politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This looks like a spectacular bust up between the SNP and the
Options
Comments
-
To be fair to her, I don't think the voters of Broxtowe were under any illusions about her views on the EU.brendan16 said:
WIll Anna Soubry ever suck it up and move on? She did of course get elected on a Tory manifesto that stated we would leave the single market and customs union. There is no reference to either the single market of the customs union in the GFA as far as I am aware?Richard_Tyndall said:
Anna showing her ignorance yet again.williamglenn said:
Maybe it's time she forced a by election so the people of Broxtowe can have a people's vote?!0 -
Enough about the SNP, some actual good news today from the government, well done Sajid Javid.
https://twitter.com/DanielKorski/status/10066701685069373450 -
The Government's approach and proposed legislation, ignoring the Sewel conventions, was clearly outlined weeks if not months in advance. Only when attempts by the Scottish Government to agree changes failed did their Continuity bill have to be fast-tracked.Alistair said:
So which is it, is Westminster legislating without Holyrood's consent or are they not?TheScreamingEagles said:Actually the SNP might be talking shite about the Sewel convention.
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006624383237083136?s=21
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006624784459948032?s=21
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006625295514861568?s=21
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006625973792624640?s=21
Status of the former does not depend on the latter.0 -
This is particularly important as the US is closing down their version - despite the fact that a large number of successful companies were created under it.Sandpit said:Enough about the SNP, some actual good news today from the government, well done Sajid Javid.
https://twitter.com/DanielKorski/status/10066701685069373450 -
There were at least two Divisions in the middle of the - I think - 1988 Budget Speech which delayed the proceedings for over 45 minutes. Only the SNP appetite would be relevant here. How disruptive do they wish to be? Irish Nationalists proved very disruptive in the late 19th century.RobD said:
I thought the Speaker could ask members to stand/sit to indicate their support? It would be obvious if a majority supported the motion. Anyway, after the first division, if there was one, I suspect there would be no appetite among other members for it to continue.justin124 said:
It would mean a Division.When Salmond and his colleagues did this in the middle of the Budget speech there were only a handful of SNP members.RobD said:
Suspect that the vote would not require a division. The SNP members can only shout so hard.justin124 said:
Indeed - but they could have pushed it further. Had the SNP Leader refused to leave when so ordered, the Speaker would have had to put a motion to the House and that could have taken almost half an hour. Then at the end of that Division a second SNP MP gets up to make the same point and the entire process has to be followed all over again. I recall one of Nigel Lawson's later Budget Speeches being disrupted in this way in the late 1980s when Alex Salmond and other SNP MPs forced such divisions in the middle of the Speech. 35 MPs could potentially cauise a lot of procedural mayhem - if sufficiently determined!RobD said:
While exciting, it was only a couple of minutes before they were ejected.justin124 said:I wonder what would be the impact of the SNP deciding to behave like this at every PMQs? Or indeed in the middle of every debate relating to Brexit simply to cause chaos on the floor of the House?
Bercow was clearly on the verge of calling a vote today when it initially appeared that Blackford was refusing to depart.0 -
Should have scheduled 5 ODIs against Scotland...AlastairMeeks said:
It must have been pressing if Sir John was persuaded to miss the cricket.Scott_P said:0 -
I think the Speaker would have a thing or two to say about it, it isn't just the SNP's "appetite" that matters.justin124 said:
There were at least two Divisions in the middle of the - I think - 1988 Budget Speech which delayed the proceedings for over 45 minutes. Only the SNP appetite would be relevant here. How disruptive do they wish to be? Irish Nationalists proved very disruptive in the late 19th century.RobD said:
I thought the Speaker could ask members to stand/sit to indicate their support? It would be obvious if a majority supported the motion. Anyway, after the first division, if there was one, I suspect there would be no appetite among other members for it to continue.justin124 said:
It would mean a Division.When Salmond and his colleagues did this in the middle of the Budget speech there were only a handful of SNP members.RobD said:
Suspect that the vote would not require a division. The SNP members can only shout so hard.justin124 said:
Indeed - but they could have pushed it further. Had the SNP Leader refused to leave when so ordered, the Speaker would have had to put a motion to the House and that could have taken almost half an hour. Then at the end of that Division a second SNP MP gets up to make the same point and the entire process has to be followed all over again. I recall one of Nigel Lawson's later Budget Speeches being disrupted in this way in the late 1980s when Alex Salmond and other SNP MPs forced such divisions in the middle of the Speech. 35 MPs could potentially cauise a lot of procedural mayhem - if sufficiently determined!RobD said:
While exciting, it was only a couple of minutes before they were ejected.justin124 said:I wonder what would be the impact of the SNP deciding to behave like this at every PMQs? Or indeed in the middle of every debate relating to Brexit simply to cause chaos on the floor of the House?
