I know it’s repetitive but the FTPA really is an utter sh*t show. It is one of the basic principles of U.K. Parliamentary democracy that when Parliament and the Executive are deadlocked that it should be thrown back to the people to decide. This was, I would argue, one great strength of the U.K. system over others with fixed term Parliaments. But having been handicapped in that way at least politicians in those models generally accept that they have a responsibility to try and work together to break such deadlocks.
We a now blessed with a Fixed Term model, but politicians who don’t accept their consequential responsibilities.
It wasn't a principle at all, as the Lascelles letter makes clear. The situation was and is that if a government can't govern either an election should take place or a new government should take over. But I agree that it is not acceptable to do neither, which is what is happening now. It wouldn't have been acceptable under the Lascelles letter for the monarch to do neither and it isn't acceptable under the FTPA for the House of Commons to do neither.
Apologies I should have written, “...deadlocked, and no alternative executive can be formed...”
Agreed, though it's worth adding that a PM refusing to resign when an alternative government does exist shouldn't count as a situation in which a new government can't be formed.
A Prime Minister traditionally can’t resign without a recommendation of either an election or an alternative PM who can command the confidence of the Commons. So doesn’t apply here.
Not really. As the Cabinet Manual makes clear, the monarch doesn't have to ask for a recommendation. The convention is merely that outgoing PM should be prepared to offer a recommendation if asked. And a PM who has lost the confidence of the House is not entitled to have that advice accepted.
The problem I was referring to was 'Number 10 sources' apparently saying that Johnson would not resign even if a vote of no confidence was passed and the Commons had resolved that a specific other person should be appointed PM.
Tories cheering on voter suppression is another depressing feature of modern political debate. Short term tactical advantage but longterm corrosion of our democracy.
Almost as bad as remainers cheering on a votes for 16 year olds amendment.
Not even remotely comparable. Openly and lawfully seeking to extend the franchise to people who cannot currently vote can be debated and determined according to the merits. Seeking to deny the franchise to people who already have it through no fault of their own is a quite different matter.
As probably one of the most northerly located PBers, all this fear of a December election is pathetic. In the Highlands in mid December we have daylight from around 09.30 until 15.30. That is amply time for dedicated voters i.e. the elderly to turn out and not for the lukewarm voters i.e. students, soap opera watchers and generally those who find anything more interesting than voting. Plus of course universities have broken up so students, if they vote, will have to be registered in their home constituencies or get off their arses and register for postal votes. A potentially healthy Tory majority beckons.
Universities having broken up is a good point not previously mentioned. Con Gain Canterbury....
Labour should come back with a date in November as their counter. Hell, with a one-clause Bill we could have a ten day campaign - if the parties so wished.
Tories cheering on voter suppression is another depressing feature of modern political debate. Short term tactical advantage but longterm corrosion of our democracy.
Why is it voter suppression? They can vote at home.
Putting barriers in the way of voting is the essence of voter suppression. That seems to be Tory party policy now.
The day with the latest sunrise, the winter solstice, is December 22nd. I hadn’t realised until checking this that the earliest sunset and the latest sunrise do not happen on the same day.
A 15.51 sunset happens between December 8th - 17th in London and varies by less across the month (9 minutes - 16.00-15.51) than sunrise (23 minutes, 07.43-08.06), so there's nothing particularly special about the 12th.
It's also worth noting that the last "winter" GE we had - February 1974 had a turnout of 78.8% - up 6.8% on the June 1970 election that saw Heath win - the highest turnout since 1951 and higher than any general election since then. Before that, the highest turnout (83.9%) had been February 1950.
If people want to vote, they will.
Top 5 UK General elections ranked by turnout since
Politicians fear of "people not voting in winter General Elections" is not supported by the facts.
Whilst that’s true, 1974 was a very long time ago.
The UK and people attitude to duty, deference and obligation have changed an awful lot in the last 45 years.
To put it into some perspective: you’d have had a large number of pensioners who were WW1 veterans voting in 1974.
Probably not - average UK life expectancy in 1974 was 72 - so a lot of the 1900 cohort would have passed on. Turnout in General Elections has risen every election since the 2001 nadir. I think it’s impossible to predict how turnout will go - but to assert that it will be “low” is based on special pleading, not precedent.
No, there were a lot of WWI veterans in 1974. This is fact. You can look it up.
Since you made the claim, could you supply the data please?
1.6% of 56.1 million in the relevant age bracket. Nearly 900k.
What proportion would have served? Probably quite high, and even if relatively low you're still looking at a couple of hundred thousand WWI veterans. Which would mean the high hundreds per constituency.
Yes, and you’d have a much larger number of WWII veterans on top.
My point is that in understanding such a high turnout we have to understand that it was also informed by millions of voters who’d personally served in the cause of defending democracy by force of arms, and saw voting in all weathers as a duty.
So we must be careful of comparing them and us today directly.
Not even remotely comparable. Openly and lawfully seeking to extend the franchise to people who cannot currently vote can be debated and determined according to the merits. Seeking to deny the franchise to people who already have it through no fault of their own is a quite different matter.
And how would these students be denied the franchise?
The day with the latest sunrise, the winter solstice, is December 22nd. I hadn’t realised until checking this that the earliest sunset and the latest sunrise do not happen on the same day.
A 15.51 sunset happens between December 8th - 17th in London and varies by less across the month (9 minutes - 16.00-15.51) than sunrise (23 minutes, 07.43-08.06), so there's nothing particularly
If people want to vote, they will.
Top 5 UK General elections ranked by turnout since 1950:
February 1950 - 83.9% October 1951 - 82.6% February 1974 - 78.8% October 1959 - 78.7% October 1964 - 77.1%
The lowest turnout GE was in June 2001 (59.4%)
Politicians fear of "people not voting in winter General Elections" is not supported by the facts.
Whilst that’s true, 1974 was a very long time ago.
The UK and people attitude to duty, deference and obligation have changed an awful lot in the last 45 years.
To put it into some perspective: you’d have had a large number of pensioners who were WW1 veterans voting in 1974.
Probably not - average UK life expectancy in 1974 was 72 - so a lot of the 1900 cohort would have passed on. Turnout in General Elections has risen every election since the 2001 nadir. I think it’s impossible to predict how turnout will go - but to assert that it will be “low” is based on special pleading, not precedent.
No, there were a lot of WWI veterans in 1974. This is fact. You can look it up.
Since you made the claim, could you supply the data please?
