The same argument could be made about Merseyside, except that there's no Scouse nationalist party - yet. But it'll only be a few hours before a Scouse MP (Fields) or other politician makes that
Is this the beginning of the Johnson deal's death by a thousand press conferences as each of its 110 pages gets its moment in the sun of glaring scrutiny?
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
Any amendments on customs union or referendum Boris pulls it
This meeting with Boris, Corbyn et al seems more likely to be about a GE
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
It's nice that PB has yet another expert on matters Scotch, the collective wisdom on this subject is unsurpassed.
Can you give a brief breakdown on how the SNP would call for a Scottish GE, and the mechanism required to bring it about?
They would need two thirds of MSPs to vote in favour. That's why they can only "call for" an SGE, rather than "call" one. Remind you of any other Parliament?
The other route would be for the First Minister to resign (off her own bat or because she got VONCed) and nobody to be elected to the office within 28 days.
I'm gratified to have increased traffic to Google, if only infinitesimally.
Now, what extraordinary question do you think this convoluted and without precedent process would be the answer to?
How to cure oneself of the habit of throwing unpleasant sarcasm and then expecting to be answered?
That's the first time I've heard "precedent" used to describe a process clearly defined by statute, by the way.
What's "convoluted" about "Let's have an election - are there two-thirds of members in favour?"
an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances.
If you were in the habit of constructing arguments rather than throwing handfuls of sarcastic dung at people you would present your claim clearly that it's difficult for legitimate and respectable reasons for the SNP's minority government to call for an SGE. Your problem would be that it isn't.
How many times a week do you ask a person to explain something to you that you should already have known if you are deigning to take part in the exchange at all and then, after they have explained it to you politely, sneer at them that they got it from Google? That move is so dirt cheap that it hurts to watch.
It's idiotic to claim that it would be hard for the SNP to call for an extraordinary SGE because there has been no "precedent" for such a move in the 20 years since the Scottish Parliament was revived. We're talking about a statutory mechanism in respect of which there is no relevant lack of clarity or need for precedent. Of course the outcome would not be fully known in advance, but that was part of my point. Similarly the mechanism is not in the slightest bit "convoluted". You've totally lost an argument you were never in. I'm putting you on ignore now.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
Any amendments on customs union or referendum Boris pulls it
Not so sure about that. I don't think a PV amendment will have enough support. CU probably will. Michael Gove wasn't especially anti it. Johnson won't give a shit. His only concern will be losing the ERG. But if he gets Labour support that won't bother him either. Look at the DUP if you don't believe me.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
Any amendments on customs union or referendum Boris pulls it
Not so sure about that. I don't think a PV amendment will have enough support. CU probably will. Michael Gove wasn't especially anti it. Johnson won't give a shit. His only concern will be losing the ERG. But if he gets Labour support that won't bother him either. Look at the DUP if you don't believe me.
A man without principles won't give a shit.
Customs union is totally unacceptable to pretty much the entire Tory party with the exception of Ken Clarke. If it passes (very doubtful) the bill is pulled
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
I think all amendments would be with regard to positions in future FT negotiations.
The Brexit Party will thrive - but from Labour Brexiteers heading that way. Boris will still be polling in the high thirties.
Labour are reading this so wrong....
I’m not sure the Brexit Party will thrive.
From my lofty perch in Yvette Cooper's 70% leave constituency, where a Brexit Party candidate will more than likely stand, I think yes, they'll take some votes. There are some really vocal Brexiteers round here. But I don't think it'll be enough to dethrone Cooper. And I suspect a sizeable proportion of BP votes will be from local Tories who's vote has effectively been wasted in this constituency for decades.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
I think that Ken Clarke may have precipitated a GE by saying he is going to co-author an amendment with labour for a customs union. That would be the end of this deal
The same argument could be made about Merseyside, except that there's no Scouse nationalist party - yet. But it'll only be a few hours before a Scouse MP (Fields) or other politician makes that
Is this the beginning of the Johnson deal's death by a thousand press conferences as each of its 110 pages gets its moment in the sun of glaring scrutiny?