Bercow was clearly on the verge of calling a vote today when it initially appeared that Blackford was refusing to depart.0 -
I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.rcs1000 said:
To be fair to her, I don't think the voters of Broxtowe were under any illusions about her views on the EU.brendan16 said:
WIll Anna Soubry ever suck it up and move on? She did of course get elected on a Tory manifesto that stated we would leave the single market and customs union. There is no reference to either the single market of the customs union in the GFA as far as I am aware?Richard_Tyndall said:
Anna showing her ignorance yet again.williamglenn said:
Maybe it's time she forced a by election so the people of Broxtowe can have a people's vote?!0 -
I am sure he would - but procedurely I don't think the Divisions could be avoided if SNP MPs were to shout 'Noe' when the question is put by him to the House.RobD said:
I think the Speaker would have a thing or two to say about it, it isn't just the SNP's "appetite" that matters.justin124 said:
There were at least two Divisions in the middle of the - I think - 1988 Budget Speech which delayed the proceedings for over 45 minutes. Only the SNP appetite would be relevant here. How disruptive do they wish to be? Irish Nationalists proved very disruptive in the late 19th century.RobD said:
I thought the Speaker could ask members to stand/sit to indicate their support? It would be obvious if a majority supported the motion. Anyway, after the first division, if there was one, I suspect there would be no appetite among other members for it to continue.justin124 said:
It would mean a Division.When Salmond and his colleagues did this in the middle of the Budget speech there were only a handful of SNP members.RobD said:
Suspect that the vote would not require a division. The SNP members can only shout so hard.justin124 said:
Indeed - but they could have pushed it further. Had the SNP Leader refused to leave when so ordered, the Speaker would have had to put a motion to the House and that could have taken almost half an hour. Then at the end of that Division a second SNP MP gets up to make the same point and the entire process has to be followed all over again. I recall one of Nigel Lawson's later Budget Speeches being disrupted in this way in the late 1980s when Alex Salmond and other SNP MPs forced such divisions in the middle of the Speech. 35 MPs could potentially cauise a lot of procedural mayhem - if sufficiently determined!RobD said:
While exciting, it was only a couple of minutes before they were ejected.justin124 said:I wonder what would be the impact of the SNP deciding to behave like this at every PMQs? Or indeed in the middle of every debate relating to Brexit simply to cause chaos on the floor of the House?
Bercow was clearly on the verge of calling a vote today when it initially appeared that Blackford was refusing to depart.0 -
As I said, the Speaker can ask members to stand/sit to indicate their support.justin124 said:
I am sure he would - but procedurely I don't think the Divisions could be avoided if SNP MPs were to shout 'Noe' when the question is put by him to the House.RobD said:
I think the Speaker would have a thing or two to say about it, it isn't just the SNP's "appetite" that matters.justin124 said:
There were at least two Divisions in the middle of the - I think - 1988 Budget Speech which delayed the proceedings for over 45 minutes. Only the SNP appetite would be relevant here. How disruptive do they wish to be? Irish Nationalists proved very disruptive in the late 19th century.RobD said:
I thought the Speaker could ask members to stand/sit to indicate their support? It would be obvious if a majority supported the motion. Anyway, after the first division, if there was one, I suspect there would be no appetite among other members for it to continue.justin124 said:
It would mean a Division.When Salmond and his colleagues did this in the middle of the Budget speech there were only a handful of SNP members.RobD said:
Suspect that the vote would not require a division. The SNP members can only shout so hard.justin124 said:
Indeed - but they could have pushed it further. Had the SNP Leader refused to leave when so ordered, the Speaker would have had to put a motion to the House and that could have taken almost half an hour. Then at the end of that Division a second SNP MP gets up to make the same point and the entire process has to be followed all over again. I recall one of Nigel Lawson's later Budget Speeches being disrupted in this way in the late 1980s when Alex Salmond and other SNP MPs forced such divisions in the middle of the Speech. 35 MPs could potentially cauise a lot of procedural mayhem - if sufficiently determined!RobD said:
While exciting, it was only a couple of minutes before they were ejected.justin124 said:I wonder what would be the impact of the SNP deciding to behave like this at every PMQs? Or indeed in the middle of every debate relating to Brexit simply to cause chaos on the floor of the House?
Bercow was clearly on the verge of calling a vote today when it initially appeared that Blackford was refusing to depart.0 -
I believe that is restricted to a particular context - not to one of his rulings. A Division would arise here if an MP refused to depart when ordered to do so by the Speaker. The Division would effectively be held to uphold the Speaker's authority.RobD said:
As I said, the Speaker can ask members to stand/sit to indicate their support.justin124 said:
I am sure he would - but procedurely I don't think the Divisions could be avoided if SNP MPs were to shout 'Noe' when the question is put by him to the House.RobD said:
I think the Speaker would have a thing or two to say about it, it isn't just the SNP's "appetite" that matters.justin124 said:
There were at least two Divisions in the middle of the - I think - 1988 Budget Speech which delayed the proceedings for over 45 minutes. Only the SNP appetite would be relevant here. How disruptive do they wish to be? Irish Nationalists proved very disruptive in the late 19th century.RobD said:
I thought the Speaker could ask members to stand/sit to indicate their support? It would be obvious if a majority supported the motion. Anyway, after the first division, if there was one, I suspect there would be no appetite among other members for it to continue.justin124 said:
It would mean a Division.When Salmond and his colleagues did this in the middle of the Budget speech there were only a handful of SNP members.RobD said:
Suspect that the vote would not require a division. The SNP members can only shout so hard.justin124 said:
Indeed - but they could have pushed it further. Had the SNP Leader refused to leave when so ordered, the Speaker would have had to put a motion to the House and that could have taken almost half an hour. Then at the end of that Division a second SNP MP gets up to make the same point and the entire process has to be followed all over again. I recall one of Nigel Lawson's later Budget Speeches being disrupted in this way in the late 1980s when Alex Salmond and other SNP MPs forced such divisions in the middle of the Speech. 35 MPs could potentially cauise a lot of procedural mayhem - if sufficiently determined!RobD said:
While exciting, it was only a couple of minutes before they were ejected.justin124 said:I wonder what would be the impact of the SNP deciding to behave like this at every PMQs? Or indeed in the middle of every debate relating to Brexit simply to cause chaos on the floor of the House?