No. Mine very logically stands to reason. Almost 9 million men served in the UK and the average age was 24. So in 1974 most would have been in their mid-late 70s, or early 80s at worst, and alive. The last veterans didn’t die until well into the 21st Century.
If you want to dispute this then be my guest - and find the evidence. I have better things to do with my time.
You’re the one who made the claim as “fact” but can’t or won’t look it up......
You’re the one who’s disputing a totally obvious fact but who can’t or won’t provide any evidence to dispute it. You’ve also proven by your posts this morning that you totally misunderstand life expectancy.
Pathetic.
You don’t think name calling is a sign of losing an argument?
I’m neither calling you names nor losing the argument.
So the message from Johnson is now: ‘Let’s not get Brexit done! Let’s have an election instead!’ I’d suggest the opposition parties should allow him to have his election, and point out to voters that he’s wasting their time.
Exactly! It's why he needs to try for the WAIB even without an election. Either he succeeds and delivers Brexit, or he gets more evidence of parliament trying to stop Brexit. Don't try and just how much does he want it?
He will do anything to get Brexit except try hard apparently.
Listening to Chukka yesterday he'd pretty much given up on the idea of R2 with the current composition of parliament.
Yes, Ref2 comes only with a Lab govt after a GE. Therefore unlikely. Can be laid at 3 and that, for my money, is one of the better political bets around right now.
The day with the latest sunrise, the winter solstice, is December 22nd. I hadn’t realised until checking this that the earliest sunset and the latest sunrise do not happen on the same day.
A 15.51 sunset happens between December 8th - 17th in London and varies by less across the month (9 minutes - 16.00-15.51) than sunrise (23 minutes, 07.43-08.06), so there's nothing particularly special about the 12th.
It's also worth noting that the last "winter" GE we had - February 1974 had a turnout of 78.8% - up 6.8% on the June 1970 election that saw Heath win - the highest turnout since 1951 and higher than any general election since then. Before that, the highest turnout (83.9%) had been February 1950.
If people want to vote, they will.
Top 5 UK General elections ranked by turnout since
Politicians fear of "people not voting in winter General Elections" is not supported by the facts.
Whilst that’s true, 1974 was a very long time ago.
The UK and people attitude to duty, deference and obligation have changed an awful lot in the last 45 years.
To put it into some perspective: you’d have had a large number of pensioners who were WW1 veterans voting in 1974.
Probably not - average UK life expectancy in 1974 was 72 - so a lot of the 1900 cohort would have passed on. Turnout in General Elections has risen every election since the 2001 nadir. I think it’s impossible to predict how turnout will go - but to assert that it will be “low” is based on special pleading, not precedent.
No, there were a lot of WWI veterans in 1974. This is fact. You can look it up.
Since you made the claim, could you supply the data please?
You have to decide what constitutes "a lot" in this context before looking at the data,
Yes, and you’d have a much larger number of WWII veterans on top.
My point is that in understanding such a high turnout we have to understand that it was also informed by millions of voters who’d personally served in the cause of defending democracy by force of arms, and saw voting in all weathers as a duty.
So we must be careful of comparing them and us today directly.
The numbers of WW2 veterans who made for such high turnouts in 1950 would have been huge still in 1974. This interviews filmed in 63 and 64 are with a fairly spritely bunch. Many more would still be around a decade later.
It will be a very nasty campaign if it happens, according to Downing St Sources.
Oh I agree. And don't underestimate the superb nastiness of both Momentum and the Brexit Party.
But I said 'on here'. Pb.com is a standout site for by-and-large bypassing a lot of the partisan trolling and flaming that goes on everywhere else. And, sounding a little like Mary Whitehouse, we've already had a full-bore "f***ing" on here this morning.
I have a political persuasion, most of us do, but it would be great to keep this as objective as we can, especially as it's a betting site and I plan to continue splashing some cash in the markets
Agreed. And how about this for a really alarming poll? Most people think violence is worthwhile to get the Brexit result they want. Economic decline is worthwhile. The breakup of the country is worthwhile. The end of both agriculture and fishing is worthwhile.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is fanaticism. And it's gripped MOST voters on both sides.
If it is true the EU 27 don't want to take a decision which might be seen to influence UK politics one way or the other and the decision to grant an extension to Art50 is delayed into next week, that presumably means Corbyn doesn't agree to GE 12th December. Boris refuses to bring back the Withdrawal Act. By Tuesday/Wednesday do we then see the HoC and the HoL forced to accede and pass the Withdrawal Act basically unamended by Thursday because if not we leave the EU next Friday without a deal and no-one wants that.
Boris gets his Act through, the EU avoids taking a decision and Corbyn can then agree to a GE.
The EU wouldn’t risk that . It would look terrible to force the Commons into voting for the deal with hardly any scrutiny. Secondly the European Parliament needs to ratify , they can’t do it at short notice .
The issue is the length of the extension not whether there will be one . Macron is not going to veto causing a no deal . He has to work with 26 countries in the future , he’s not going to put all that at risk for a departing member .
I think you also have to factor in the outside possibility of the EU Parliament voting down the deal or at least being very unhappy. The EU leaders won’t want to face accusations that they haven’t given them enough time for scrutiny either.
It would only be extended further if the legislation for EUref2 had got through this Parliament which is unlikely given DUP and Labour MPs from Leave seats opposition, so that means a general election or No Deal if the Withdrawal Agreement is not passed by the end of November into law
I think the EU will always agree to extend if a No Deal exit would result from them not doing so.
Jav has just road tested “on strike” theory on the Today programme. And it crashed and burned. 😕
Good, it's a stupid idea.
The government should just keep pressing their case in a way that paints the opposition in an intransigent/scared/dishonest light.
Eventually Corbyn will cave and either vote the deal through pretty much as it is or he will agree to a GE.
He doesn't have any other realistic options.
It’s “zombie parliament blocking the people’s brexit” one minute and unable to explain why the urgent deal with a majority of thirty isn’t before Parliament the next. Holistically it doesn’t make a peanut of sense.
They're just having a bit of fun. I think they're annoyed our mps want to use what they will do as an excuse for their actions, when the eu would prefer to respond to our actions. So some slight messing with us, without truly forcing us.
If there is not a vote for an election the EU may will agree either an extension to the end of November to get the Withdrawal Agreement through and if it is not got through an extension to January only with a general election or another referendum anyway. I believe that is what Macron is pushing for
The extension would need to be considerably longer than 31 January for a referendum to take place.