That's interesting, also because exactly the same problem - of a customs barrier - applies to Boris Bridge Mark 2 from NI to Scotland as being discussed by Messrs Malcy and LuckyGuy this morning. Possibly partly mitigated if sealed containers could go straight through.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
Wrecking is the recognized term for am amendment which completely alters the purpose of the bill, it's not a pejorative term
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
Any amendments on customs union or referendum Boris pulls it
Not so sure about that. I don't think a PV amendment will have enough support. CU probably will. Michael Gove wasn't especially anti it. Johnson won't give a shit. His only concern will be losing the ERG. But if he gets Labour support that won't bother him either. Look at the DUP if you don't believe me.
I think that Ken Clarke may have precipitated a GE by saying he is going to co-author an amendment with labour for a customs union. That would be the end of this deal
I think it would command a majority in the House. So there you have it: a Brexit deal supported by the HoC. The EU won't care, they'll like it.
I think that Ken Clarke may have precipitated a GE by saying he is going to co-author an amendment with labour for a customs union. That would be the end of this deal
Its unlikely to pass imo, no more than 5 ex tories for it, DUP LD and SNP previously against, dealers likely to avoid to get deal done
Good article Ms Cyclefree, to which I'd add three points:
1. I think that you identify very well the chief reasons behind the Brexit vote. In terms of the local/regional vs national/global argument, this is backed up by the fact that of the four regions that had devolved Government at the time - Wales, Scotland, NI and London, three voted strongly to remain. The fourth (Wales) has had ineffective government that is largely controlled by the central Labour party and this could be a reason why it voted to leave. ALL other regions voted to leave. This is a clear correlation to back up your theory. I am told by contacts of mine that Boris is investigating further devolved government for England and possibly for the regions of England - with this in mind this would appear to be the way to go, moving away from central government to decisions taken at a regional level. The EU, of course, is one step further away from central government hence it is often seen as unrepresentative.
2. While the problem for addressing the causes of Brexit will inevitably pass to the government should it succeed in getting it through, surely at the current time the burden for addressing these concerns rests with those who wish to overturn the result, of which you, I believe, are one? Unless there is an attempt to address these underlying concerns then the Remain side leave themselves wide open to being perceived as antidemocratic, a view which appears to be favoured by a large slice of the population. Why do you feel your side has been so negligent in this regard?
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
Wrecking is the recognized term for am amendment which completely alters the purpose of the bill, it's not a pejorative term
It is and it's a redundant adjective.
Just use the word 'amendment' and leave out your prejudices.
I think that Ken Clarke may have precipitated a GE by saying he is going to co-author an amendment with labour for a customs union. That would be the end of this deal
Its unlikely to pass imo, no more than 5 ex tories for it, DUP LD and SNP previously against, dealers likely to avoid to get deal done
I'm not so sure - if there isn't much chance of an election - it's closer to what the SNP and LDs want than anything else.
Plus it probably makes an election closer so it's a win win option for them.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
"Wrecking" is not childish, it has a specific meaning as a part of Westminster jargon. It even has a page in the Parliament glossary.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
I thought 'wrecking amendment' was an official term, used to describe an amendment that was designed to destroy a piece of legislation and can therefore be rejected by the Speaker for debate.
The point is that in the HoC in order to get Brexit there will have to be compromise. Anyone dreaming that somehow there's a path paved in gold to a HoC full of Mark Francois is in cuckoo land. The likelihood is that a General Election will produce more of the same: another hung parliament of some manner.
Which is pretty much the state of play in the country.
So, whilst 'compromise' may be a dirty word still for some, it's the only way to deliver Brexit.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
Wrecking is the recognized term for am amendment which completely alters the purpose of the bill, it's not a pejorative term
It is and it's a redundant adjective.