Bercow was clearly on the verge of calling a vote today when it initially appeared that Blackford was refusing to depart.0 -
0
-
That may be true of Justine Greening in Putney too.tpfkar said:
I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.rcs1000 said:
To be fair to her, I don't think the voters of Broxtowe were under any illusions about her views on the EU.brendan16 said:
WIll Anna Soubry ever suck it up and move on? She did of course get elected on a Tory manifesto that stated we would leave the single market and customs union. There is no reference to either the single market of the customs union in the GFA as far as I am aware?Richard_Tyndall said:
Anna showing her ignorance yet again.williamglenn said:
Maybe it's time she forced a by election so the people of Broxtowe can have a people's vote?!0 -
No it would be on the River Foyle. A joyous prospect for peace.RobD said:
The "cleanest" and "hardest" brexit would surely be WTO? The border wouldn't be in the Irish Sea.williamglenn said:
Do you think May would have used a larger majority to impose an Irish sea border? If not, a cleaner and harder Brexit doesn't exist.Casino_Royale said:
It’s the hung parliament that gives the Europhile Tory rebels the most power.MaxPB said:
Yes, if the SNP aren't coming back to the chamber today then the vote will be easily won by the government. If the SNP do a Sinn Fein then the Pro-EU lot have lost all of their power.Richard_Nabavi said:
She probably doesn't need their votes now.Scott_P said:
The SNP have chosen a nifty way of supporting the government whilst appearing to oppose it. I presume it's a dry run for any No Confidence vote.
It May had got a majority of 40, 15-20 rebels on the EU side could have more or less been ignored. 70-80 in the ERG could not have been, and they would have had the power, so we’d be getting a cleaner and harder Brexit.0 -
Ummm: I thought it was New York state prosecutors who were working on Cohen?AlastairMeeks said:A bit overheated but...
https://twitter.com/funder/status/10069125181183467520 -
What gives you that impression? The standing order states that a motion is made to suspend a member. Motions are all voted on in the same way.justin124 said:
I believe that is restricted to a particular context - not to one of his rulings. A Division would arise here if an MP refused to depart when ordered to do so by the Speaker. The Division would effectively be held to uphold the Speaker's authority.0 -
Looks like somebody at least is planning for Brexit happening......Sandpit said:Enough about the SNP, some actual good news today from the government, well done Sajid Javid.
https://twitter.com/DanielKorski/status/10066701685069373450 -
It is and Norman Godman (lovely bloke) and Henry McLeish in front row and Adam Ingram is 2nd from right in second row.NotThatNick said:
Isn't that a young Gavin Strang, not Russell HartyAnorak said:0 -
Broxtowe 52.5% Leave, maj 863rcs1000 said:
That may be true of Justine Greening in Putney too.tpfkar said:I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.
Loughborough 50.1% Leave, maj 4,269
Putney 27.8% Leave, maj 1,554
It's only Greening that I can see the case for from here.0 -
Motions are normally decided by Division - the Speaker does not have discretion on that. Bercow today was clearly very reliant on the advice from the Clerks to the House. On your reasoning, why are Divisions ever held when one side is clearly going to win overwhelmingly? The minor parties would never succeed in bringing their own issues to a vote because the majority opposing them would be so overwheming!RobD said:
What gives you that impression? The standing order states that a motion is made to suspend a member. Motions are all voted on in the same way.justin124 said:
I believe that is restricted to a particular context - not to one of his rulings. A Division would arise here if an MP refused to depart when ordered to do so by the Speaker. The Division would effectively be held to uphold the Speaker's authority.0 -
-
Not so sure with Soubry. Broxtowe was a pretty strong Leave constituency at the referendum. If we end up with a very soft or no Brexit I would suggest she is toast at the next GE.tpfkar said:
I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.rcs1000 said:
To be fair to her, I don't think the voters of Broxtowe were under any illusions about her views on the EU.brendan16 said:
WIll Anna Soubry ever suck it up and move on? She did of course get elected on a Tory manifesto that stated we would leave the single market and customs union. There is no reference to either the single market of the customs union in the GFA as far as I am aware?Richard_Tyndall said:
Anna showing her ignorance yet again.williamglenn said:
Maybe it's time she forced a by election so the people of Broxtowe can have a people's vote?!0 -
Scott_P said:
Wonder what Theresa's up to now?0 -
Parliament's own background paper (citing Erskine May) disagrees with you.justin124 said:
Motions are normally decided by Division - the Speaker does not have discretion on that. Bercow today was clearly very reliant on the advice from the Clerks to the House. On your reasoning, why are Divisions ever held when one side is clearly going to win overwhelmingly? The minor parties would never succeed in bringing their own issues to a vote because the majority opposing them would be so overwheming!RobD said:
What gives you that impression? The standing order states that a motion is made to suspend a member. Motions are all voted on in the same way.justin124 said:
I believe that is restricted to a particular context - not to one of his rulings. A Division would arise here if an MP refused to depart when ordered to do so by the Speaker. The Division would effectively be held to uphold the Speaker's authority.
The Speaker has the discretion to ask each side to stand in their places in the Chamber, if s/he believes that a division is unnecessary.3.
http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06401
And on your second point, divisions aren't always held. They cite an example of that in the same background paper.
0 -
I think Soubry and Morgan will be out next time... But so too will a lot of Con leavers.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not so sure with Soubry. Broxtowe was a pretty strong Leave constituency at the referendum. If we end up with a very soft or no Brexit I would suggest she is toast at the next GE.tpfkar said:
I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.rcs1000 said:
To be fair to her, I don't think the voters of Broxtowe were under any illusions about her views on the EU.brendan16 said:
WIll Anna Soubry ever suck it up and move on? She did of course get elected on a Tory manifesto that stated we would leave the single market and customs union. There is no reference to either the single market of the customs union in the GFA as far as I am aware?Richard_Tyndall said:
Anna showing her ignorance yet again.williamglenn said:
Maybe it's time she forced a by election so the people of Broxtowe can have a people's vote?!
