Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On the day Johnson wants for the general election the UK sunse

123457

Comments

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think something like Brexit should have been the subject of a 50 pence piece. Inappropriate.
    Freedom is an extremely appropriate subject for celebration and commemoration.
    In which case I look forward to the special 50p celebrating our freedom from the dreariness of Brexit once we revoke A50! :smile:
  • Scott_P said:
    QTWAIN.

    Hunt would not have gotten rid of the backstop. It was only Boris's pressure on the date that forced people to compromise - now he has squared off the EU Boris only has one front rather than two to worry about.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751

    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    Under the Benn Act, the Commons doesn't have to agree. The Commons can vote not to approve a non-3-month extension, in which case Johnson isn't forced by law to accept it, but still can if he wants to.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696
    nico67 said:

    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The EU ambassadors sign off in writing at their meeting . They don’t need letters from the EU leaders .

    If the EU offer just one month MPs will have no choice but to accept it .
    Revoke is always there as an ultimate backstop for MPs not happy with the prospect of No Deal.
  • Foxy said:

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think something like Brexit should have been the subject of a 50 pence piece. Inappropriate.
    There were commemorative 50 pences when joining (linked hands).
    Perhaps just a single hand flicking the vickies when they finally get round to minting this one?
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591
    Foxy said:



    Aren't most pension deficits down to future liabilities (relating to poor interest and annuity rates) rather than current outgoings? As such wouldn't the deficits improve with an interest rate hike?

    If only there was an eminent pensions lawyer about...

    No, deficits are related to past liabilities, future liabilities are supposed to be covered out of existing contributions, which is why many schemes have been reducing future liabilities by reducing benefits. Hardly anywhere outside the public sector offers guaranteed "defined benefits" now. But you are right about interest rates - if rates rise the assets in pension schemes would be assumed to generate a higher income and therefore deficits would go down. Pension scheme accounting is incredibly conservative following the Maxwell and other scandals and the assumptions about future income are based on gilt rates, which are, of course, at historic lows.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    edited October 2019



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.

    In my previous post MPs will have to accept a shorter delay because they can’t negotiate with the EU . Politically they really have no choice but to go along with the EU.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696
    There would be some irony in the EU forcing Brexit on a UK that has been unable to deliver it.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Golly, BBC Scotland hack tweeting this.

    https://twitter.com/BBCDouglasF/status/1187298776286928897?s=20

    Ruth's free ride press pass has most definitely been REVOKED.

    She's currently on holiday so unable to answer questions.

    Convenient that.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    So no, it may have legally been the case but it was certainly not explicit.

    It can't have been legally explicit (which it was) and not explicit
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    kjh said:

    Let's assume that the Government fails to get 2/3rds of the Commons supporting its motion on Monday. Johnson then immediately tables a vote of no confidence in the Government which takes place on Tuesday 29th November and is carried. No other government can command a vote of confidence in the 14 day period that follows, while Johnson remains in Downing Street in the interim.

    What is the earliest legal date that a GE could then be held, assuming that it did not necessarily need to be on a Thursday?

    I'm interested in the response to this question also. Anyone?

    Surely if the 12/12 fails for which there must be a reasonably high probability a 31/1 extension is pointlessly short.
    Maybe 20th January given that Bank Holidays are excluded. That will be a Monday - 23rd Jan more likely.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751
    nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    It says that nothing in the section prevents the PM from accepting an extension otherwise. So the Commons can't prevent him accepting a short one if he wants to.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,722
    It is said that the EU is concerned not get involved in UK politics in deciding how long any extension can be. But whatever they decide will pander to one side or the other. They should do as Macron has suggested: 15 days, deal or no-deal.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    kjh said:

    Let's assume that the Government fails to get 2/3rds of the Commons supporting its motion on Monday. Johnson then immediately tables a vote of no confidence in the Government which takes place on Tuesday 29th November and is carried. No other government can command a vote of confidence in the 14 day period that follows, while Johnson remains in Downing Street in the interim.

    What is the earliest legal date that a GE could then be held, assuming that it did not necessarily need to be on a Thursday?

    I'm interested in the response to this question also. Anyone?

    Surely if the 12/12 fails for which there must be a reasonably high probability a 31/1 extension is pointlessly short.
    By my reckoning Tuesday 17th December.

    14 days puts you to 12th November.
    25 working days for the campaign puts you to 17th December
    Not if VNOC is on 29th November!!
  • Charles said:

    Charles said:

    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 issue is that Parliament is not doing its job

    It is preventing the executive from doing its but is not willing to replace the executive
    Parliament passed the WA and it is the executive who have stalled it specifically for seeking political advantage.
    It wants to amend a treaty. Not it’s job. Parliamentary overreach is the heart of the problem
    We dont know what it wants as the executive has gone on strike seeking political gain. I think the WA for all its faults would have passed in exchange for parliamentary involvement and control of the FTA negotiations. Guess the fans of an all powerful personality cult PM think that is the wrong type of taking back control.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.
  • Incidentally, whenever I see pictures of Jeremy Corbyn I can't help feeling that he has aged a lot in the last year or so. He looks really tired and quite haggard, which wasn't the case in (say) 2017. I have some sympathy for him in that, even if he wanted to retire from the LOTO job, he's rather trapped by the combination of the Labour leadership contest rules and the likelihood of a GE within months if not weeks.
  • nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    I have the section from Wiki

    Section 3 obliges the Prime Minister to accept an extension to 31st January 2020, and allows the Prime Minister to either accept an offer or ask the HOC to accept an offer of any other date

    So if 31st January 2020 is offered Boris has to accept it but any other offer is more problematic
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,003
    edited October 2019
    Duplicate
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Tulsi Gabbard with her finger on the pulse of what the Dem base wants

    https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1187544241427214336?s=19

    How much more blatant does she have to get?
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Has Johnson admitted we are not leaving on 311019 yet ?
    What a waste of a shit load of money on advertising.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,003
    edited October 2019
    Alistair said:

    Golly, BBC Scotland hack tweeting this.

    https://twitter.com/BBCDouglasF/status/1187298776286928897?s=20

    Ruth's free ride press pass has most definitely been REVOKED.