Just use the word 'amendment' and leave out your prejudices.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
Any amendments on customs union or referendum Boris pulls it
Not so sure about that. I don't think a PV amendment will have enough support. CU probably will. Michael Gove wasn't especially anti it. Johnson won't give a shit. His only concern will be losing the ERG. But if he gets Labour support that won't bother him either. Look at the DUP if you don't believe me.
A man without principles won't care.
On the ERG front, Boris has cleverly recruited Jacob Rees-Mogg from his official post as ERG chair and unofficial post as its token intellectual. JRM is now bound by collective responsibility and ambition to agree with every Boris/Cummings wheeze and most of the ERG will take his word for it.
I think that Ken Clarke may have precipitated a GE by saying he is going to co-author an amendment with labour for a customs union. That would be the end of this deal
I think it would command a majority in the House. So there you have it: a Brexit deal supported by the HoC. The EU won't care, they'll like it.
You are expressing your own hopes but are unrealistic
It is not negotiable in this deal and would change matters and there is no time for the EU to amend this complex treaty
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
Wrecking is the recognized term for am amendment which completely alters the purpose of the bill, it's not a pejorative term
It is and it's a redundant adjective.
Just use the word 'amendment' and leave out your prejudices.
It isn't a redundant adjective, it is the widely accepted adjective for such an amendment. It has nothing to do with the specifics of Brexit. And I haven't called anything wrecking or surrender, so my prejudices are not just irrelevant, they are unrevealed
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
Wrecking is the recognized term for am amendment which completely alters the purpose of the bill, it's not a pejorative term
It is and it's a redundant adjective.
Just use the word 'amendment' and leave out your prejudices.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
I thought 'wrecking amendment' was an official term, used to describe an amendment that was designed to destroy a piece of legislation and can therefore be rejected by the Speaker for debate.
Eh ? I thought they were allowed. Letwin on the MV was clearly wrecking as if/when passed nullified the MV and meant it couldn't be brought a second time.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
Any amendments on customs union or referendum Boris pulls it
Not so sure about that. I don't think a PV amendment will have enough support. CU probably will.
An all-Britain CU is close to May's Deal in the form in which it was about to be agreed with Labour before the ERG got rid of the May administration. Then the Kinnock amendment to the Benn Bill went through because, ahem, the Johnson government didn't provide tellers. Let's not forget the Kinnock amendment:
"The PM must seek to obtain (...) an extension (...) in order to debate and pass a Bill to implement the agreement between the UK and the EU under (A50), including provisions reflecting the outcome of inter-party talks as announced by the PM on 21 May 2019, and in particular the need for the UK to secure changes to the political declaration to reflect the outcome of those inter-party talks".
Yes. That is hiding in plain sight. He has voted against Europe for 40 years and stood as leader on a Brexit manifesto in 2017. We knew that. The complicated bit is not 'Is he a Brexiteer' but 'How does the politics of power work out in this situation'.
The point is that in the HoC in order to get Brexit there will have to be compromise. Anyone dreaming that somehow there's a path paved in gold to a HoC full of Mark Francois is in cuckoo land. The likelihood is that a General Election will produce more of the same: another hung parliament of some manner.
Which is pretty much the state of play in the country.
So, whilst 'compromise' may be a dirty word still for some, it's the only way to deliver Brexit.
I think you are right, but the problem is, when Brexit backing politicians compromise, it is called "an embarrassing climbdown", "A great victory for Varadkar/Ireland/Barnier/The EU" etc
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
Wrecking is the recognized term for am amendment which completely alters the purpose of the bill, it's not a pejorative term
It is and it's a redundant adjective.
Just use the word 'amendment' and leave out your prejudices.
It isn't a redundant adjective, it is the widely accepted adjective for such an amendment. It has nothing to do with the specifics of Brexit. And I haven't called anything wrecking or surrender, so my prejudices are not just irrelevant, they are unrevealed
Speaking of language - what do we reckon Boris will do at PMQs - continue the ‘glutinous emollience’ of the past few weeks, or do a (Geoffrey) Cox?