The next election will be a bloodbath for the Conservatives.0 -
Not obviously, but I also see Dennis Canavan right at the back on the left, Tom Clarke and whisky-frisky George (now Lord) Foulkes.Scott_P said:
Henry McLeish - Wow!JohnO said:It is and Norman Godman (lovely bloke) and Henry McLeish in front row and Adam Ingram is 2nd from right in second row.
Is Gorbals Mick there somewhere?0 -
Broxtowe was 54.6% LeaveTissue_Price said:
Broxtowe 52.5% Leave, maj 863rcs1000 said:
That may be true of Justine Greening in Putney too.tpfkar said:I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.
Loughborough 50.1% Leave, maj 4,269
Putney 27.8% Leave, maj 1,554
It's only Greening that I can see the case for from here.0 -
With lots of Labour abstentions it's an easy way to remind Theresa that he's not going away.Scott_P said:0 -
And Henry McLeish (future FM, quite incredibly) and Gavin Strang at the front.Stark_Dawning said:
Is that George Robertson towards the back?Scott_P said:https://twitter.com/S_Politics/status/1006887072706301953
how many can we name?0 -
I'm going off Hanretty's final estimates: https://medium.com/@chrishanretty/final-estimates-of-the-leave-vote-or-areal-interpolation-and-the-uks-referendum-on-eu-membership-5490b6cab878Richard_Tyndall said:
Broxtowe was 54.6% LeaveTissue_Price said:
Broxtowe 52.5% Leave, maj 863rcs1000 said:
That may be true of Justine Greening in Putney too.tpfkar said:I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.
Loughborough 50.1% Leave, maj 4,269
Putney 27.8% Leave, maj 1,554
It's only Greening that I can see the case for from here.0 -
To me this seems epic mismanagement by the May team. If they had arranged for all repatriated EU functions such as Farming, Fisheries, Environment etc to Holyrood rather than Westminster, they would flip a large part of the SNP on the subject of Brexit.
A similar arrangement in Wales and NI would most likely be well recieved too, and in NI substantially resolve the Irish border issue. A devolved NI taking control of agriculture could make a policy of alignment with the RoI a local matter.
Stuff their mouths with gold! as Nye Bevan might suggest.0 -
After the Speaker has asked for shouts of 'Aye' and 'Noe' he can say 'I think the Ayes have it' - or 'the Noes have it'. If his opinion is challenged , he will then shout 'Division'. I am not aware of a single example of an MP having to leave the House as a result of the other Members rising to their feet.RobD said:
Parliament's own background paper (citing Erskine May) disagrees with you.justin124 said:
Motions are normally decided by Division - the Speaker does not have discretion on that. Bercow today was clearly very reliant on the advice from the Clerks to the House. On your reasoning, why are Divisions ever held when one side is clearly going to win overwhelmingly? The minor parties would never succeed in bringing their own issues to a vote because the majority opposing them would be so overwheming!RobD said:
What gives you that impression? The standing order states that a motion is made to suspend a member. Motions are all voted on in the same way.justin124 said:
I believe that is restricted to a particular context - not to one of his rulings. A Division would arise here if an MP refused to depart when ordered to do so by the Speaker. The Division would effectively be held to uphold the Speaker's authority.
The Speaker has the discretion to ask each side to stand in their places in the Chamber, if s/he believes that a division is unnecessary.3.
http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06401
And on your second point, divisions aren't always held. They cite an example of that in the same background paper.0 -
I think Broxtowe the constituency was estimated to be slightly less leave than Broxtowe the district - they are not quite contiguous.Richard_Tyndall said:
Broxtowe was 54.6% LeaveTissue_Price said:
Broxtowe 52.5% Leave, maj 863rcs1000 said:
That may be true of Justine Greening in Putney too.tpfkar said:I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.
Loughborough 50.1% Leave, maj 4,269
Putney 27.8% Leave, maj 1,554
It's only Greening that I can see the case for from here.0 -
I'm well aware of how votes are called (I've recently read through a background paper on the matter!). That does not mean it is not within his right, and after a campaign of disruption don't you think he'd exercise it?justin124 said:
After the Speaker has asked for shots of 'Aye' and 'Noe' he can say 'I think the Ayes have it' - or 'the Noes have it'. If his opinion is challenged , he will then shout 'Division'. I am not aware of a single example of an MP having to leave the House as a result of the other Members rising to their feet.RobD said:
Parliament's own background paper (citing Erskine May) disagrees with you.justin124 said:
Motions are normally decided by Division - the Speaker does not have discretion on that. Bercow today was clearly very reliant on the advice from the Clerks to the House. On your reasoning, why are Divisions ever held when one side is clearly going to win overwhelmingly? The minor parties would never succeed in bringing their own issues to a vote because the majority opposing them would be so overwheming!RobD said:
What gives you that impression? The standing order states that a motion is made to suspend a member. Motions are all voted on in the same way.justin124 said:
I believe that is restricted to a particular context - not to one of his rulings. A Division would arise here if an MP refused to depart when ordered to do so by the Speaker. The Division would effectively be held to uphold the Speaker's authority.
The Speaker has the discretion to ask each side to stand in their places in the Chamber, if s/he believes that a division is unnecessary.3.
http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06401
And on your second point, divisions aren't always held. They cite an example of that in the same background paper.0 -
Swedish general election in 3 months' time.