    She's currently on holiday so unable to answer questions.

    Convenient that.
    This seems absolutely black and white. Christmas by election in Edinburgh Central anyone?

    https://twitter.com/_DanParis/status/1187679428052160513?s=20

  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,722
    Andrew said:

    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.

    If so, good.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,865
    I am surprised that he wants to highlight the stupidity of the Benn Act.
  • AndyJS said:

    I don't think something like Brexit should have been the subject of a 50 pence piece. Inappropriate.
    Agreed, two pence would have been far more suitable.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Andrew said:

    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.

    That’s a problem for the Benn Act .

    MPs must vote by 30 October for any different length extension.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696
    edited October 2019
    nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    No.

    If the EU offer an extension to 31st January, the PM has to accept it, end of.

    If the EU offer less time (or more time) the PM can accept it without a vote.

    If he doesn't want to accept an alternative to 31st January he has to get the HoC to reject, within two calendar days, a motion:

    “That this House has approved the extension to the period in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union which the European Council has decided.”

    But there is no necessity for that vote in order for any extension to be accepted.

    If the HoC wasn't sitting during the two calendar days when they offer the extension the PM just has to accept it no matter what the proposed date is, as no HoC vote is possible.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,534
    AndyJS said:

    Pulpstar said:

    They think young people will vote for Corbyn, one of UK's leading Brexiteers?

    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1187677262612709376

    If the students are off term won't they just vote in their "home" constituency ?
    There's something a bit odd about people being able to effectively choose which constituency they vote in. It means you'd logically try to arrange to vote in the more marginal seat because your vote would be more likely to make a difference. (I accept hardly anyone does this in practice.)
    I thought nearly everyone did! All the people I know who have two homes (not all of them very political, but enough to bother to vote) do exactly that.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541

    Scott_P said:
    QTWAIN.

    Hunt would not have gotten rid of the backstop. It was only Boris's pressure on the date that forced people to compromise - now he has squared off the EU Boris only has one front rather than two to worry about.
    He’s replaced one front with another front. Johnson has replaced the hostility of the EU with the hostility of the people propping up his Government. Genius. Seriously, the EU can be bargained with, but the DUP is an enemy for life.

    OT. I find this habit of referring to the PM by his first name but all other politiciansby their surname infuriating. He’s not an infant.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696
    nico67 said:

    Andrew said:

    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.

    That’s a problem for the Benn Act .

    MPs must vote by 30 October for any different length extension.
    No No No!
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    On the subject of numismatics, I received my first new Northern Irish £5 note today (the sideways ones). I have to admit they look pretty neat. But the problem will be trying to spend it in England - Northern Irish notes are already looked at with suspicion and this looks odder than most bank notes.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Andrew said:

    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.

    Your source for that? It's not what briefings are suggesting at this moment. Extension to 31st Jan to come on Monday after the Westminster shenanigans. Corbyn looks likely to go for an election if Johnson promises in Parliament to take No Deal off the table. But Corbyn also pressing for earlier than Dec 12th to encompass Uni students.

    https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1187690614558736389?s=20
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751
    nico67 said:

    Andrew said:

    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.

    That’s a problem for the Benn Act .

    MPs must vote by 30 October for any different length extension.
    No. They have to vote against it for it not to be accepted.
  • nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    No.

    If the EU offer an extension to 31st January, the PM has to accept it, end of.

    If the EU offer less time (or more time) the PM can accept it without a vote.

    If he doesn't want to accept an alternative to 31st January he has to get the HoC to reject, within two calendar days, a motion:

    “That this House has approved the extension to the period in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union which the European Council has decided.”

    But there is no necessity for that vote in order for any extension to be accepted.

    If the HoC wasn't sitting during the two calendar days when they offer the extension the PM just has to accept it no matter what the proposed date is, as no HoC vote is possible.
    So what happens if they ofer 14 days and he the accepts it? Is the Benn act then defunct?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Yorkcity said:

    Has Johnson admitted we are not leaving on 311019 yet ?
    What a waste of a shit load of money on advertising.

    90% of people thought we would be leaving on that date 6 months ago.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited October 2019
    justin124 said:

    kjh said:

    Let's assume that the Government fails to get 2/3rds of the Commons supporting its motion on Monday. Johnson then immediately tables a vote of no confidence in the Government which takes place on Tuesday 29th November and is carried. No other government can command a vote of confidence in the 14 day period that follows, while Johnson remains in Downing Street in the interim.

    What is the earliest legal date that a GE could then be held, assuming that it did not necessarily need to be on a Thursday?

    I'm interested in the response to this question also. Anyone?

    Surely if the 12/12 fails for which there must be a reasonably high probability a 31/1 extension is pointlessly short.
    Maybe 20th January given that Bank Holidays are excluded. That will be a Monday - 23rd Jan more likely.
    An October election was rejected because the opposition said they didn't trust Johnson not to push it back to after Exit Day. Logically that rules out a January election with an Exit Day of 31st January.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751

    nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    I have the section from Wiki

    Section 3 obliges the Prime Minister to accept an extension to 31st January 2020, and allows the Prime Minister to either accept an offer or ask the HOC to accept an offer of any other date

    So if 31st January 2020 is offered Boris has to accept it but any other offer is more problematic
    Please read the Act, and stop contradicting people who have read it based on what you've seen on Wikipedia.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    AndyJS said:

    Not sure if anyone else has pointed this out as haven't had a chance to catch up on the threads between, but re that poll about violence to MPs yesterday..