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
"Wrecking" is not childish, it has a specific meaning as a part of Westminster jargon. It even has a page in the Parliament glossary.
"Surrender" is missing form the glossary, and this is what the Parliament website has to say about Scrutiny (parliamentary scrutiny) (my emphasis in bold):
"Parliamentary scrutiny is the close examination and investigation of government policies, actions and spending that is carried out by the House of Commons and the House of Lords and their committees."
3. A more generic point - it is not Parliament's job to negotiate the deal. It is there as, if you like, board approval when negotiations are complete. It is perfectly within its rights to withhold approval but if it asks for items such as a/the customs union to be added to the deal it is exceeding its authority in a big way. The responsibility for negotiating the deal rests with the government (on behalf of the people who voted in the plebiscite), and if Parliament does not like what the government has offered it has two options - reject the deal, or call an election or VONC so that another government can take over the negotiations. Both options are available and the numbers are there for each should they choose, yet they refuse both, preferring instead to effectively kill the deal by stealth. They are of course free to do this but it's difficult to argue that they're acting in anyone's interests other than their own, and I expect they will be brutally judged by their actions or lack of.
This could indeed be the true Brexit breakthrough moment. Initiated, rather bemusingly, by Corbyn last night who was statesmanlike and dignified. I think Corbyn would quite like Brexit put to bed.
The question though is whether Johnson will stomach amendments. As he's not really a Brexiteer and the only things he's passionate about are himself and other people's wives (in that order) the answer I think will be 'yes.' He'll get it done, just not quite on his terms and not quite in his timescale. Corbyn will be able to point out that he nudged the whole thing along when it was stuck and both might save face.
And the General Election will then be next year at the earliest and will have nothing to do with Brexit.
How will amendments work on a deal that has been agreed?
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
Do get over the childish 'wrecking' and 'surrender' language. It's pathetic.
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
I note that Swinson uses the word in her statement this morning.
Wrecking is the recognized term for am amendment which completely alters the purpose of the bill, it's not a pejorative term
It is and it's a redundant adjective.
Just use the word 'amendment' and leave out your prejudices.
I notice that Swinson uses the word in her statement this morning.
- Gavin Esler - Robert Peston - Shelagh Fogerty - Paul Mason - Sir Michael Smithson
That's a tad unfair, Paul Mason was always nuts.
He did some good work covering the Greek crisis for Channel4 in 2015. Of late he has seemed quite unhinged.
Paul Mason's 2015 work PostCapitalism was bilge: just grab observations from all and sundry, stir them together in a big pot, slap them between some boards and call the result a book.
The "sick of us" argument was never convincing because, apart from Ireland, the mayor of Calais and a handful of EU apparatchiks who are probably glad of the work, there is not much for them to do on a day-to-day basis, and even if they are, it is better on balance for them if Britain stays in.
Exactly. The choice for most 27 Governments is 1) say no to an extension leading to certain chaos next weekend 2) say yes to an extension leading to: some chance of chaos some time in the future, or a good chance of an orderly brexit, or some chance that Brexit never gets its act together.
Which one is Latvia going to choose? It's a no brainer.
The "sick of us" argument was never convincing because, apart from Ireland, the mayor of Calais and a handful of EU apparatchiks who are probably glad of the work, there is not much for them to do on a day-to-day basis, and even if they are, it is better on balance for them if Britain stays in.
Exactly. The choice for most 27 Governments is 1) say no to an extension leading to certain chaos next weekend 2) say yes to an extension leading to: some chance of chaos some time in the future, or a good chance of an orderly brexit, or some chance that Brexit never gets its act together.
Which one is Latvia going to choose? It's a no brainer.
Latvia will go with the flow, France OTOH is a major player
I find it difficult to believe that Swinson wrote that.