10 most recent polls, averages:
Social Democrats: 24.6%
Sweden Democrats: 21.1%
Moderate Party: 20.8%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Swedish_general_election,_20180 -
Its a day night match. He wouldn't have missed much.AlastairMeeks said:
It must have been pressing if Sir John was persuaded to miss the cricket.Scott_P said:0 -
The overall general election set of voters will probably have voted to remain at the General Election, though certainly Soubry's votes on their own would tally for 'leave'.Tissue_Price said:
I'm going off Hanretty's final estimates: https://medium.com/@chrishanretty/final-estimates-of-the-leave-vote-or-areal-interpolation-and-the-uks-referendum-on-eu-membership-5490b6cab878Richard_Tyndall said:
Broxtowe was 54.6% LeaveTissue_Price said:
Broxtowe 52.5% Leave, maj 863rcs1000 said:
That may be true of Justine Greening in Putney too.tpfkar said:I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.
Loughborough 50.1% Leave, maj 4,269
Putney 27.8% Leave, maj 1,554
It's only Greening that I can see the case for from here.0 -
Plus one has the Swedish Democrats in front and another tied for the leadAndyJS said:Swedish general election in 3 months' time.
10 most recent polls, averages:
Social Democrats: 24.6%
Sweden Democrats: 21.1%
Moderate Party: 20.8%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Swedish_general_election,_20180 -
Why on earth would you doubt that? They rebelled all the time during 2010-2016.Benpointer said:
You're assuming the 70-80 in ERG are as rebellious as the 15-20 proEU rebels. I doubt that. The 15-20 are just the most committed, there must be well over 50 other Tory MPs who would like to see a soft-Brexit.Casino_Royale said:
It’s the hung parliament that gives the Europhile Tory rebels the most power.MaxPB said:
Yes, if the SNP aren't coming back to the chamber today then the vote will be easily won by the government. If the SNP do a Sinn Fein then the Pro-EU lot have lost all of their power.Richard_Nabavi said:
She probably doesn't need their votes now.Scott_P said:
The SNP have chosen a nifty way of supporting the government whilst appearing to oppose it. I presume it's a dry run for any No Confidence vote.
It May had got a majority of 40, 15-20 rebels on the EU side could have more or less been ignored. 70-80 in the ERG could not have been, and they would have had the power, so we’d be getting a cleaner and harder Brexit.
They are not doing so now because they want Brexit to happen and don’t want to precipitate a downfall of a Conservative Government before it happens.0 -
I've just put a small bet on Australia at 11/1 following England's performance against Scotland the other day.DavidL said:
Its a day night match. He wouldn't have missed much.AlastairMeeks said:
It must have been pressing if Sir John was persuaded to miss the cricket.Scott_P said:0 -
In Spain meanwhile Citizens have fallen to third in 4 out of 5 of the last polls behind the PP and PSOE
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Spanish_general_election0 -
WinViz has England at 98%. I'd say your bet was optimistic.AndyJS said:
I've just put a small bet on Australia at 11/1 following England's performance against Scotland the other day.DavidL said:
Its a day night match. He wouldn't have missed much.AlastairMeeks said:
It must have been pressing if Sir John was persuaded to miss the cricket.Scott_P said:0 -
One would expect the Socialists to get a small boost following the change of PM. It'll be interesting to see how long it lasts.HYUFD said:In Spain meanwhile Citizens have fallen to third in 4 out of 5 of the last polls behind the PP and PSOE
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Spanish_general_election0 -
No. And I disagree, the Irish border is a red herring. The EU are trying to use it to force the UK into a softer Brexit (very irresponsibly I might add) than it would otherwise seek.williamglenn said:
Do you think May would have used a larger majority to impose an Irish sea border? If not, a cleaner and harder Brexit doesn't exist.Casino_Royale said:
It’s the hung parliament that gives the Europhile Tory rebels the most power.MaxPB said:
Yes, if the SNP aren't coming back to the chamber today then the vote will be easily won by the government. If the SNP do a Sinn Fein then the Pro-EU lot have lost all of their power.Richard_Nabavi said:
She probably doesn't need their votes now.Scott_P said:
The SNP have chosen a nifty way of supporting the government whilst appearing to oppose it. I presume it's a dry run for any No Confidence vote.
It May had got a majority of 40, 15-20 rebels on the EU side could have more or less been ignored. 70-80 in the ERG could not have been, and they would have had the power, so we’d be getting a cleaner and harder Brexit.0 -
They're making a mistake because they think it will save them from losing face.Casino_Royale said:
Why on earth would you doubt that? They rebelled all the time during 2010-2016.Benpointer said:
You're assuming the 70-80 in ERG are as rebellious as the 15-20 proEU rebels. I doubt that. The 15-20 are just the most committed, there must be well over 50 other Tory MPs who would like to see a soft-Brexit.Casino_Royale said:
It’s the hung parliament that gives the Europhile Tory rebels the most power.MaxPB said:
Yes, if the SNP aren't coming back to the chamber today then the vote will be easily won by the government. If the SNP do a Sinn Fein then the Pro-EU lot have lost all of their power.Richard_Nabavi said:
She probably doesn't need their votes now.Scott_P said:
The SNP have chosen a nifty way of supporting the government whilst appearing to oppose it. I presume it's a dry run for any No Confidence vote.
It May had got a majority of 40, 15-20 rebels on the EU side could have more or less been ignored. 70-80 in the ERG could not have been, and they would have had the power, so we’d be getting a cleaner and harder Brexit.