    Remainers think it's much more likely, whatever the Brexit outcome

    Violence to MPs likely if UK leaves EU:
    Remainers - 69%
    Leavers - 35%

    Violence to MPs likely if UK remains in EU:
    Remainers - 61%
    Leavers - 54%

    They also think that protests where the public get injured are more likely if we leave, though tied on remain

    Public injured in protests if UK leaves:
    Remainers - 70%
    Leavers - 32%

    Public injured in protests if UK remains:
    Remainers - 54%
    Leavers - 54%

    Who's predicting violence here then?

    A lot of people are questioning this survey.
    The fact that people are questioning it does not make it wrong. There's a Yes Minister quote specifically for this.
  • Andrew said:

    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.

    Too late, we leave the day after
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,865
    Mental note, must look down the back of the sofa tonight: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50181360

    I might have been tempted to make comments about people who produce forecasts 10 years into the future but can't even get the current year right but its a Friday so I won't bother.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    geoffw said:

    Andrew said:

    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.

    If so, good.
    Is the delay in the approval of an extension a warning to the U.K. in the following terms?

    If you mess us about again we may well say No. This time we are keeping you guessing until the last minute, you are testing our patience and unity. Don't do it again.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151
    edited October 2019
    So the EU has agreed to an extension but with no end date yet, suggesting Macron is standing by only a short extension

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50175914
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131

    On topic, and by way of light relief from politics, the date of the latest sunrise is not the solstice (21st) December but the 30th. This is because there's a discrepancy between clock time (where the day is invariably 24 hours) and astronomical time (where the length of the day varies). The difference between the two - the equation of time - has been known for centuries and explains the variation between clocks and sundials - sometimes as much as 20 minutes positive or negative. The principal causes are (a) the earth's elliptical orbit around the sun and (b) wobbles in the axis of tilt, and, unlike Brexit, are reassuringly predictable.

    That is very interesting, thank you.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696

    Andrew said:

    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.

    Too late, we leave the day after
    It's not too late.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited October 2019
    It's not especially 'tight.' Parliament and the EU have accepted the extension request. It's just a question of 'when' not 'if'. So those still clinging to a No Deal on 31/10, you have better things to focus on. Interesting to see too that Johnson has accepted it and moved on. Just like that. Very Dom-esque.

    I reckon Corbyn will push for 1st week of December for the General Election, judging by his comments this morning. 3rd or 5th December looking best bets right now.*

    *p.s. also quite smart to insist on a different date to Johnson.
  • Andrew said:

    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.

    Your source for that? It's not what briefings are suggesting at this moment. Extension to 31st Jan to come on Monday after the Westminster shenanigans. Corbyn looks likely to go for an election if Johnson promises in Parliament to take No Deal off the table. But Corbyn also pressing for earlier than Dec 12th to encompass Uni students.

    https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1187690614558736389?s=20
    No deal falls with an extension.

    There is a chance if and when the deal passes it could rise again by December 2020 but Corbyn is not going to get that deal abandoned
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696
    Chris said:

    nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    I have the section from Wiki

    Section 3 obliges the Prime Minister to accept an extension to 31st January 2020, and allows the Prime Minister to either accept an offer or ask the HOC to accept an offer of any other date

    So if 31st January 2020 is offered Boris has to accept it but any other offer is more problematic
    Please read the Act, and stop contradicting people who have read it based on what you've seen on Wikipedia.
    Hear, hear.

    And here's a link to the Act itself:

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/26/enacted/data.htm

    There is no need for the HoC to approve any extension.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    kjh said:

    Let's assume that the Government fails to get 2/3rds of the Commons supporting its motion on Monday. Johnson then immediately tables a vote of no confidence in the Government which takes place on Tuesday 29th November and is carried. No other government can command a vote of confidence in the 14 day period that follows, while Johnson remains in Downing Street in the interim.

    What is the earliest legal date that a GE could then be held, assuming that it did not necessarily need to be on a Thursday?

    I'm interested in the response to this question also. Anyone?

    Surely if the 12/12 fails for which there must be a reasonably high probability a 31/1 extension is pointlessly short.
    Maybe 20th January given that Bank Holidays are excluded. That will be a Monday - 23rd Jan more likely.
    An October election was rejected because the opposition said they didn't trust Johnson not to push it back to after Exit Day. Logically that rules out a January election with an Exit Day of 31st January.
    The original comment referred to a VNOC on 29th November - perhaps he meant 29th October!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151
    edited October 2019
    DougSeal said:

    Scott_P said:
    QTWAIN.

    Hunt would not have gotten rid of the backstop. It was only Boris's pressure on the date that forced people to compromise - now he has squared off the EU Boris only has one front rather than two to worry about.
    He’s replaced one front with another front. Johnson has replaced the hostility of the EU with the hostility of the people propping up his Government. Genius. Seriously, the EU can be bargained with, but the DUP is an enemy for life.

    OT. I find this habit of referring to the PM by his first name but all other politiciansby their surname infuriating. He’s not an infant.
    The only way the Tory Party gets a Deal through is with a Tory majority after the next general election, if the DUP hold the balance of power again that guarantees No Deal as the EU will not agree their terms. (Same if the Brexit Party held the balance of power).
  • Aye, Aberdeen get's far to dark in the winter - and far too light in the summer.

    Hippy dippy Ms Briskin likes the Stonehenge photo.
  • MangoMango Posts: 1,019
    DavidL said:

    alex. said:

    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.

    @AlastairMeeks has made the latter point well on several occasions and he is right that it is time that our politicians learned some new tricks. A more consensual Parliament would be an improvement on the current dialogue of the deaf. There is more to rhetoric than shouting abuse. But there is absolutely no sign of this new trick being learned any time soon.
    FPTP.

    It is the root of all political evil.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,722
    HYUFD said:

    So the EU has agreed to an extension but with no end date yet, suggesting Macron is standing by only a short extension

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50175914

    O come, O come, Emmanuel
    And ransom captive Israel
    That mourns in lonely exile here
    Until the Son of God appear.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    edited October 2019

    It's not especially 'tight.' Parliament and the EU have accepted the extension request. It's just a question of 'when' not 'if'. So those still clinging to a No Deal on 31/10, you have better things to focus on. Interesting to see too that Johnson has accepted it and moved on. Just like that. Very Dom-esque.