Why would she include 'six white men' in what otherwise is a legitimate argument.
Perhaps to make a point ?
If Parliament reflected the population, the probability of the composition of that group happening by chance would be around 1.5%.
Perhaps a point clumsily made, but impossible to deny that she has a point, without being super-woke, or whatever the perjorative term of the day might be.
Apparently Dom said in the meeting that France would veto the extension
Macron will veto further extension unless the Commons either votes for the Withdrawal Agreement legislation by 31st October or MPs vote for a general election or EUref2 or revoke instead
The EU will have an interesting future and it is highly likely that it will not progress as the members and proponents anticipate, as it reacts to pressure from within and without. The larger and closer it is the more difficult it is to react to a 'situation' without causing stress to the organisation. Ultimately this has to result in a further and ratcheting centralisation of powers, which ultimately in xyz number of years will result in it fracturing into its component parts as it has to impose it will on unwilling parts of the Union..
The irony of this view is that of course the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has had a fairly long existence and was working (at least to a point) until relatively recently but seems very likely to be finally fractured by Brexit. The leavers have long expressed the view that there is somehow an inevitability that the EU will collapse but have only succeeded in collapsing the UK. I have some sympathy with the argument that the EU will come under huge pressure in years to come but given the increased and inevitably pressure for globalisation in the end the EU in some form will survive. It is also inevitable that the component parts of the UK will find their way back to membership of the EU but as pale shadows of the powerful part of the union that we were before 2016. Last back into the EU will probably be England which has always been the problem anyway. The English seem to have been unable to be part of any club where they cannot be seen as the 'natural leaders'. Future generations will need to learn that in a globalised world they are no more (or less) important than others and they will have to learn to play nicely rather than always insist that they have to have their own way.
Apparently Dom said in the meeting that France would veto the extension
Macron will veto further extension unless the Commons either votes for the Withdrawal Agreement legislation by 31st October or MPs vote for a general election or EUref2 instead
Just seen that Rupa Huq question - she actually managed to try and have a dig first of all whilst associating herself with his words about the tragic news from Essex today. That was v v poor.
CU amendment - depends how it is worded. If it is "And shall seek" or alters PD that is fine. Inside the WA it is wrecking.
I don't think it can be part of the WA because (as the EU keeps reminding us) under A50 the WA can't specify the UK's future trading relationship with the EU.
I'd have to have a think about whether its inclusion in the WAB somewhere other than the WA itself would be effective though.
Just seen that Rupa Huq question - she actually managed to try and have a dig first of all whilst associating herself with his words about the tragic news from Essex today. That was v v poor.
Apparently Dom said in the meeting that France would veto the extension
Macron will veto further extension unless the Commons either votes for the Withdrawal Agreement legislation by 31st October or MPs vote for a general election or EUref2 or revoke instead
And Bozo will resign rather than seek an A50 extension. We know that because you told us so repeatedly over the past few weeks.
Apparently Dom said in the meeting that France would veto the extension
Macron will veto further extension unless the Commons either votes for the Withdrawal Agreement legislation by 31st October or MPs vote for a general election or EUref2 or revoke instead
And Bozo will resign rather than seek an A50 extension. We know that because you told us so repeatedly over the past few weeks.
I would disregard HYUFD musing and expect a flexible extension to 31st January will be forthcoming prompting a GE this year as just demanded by the SNP
Apparently Dom said in the meeting that France would veto the extension
Macron will veto further extension unless the Commons either votes for the Withdrawal Agreement legislation by 31st October or MPs vote for a general election or EUref2 or revoke instead
And Bozo will resign rather than seek an A50 extension. We know that because you told us so repeatedly over the past few weeks.
He's successfully spun the optics to being "parliament's request" for anything he legally has to do on that. No more "die in a ditch" beartraps now
...The responsibility for negotiating the deal rests with the government (on behalf of the people who voted in the plebiscite), and if Parliament does not like what the government has offered it has two options...[Y]et they refuse both, preferring instead to effectively kill the deal by stealth.
