossible
It is fascinating and compelling but disturbing all at the same time
You say this same post quite a lot. My understanding of what you are saying, the divisive part is not good and doesn’t sit well with conservatism?
Yes, but the reason was that they wanted the letter to be sent. That it now has been is a material change of circumstances.
To be clear, I think Bercow was right, but I can see the argument on the other side.
They wanted the letter sent AND the WAIB passed. If the MV passed today, Johnson could withdraw the letter, hence reopening the No Deal loophole. So the same amendment would have been needed to close it - Groundhog Day.
Its not a loophole, it was an explicit option in the Benn Act that if Parliament agreed a deal no letter was needed, so deciding not to vote on the deal does not close a loophole it goes against what was passed in the Benn Act.
The Benn Act was badly drafted to be in this mess. Perhaps it should have said that a letter would need to be sent unless Parliament had passed a Withdrawal Act but it didn't.
Probably the trouble was that, given the timing of the European Council meeting, that would have put the deadline too close to 31 October.
Then why the hell did the Benn Act give Saturday as an acceptable date to accept a deal then?
To say you have until 19 Oct to get a deal then say on 19 Oct "sorry too late" is bad faith at the very least.
They didn't say "too late." They said "We don't trust you unless the legislation is passed."
The one thing Boris has done with his 31st October 'do or die' has brought this whole thing to a head
The fury from remainers is understandable and the timetable very ambitious
However, from the people v parliament narrative developed with some success to today's charade, probably orchestrated by Cummings, to encourage the speaker to fall in a trap he could not avoid, if Brexit happens Cummings will have been the architect of the almost impossible
It is fascinating and compelling but disturbing all at the same time
You say this same post quite a lot. My understanding of what you are saying, the divisive part is not good and doesn’t sit well with conservatism?
Essentially yes, but the divisive part is all sides fighting to win their cause with no thought of compromise
I believe in compromise as an essential ingredient in solving difficult disputes
The one thing Boris has done with his 31st October 'do or die' has brought this whole thing to a head
The fury from remainers is understandable and the timetable very ambitious
However, from the people v parliament narrative developed with some success to today's charade, probably orchestrated by Cummings, to encourage the speaker to fall in a trap he could not avoid, if Brexit happens Cummings will have been the architect of the almost impossible
It is fascinating and compelling but disturbing all at the same time
You say this same post quite a lot. My understanding of what you are saying, the divisive part is not good and doesn’t sit well with conservatism?
Essentially yes, but the divisive part is all sides fighting to win their cause with no thought of compromise
I believe in compromise as an essential ingredient in solving difficult disputes
In what way is your party in a position to lecture on compromise? There has been no compromise by the Conservative Party to remainers.
The one thing Boris has done with his 31st October 'do or die' has brought this whole thing to a head
The fury from remainers is understandable and the timetable very ambitious
However, from the people v parliament narrative developed with some success to today's charade, probably orchestrated by Cummings, to encourage the speaker to fall in a trap he could not avoid, if Brexit happens Cummings will have been the architect of the almost impossible
It is fascinating and compelling but disturbing all at the same time
You say this same post quite a lot. My understanding of what you are saying, the divisive part is not good and doesn’t sit well with conservatism?
Essentially yes, but the divisive part is all sides fighting to win their cause with no thought of compromise
I believe in compromise as an essential ingredient in solving difficult disputes
Sadly the 24 hour news cycle and social media has led politicians to believe compromise is weakness rather than strength.
If you go door-knocking during the day on a Monday the sample size of retired racist frothers is going to be very unrepresentative.
It matters not what time you go dooe knocking, you are looking for changes in intention/committment to vote amongst those that are there. In the same way you can still get VI figures from unusually loaded samples by adjusting. And plenty of people that aren't retired, or are retired and not racist or frothing are home on a monday
The one thing Boris has done with his 31st October 'do or die' has brought this whole thing to a head
The fury from remainers is understandable and the timetable very ambitious
However, from the people v parliament narrative developed with some success to today's charade, probably orchestrated by Cummings, to encourage the speaker to fall in a trap he could not avoid, if Brexit happens Cummings will have been the architect of the almost impossible
It is fascinating and compelling but disturbing all at the same time
You say this same post quite a lot. My understanding of what you are saying, the divisive part is not good and doesn’t sit well with conservatism?