And that is why I argued earlier that a GE is the best chance for a legitimate referendum as it is far from certain Boris will get a majority and it is possible it could be a remain parliament thereby opening the pathway to a referendum
Jav has just road tested “on strike” theory on the Today programme. And it crashed and burned. 😕
It is spectacularly stupid. Rewind a week, and when parliament said it wanted more scrutiny, negotiate the number of days up from 3 to around 6, job done, Brexit passed.
Now they present Labour with the opportunity to show the Tories refusing to progress Brexit and looking childish!
How can anyone go from from the triumph of a week ago, to the Trumpesque spouting of inanities the next? To simply blame Jeremy Corbyn for that change of fortune makes Corbyn look a better politician than he actually is.
The day with the latest sunrise, the winter solstice, is December 22nd. I hadn’t realised until checking this that the earliest sunset and the latest sunrise do not happen on the same day.
A 15.51 sunset happens between December 8th - 17th in London and varies by less across the month (9 minutes - 16.00-15.51) than sunrise (23 minutes, 07.43-08.06), so there's nothing particularly special about the 12th.
It's also worth noting that the last "winter" GE we had - February 1974 had a turnout of 78.8% - up 6.8% on the June 1970 election that saw Heath win - the highest turnout since 1951 and higher than any general election since then. Before that, the highest turnout (83.9%) had been February 1950.
If people want to vote, they will.
Top 5 UK General elections ranked by turnout since 1950:
February 1950 - 83.9% October 1951 - 82.6% February 1974 - 78.8% October 1959 - 78.7% October 1964 - 77.1%
The lowest turnout GE was in June 2001 (59.4%)
Politicians fear of "people not voting in winter General Elections" is not supported by the facts.
Whilst that’s true, 1974 was a very long time ago.
The UK and people attitude to duty, deference and obligation have changed an awful lot in the last 45 years.
To put it into some perspective: you’d have had a large number of pensioners who were WW1 veterans voting in 1974.
.
However I suspect that the average may be a mean average - in which case the median will be above the mean because there is a longer 'tail' on the the downside than the upside.
Casino somehow thinks that WW1 veterans who hadn’t gone out to vote in June 1970 were suddenly motivated to go out in February 1974, despite it being winter and them being 4 years older, increasing turnout by nearly 7%. Its horsefeathers on stilts.
I can understand why he doesn’t want to canvas in December (and hats off to those who do, of whatever party) but as I observed earlier this “winter GEs are bad” is special pleading, not based on data.
No, that’s a total misrepresentation of what I said, and you know it.
I said that the veterans accounted for a much higher voting base and propensity to vote. The crisis feeling of Feb 1974 and perceived closeness of the election drove higher turnout all round. Neither did I say they accounted for all of the voting increase.
I have no interest in canvassing or not canvassing. Only in correctly predicting outcomes and making money out of politics, where I have a much better record than you, who are mainly interested in political spin.
You wouldn’t understand data if it hit you square nose on the face.
Mr. B, every mandate to hold office is temporary. Both sides proclaimed that the referendum was a one-off and the result would be honoured.
An argument on this ground is not conducive to pro-EU types winning. They're much better off going with the informed consent line.
You are assuming the argument is for a 2nd ref. What if the argument being made is for not allowing the PM to choose an election date during a fixed term parliament?
The day with the latest sunrise, the winter solstice, is December 22nd. I hadn’t realised until checking this that the earliest sunset and the latest sunrise do not happen on the same day.
A 15.51 sunset happens between December 8th - 17th in London and varies by less across the month
It's also worth noting that the last "winter" GE we had - February 1974 had a turnout of 78.8% - up 6.8% on the June 1970 election that saw Heath win - the highest turnout since 1951 and higher than any general election since then. Before that, the highest turnout (83.9%) had been February 1950.
If people want to vote, they will.
Top 5 UK General elections ranked by turnout since
Politicians fear of "people not voting in winter General Elections" is not supported by the facts.
Whilst that’s true, 1974 was a very long time ago.
The UK and people attitude to duty, deference and obligation have changed an awful lot in the last 45 years.
To put it into some perspective: you’d have had a large number of pensioners who were WW1 veterans voting in 1974.
Probably not - average UK life expectancy in 1974 was 72 - so a lot of the 1900 cohort would have passed on. Turnout in General Elections has risen every election since the 2001 nadir. I think it’s impossible to predict how turnout will go - but to assert that it will be “low” is based on special pleading, not precedent.
No, there were a lot of WWI veterans in 1974. This is fact. You can look it up.
Since you made the claim, could you supply the data please?
You have to decide what constitutes "a lot" in this context before looking at the data,
Yes, and you’d have a much larger number of WWII veterans on top.
My point is that in understanding such a high turnout we have to understand that it was also informed by millions of voters who’d personally served in the cause of defending democracy by force of arms, and saw voting in all weathers as a duty.
So we must be careful of comparing them and us today directly.
The numbers of WW2 veterans who made for such high turnouts in 1950 would have been huge still in 1974. This interviews filmed in 63 and 64 are with a fairly spritely bunch. Many more would still be around a decade later.
Well this guy has no proper command of English and his tweet is nonsense. How many voters actually realised it was a FTP?
Now you have made your feelings about the tweeter clear, perhaps you would like to address the substance of his argument and his heavy implication of Brexiteer hypocrisy in stating that the voters didn’t realise the all the implications of their vote in 2017 but did in 2016?
Jav has just road tested “on strike” theory on the Today programme. And it crashed and burned. 😕
It is spectacularly stupid. Rewind a week, and when parliament said it wanted more scrutiny, negotiate the number of days up from 3 to around 6, job done, Brexit passed.
Now they present Labour with the opportunity to show the Tories refusing to progress Brexit and looking childish!
We want to get this done, and we have the numbers too. But we dont wanna now because you're mean.
That's the strategy. It definitely sounds like something a political adviser comes up with, particularly ones who like to push scorched earth ideas
So everyone is waiting and it is now perfect deadlock
If the GE fails to get the numbers on monday the EU are due to rule on tuesday and almost certainly are going to confirm the 31st January, not least because that is the date requested under the Benn act, but they may well make it flexible to mid november to let the deal through
In those circumstances I expect Boris to bring the vote back on the tuesday and the mps will have a decision to make. They may want a new year election but campaigning over xmas and the new year holidays is madness and of course a decision has to be arrived at before the new no deal date of 31st January
So we come back to the 12th December but labours prevarication is not going to play well and if they have their political antennae switched on, they need to go all 'gung ho and bring it, we cannot wait to get rid of this tory government
Why does a decision have to be made by 31st January? The lessons from the last year are of ongoing paralysis. Perhaps the decision on Brexit will be made by then, but it is far from certain and not necessary.