The responsibility of the ruling party is to set negotiators clear terms of reference and get them endorsed by Parliament.
Like his predecessor, Johnson's refused to do this: a spectacular example of stupefying mismanagement. He's got only himself (and, arguably his predecessor) to blame for the ensuing mess.
Those who operate by assuming unaccountable power must take responsibility when the consequences become clear.
Apparently Dom said in the meeting that France would veto the extension
Macron will veto further extension unless the Commons either votes for the Withdrawal Agreement legislation by 31st October or MPs vote for a general election or EUref2 or revoke instead
And Bozo will resign rather than seek an A50 extension. We know that because you told us so repeatedly over the past few weeks.
HYUFD has a style much beloved of propagandists and fan-boys, where wild, hope filled guesses about the future are made as assertions of fact. It means that his statements should be treated with the derision and mirth that all heirs to Comical Ali deserve.
Apparently Dom said in the meeting that France would veto the extension
Macron will veto further extension unless the Commons either votes for the Withdrawal Agreement legislation by 31st October or MPs vote for a general election or EUref2 or revoke instead
And Bozo will resign rather than seek an A50 extension. We know that because you told us so repeatedly over the past few weeks.
Boris did not seek it, he sent an unsigned copy of the Benn Act to the EU and a signed letter opposing further extension.
It was Parliament which sought an A50 extension by voting for the Benn Act
Apparently Dom said in the meeting that France would veto the extension
Macron will veto further extension unless the Commons either votes for the Withdrawal Agreement legislation by 31st October or MPs vote for a general election or EUref2 or revoke instead
And Bozo will resign rather than seek an A50 extension. We know that because you told us so repeatedly over the past few weeks.
HYUFD has a style much beloved of propagandists and fan-boys, where wild, hope filled guesses about the future are made as assertions of fact. It means that his statements should be treated with the derision and mirth that all heirs to Comical Ali deserve.
To be fair HYUFD does provide a great source of mirth from time to time
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-50083216
The same argument could be made about Merseyside, except that there's no Scouse nationalist party - yet. But it'll only be a few hours before a Scouse MP (Fields) or other politician makes that
Is this the beginning of the Johnson deal's death by a thousand press conferences as each of its 110 pages gets its moment in the sun of glaring scrutiny?
This meeting with Boris, Corbyn et al seems more likely to be about a GE
What happens when the EU refuses to re-open the WA?
Does the government keeping making requests to changes to the WA each time a wrecking amendment is passed by the opposition?
How many times a week do you ask a person to explain something to you that you should already have known if you are deigning to take part in the exchange at all and then, after they have explained it to you politely, sneer at them that they got it from Google? That move is so dirt cheap that it hurts to watch.
It's idiotic to claim that it would be hard for the SNP to call for an extraordinary SGE because there has been no "precedent" for such a move in the 20 years since the Scottish Parliament was revived. We're talking about a statutory mechanism in respect of which there is no relevant lack of clarity or need for precedent. Of course the outcome would not be fully known in advance, but that was part of my point. Similarly the mechanism is not in the slightest bit "convoluted". You've totally lost an argument you were never in. I'm putting you on ignore now.
A man without principles won't care.
Labour re-iterates they will negotiate a timeline for the deal but will go to a GE on confirmation of the extension
The bill passed a second reading. Progress. We can see this through. It will just require the headbangers on both sides to give up their shibboleths.
Which is ultimately what will happen. It just seems to take time for it to sink in.
No Starmer today.
https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/irish-pm-says-northern-ireland-to-scotland-bridge-should-be-taken-seriously/10044895.article
Neither of them has the slightest principle.