    I reckon Corbyn will push for 1st week of December for the General Election, judging by his comments this morning. 3rd or 5th December looking best bets right now.*

    *p.s. also quite smart to insist on a different date to Johnson.

    Probably won't want this clash - Gives Johnson Priminesterial photo ops.

    NATO Summit London 2019
    2019 London Summit
    Date
    3–4 December 2019
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    No.

    If the EU offer an extension to 31st January, the PM has to accept it, end of.

    If the EU offer less time (or more time) the PM can accept it without a vote.

    If he doesn't want to accept an alternative to 31st January he has to get the HoC to reject, within two calendar days, a motion:

    “That this House has approved the extension to the period in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union which the European Council has decided.”

    But there is no necessity for that vote in order for any extension to be accepted.

    If the HoC wasn't sitting during the two calendar days when they offer the extension the PM just has to accept it no matter what the proposed date is, as no HoC vote is possible.
    So what happens if they ofer 14 days and he the accepts it? Is the Benn act then defunct?
    Defunct isn't the word I'd use, but it was written very specifically for extending beyond October 31st, so would have no bearing on a new Exit Day of, say, November 15th.

    A new Act would be required to force the PM to delay again (if no other Brexit option was chosen).
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    philiph said:

    It's not especially 'tight.' Parliament and the EU have accepted the extension request. It's just a question of 'when' not 'if'. So those still clinging to a No Deal on 31/10, you have better things to focus on. Interesting to see too that Johnson has accepted it and moved on. Just like that. Very Dom-esque.

    I reckon Corbyn will push for 1st week of December for the General Election, judging by his comments this morning. 3rd or 5th December looking best bets right now.*

    *p.s. also quite smart to insist on a different date to Johnson.

    Probably won't want this clash - Gives Johnson Priminesterial photo ops.

    NATO Summit London 2019
    2019 London Summit
    Date
    3–4 December 2019
    Two words.

    Donald Trump.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151
    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696
    edited October 2019

    nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    No.

    If the EU offer an extension to 31st January, the PM has to accept it, end of.

    If the EU offer less time (or more time) the PM can accept it without a vote.

    If he doesn't want to accept an alternative to 31st January he has to get the HoC to reject, within two calendar days, a motion:

    “That this House has approved the extension to the period in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union which the European Council has decided.”

    But there is no necessity for that vote in order for any extension to be accepted.

    If the HoC wasn't sitting during the two calendar days when they offer the extension the PM just has to accept it no matter what the proposed date is, as no HoC vote is possible.
    So what happens if they ofer 14 days and he the accepts it? Is the Benn act then defunct?
    Yes (well, fulfilled rather than defunct, but yes).
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688

    philiph said:

    It's not especially 'tight.' Parliament and the EU have accepted the extension request. It's just a question of 'when' not 'if'. So those still clinging to a No Deal on 31/10, you have better things to focus on. Interesting to see too that Johnson has accepted it and moved on. Just like that. Very Dom-esque.

    I reckon Corbyn will push for 1st week of December for the General Election, judging by his comments this morning. 3rd or 5th December looking best bets right now.*

    *p.s. also quite smart to insist on a different date to Johnson.

    Probably won't want this clash - Gives Johnson Priminesterial photo ops.

    NATO Summit London 2019
    2019 London Summit
    Date
    3–4 December 2019
    Two words.

    Donald Trump.
    p.s. even my hard core Conservative friends loathe him.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    TOPPING said:

    Fascinating. Thanks.

    About 20 years ago I remember watching a programme on BBC Something in the afternoon and it was these old blokes, all in collar and tie, and patterned cardigans sitting on velour armchairs chatting over tea about funny stuff that happened during the war. Any one of them could have been your favourite great uncle and they were just the sort of folk that the woke generation would have taken the piss out of mercilessly as being old fogeys and out of touch.

    And then the credits rolled and listed the participants and each one of them had at least two or three of an AFC, DFC, DSO, etc. It was the most amazing thing I wish I could remember what prog it was.
    Before the Telegraph paywalled their obits, it used to be fascinating to read them. Men, and latterly women, who had worked quietly and diligently for years in industry or the Civil Service were revealed to have the most extraordinary wartime or post-war colonial histories. Nowadays we have conservative MPs who never fought a day in their lives who scream at the Germans because their granddads were in WW2. :(
  • viewcode said:

    AndyJS said:

    Not sure if anyone else has pointed this out as haven't had a chance to catch up on the threads between, but re that poll about violence to MPs yesterday..

    Remainers think it's much more likely, whatever the Brexit outcome

    Violence to MPs likely if UK leaves EU:
    Remainers - 69%
    Leavers - 35%

    Violence to MPs likely if UK remains in EU:
    Remainers - 61%
    Leavers - 54%

    They also think that protests where the public get injured are more likely if we leave, though tied on remain

    Public injured in protests if UK leaves:
    Remainers - 70%
    Leavers - 32%

    Public injured in protests if UK remains:
    Remainers - 54%
    Leavers - 54%

    Who's predicting violence here then?

    A lot of people are questioning this survey.
    The fact that people are questioning it does not make it wrong. There's a Yes Minister quote specifically for this.
    Looks pretty meaningless to me. If someone is asked if they think something is more likely then they are being asked to guess. My own view is that the whole Brexit debate has been highly damaging and therefore these unpleasant things are sadly, possibly more likely, but hopefully will not come to pass, and the extremists are put back in their box. May take a while though. It is essentially a survey of people's guesses.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696
    It's going to be December 5th isn't it?
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited October 2019
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704

    philiph said:

    It's not especially 'tight.' Parliament and the EU have accepted the extension request. It's just a question of 'when' not 'if'. So those still clinging to a No Deal on 31/10, you have better things to focus on. Interesting to see too that Johnson has accepted it and moved on. Just like that. Very Dom-esque.