Essentially yes, but the divisive part is all sides fighting to win their cause with no thought of compromise
I believe in compromise as an essential ingredient in solving difficult disputes
In what way is your party in a position to lecture on compromise? There has been no compromise by the Conservative Party to remainers.
My comments are about myself not a political party
There's really no point in another referendum now. The result of the first one has been so thoroughly, thoroughly trashed by the remain side with the (Taken from leavers at first as a quip but now wholly owned by remain) "Parliamentary sovereignty" narrative that as soon as a Tory or Brexit Gov't gets a majority (And I think they would should leave lose) we'll be out and perhaps on even harder terms than now proposed.
No political party in their right minds, apart from TBP would, if we avoid this disastrous decision to leave, ever suggest we go there again. Life was fine no issues just some people who wanted to make more money and had the funds to bankroll a campaign of lies, lead by thelier in chief.
The one thing Boris has done with his 31st October 'do or die' has brought this whole thing to a head
The fury from remainers is understandable and the timetable very ambitious
However, from the people v parliament narrative developed with some success to today's charade, probably orchestrated by Cummings, to encourage the speaker to fall in a trap he could not avoid, if Brexit happens Cummings will have been the architect of the almost impossible
It is fascinating and compelling but disturbing all at the same time
You say this same post quite a lot. My understanding of what you are saying, the divisive part is not good and doesn’t sit well with conservatism?
Essentially yes, but the divisive part is all sides fighting to win their cause with no thought of compromise
I believe in compromise as an essential ingredient in solving difficult disputes
What compromise has the government shown with Non Leavers and Non Tories? As far as I can see it’s all manipulation, blackmail and brinkmanship?
There's really no point in another referendum now. The result of the first one has been so thoroughly, thoroughly trashed by the remain side with the (Taken from leavers at first as a quip but now wholly owned by remain) "Parliamentary sovereignty" narrative that as soon as a Tory or Brexit Gov't gets a majority (And I think they would should leave lose) we'll be out and perhaps on even harder terms than now proposed.
No political party in their right minds, apart from TBP would, if we avoid this disastrous decision to leave, ever suggest we go there again. Life was fine no issues just some people who wanted to make more money and had the funds to bankroll a campaign of lies, lead by thelier in chief.
Utter garbage I am afraid. That is your Remainer unicorns once again.
Fascinating afternoon of door-knocking in the Totnes constituency this afternoon.
The public know what is going on. They are locked and loaded and ready to go hunting bare-faced liars.....
You sound like a Trump fan from a trailer park in Nebraska! I expected better from you !
I'm just relaying the mood on the doorstep. Maybe Totnes is at the sharp end of reactions because Dr Sarah Wollaston - with a Conservative majority of 15k - pledged to implement Brexit, but has since spent two and a half years doing all she can to block it. Maybe other seats are more relaxed. But the mood in Totnes constituency is ferociously unforgiving.
And Jo Swinson isn't exactly going down a storm in the SW either. I had drect switchers from LD --> Con citing her and her Brexit policy.
You would find the pope converting to the United Reform church if it suited your completley blinkered incessant narrative.
You are the one so fucking blinkered.
I have a track record of posting on here EXACTLY what I have found on the doorstep. Which is why folk listen to what I report back. Some bet accordingly. I take that responsibility seriously.
My findings may not be universal. We went from under 4k to over 14k majority in Torbay in 2017. On the basis of what I saw - and reported here - the Tories were doing really, really well. Maybe the sample of a Monday afternoon in rural Totnes counts for jack shit. But I post it so that others can perhaps add their voices - am I seeing an outlier, or am I picking up a tsunami of pissed off voters wanting to wreak revenge on the MPs screwing over the Brexit deal on offer.
(My track record of reports in 2015 was of the LibDems going down, down, down in the SW - some here made good money as a reslut.)
I look forward to your door-step findings. Suely you are out there door-knocking too, so certain are you of the mood of the voters...?