1. I think that you identify very well the chief reasons behind the Brexit vote. In terms of the local/regional vs national/global argument, this is backed up by the fact that of the four regions that had devolved Government at the time - Wales, Scotland, NI and London, three voted strongly to remain. The fourth (Wales) has had ineffective government that is largely controlled by the central Labour party and this could be a reason why it voted to leave. ALL other regions voted to leave. This is a clear correlation to back up your theory. I am told by contacts of mine that Boris is investigating further devolved government for England and possibly for the regions of England - with this in mind this would appear to be the way to go, moving away from central government to decisions taken at a regional level. The EU, of course, is one step further away from central government hence it is often seen as unrepresentative.
2. While the problem for addressing the causes of Brexit will inevitably pass to the government should it succeed in getting it through, surely at the current time the burden for addressing these concerns rests with those who wish to overturn the result, of which you, I believe, are one? Unless there is an attempt to address these underlying concerns then the Remain side leave themselves wide open to being perceived as antidemocratic, a view which appears to be favoured by a large slice of the population. Why do you feel your side has been so negligent in this regard?
TBC...
'Surrender' is childish language (which wasn't used) however 'wrecking' in this context is a common term.
So my questions stand about how these amendments would work now the WA has been agreed with the EU.
Just use the word 'amendment' and leave out your prejudices.
Plus it probably makes an election closer so it's a win win option for them.
Which is pretty much the state of play in the country.
So, whilst 'compromise' may be a dirty word still for some, it's the only way to deliver Brexit.
Why would she include 'six white men' in what otherwise is a legitimate argument.
It is not negotiable in this deal and would change matters and there is no time for the EU to amend this complex treaty
How bitter.
https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/wrecking-amendment/
"The PM must seek to obtain (...) an extension (...) in order to debate and pass a Bill to implement the agreement between the UK and the EU under (A50), including provisions reflecting the outcome of inter-party talks as announced by the PM on 21 May 2019, and in particular the need for the UK to secure changes to the political declaration to reflect the outcome of those inter-party talks".
"Parliamentary scrutiny is the close examination and investigation of government policies, actions and spending that is carried out by the House of Commons and the House of Lords and their committees."
3. A more generic point - it is not Parliament's job to negotiate the deal. It is there as, if you like, board approval when negotiations are complete. It is perfectly within its rights to withhold approval but if it asks for items such as a/the customs union to be added to the deal it is exceeding its authority in a big way. The responsibility for negotiating the deal rests with the government (on behalf of the people who voted in the plebiscite), and if Parliament does not like what the government has offered it has two options - reject the deal, or call an election or VONC so that another government can take over the negotiations. Both options are available and the numbers are there for each should they choose, yet they refuse both, preferring instead to effectively kill the deal by stealth. They are of course free to do this but it's difficult to argue that they're acting in anyone's interests other than their own, and I expect they will be brutally judged by their actions or lack of.
1) say no to an extension leading to certain chaos next weekend
2) say yes to an extension leading to:
some chance of chaos some time in the future, or a good chance of an orderly brexit, or some chance that Brexit never gets its act together.
Which one is Latvia going to choose? It's a no brainer.
Ending this socially corrosive nonsense is actually more important to me than even Brexit.
He's just done it again.
It is GE talk not 'come together' on timetabling.
And let me just say..
......FINALLY!
Why would our withdrawal agreement with the EU mention the NHS?
If Parliament reflected the population, the probability of the composition of that group happening by chance would be around 1.5%.
Perhaps a point clumsily made, but impossible to deny that she has a point, without being super-woke, or whatever the perjorative term of the day might be.
Here we come
I'd have to have a think about whether its inclusion in the WAB somewhere other than the WA itself would be effective though.
Like his predecessor, Johnson's refused to do this: a spectacular example of stupefying mismanagement. He's got only himself (and, arguably his predecessor) to blame for the ensuing mess.
Those who operate by assuming unaccountable power must take responsibility when the consequences become clear.
His IRA salvo was there for the 6pm news soundbite.
It was Parliament which sought an A50 extension by voting for the Benn Act