Because we are right royally creating chaos in the governance of the EU and France along with others are demanding this is done and for both sides to move on. And they are not bluffing
Mr. Above, if the Commons refuse to back a deal, refuse to back a revocation, refuse to have a vote of no confidence in the Government, and refuse to agree anything else the logical conclusion is that this Commons is no good for anything but prevarication.
Tories cheering on voter suppression is another depressing feature of modern political debate. Short term tactical advantage but longterm corrosion of our democracy.
Almost as bad as remainers cheering on a votes for 16 year olds amendment.
Not even remotely comparable. Openly and lawfully seeking to extend the franchise to people who cannot currently vote can be debated and determined according to the merits. Seeking to deny the franchise to people who already have it through no fault of their own is a quite different matter.
Not quite the same thing, true, but introducing a major change so rapidly for percieved partisan advantage, as retaliation for pushing for an election, is not good governance either. If they want to do it they should do it properly, is that not what the timetable motion argument was all about?
I see the Daily Mail (formerly Andrew Wakefield’s biggest fan) is this morning claiming a “triumph” in their “campaign” to increase MMR rates. You couldn’t make this shit up.
Whilst that’s true, 1974 was a very long time ago.
The UK and people attitude to duty, deference and obligation have changed an awful lot in the last 45 years.
To put it into some perspective: you’d have had a large number of pensioners who were WW1 veterans voting in 1974.
Probably not - average UK life expectancy in 1974 was 72 - so a lot of the 1900 cohort would have passed on. Turnout in General Elections has risen every election since the 2001 nadir. I think it’s impossible to predict how turnout will go - but to assert that it will be “low” is based on special pleading, not precedent.
Based purely on logic . . .
A lot will have passed on but a large number would have still been around. Indeed if the median average age was 72 then roughly on average half will have still been around and half would have passed on. Half of an entire generation is still a large amount of people.
However I suspect that the average may be a mean average - in which case the median will be above the mean because there is a longer 'tail' on the the downside than the upside.
Casino somehow thinks that WW1 veterans who hadn’t gone out to vote in June 1970 were suddenly motivated to go out in February 1974, despite it being winter and them being 4 years older, increasing turnout by nearly 7%. Its horsefeathers on stilts.
I can understand why he doesn’t want to canvas in December (and hats off to those who do, of whatever party) but as I observed earlier this “winter GEs are bad” is special pleading, not based on data.
That's not what he said, he even prefaced his comment with saying what you wrote was true!
What he said was that 45 years ago was a long time ago and as a matter of context there were a large number of pensioners who were WWI voters in 74 (and yes 70 and earlier) while that isn't true now.
December weather is often quite mild in this country compared to what one might expect. January and February tend to be the coldest months with the most snow, ice, fog, etc.
The day with the latest sunrise, the winter solstice, is December 22nd. I hadn’t realised until checking this that the earliest sunset and the latest sunrise do not happen on the same day.
Politicians fear of "people not voting in winter General Elections" is not supported by the facts.
Whilst that’s true, 1974 was a very long time ago.
The UK and people attitude to duty, deference and obligation have changed an awful lot in the last 45 years.
To put it into some perspective: you’d have had a large number of pensioners who were WW1 veterans voting in 1974.
Probably not - average UK life
No, there were a lot of WWI veterans in 1974. This is fact. You can look it up.
Since you made the claim, could you supply the data please?
You have to decide what constitutes "a lot" in this context before looking at the data,
Yes, and you’d have a much larger number of WWII veterans on top.
My point is that in understanding such a high turnout we have to understand that it was also informed by millions of voters who’d personally served in the cause of defending democracy by force of arms, and saw voting in all weathers as a duty.
So we must be careful of comparing them and us today directly.
The numbers of WW2 veterans who made for such high turnouts in 1950 would have been huge still in 1974. This interviews filmed in 63 and 64 are with a fairly spritely bunch. Many more would still be around a decade later.
I remember admitting WW1 vets and chatting with them well into the nineties.
I envy you. I’d have loved to have had that opportunity.
Admitting patients, and getting to know them is one of the great pleasures of my job. Very few elderly people have never done something of interest, and hearing their tales is a window into real history.
I remember chatting to one retired insurance agent from suburban Leicester, one of 4 from 36 in his Fleet Air Arm training squadron who survived, another who got an MC at Imphal as a junior officer, a Dunkirk veteran from the RA telling how they destroyed their guns on the beach before getting out by taking key parts and chucking them in the sea etc etc.
Ian Blackford on Today: would prefer election on 5th December.
That's fine by me
Will anyone think of the poor people who actually have to administer these elections. It’s bad enough having to do it at short notice, even worse if you get an inkling if a date that you can start doing some proper planning for only for people to start trying to shift it marginally for no good reason, and just make it all harder.
Because almost all the MPs elected - even Wollaston, Soubry and Umunma - were elected on manifestos of respecting the referendum but now they're refusing to do so. They've breached what they were elected to do.
Ian Blackford on Today: would prefer election on 5th December.
That's fine by me
Will anyone think of the poor people who actually have to administer these elections. It’s bad enough having to do it at short notice, even worse if you get an inkling if a date that you can start doing some proper planning for only for people to start trying to shift it marginally for no good reason, and just make it all harder.
Councils had to suddenly schedule the European elections earlier this year when they weren't supposed to be taking place at all since we were expected to have left the EU by that time, and they did it very efficiently.
I think there is a difference between an election in February or October and one in mid-December, less than 2 weeks till Christmas. My work Xmas party is the next day, for instance (could make for a very awkward evening). Nobody will thank the Tories for this, I think Labour should go for it.
The last time a PM went to the country in December it backfired for him horribly. I predict a repeat.
When was that?
6th December 1923
The PM Stanley Baldwin started the campaign with 344 seats and ended it by losing 86 of them.
So, 4 years short of a century ago. Yep - that’s a telling precedent.....
If you were HYUFD, you'd be claiming it was an iron rule.