    I reckon Corbyn will push for 1st week of December for the General Election, judging by his comments this morning. 3rd or 5th December looking best bets right now.*

    *p.s. also quite smart to insist on a different date to Johnson.

    Probably won't want this clash - Gives Johnson Priminesterial photo ops.

    NATO Summit London 2019
    2019 London Summit
    Date
    3–4 December 2019
    Two words.

    Donald Trump.
    Can't deny that there is a negative there!
  • It's going to be December 5th isn't it?

    It is a much better date
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688

    It's going to be December 5th isn't it?

    It is a much better date
    Yes!

    December 5th. Which also equals a last chance this Parliament for Corbyn to rub Johnson's nose in it.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    Turned into Macron it seems now
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
    He has written two letters

    Still mulling them over.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502

    Chris said:

    nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    I have the section from Wiki

    Section 3 obliges the Prime Minister to accept an extension to 31st January 2020, and allows the Prime Minister to either accept an offer or ask the HOC to accept an offer of any other date

    So if 31st January 2020 is offered Boris has to accept it but any other offer is more problematic
    Please read the Act, and stop contradicting people who have read it based on what you've seen on Wikipedia.
    Hear, hear.

    And here's a link to the Act itself:

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/26/enacted/data.htm

    There is no need for the HoC to approve any extension.
    I get it now . The minister is not forced to bring a motion to the house for approval .
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
    Boris did not send an extension letter, only a letter opposing further extension with an unsigned copy of the Benn Act, thus no need for him to resign
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,724
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    Boris complied with the Surrender Act, by surrendering, a simple matter of fact.

    He also converted the temporary Irish backstop by agreeing a permanent one...
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,722
    viewcode said:

    TOPPING said:

    Fascinating. Thanks.

    About 20 years ago I remember watching a programme on BBC Something in the afternoon and it was these old blokes, all in collar and tie, and patterned cardigans sitting on velour armchairs chatting over tea about funny stuff that happened during the war. Any one of them could have been your favourite great uncle and they were just the sort of folk that the woke generation would have taken the piss out of mercilessly as being old fogeys and out of touch.

    And then the credits rolled and listed the participants and each one of them had at least two or three of an AFC, DFC, DSO, etc. It was the most amazing thing I wish I could remember what prog it was.
    Before the Telegraph paywalled their obits, it used to be fascinating to read them. Men, and latterly women, who had worked quietly and diligently for years in industry or the Civil Service were revealed to have the most extraordinary wartime or post-war colonial histories. Nowadays we have conservative MPs who never fought a day in their lives who scream at the Germans because their granddads were in WW2. :(
    There's a brilliant one in yesterday's - 'Split Waterman' Devil-may care star of post-war speedway who later applied his 'quick decisive mind' to crime.
  • EU not interfering with UK politics

    https://twitter.com/i/events/1187672827970768896?s=13
  • philiph said:

    geoffw said:

    Andrew said:

    Now there's talk of the French digging in, and an emergency EC summit on Wednesday.....

    This is getting entirely much too tight.

    If so, good.
    Is the delay in the approval of an extension a warning to the U.K. in the following terms?

    If you mess us about again we may well say No. This time we are keeping you guessing until the last minute, you are testing our patience and unity. Don't do it again.
    Yes partly, but that is as realistic as the Uk threat of no deal was a bargaining tool. I think it is mostly because whatever decision they make now could be seen as interfering in a possible UK GE which they are hoping to avoid through delay.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,675
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
    Boris did not send an extension letter, only a letter opposing further extension with an unsigned copy of the Benn Act, thus no need for him to resign
    He definitely sent an extension letter. He did it in a silly way to make a point, but he definitely sent it.
  • back to the letters

    :/
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    TOPPING said:

    Fascinating. Thanks.

    About 20 years ago I remember watching a programme on BBC Something in the afternoon and it was these old blokes, all in collar and tie, and patterned cardigans sitting on velour armchairs chatting over tea about funny stuff that happened during the war. Any one of them could have been your favourite great uncle and they were just the sort of folk that the woke generation would have taken the piss out of mercilessly as being old fogeys and out of touch.

    And then the credits rolled and listed the participants and each one of them had at least two or three of an AFC, DFC, DSO, etc. It was the most amazing thing I wish I could remember what prog it was.
    It's this generation's kids, the baby boomers, that the woke lot take the piss out of. The generation that fought in the War are almost all dead now. Boomers are pretty ridiculous, to be fair.
    I detect a lot of green cheese there.
    Qué?
    Envy of the Boomers and their lifestyles/money versus the pathetic snivelling woke one we have now, who want it all on a plate for nothing.
    Boomers worked for their cash.
    Indeed. They were funded by student grants and worked at jobs in a time of full employment and stable workweeks, earning wages that were high enough to afford in their twenties a deposit for a house with a garden, then retired at 60/65 to lead a long retirement funded positive equity fueled by increases in house price inflation that would make the Weimar Republic blush, and taxation on their fee-burdened grandchildren in cheap pokey flats.

    Such depravation! How could they survive it!
  • nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    No.

    If the EU offer an extension to 31st January, the PM has to accept it, end of.

    If the EU offer less time (or more time) the PM can accept it without a vote.

    If he doesn't want to accept an alternative to 31st January he has to get the HoC to reject, within two calendar days, a motion:

    “That this House has approved the extension to the period in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union which the European Council has decided.”

    But there is no necessity for that vote in order for any extension to be accepted.