They are not doing so now because they want Brexit to happen and don’t want to precipitate a downfall of a Conservative Government before it happens.
https://twitter.com/CitySamuel/status/10059397594353950730 -
Not long if they keep opening the door to African migrant boats I imagineAndyJS said:
One would expect the Socialists to get a small boost following the change of PM. It'll be interesting to see how long it lasts.HYUFD said:In Spain meanwhile Citizens have fallen to third in 4 out of 5 of the last polls behind the PP and PSOE
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Spanish_general_election0 -
They got 365. Today they need 215. Once Bairstow's got his 100 that doesn't leave many for the others. I would have been looking for a lot better odds than that.AndyJS said:
I've just put a small bet on Australia at 11/1 following England's performance against Scotland the other day.DavidL said:
Its a day night match. He wouldn't have missed much.AlastairMeeks said:
It must have been pressing if Sir John was persuaded to miss the cricket.Scott_P said:0 -
No I don't! His predecessors in the late 19th century had to put up with such tactics - which at the end of the day would be legitimate however disruptive they might prove to be. If Blackford had refused to move today - as Salmond and others did in the late 1980s - the resultant Division would have overwhelmingly backed the Speaker. Had he still refused to depart - as some Irish Nationalists did in the late 19th century - the Speaker would have called on the Sergeant at Arms to physically evict him. If Blackford and his SNP colleagues had then resorted to a serious physical brawl to resist eviction on the floor of the House - such has been seen in other Assemblies - such behaviour would clearly not be legitimate.RobD said:
I'm well aware of how votes are called (I've recently read through a background paper on the matter!). That does not mean it is not within his right, and after a campaign of disruption don't you think he'd exercise it?justin124 said:
After the Speaker has asked for shots of 'Aye' and 'Noe' he can say 'I think the Ayes have it' - or 'the Noes have it'. If his opinion is challenged , he will then shout 'Division'. I am not aware of a single example of an MP having to leave the House as a result of the other Members rising to their feet.RobD said:
Parliament's own background paper (citing Erskine May) disagrees with you.justin124 said:
Motions are normally decided by Division - the Speaker does not have discretion on that. Bercow today was clearly very reliant on the advice from the Clerks to the House. On your reasoning, why are Divisions ever held when one side is clearly going to win overwhelmingly? The minor parties would never succeed in bringing their own issues to a vote because the majority opposing them would be so overwheming!RobD said:
What gives you that impression? The standing order states that a motion is made to suspend a member. Motions are all voted on in the same way.justin124 said:
I believe that is restricted to a particular context - not to one of his rulings. A Division would arise here if an MP refused to depart when ordered to do so by the Speaker. The Division would effectively be held to uphold the Speaker's authority.
The Speaker has the discretion to ask each side to stand in their places in the Chamber, if s/he believes that a division is unnecessary.3.
http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06401
And on your second point, divisions aren't always held. They cite an example of that in the same background paper.0 -
Because Marxism and open borders will become huge vote winners for Labour in the next few years?GIN1138 said:
I think Soubry and Morgan will be out next time... But so too will a lot of Con leavers.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not so sure with Soubry. Broxtowe was a pretty strong Leave constituency at the referendum. If we end up with a very soft or no Brexit I would suggest she is toast at the next GE.tpfkar said:
I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.rcs1000 said:
To be fair to her, I don't think the voters of Broxtowe were under any illusions about her views on the EU.brendan16 said:
WIll Anna Soubry ever suck it up and move on? She did of course get elected on a Tory manifesto that stated we would leave the single market and customs union. There is no reference to either the single market of the customs union in the GFA as far as I am aware?Richard_Tyndall said:
Anna showing her ignorance yet again.williamglenn said:
Maybe it's time she forced a by election so the people of Broxtowe can have a people's vote?!
The next election will be a bloodbath for the Conservatives.0 -
I'm guessing that percentage has just gone down a bit.OblitusSumMe said:
WinViz has England at 98%. I'd say your bet was optimistic.AndyJS said:
I've just put a small bet on Australia at 11/1 following England's performance against Scotland the other day.DavidL said:
Its a day night match. He wouldn't have missed much.AlastairMeeks said:
It must have been pressing if Sir John was persuaded to miss the cricket.Scott_P said:0 -
Seeing that picture of Lord Sewel every time I refresh the page is wearing a bit thin....0
-
Sanchez has had a very good two weeks - he has played the nationalists, Cs and Podemos perfectly, while PP is licking its wounds. Right now, no-one wants an elections, which suits him perfectly.AndyJS said:
One would expect the Socialists to get a small boost following the change of PM. It'll be interesting to see how long it lasts.HYUFD said:In Spain meanwhile Citizens have fallen to third in 4 out of 5 of the last polls behind the PP and PSOE
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Spanish_general_election
0 -
Okay. It's a big difference though. The Leave majority in the district was over 6000Pro_Rata said:
I think Broxtowe the constituency was estimated to be slightly less leave than Broxtowe the district - they are not quite contiguous.Richard_Tyndall said:
Broxtowe was 54.6% LeaveTissue_Price said:
Broxtowe 52.5% Leave, maj 863rcs1000 said:
That may be true of Justine Greening in Putney too.tpfkar said:I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.
Loughborough 50.1% Leave, maj 4,269
Putney 27.8% Leave, maj 1,554
It's only Greening that I can see the case for from here.0 -
What time will the amendments be voted on?0
-
No... Because millions of Con Leave voters will stay at home.blueblue said:
Because Marxism and open borders will become huge vote winners for Labour in the next few years?GIN1138 said:
I think Soubry and Morgan will be out next time... But so too will a lot of Con leavers.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not so sure with Soubry. Broxtowe was a pretty strong Leave constituency at the referendum. If we end up with a very soft or no Brexit I would suggest she is toast at the next GE.tpfkar said:
I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.rcs1000 said:
To be fair to her, I don't think the voters of Broxtowe were under any illusions about her views on the EU.brendan16 said:
WIll Anna Soubry ever suck it up and move on? She did of course get elected on a Tory manifesto that stated we would leave the single market and customs union. There is no reference to either the single market of the customs union in the GFA as far as I am aware?Richard_Tyndall said:
Anna showing her ignorance yet again.williamglenn said:
Maybe it's time she forced a by election so the people of Broxtowe can have a people's vote?!