The only phrase I can say in a Belfast accent is “the iron law of historical necessity” - paisleys justification for saying NO
December weather is often quite mild in this country compared to what one might expect. January and February tend to be the coldest months with the most snow, ice, fog, etc.
One question which isn't being thought about enough is who now has the more difficult voter base to get out. With the transformation in both main parties' voter base in the last few years, the Conservatives should be careful about anything that puts voters off going to the polling stations.
I think there is a difference between an election in February or October and one in mid-December, less than 2 weeks till Christmas. My work Xmas party is the next day, for instance (could make for a very awkward evening). Nobody will thank the Tories for this, I think Labour should go for it.
The last time a PM went to the country in December it backfired for him horribly. I predict a repeat.
When was that?
6th December 1923
The PM Stanley Baldwin started the campaign with 344 seats and ended it by losing 86 of them.
So, 4 years short of a century ago. Yep - that’s a telling precedent.....
If you were HYUFD, you'd be claiming it was an iron rule.
The only phrase I can say in a Belfast accent is “the iron law of historical necessity” - paisleys justification for saying NO
December weather is often quite mild in this country compared to what one might expect. January and February tend to be the coldest months with the most snow, ice, fog, etc.
One question which isn't being thought about enough is who now has the more difficult voter base to get out. With the transformation in both main parties' voter base in the last few years, the Conservatives should be careful about anything that puts voters off going to the polling stations.
Lines of broken glass won't stop those who feel they are being robbed of Brexit from voting.
Ian Blackford on Today: would prefer election on 5th December.
That's fine by me
Will anyone think of the poor people who actually have to administer these elections. It’s bad enough having to do it at short notice, even worse if you get an inkling if a date that you can start doing some proper planning for only for people to start trying to shift it marginally for no good reason, and just make it all harder.
Not to mention public sector workers who have dealt with a shadow purdah for the last god knows how long. My dad was telling me his bosses wanted to enact purdah "just in case an election will be called" a month ago, and I'm sure some services have done just that.
Ian Blackford on Today: would prefer election on 5th December.
That's fine by me
Will anyone think of the poor people who actually have to administer these elections. It’s bad enough having to do it at short notice, even worse if you get an inkling if a date that you can start doing some proper planning for only for people to start trying to shift it marginally for no good reason, and just make it all harder.
Councils had to suddenly schedule the European elections earlier this year when they weren't supposed to be taking place at all since we were expected to have left the EU by that time, and they did it very efficiently.
I thought that councils had planned on them happening until told they weren't? Of course they were never told they weren't.
The day with the latest sunrise, the winter solstice, is December 22nd. I hadn’t realised until checking this that the earliest sunset and the latest sunrise do not happen on the same day.
A 15.51 sunset happens between December 8th - 17th in London and varies by less across the month (9 minutes - 16.00-15.51) than sunrise (23 Politicians fear of "people not voting in winter General Elections" is not supported by the facts.
Whilst that’s true, 1974 was a very long time ago.
The UK and people attitude to duty, deference and obligation have changed an awful lot in the last 45 years.
To put it into some perspective: you’d have had a large number of pensioners who were WW1 veterans voting in 1974.
Probably not - average UK life expectancy in 1974 was 72 - so a lot of the 1900 cohort would have passed on. Turnout in General Elections has risen every election since the 2001 nadir. I think it’s impossible to predict how turnout will go - but to assert that it will be “low” is based on special pleading, not precedent.
No, there were a lot of WWI veterans in 1974. This is fact. You can look it up.
Since you made the claim, could you supply the data please?
No. Mine very logically stands to reason. Almost 9 million men served in the UK and the average age was 24. So in 1974 most would have been in their mid-late 70s, or early 80s at worst, and alive. The last veterans didn’t die until well into the 21st Century.
If you want to dispute this then be my guest - and find the evidence. I have better things to do with my time.
You’re the one who made the claim as “fact” but can’t or won’t look it up......
You’re the one who’s disputing a totally obvious fact but who can’t or won’t provide any evidence to dispute it. You’ve also proven by your posts this morning that you totally misunderstand life expectancy.
Pathetic.
You don’t think name calling is a sign of losing an argument?
I’m neither calling you names nor losing the argument.
I was just pointing out that yours was pathetic.
I rest my case. You said there were “facts” - but wouldn’t provide them, Thanks to others, it looks like there were several hundred thousand out of a total of 31 million Votes cast, when turnout increased by 3 million vs the previous election.
Because almost all the MPs elected - even Wollaston, Soubry and Umunma - were elected on manifestos of respecting the referendum but now they're refusing to do so. They've breached what they were elected to do.
And the vote leave campaigners, Johnson, Gove, Cummings are putting forward a very different version of leave to that they campaigned on, they are trying to breach what they campaigned for.
Ian Blackford on Today: would prefer election on 5th December.
That's fine by me
Will anyone think of the poor people who actually have to administer these elections. It’s bad enough having to do it at short notice, even worse if you get an inkling if a date that you can start doing some proper planning for only for people to start trying to shift it marginally for no good reason, and just make it all harder.
Mr. Above, if the Commons refuse to back a deal, refuse to back a revocation, refuse to have a vote of no confidence in the Government, and refuse to agree anything else the logical conclusion is that this Commons is no good for anything but prevarication.
[Of course, the next Commons could be worse].
Clearly this parliament is not great. That is a separate issue to whether the PM should be able to decide when the election is, when the law is clear that is for parliament to decide, and the mandate from the people is for 5 years.
I don't think there will be an election but if there was my thoughts are Boris securing a deal is very important, it offers the voter clarity and a simple message regarding what a Tory government will bring. As long as Labour have a confused Brexit policy it will bother them throughout the campaign trail and they'll struggle to talk about the things they want.
In such polarised times are people going to vote for a party that guarantees months and years more confusion?
December weather is often quite mild in this country compared to what one might expect. January and February tend to be the coldest months with the most snow, ice, fog, etc.
One question which isn't being thought about enough is who now has the more difficult voter base to get out. With the transformation in both main parties' voter base in the last few years, the Conservatives should be careful about anything that puts voters off going to the polling stations.
I will be offering a polling day taxi service (free) to my local constituency
I think there is a difference between an election in February or October and one in mid-December, less than 2 weeks till Christmas. My work Xmas party is the next day, for instance (could make for a very awkward evening). Nobody will thank the Tories for this, I think Labour should go for it.
The last time a PM went to the country in December it backfired for him horribly. I predict a repeat.
When was that?