    If the HoC wasn't sitting during the two calendar days when they offer the extension the PM just has to accept it no matter what the proposed date is, as no HoC vote is possible.
    So what happens if they ofer 14 days and he the accepts it? Is the Benn act then defunct?
    Yes (well, fulfilled rather than defunct, but yes).
    I was standing in the rain supervising a dig when I typed it so 'defunct' was the first word that sprang to mind in a rush :smile:

    But you are right fulfilled is more appropriate.
  • 148grss said:
    Another stroke of genius from Cummings. Lets take back control and give it to more unelected bureaucrats with a chip on their shoulder.....
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478
    viewcode said:

    TOPPING said:

    Fascinating. Thanks.

    About 20 years ago I remember watching a programme on BBC Something in the afternoon and it was these old blokes, all in collar and tie, and patterned cardigans sitting on velour armchairs chatting over tea about funny stuff that happened during the war. Any one of them could have been your favourite great uncle and they were just the sort of folk that the woke generation would have taken the piss out of mercilessly as being old fogeys and out of touch.

    And then the credits rolled and listed the participants and each one of them had at least two or three of an AFC, DFC, DSO, etc. It was the most amazing thing I wish I could remember what prog it was.
    Before the Telegraph paywalled their obits, it used to be fascinating to read them. Men, and latterly women, who had worked quietly and diligently for years in industry or the Civil Service were revealed to have the most extraordinary wartime or post-war colonial histories. Nowadays we have conservative MPs who never fought a day in their lives who scream at the Germans because their granddads were in WW2. :(
    Some years ago I had a job which required me to interview elderly people on several medications, to ensure that they were happy, knew what they were doing or had to watch out for and so on.
    Always used to ask them what job they'd done in life, partly to put them at ease, partly to try and reference any advice in the context of their past employment.
    Anyway one old chap told me he had left UCL in the v. early 40's with an excellent Chemistry degree and had immediately toddled along to sign up to do his bit. However, before he could be given a khaki suit he was contacted by the authorities and whisked back into a lab to work on the development of penicillin. Which he'd done..... well, not just penicillin...... for some considerable time.
    Fascinating.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,722
    viewcode said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    TOPPING said:

    Fascinating. Thanks.

    About 20 years ago I remember watching a programme on BBC Something in the afternoon and it was these old blokes, all in collar and tie, and patterned cardigans sitting on velour armchairs chatting over tea about funny stuff that happened during the war. Any one of them could have been your favourite great uncle and they were just the sort of folk that the woke generation would have taken the piss out of mercilessly as being old fogeys and out of touch.

    And then the credits rolled and listed the participants and each one of them had at least two or three of an AFC, DFC, DSO, etc. It was the most amazing thing I wish I could remember what prog it was.
    It's this generation's kids, the baby boomers, that the woke lot take the piss out of. The generation that fought in the War are almost all dead now. Boomers are pretty ridiculous, to be fair.
    I detect a lot of green cheese there.
    Qué?
    Envy of the Boomers and their lifestyles/money versus the pathetic snivelling woke one we have now, who want it all on a plate for nothing.
    Boomers worked for their cash.
    Indeed. They were funded by student grants and worked at jobs in a time of full employment and stable workweeks, earning wages that were high enough to afford in their twenties a deposit for a house with a garden, then retired at 60/65 to lead a long retirement funded positive equity fueled by increases in house price inflation that would make the Weimar Republic blush, and taxation on their fee-burdened grandchildren in cheap pokey flats.

    Such depravation! How could they survive it!
    Depraved but not deprived, fortunately.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
    Boris did not send an extension letter, only a letter opposing further extension with an unsigned copy of the Benn Act, thus no need for him to resign
    What rot. He sent the following letter:

    Dear Mr President,

    The UK Parliament has passed the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019. Its provisions now require Her Majesty’s Government to seek an extension of the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty, currently due to expire at 11.00pm GMT on 31 October 2019, until 11.00pm GMT on 31 January 2020.

    I am writing therefore to inform the European Council that the United Kingdom is seeking a further extension to the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty. The United Kingdom proposes that this period should end at 11.00pm GMT on 31 January 2020. If the parties are able to ratify before this date, the Government proposes that the period should be terminated early.

    Yours sincerely,

    Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

    The fact he childishly refused to get his crayon out and write "Luv frum Boriz" at the end is neither here nor there. He's the PM and he sent the letter as he was required by law to do.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,696

    nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    No.

    If the EU offer an extension to 31st January, the PM has to accept it, end of.

    If the EU offer less time (or more time) the PM can accept it without a vote.

    If he doesn't want to accept an alternative to 31st January he has to get the HoC to reject, within two calendar days, a motion:

    “That this House has approved the extension to the period in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union which the European Council has decided.”

    But there is no necessity for that vote in order for any extension to be accepted.

    If the HoC wasn't sitting during the two calendar days when they offer the extension the PM just has to accept it no matter what the proposed date is, as no HoC vote is possible.
    So what happens if they ofer 14 days and he the accepts it? Is the Benn act then defunct?
    Yes (well, fulfilled rather than defunct, but yes).
    I was standing in the rain supervising a dig when I typed it so 'defunct' was the first word that sprang to mind in a rush :smile:

    But you are right fulfilled is more appropriate.
    Fair enough... I hope you find what you are looking for! :smile:
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151
    edited October 2019
    OllyT said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tabman said:

    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    TOPPING said:

    Fascinating. Thanks.

    About 20 years ago I remember watching a programme on BBC Something in the afternoon and it was these old blokes, all in collar and tie, and patterned cardigans sitting on velour armchairs chatting over tea about funny stuff that happened during the war. Any one of them could have been your favourite great uncle and they were just the sort ng I wish I could remember what prog it was.
    It's this generation's kids, the baby boomers, that the woke lot take the piss out of. The generation that fought in the War are almost all dead now. Boomers are pretty ridiculous, to be fair.
    I detect a lot of green cheese there.
    Qué?
    Envy of the Boomers and their lifestyles/money versus the pathetic snivelling woke one we have now, who want it all on a plate for nothing.
    Boomers worked for their cash.
    No one uses cash these days, malc.
    Boomers got a lot of stuff on a plate. House price windfalls being the biggest, along with gold plated pensions at 60.
    Gen Xers are the once who've really lost out.
    Bollocks, they've had a decade of interest rates on the floor, all to protect the value of their inheritance.
    But many - probably the majority - will not get an inheritance, either their parents haven't got one or if they have it will be spent on care fees.
    Totally off topic I wonder what the long term economic consequences will be of vast quantities of money being diverted to care companies rather than being handed down to children and charities.I guess it creates a lot of employment in the care sector so that is a benefit.