The next election will be a bloodbath for the Conservatives.
I think both Lab and Con will be down in 2022 compared to 2017 but Con will be down a lot more.0 -
From 7 30pm, EEA first upRoyalBlue said:What time will the amendments be voted on?
https://mobile.twitter.com/labourwhips/status/1006881396777013254?ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-parliaments-444408090 -
100% Agree. This and the Henry VIII clause are ridiculous power grabs off the back of Brexit and do massive harm to the process.Foxy said:To me this seems epic mismanagement by the May team. If they had arranged for all repatriated EU functions such as Farming, Fisheries, Environment etc to Holyrood rather than Westminster, they would flip a large part of the SNP on the subject of Brexit.
A similar arrangement in Wales and NI would most likely be well recieved too, and in NI substantially resolve the Irish border issue. A devolved NI taking control of agriculture could make a policy of alignment with the RoI a local matter.
Stuff their mouths with gold! as Nye Bevan might suggest.0 -
More because chaos and incompetence in government are viewed very badly by the voters.blueblue said:
Because Marxism and open borders will become huge vote winners for Labour in the next few years?GIN1138 said:
I think Soubry and Morgan will be out next time... But so too will a lot of Con leavers.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not so sure with Soubry. Broxtowe was a pretty strong Leave constituency at the referendum. If we end up with a very soft or no Brexit I would suggest she is toast at the next GE.tpfkar said:
I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.rcs1000 said:
To be fair to her, I don't think the voters of Broxtowe were under any illusions about her views on the EU.brendan16 said:
WIll Anna Soubry ever suck it up and move on? She did of course get elected on a Tory manifesto that stated we would leave the single market and customs union. There is no reference to either the single market of the customs union in the GFA as far as I am aware?Richard_Tyndall said:
Anna showing her ignorance yet again.williamglenn said:
Maybe it's time she forced a by election so the people of Broxtowe can have a people's vote?!
The next election will be a bloodbath for the Conservatives.0 -
I must admit I cannot vote for May. The combination of incompetence, authoritarianism and dishonesty makes her entirely unfit for office.GIN1138 said:
No... Because millions of Con Leave voters will stay at home.blueblue said:
Because Marxism and open borders will become huge vote winners for Labour in the next few years?GIN1138 said:
I think Soubry and Morgan will be out next time... But so too will a lot of Con leavers.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not so sure with Soubry. Broxtowe was a pretty strong Leave constituency at the referendum. If we end up with a very soft or no Brexit I would suggest she is toast at the next GE.tpfkar said:
I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.rcs1000 said:
To be fair to her, I don't think the voters of Broxtowe were under any illusions about her views on the EU.brendan16 said:
WIll Anna Soubry ever suck it up and move on? She did of course get elected on a Tory manifesto that stated we would leave the single market and customs union. There is no reference to either the single market of the customs union in the GFA as far as I am aware?Richard_Tyndall said:
Anna showing her ignorance yet again.williamglenn said:
Maybe it's time she forced a by election so the people of Broxtowe can have a people's vote?!
The next election will be a bloodbath for the Conservatives.
I think both Lab and Con will be down in 2022 compared to 2017 but Con will be down a lot more.0 -
I think we will see this in practice but the rules for extracting EU law out of our domestic law are going to be pretty standard and frankly probably best left to the draughtsman in Westminster. The only area I see beng even vaguely problematic is fishing where it is likely that there will be some sort of trade off in the main negotiations.Richard_Tyndall said:
100% Agree. This and the Henry VIII clause are ridiculous power grabs off the back of Brexit and do massive harm to the process.Foxy said:To me this seems epic mismanagement by the May team. If they had arranged for all repatriated EU functions such as Farming, Fisheries, Environment etc to Holyrood rather than Westminster, they would flip a large part of the SNP on the subject of Brexit.
A similar arrangement in Wales and NI would most likely be well recieved too, and in NI substantially resolve the Irish border issue. A devolved NI taking control of agriculture could make a policy of alignment with the RoI a local matter.
Stuff their mouths with gold! as Nye Bevan might suggest.0 -
Given the threat of Corbyn unlikely and we will still be likely out of the EEA and Customs Union and have replaced free movement with work permits or a job offer requirement which will be fine for all but a few obsessives like you for whom anything short of WTO terms Brexit is a 'betrayal'GIN1138 said:
No... Because millions of Con Leave voters will stay at home.blueblue said:
Because Marxism and open borders will become huge vote winners for Labour in the next few years?GIN1138 said:
I think Soubry and Morgan will be out next time... But so too will a lot of Con leavers.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not so sure with Soubry. Broxtowe was a pretty strong Leave constituency at the referendum. If we end up with a very soft or no Brexit I would suggest she is toast at the next GE.tpfkar said:
I'd go further - given what happened to other Tory MPs in urban seats, my hypothesis is that both Anna Soubry and Nicky Morgan would have lost their seats to Labour had they supported a hard Brexit. Much less gnashing of teeth from Tories that 2 of their own weren't "sound" but would have made a parliamentary majority even more tenuous.rcs1000 said:
To be fair to her, I don't think the voters of Broxtowe were under any illusions about her views on the EU.brendan16 said:
WIll Anna Soubry ever suck it up and move on? She did of course get elected on a Tory manifesto that stated we would leave the single market and customs union. There is no reference to either the single market of the customs union in the GFA as far as I am aware?Richard_Tyndall said:
Anna showing her ignorance yet again.williamglenn said:
Maybe it's time she forced a by election so the people of Broxtowe can have a people's vote?!