6th December 1923
The PM Stanley Baldwin started the campaign with 344 seats and ended it by losing 86 of them.
So, 4 years short of a century ago. Yep - that’s a telling precedent.....
If you were HYUFD, you'd be claiming it was an iron rule.
The only phrase I can say in a Belfast accent is “the iron law of historical necessity” - paisleys justification for saying NO
Have you decided whether to be Irish or not yet?
I’m in no hurry to do so. Having two passports isn’t something that should be done lightly. I just mentioned it was an option if things become intolerable
Because almost all the MPs elected - even Wollaston, Soubry and Umunma - were elected on manifestos of respecting the referendum but now they're refusing to do so. They've breached what they were elected to do.
And the vote leave campaigners, Johnson, Gove, Cummings are putting forward a very different version of leave to that they campaigned on, they are trying to breach what they campaigned for.
As probably one of the most northerly located PBers, all this fear of a December election is pathetic. In the Highlands in mid December we have daylight from around 09.30 until 15.30. That is amply time for dedicated voters i.e. the elderly to turn out and not for the lukewarm voters i.e. students, soap opera watchers and generally those who find anything more interesting than voting. Plus of course universities have broken up so students, if they vote, will have to be registered in their home constituencies or get off their arses and register for postal votes. A potentially healthy Tory majority beckons.
Universities having broken up is a good point not previously mentioned. Con Gain Canterbury....
Labour should come back with a date in November as their counter. Hell, with a one-clause Bill we could have a ten day campaign - if the parties so wished.
Tories cheering on voter suppression is another depressing feature of modern political debate. Short term tactical advantage but longterm corrosion of our democracy.
Why is it voter suppression? They can vote at home.
Putting barriers in the way of voting is the essence of voter suppression. That seems to be Tory party policy now.
Is asking for photo ID when collecting something at the post office delivery suppresion?
Because almost all the MPs elected - even Wollaston, Soubry and Umunma - were elected on manifestos of respecting the referendum but now they're refusing to do so. They've breached what they were elected to do.
And the vote leave campaigners, Johnson, Gove, Cummings are putting forward a very different version of leave to that they campaigned on, they are trying to breach what they campaigned for.
Nope. Nice try to deflect. But nope.
Can we have all the benefits of the single market, no rulings from ECJ, golden trade deals negotiated in our favour with the rest of the world instantly please?
I think there is a difference between an election in February or October and one in mid-December, less than 2 weeks till Christmas. My work Xmas party is the next day, for instance (could make for a very awkward evening). Nobody will thank the Tories for this, I think Labour should go for it.
The last time a PM went to the country in December it backfired for him horribly. I predict a repeat.
When was that?
6th December 1923
The PM Stanley Baldwin started the campaign with 344 seats and ended it by losing 86 of them.
So, 4 years short of a century ago. Yep - that’s a telling precedent.....
If you were HYUFD, you'd be claiming it was an iron rule.
The only phrase I can say in a Belfast accent is “the iron law of historical necessity” - paisleys justification for saying NO
I always try to ask locals the time here at 8.30. It's a harmless pleasure.
I think there is a difference between an election in February or October and one in mid-December, less than 2 weeks till Christmas. My work Xmas party is the next day, for instance (could make for a very awkward evening). Nobody will thank the Tories for this, I think Labour should go for it.
The last time a PM went to the country in December it backfired for him horribly. I predict a repeat.
When was that?
6th December 1923
The PM Stanley Baldwin started the campaign with 344 seats and ended it by losing 86 of them.
So, 4 years short of a century ago. Yep - that’s a telling precedent.....
If you were HYUFD, you'd be claiming it was an iron rule.
The only phrase I can say in a Belfast accent is “the iron law of historical necessity” - paisleys justification for saying NO
Have you decided whether to be Irish or not yet?
I’m in no hurry to do so. Having two passports isn’t something that should be done lightly. I just mentioned it was an option if things become intolerable
Another Leaver considering ways out of his decision.
Because almost all the MPs elected - even Wollaston, Soubry and Umunma - were elected on manifestos of respecting the referendum but now they're refusing to do so. They've breached what they were elected to do.
And the vote leave campaigners, Johnson, Gove, Cummings are putting forward a very different version of leave to that they campaigned on, they are trying to breach what they campaigned for.
That's fine but the Conservatives are offering their Brexit to voters, which seems pretty democratic. If you don't like what they offer don't vote for them. Soubry, Wollaston and Umunna have changed parties (more than once) and still are trying to hide away from letting the public have a say on what they stand for. Boris may be many things but in the eyes of the British public he isn't the one looking like a coward.
The day with the latest sunrise, the winter solstice, is December 22nd. I hadn’t realised until checking this that the earliest sunset and the latest sunrise do not happen on the same day.
A 15.51 sunset happens between December 8th - 17th in London and varies by less across the month (9 minutes - 16.00-15.51) than sunrise (23 Politicians fear of "people not voting in winter General Elections" is not supported by the facts.
To put it into some perspective: you’d have had a large number of pensioners who were WW1 veterans voting in 1974.
.
No, there were a lot of WWI veterans in 1974. This is fact. You can look it up.
Since you made the claim, could you supply the data please?
.
You’re the one who made the claim as “fact” but can’t or won’t look it up......
You’re the one who’s disputing a totally obvious fact but who can’t or won’t provide any evidence to dispute it. You’ve also proven by your posts this morning that you totally misunderstand life expectancy.
Pathetic.
You don’t think name calling is a sign of losing an argument?
I’m neither calling you names nor losing the argument.
I was just pointing out that yours was pathetic.
I rest my case. You said there were “facts” - but wouldn’t provide them, Thanks to others, it looks like there were several hundred thousand out of a total of 31 million Votes cast, when turnout increased by 3 million vs the previous election.
There’s no case to rest. You’re wrong, and I’m right.
There were millions of veterans votes in 1974 that drove a very different voting culture. You’ve switched to a straw man now because you can’t defeat the original point.
All you’ve done on here this morning is embarrass yourself. If you’re representative of the Tory point of view (and we’re supposed to be ON THE SAME SIDE) then Boris will get thumped.
I have no more time to waste on morons like you. I now have to go and do some work.
Because almost all the MPs elected - even Wollaston, Soubry and Umunma - were elected on manifestos of respecting the referendum but now they're refusing to do so. They've breached what they were elected to do.
And the vote leave campaigners, Johnson, Gove, Cummings are putting forward a very different version of leave to that they campaigned on, they are trying to breach what they campaigned for.