    We are fortunate not to need an inheritance but it would be all the same if we did because it's all but disappeared in care fees now at £60,000 pa per person and rising.

    Dignitas beckons for me when the time comes I'd rather the cash went to the dogs home than the care companies!
    Many parents now give cash to their children for their deposits for houses etc in their 50s and 60s ie well before care home fees are an issue. While if you only have at home care thanks to the scrapping of the dementia tax you still pay nothing from your house value on care fees after death while benefiting from Osborne's raising of the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million still
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
    Boris did not send an extension letter, only a letter opposing further extension with an unsigned copy of the Benn Act, thus no need for him to resign
    If he didn't send it he should be arrested because he's broken the law.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
    Boris did not send an extension letter, only a letter opposing further extension with an unsigned copy of the Benn Act, thus no need for him to resign
    What rot. He sent the following letter:

    Dear Mr President,

    The UK Parliament has passed the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019. Its provisions now require Her Majesty’s Government to seek an extension of the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty, currently due to expire at 11.00pm GMT on 31 October 2019, until 11.00pm GMT on 31 January 2020.

    I am writing therefore to inform the European Council that the United Kingdom is seeking a further extension to the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty. The United Kingdom proposes that this period should end at 11.00pm GMT on 31 January 2020. If the parties are able to ratify before this date, the Government proposes that the period should be terminated early.

    Yours sincerely,

    Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

    The fact he childishly refused to get his crayon out and write "Luv frum Boriz" at the end is neither here nor there. He's the PM and he sent the letter as he was required by law to do.
    So I repeat Boris just sent an unsigned copy of the Benn Act and an accompanying signed letter opposing further extension.

    Thanks for confirming
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
    Boris did not send an extension letter, only a letter opposing further extension with an unsigned copy of the Benn Act, thus no need for him to resign
    What rot. He sent the following letter:

    Dear Mr President,

    The UK Parliament has passed the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019. Its provisions now require Her Majesty’s Government to seek an extension of the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty, currently due to expire at 11.00pm GMT on 31 October 2019, until 11.00pm GMT on 31 January 2020.

    I am writing therefore to inform the European Council that the United Kingdom is seeking a further extension to the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty. The United Kingdom proposes that this period should end at 11.00pm GMT on 31 January 2020. If the parties are able to ratify before this date, the Government proposes that the period should be terminated early.

    Yours sincerely,

    Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

    The fact he childishly refused to get his crayon out and write "Luv frum Boriz" at the end is neither here nor there. He's the PM and he sent the letter as he was required by law to do.
    He sent an Act of Parliament.

    If it was a letter from him it'd be on his letterhead. Was it?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
    Boris did not send an extension letter, only a letter opposing further extension with an unsigned copy of the Benn Act, thus no need for him to resign
    If he didn't send it he should be arrested because he's broken the law.
    Technically not, there was no legal requirement for a signed extension letter
  • HYUFD said:

    OllyT said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tabman said:

    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    TOPPING said:

    Fascinating. Thanks.

    About 20 years ago I remember watching a programme on BBC Something in the afternoon and it was these old blokes, all in collar and tie, and patterned cardigans sitting on velour armchairs chatting over tea about funny stuff that happened during the war. Any one of them could have been your favourite great uncle and they were just the sort ng I wish I could remember what prog it was.
    I detect a lot of green cheese there.
    Qué?
    Envy of the Boomers and their lifestyles/money versus the pathetic snivelling woke one we have now, who want it all on a plate for nothing.
    Boomers worked for their cash.
    No one uses cash these days, malc.
    Boomers got a lot of stuff on a plate. House price windfalls being the biggest, along with gold plated pensions at 60.
    Gen Xers are the once who've really lost out.
    Bollocks, they've had a decade of interest rates on the floor, all to protect the value of their inheritance.
    But many - probably the majority - will not get an inheritance, either their parents haven't got one or if they have it will be spent on care fees.
    Totally off topic I wonder what the long term economic consequences will be of vast quantities of money being diverted to care companies rather than being handed down to children and charities.I guess it creates a lot of employment in the care sector so that is a benefit.

    We are fortunate not to need an inheritance but it would be all the same if we did because it's all but disappeared in care fees now at £60,000 pa per person and rising.

    Dignitas beckons for me when the time comes I'd rather the cash went to the dogs home than the care companies!
    Many parents now give cash to their children for their deposits for houses etc in their 50s and 60s ie well before care home fees are an issue. While if you only have at home care thanks to the scrapping of the dementia tax you still pay nothing from your house value on care fees after death while benefiting from Osborne's raising of the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million still
    The party of opportunity and home ownership. Hope you were born to rich and generous parents and you might have a house deposit by your 60s. What are the youngsters complaining about!?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478
    edited October 2019
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
    Boris did not send an extension letter, only a letter opposing further extension with an unsigned copy of the Benn Act, thus no need for him to resign
    What rot. He sent the following letter:

    Dear Mr President,

    The UK Parliament has passed the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019. Its provisions now require Her Majesty’s Government to seek an extension of the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty, currently due to expire at 11.00pm GMT on 31 October 2019, until 11.00pm GMT on 31 January 2020.

    I am writing therefore to inform the European Council that the United Kingdom is seeking a further extension to the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty. The United Kingdom proposes that this period should end at 11.00pm GMT on 31 January 2020. If the parties are able to ratify before this date, the Government proposes that the period should be terminated early.