I've just caught up on some excellent summaries of the constituency and would say it's a 'just get Brexit done' sort of Remainer with a fair chunk of dedicated leavers who don't like Farage. I'd expect the idea of revoke will not be a big enough winner here for the Lib Dems - we're the burbs not the metropolitan liberal type.
Corbyn is a total turn off to the villages and which dominate the electorate.
Tory hold/gain - and finally back with a voice in politics which will be a massive relief!
The one thing Boris has done with his 31st October 'do or die' has brought this whole thing to a head
The fury from remainers is understandable and the timetable very ambitious
However, from the people v parliament narrative developed with some success to today's charade, probably orchestrated by Cummings, to encourage the speaker to fall in a trap he could not avoid, if Brexit happens Cummings will have been the architect of the almost impossible
It is fascinating and compelling but disturbing all at the same time
You say this same post quite a lot. My understanding of what you are saying, the divisive part is not good and doesn’t sit well with conservatism?
Essentially yes, but the divisive part is all sides fighting to win their cause with no thought of compromise
I believe in compromise as an essential ingredient in solving difficult disputes
Sadly the 24 hour news cycle and social media has led politicians to believe compromise is weakness rather than strength.
There’s philosophical arguments being made that it is the internet revolution and social media that is bringing the division into our politics and our society’s.
Gove is explaining why further £millions of our money is going to be wasted on No Deal propaganda in a bid to frighten MPs into quickly agreeing the WAIB. A big expensive bluff.
That might have worked if MPs had passed the MV if it had been allowed.
That would have allowed the government to be able to withdraw the extension request .
Withdrawing the extension request increases the chance of No Deal if the WAB overruns as it probably will. Hence Letwin's amendment.
Gove is pretending there is still a risk of No Deal. There isn't. An extension will be offered and accepted. Gove is playing games with our money. £millions.
I think that a sense of perspective is required. The cost of an extension is in excess of £200m a week. That's quite a lot of money so some pontificating liars can run their fantasies just one more time. I mean its not as if what is laughably called a debate is going to change a single mind or vote is it? No one is even pretending that.
So this is all over bar the shouting - Johnson will be taking us out of the EU with this Deal.
The key thing now for all people of sound mind and good character is that he is not allowed the MASSIVE triumph of doing so on the iconic date of 31 October.
He has to miss the deadline for there to be a fighting chance of avoiding a big GE win for him and the motliest set of Tories we have seen in many a long year.
It is worth continuing the guerilla warfare in parliament purely in order to achieve this objective. He must NOT be allowed to get Brexit done by that magic date.
Sadly the 24 hour news cycle and social media has led politicians to believe compromise is weakness rather than strength.
It's also endemic to the UK political system: dysfunctional, adversarial and "winner" takes all. See also "industrial relations" for more evidence of why the UK is a chronic underperformer.
Comments
In practice, "Honours" are not given to those who are honourable, but mostly politicians, civil servants, judges, entertainers and sports people who are near the top of their profession.
As obnoxious as he is, Farage meets that criteria with ease, and I wouldnt see a problem with him getting one.
That would have allowed the government to be able to withdraw the extension request .
No, that is your choice, MPs.
You need more than 3 days to decide your answer. Really?
Also, it’s the one thing that might tone him down a bit. All he’s ever really wanted is to be accepted by the Establishment.
No, that is your choice, MPs."
I actually think that Corbyn wants a Hard Brexit so that 1) Boris misses 31/10 date and 2) to maximise the chaos which (he thinks) Tories will be blamed for.
And in answer to @Gabs2, yes that should include those who promulgate anti-semitism too or prejudice against other minority groups.
If they are not even going to bother reading the things why do they need more time?
The growing secular population in Northern Ireland will also not take kindly to having no gay marriage and abortion banned when they could unite with the Republic of Ireland and have both.
That is why Unionists with a brain like Lord Trimble back the Boris Deal
It is a great pity he was batting for the other side.
Take as an example Labour unhappy workers rights moved by Boris out the WA to the PD. Is watering down pay and conditions in order to be competitive post brexit really secured never to happen by being in the WA? Or is there always potential for us to diverge post brexit regardless of it being in the WA?