Nope. Nice try to deflect. But nope.
Can we have all the benefits of the single market, no rulings from ECJ, golden trade deals negotiated in our favour with the rest of the world instantly please?
Also voters were obviously aware of the long tradition of MPs crossing the benches, being elected as individual representatives of their constituents rather than members of a party that enact a manifesto AND that MPs are under no legal or traditional obligation to hold a by election in those circumstances.
Because voters always understand every possible implication of their vote, and that understanding is immutable and unchangeable until the next duly timed vote.
Because almost all the MPs elected - even Wollaston, Soubry and Umunma - were elected on manifestos of respecting the referendum but now they're refusing to do so. They've breached what they were elected to do.
And the vote leave campaigners, Johnson, Gove, Cummings are putting forward a very different version of leave to that they campaigned on, they are trying to breach what they campaigned for.
That's fine but the Conservatives are offering their Brexit to voters, which seems pretty democratic. If you don't like what they offer don't vote for them. Soubry, Wollaston and Umunna have changed parties (more than once) and still are trying to hide away from letting the public have a say on what they stand for. Boris may be many things but in the eyes of the British public he isn't the one looking like a coward.
When people talk about the British public they tend to talk about the parts of the British public they agree with. I and many others think Johnson is a coward, he has sought the benefits of office whilst shirking the responsibilities that come with it his whole life.
Mr. Above, if the Commons refuse to back a deal, refuse to back a revocation, refuse to have a vote of no confidence in the Government, and refuse to agree anything else the logical conclusion is that this Commons is no good for anything but prevarication.
[Of course, the next Commons could be worse].
Clearly this parliament is not great. That is a separate issue to whether the PM should be able to decide when the election is, when the law is clear that is for parliament to decide, and the mandate from the people is for 5 years.
The law is clear, he can ask Parliament, which is what he is doing on Monday.
If there is no election agreed I am not sure what the EU will offer on the extension.
They know that Parliament will not agree on anything. There is a deal on offer. An election is off the menu. Not ideal for them.
The question they will want an answer to is: What is the point of and reason for the extension?
The answer to that will guide the decision they make. The EU is capable of making decisions that bring about a solution to a problem. Because of the (as we see it) democratic deficit difficult decisions are easier and far more anonymous than those made by a National Parliament.
I would not count out either a straight No or 2 to 4 weeks to pass the bill on offer.
Because almost all the MPs elected - even Wollaston, Soubry and Umunma - were elected on manifestos of respecting the referendum but now they're refusing to do so. They've breached what they were elected to do.
And the vote leave campaigners, Johnson, Gove, Cummings are putting forward a very different version of leave to that they campaigned on, they are trying to breach what they campaigned for.
You what?
They campaigned that they would get a deal that would: Take back control of laws Take back control of money Take back control of borders Leave the ECJ Leave the Single Market Have a free trade deal with Europe Have our own trade policies with the rest of the world Maintain peace in Northern Ireland Extra money for the NHS
They've managed to get a deal that would: Take back control of laws Take back control of money Take back control of borders Leave the ECJ Leave the Single Market Have a free trade deal with Europe Have our own trade policies with the rest of the world Maintain peace in Northern Ireland Extra money for the NHS
If someone has a better way of meeting those promises I'd love to see it!
These electors are supposed to be Labour's core vote.
I believe Labour still leads with DEs, the poorest voters but even with them Boris leads Corbyn as best PM. The Tories have a big lead with skilled working class C2 voters
Mr. Above, if this Parliament can agree on nothing when we have a clear decision to make, it can't fulfil its basic function.
Delay is a decision, and that is the decision parliament has taken. It is unlikely to be optimal but neither is it likely to be the worst case. It is the will of the people as expressed at the GE.
December weather is often quite mild in this country compared to what one might expect. January and February tend to be the coldest months with the most snow, ice, fog, etc.
Yes. If you look at the Central England Temperature series the average coldest time of year is at the end of January and beginning of February. So there will be more sunlight for an election in February, but greater potential for disruptive cold weather than in mid-December.
Mr. Above, if the Commons refuse to back a deal, refuse to back a revocation, refuse to have a vote of no confidence in the Government, and refuse to agree anything else the logical conclusion is that this Commons is no good for anything but prevarication.
[Of course, the next Commons could be worse].
Clearly this parliament is not great. That is a separate issue to whether the PM should be able to decide when the election is, when the law is clear that is for parliament to decide, and the mandate from the people is for 5 years.
The law is clear, he can ask Parliament, which is what he is doing on Monday.
If there is no election agreed I am not sure what the EU will offer on the extension.
They know that Parliament will not agree on anything. There is a deal on offer. An election is off the menu. Not ideal for them.
The question they will want an answer to is: What is the point of and reason for the extension?
The answer to that will guide the decision they make. The EU is capable of making decisions that bring about a solution to a problem. Because of the (as we see it) democratic deficit difficult decisions are easier and far more anonymous than those made by a National Parliament.
I would not count out either a straight No or 2 to 4 weeks to pass the bill on offer.
Of course he can ask parliament. He can even sulk and go on strike if he wants. His opponents can respond as they please, if they do not want an election at this particular time that is within their rights and perfectly democratic.
Mr. Above, if this Parliament can agree on nothing when we have a clear decision to make, it can't fulfil its basic function.
Delay is a decision, and that is the decision parliament has taken. It is unlikely to be optimal but neither is it likely to be the worst case. It is the will of the people as expressed at the GE.
The will of the people at the GE can be viewed as having voted 4 to 1 for parties with a manifesto commitment to deliver on the referendum result.
I fail to see how this never-ending cycle of delay is achieving that
Zombie Parliament Zombie Parliament Zombie Parliament And can I just say Zombie Parliament
Not one of life's sparklers, is he?
Not sure this zombie narrative will help the Tories - after all, if there is an election they will be asking the voters to re-elect many of the zombies who form the current parliament.
Because almost all the MPs elected - even Wollaston, Soubry and Umunma - were elected on manifestos of respecting the referendum but now they're refusing to do so. They've breached what they were elected to do.
And the vote leave campaigners, Johnson, Gove, Cummings are putting forward a very different version of leave to that they campaigned on, they are trying to breach what they campaigned for.
That's fine but the Conservatives are offering their Brexit to voters, which seems pretty democratic. If you don't like what they offer don't vote for them. Soubry, Wollaston and Umunna have changed parties (more than once) and still are trying to hide away from letting the public have a say on what they stand for. Boris may be many things but in the eyes of the British public he isn't the one looking like a coward.