    Yours sincerely,

    Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

    The fact he childishly refused to get his crayon out and write "Luv frum Boriz" at the end is neither here nor there. He's the PM and he sent the letter as he was required by law to do.
    So I repeat Boris just sent an unsigned copy of the Benn Act and an accompanying signed letter opposing further extension.

    Thanks for confirming
    One of these days I'm going to send an unsigned cheque to see if the payee's bank accepts it as settlement of the debt!
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Hunt would have asked for an extension and the Brexit Party would be ahead of the Tories again.

    Boris did not ask for an extension, he just forwarded Parliament's extension request on, a difference.

    Boris has also removed the GB backstop to get a new Deal, Hunt would not have done
    How's your Hungarian Prime Minister?

    :smiley:
    And what happened to Boris resigning? :wink:
    Boris did not send an extension letter, only a letter opposing further extension with an unsigned copy of the Benn Act, thus no need for him to resign
    What rot. He sent the following letter:

    Dear Mr President,

    The UK Parliament has passed the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019. Its provisions now require Her Majesty’s Government to seek an extension of the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty, currently due to expire at 11.00pm GMT on 31 October 2019, until 11.00pm GMT on 31 January 2020.

    I am writing therefore to inform the European Council that the United Kingdom is seeking a further extension to the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty. The United Kingdom proposes that this period should end at 11.00pm GMT on 31 January 2020. If the parties are able to ratify before this date, the Government proposes that the period should be terminated early.

    Yours sincerely,

    Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

    The fact he childishly refused to get his crayon out and write "Luv frum Boriz" at the end is neither here nor there. He's the PM and he sent the letter as he was required by law to do.
    So I repeat Boris just sent an unsigned copy of the Benn Act and an accompanying signed letter opposing further extension.

    Thanks for confirming
    One of these days I'm going to send and unsigned cheque to see if the payee's bank accepts it as settlement of the debt!
    You still use cheques?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,504
    Please spare us #letterchat
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478
    HYUFD said:

    OllyT said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tabman said:

    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    TOPPING said:

    Fascinating. Thanks.

    About 20 years ago I remember watching a programme on BBC Something in the afternoon and it was these old blokes, all in collar and tie, and patterned cardigans sitting on velour armchairs chatting over tea about funny stuff that happened during the war. Any one of them could have been your favourite great uncle and they were just the sort ng I wish I could remember what prog it was.
    It's this generation's kids, the baby boomers, that the woke lot take the piss out of. The generation that fought in the War are almost all dead now. Boomers are pretty ridiculous, to be fair.
    I detect a lot of green cheese there.
    Qué?
    Boomers worked for their cash.
    No one uses cash these days, malc.
    Boomers got a lot of stuff on a plate. House price windfalls being the biggest, along with gold plated pensions at 60.
    Gen Xers are the once who've really lost out.
    Bollocks, they've had a decade of interest rates on the floor, all to protect the value of their inheritance.
    But many - probably the majority - will not get an inheritance, either their parents haven't got one or if they have it will be spent on care fees.
    Totally off topic I wonder what the long term economic consequences will be of vast quantities of money being diverted to care companies rather than being handed down to children and charities.I guess it creates a lot of employment in the care sector so that is a benefit.

    We are fortunate not to need an inheritance but it would be all the same if we did because it's all but disappeared in care fees now at £60,000 pa per person and rising.

    Dignitas beckons for me when the time comes I'd rather the cash went to the dogs home than the care companies!
    Many parents now give cash to their children for their deposits for houses etc in their 50s and 60s ie well before care home fees are an issue. While if you only have at home care thanks to the scrapping of the dementia tax you still pay nothing from your house value on care fees after death while benefiting from Osborne's raising of the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million still
    There are adverts to that end on TV. I'm somewhat(!) iffy about equity release myself.
  • nico67 said:



    nico67 said:

    The EU seem to be getting a lot of criticism but there’s a reason they can’t agree to the duration of the extension until after the vote on Monday .

    If MPs don’t back an election and then Bozo freaks out and says right I’m pulling the WAIB .

    What do the EU do then ? No election and no imminent chance of the deal passing .

    If Bozo does that any goodwill in the EU will disappear completely .

    So I expect another u turn from Bozo , if MPs vote against the election he’ll then have to bring the WAIB back anyway .

    And if he doesn't we leave with no deal 2 days later because the EU have to respond in writing and the HOC has to agree. Letters lost in post or unexpected delays are increasing no deal considerably
    The HoC does not have to agree.
    I think you find it does but I am willing to be corrected if someone can affirm otherwise
    If the EU offer the three months Johnson has to accept it . If the EU offer less time MPs have to vote . If the EU offer more than 3 months then Johnson can accept it but if he likes put it to MPs. I think that’s what the Benn Act says.
    No.

    If the EU offer an extension to 31st January, the PM has to accept it, end of.

    If the EU offer less time (or more time) the PM can accept it without a vote.

    If he doesn't want to accept an alternative to 31st January he has to get the HoC to reject, within two calendar days, a motion:

    “That this House has approved the extension to the period in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union which the European Council has decided.”

    But there is no necessity for that vote in order for any extension to be accepted.

    If the HoC wasn't sitting during the two calendar days when they offer the extension the PM just has to accept it no matter what the proposed date is, as no HoC vote is possible.
    So what happens if they ofer 14 days and he the accepts it? Is the Benn act then defunct?
    Defunct isn't the word I'd use, but it was written very specifically for extending beyond October 31st, so would have no bearing on a new Exit Day of, say, November 15th.

    A new Act would be required to force the PM to delay again (if no other Brexit option was chosen).
    So what happens if they extend until November 1st and say you have until the end of next week to ratify the deal?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,504
    Letterati = Birthers
  • Everybody here knows what letters the PM sent and which of them he signed. The quibbling over semantics is tedious.
This discussion has been closed.