How much of a lock on future post brexit government is the WA? How important or not to get this right?
I nearly shat.
Oh diddums! He has failed to get elected to Parliament 8 times, or is it 9. That's the way to represent people. He doesn't get to be a legislator as compensation for his hurt feelings or his failures or to massage his ego.
Opposition MPs are looking to fight a long protracted rearguard action in the hope something comes up, which it might of course.
An amendment will have to be creative to allow them to block it but not seem to be assuming that an extension will be granted .
22 weeks is the minimum time for your losers revote. And that is without the court challenges.
Until recently my understanding was that the non-aligned NI population was the fastest growing, and new migrants to NI (few as they are) weren’t that keen on a United Ireland.
The public know what is going on. They are locked and loaded and ready to go hunting bare-faced liars.....
Gove is pretending there is still a risk of No Deal. There isn't. An extension will be offered and accepted. Gove is playing games with our money. £millions.
To say you have until 19 Oct to get a deal then say on 19 Oct "sorry too late" is bad faith at the very least.
The public know what is going on. They are locked and loaded and ready to go hunting bare-faced liars....."
I can understand that they are saying that about the Labour Party - but out of interest what are they saying about the LibDems (who at least have been remain all along)?
By my (admittedly unscientific) soundings I’ve been surprised by just how many Remainers think enough is enough and think it’s time to move on, even if they have grave doubts about the wisdom of the decision.
And Jo Swinson isn't exactly going down a storm in the SW either. I had drect switchers from LD --> Con citing her and her Brexit policy.
The fury from remainers is understandable and the timetable very ambitious
However, from the people v parliament narrative developed with some success to today's charade, probably orchestrated by Cummings, to encourage the speaker to fall in a trap he could not avoid, if Brexit happens Cummings will have been the architect of the almost impossible
It is fascinating and compelling but disturbing all at the same time
× When I said I get the mail on line (Mail plus) mainly for my wife's puzzles it is absolutely true.
I do not have time keeping upto date with everything 'live' and 'on line' and on twitter to peruse the mail
The Boris of the doorsteps is a very different one to that promoted by the Westminster bubble.
I believe in compromise as an essential ingredient in solving difficult disputes
And the chancellor says theres no need to do an economic assessment you just have to believe it will be great !
There are some very nasty retirees but most are honest, decent people who have worked hard all their lives
The fact we are door-knocking on a Monday afternoon shows how up for the fight we are.
Perhaps you would like to relay your door-knocking findings? Then we can compare notes....
And plenty of people that aren't retired, or are retired and not racist or frothing are home on a monday
Never has been.
😮
I have a track record of posting on here EXACTLY what I have found on the doorstep. Which is why folk listen to what I report back. Some bet accordingly. I take that responsibility seriously.
My findings may not be universal. We went from under 4k to over 14k majority in Torbay in 2017. On the basis of what I saw - and reported here - the Tories were doing really, really well. Maybe the sample of a Monday afternoon in rural Totnes counts for jack shit. But I post it so that others can perhaps add their voices - am I seeing an outlier, or am I picking up a tsunami of pissed off voters wanting to wreak revenge on the MPs screwing over the Brexit deal on offer.
(My track record of reports in 2015 was of the LibDems going down, down, down in the SW - some here made good money as a reslut.)
I look forward to your door-step findings. Suely you are out there door-knocking too, so certain are you of the mood of the voters...?
Corbyn is a total turn off to the villages and which dominate the electorate.
Tory hold/gain - and finally back with a voice in politics which will be a massive relief!
One of the pb meme aren’t we supposed to post something like
THIS THREAD HAS BEEN RULED DISORDERLY, AND INADMISSABLE, SO THOSE WHO DIDNT TURN UP LIKE BORIS HASNT MISSED ANYTHING
🙂
The key thing now for all people of sound mind and good character is that he is not allowed the MASSIVE triumph of doing so on the iconic date of 31 October.
He has to miss the deadline for there to be a fighting chance of avoiding a big GE win for him and the motliest set of Tories we have seen in many a long year.
It is worth continuing the guerilla warfare in parliament purely in order to achieve this objective. He must NOT be allowed to get Brexit done by that magic date.