They are not offering their Brexit Deal to voters; that would require a second referendum. Arguably now the best referendum question would be something along the lines of "do you want to leave the EU with this deal?" with the clear understanding that if they vote no it will not default to Remain but x more years of negotiation.
What Johnson is asking is to be elected to government, on other policies as well as Brexit. If all their manifesto says is "we'll leave the EU, hell or high water" it could be any deal, May's deal, Johnson's deal, or No deal. They can also use an election as a mandate for a great many other things beyond Brexit, such as the NHS, crime, education etc. This is what GEs are for, not single issues like Brexit.
I think there is a difference between an election in February or October and one in mid-December, less than 2 weeks till Christmas. My work Xmas party is the next day, for instance (could make for a very awkward evening). Nobody will thank the Tories for this, I think Labour should go for it.
The last time a PM went to the country in December it backfired for him horribly. I predict a repeat.
When was that?
6th December 1923
The PM Stanley Baldwin started the campaign with 344 seats and ended it by losing 86 of them.
So, 4 years short of a century ago. Yep - that’s a telling precedent.....
If you were HYUFD, you'd be claiming it was an iron rule.
The only phrase I can say in a Belfast accent is “the iron law of historical necessity” - paisleys justification for saying NO
Have you decided whether to be Irish or not yet?
I’m in no hurry to do so. Having two passports isn’t something that should be done lightly. I just mentioned it was an option if things become intolerable
You're lucky. Some of us didn't vote for Brexit and have no such option.
Ian Blackford on Today: would prefer election on 5th December.
That's fine by me
Will anyone think of the poor people who actually have to administer these elections. It’s bad enough having to do it at short notice, even worse if you get an inkling if a date that you can start doing some proper planning for only for people to start trying to shift it marginally for no good reason, and just make it all harder.
Councils had to suddenly schedule the European elections earlier this year when they weren't supposed to be taking place at all since we were expected to have left the EU by that time, and they did it very efficiently.
No they didn't. There were well publicised problems with posting ballots to voters living overseas and with the paperwork allowing EU citizens to vote in the UK rather than their home country.
Comments
The problem I was referring to was 'Number 10 sources' apparently saying that Johnson would not resign even if a vote of no confidence was passed and the Commons had resolved that a specific other person should be appointed PM.
My point is that in understanding such a high turnout we have to understand that it was also informed by millions of voters who’d personally served in the cause of defending democracy by force of arms, and saw voting in all weathers as a duty.
So we must be careful of comparing them and us today directly.
Instead of titillating themselves, those who actually want another vote should return to the more compelling argument/line of "informed consent".
Eight Remainers Roaring.
I think the comparison valid.
Corollary, there should be no voter checks?
I was just pointing out that yours was pathetic.
He will do anything to get Brexit except try hard apparently.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/group/p01tbj6p
I remember admitting WW1 vets and chatting with them well into the nineties.
An argument on this ground is not conducive to pro-EU types winning. They're much better off going with the informed consent line.
There is virtually no evidence of impersonation at polling booths under present systems.
That's the strategy. It definitely sounds like something a political adviser comes up with, particularly ones who like to push scorched earth ideas
Taken from the UCAS website explaining how to register:
...Registering online only takes about three minutes, so there are no excuses!
[Of course, the next Commons could be worse].
What he said was that 45 years ago was a long time ago and as a matter of context there were a large number of pensioners who were WWI voters in 74 (and yes 70 and earlier) while that isn't true now.
I remember chatting to one retired insurance agent from suburban Leicester, one of 4 from 36 in his Fleet Air Arm training squadron who survived, another who got an MC at Imphal as a junior officer, a Dunkirk veteran from the RA telling how they destroyed their guns on the beach before getting out by taking key parts and chucking them in the sea etc etc.
Zombie Parliament
Zombie Parliament
Zombie Parliament
And can I just say
Zombie Parliament
Not one of life's sparklers, is he?
(Five golden rings)
How about
Five joyful hacks
It also fits the original "ings", which sounds more satisfying.
In such polarised times are people going to vote for a party that guarantees months and years more confusion?
There were millions of veterans votes in 1974 that drove a very different voting culture. You’ve switched to a straw man now because you can’t defeat the original point.
All you’ve done on here this morning is embarrass yourself. If you’re representative of the Tory point of view (and we’re supposed to be ON THE SAME SIDE) then Boris will get thumped.
I have no more time to waste on morons like you. I now have to go and do some work.
Because voters always understand every possible implication of their vote, and that understanding is immutable and unchangeable until the next duly timed vote.
If there is no election agreed I am not sure what the EU will offer on the extension.
They know that Parliament will not agree on anything. There is a deal on offer. An election is off the menu. Not ideal for them.
The question they will want an answer to is:
What is the point of and reason for the extension?
The answer to that will guide the decision they make. The EU is capable of making decisions that bring about a solution to a problem. Because of the (as we see it) democratic deficit difficult decisions are easier and far more anonymous than those made by a National Parliament.
I would not count out either a straight No or 2 to 4 weeks to pass the bill on offer.
They campaigned that they would get a deal that would:
Take back control of laws
Take back control of money
Take back control of borders
Leave the ECJ
Leave the Single Market
Have a free trade deal with Europe
Have our own trade policies with the rest of the world
Maintain peace in Northern Ireland
Extra money for the NHS
They've managed to get a deal that would:
Take back control of laws
Take back control of money
Take back control of borders
Leave the ECJ
Leave the Single Market
Have a free trade deal with Europe
Have our own trade policies with the rest of the world
Maintain peace in Northern Ireland
Extra money for the NHS
If someone has a better way of meeting those promises I'd love to see it!
The deal is there to sign
I fail to see how this never-ending cycle of delay is achieving that
What Johnson is asking is to be elected to government, on other policies as well as Brexit. If all their manifesto says is "we'll leave the EU, hell or high water" it could be any deal, May's deal, Johnson's deal, or No deal. They can also use an election as a mandate for a great many other things beyond Brexit, such as the NHS, crime, education etc. This is what GEs are for, not single issues like Brexit.
Temporary - Request an extension, already done! Just kicks the can, the deadline comes back later.
Permanent: Agree a deal (there's one to sign already) or revoke A50.
Which is her preference then?
Sixtus Rees-Mogg a-playing