The next election will be a bloodbath for the Conservatives.
I think both Lab and Con will be down in 2022 compared to 2017 but Con will be down a lot more.0 -
I think that I must be hallucinating. I don't think we have ever agreed!Richard_Tyndall said:
100% Agree. This and the Henry VIII clause are ridiculous power grabs off the back of Brexit and do massive harm to the process.Foxy said:To me this seems epic mismanagement by the May team. If they had arranged for all repatriated EU functions such as Farming, Fisheries, Environment etc to Holyrood rather than Westminster, they would flip a large part of the SNP on the subject of Brexit.
A similar arrangement in Wales and NI would most likely be well recieved too, and in NI substantially resolve the Irish border issue. A devolved NI taking control of agriculture could make a policy of alignment with the RoI a local matter.
Stuff their mouths with gold! as Nye Bevan might suggest.
0 -
Roy is going to seriously regret missing out here. His position is looking slightly less secure again, especially when Stokes comes back and with Hales a ready made opener at 3.0
-
Cue outrage that the EU are using security as a bargaining chip?CarlottaVance said:twitter.com/guardiantech/status/1006930170446430209?s=21
I see that talks are ongoing with the Australians. Perhaps a Five Eyes GPS is in order? 0 -
Wasnt the point of continued contributions to account for particular programmes that still had time to run. To block us access is an act of aggression. We must retaliate if that is their position.CarlottaVance said:0 -
And another wicket goes...0
-
You can always rely on England to make a mess of things, even if it's only temporary.OblitusSumMe said:
WinViz has England at 98%. I'd say your bet was optimistic.AndyJS said:
I've just put a small bet on Australia at 11/1 following England's performance against Scotland the other day.DavidL said:
Its a day night match. He wouldn't have missed much.AlastairMeeks said:
It must have been pressing if Sir John was persuaded to miss the cricket.Scott_P said:0 -
GPS is a US system and they are obviously part of Five Eyes. Do you expect them to give the UK some plum contracts??RobD said:
Cue outrage that the EU are using security as a bargaining chip?CarlottaVance said:twitter.com/guardiantech/status/1006930170446430209?s=21
I see that talks are ongoing with the Australians. Perhaps a Five Eyes GPS is in order?0 -
-
That 11/1 from half an hour ago is now 7/2.FrancisUrquhart said:And another wicket goes...
0 -
Is this thought experiment just supposed to demonstrate that Brexit is a doomed project that serves noone’s interests and the tactics we employ are irrelevant?RobD said:0 -
“UK companies have been central to its design and build. A technical paper handed to the EU negotiators last month warned that restricting the UK from its desired involvement would lead would lead to up to three-year delays and an extra cost of around €1bn for the union.”CarlottaVance said:
It is clear that the EU isn’t negotiating in good faith trying to work a mutually beneficial deal.0 -
No deal is better than a bad deal (for the EU).FrancisUrquhart said:
“UK companies have been central to its design and build. A technical paper handed to the EU negotiators last month warned that restricting the UK from its desired involvement would lead would lead to up to three-year delays and an extra cost of around €1bn for the union.”CarlottaVance said:
It is clear that the EU isn’t negotiating in good faith trying to work a mutually beneficial deal.0 -
Theresa May has been forced to explain herself to top European politicians after her plan to link security cooperation to trade bargaining with the EU sparked anger on the continent.RobD said:Yeah, but consider the reactions if the UK proposed ending the existing security relationship with the EU.
Current holder of the EU rotating presidency Joseph Muscat and President of the European Council Donald Tusk said that following calls from London, they would take the British Government’s word that it had been a “misunderstanding”.
Ms May’s repeated connecting of security and trade issues in her letter triggering Article 50 led political leaders in both Brussels and London to claim that she was threatening to withdraw help in the fight against terrorism, in a bid to extract good trade terms. Downing Street later denied it.0 -
It’s plain as day that the EU thinks we’re just another Greece; an upstart peripheral state that needs to be brought to heel with a smack on the nose.0
-
Let’s agree now on no deal then.williamglenn said:
No deal is better than a bad deal (for the EU).FrancisUrquhart said:
“UK companies have been central to its design and build. A technical paper handed to the EU negotiators last month warned that restricting the UK from its desired involvement would lead would lead to up to three-year delays and an extra cost of around €1bn for the union.”CarlottaVance said:
It is clear that the EU isn’t negotiating in good faith trying to work a mutually beneficial deal.
We have 9 months and £39bn to prepare for it.
The EU has 9 months and -£39bn to work out how it isn’t going to build a wall across Ireland or prevent massive queues in Calais.0 -
He is a balloon , and as a Labour turned Tory the worst kind. If his lips are moving you know it is mince. Both of above are famous for pork pies, only missing estate agent for the royal flush.TheScreamingEagles said:
He’s a lawyer and academic.malcolmg said:
It is both you and that halfwitted creature that are spouting the shite.TheScreamingEagles said:Actually the SNP might be talking shite about the Sewel convention.
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006624383237083136?s=21
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006624784459948032?s=21
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006625295514861568?s=21
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006625973792624640?s=21
What’s your qualifications to critique his analysis?0 -
Do not hold your breath waiting on an answerAlistair said:
So which is it, is Westminster legislating without Holyrood's consent or are they not?TheScreamingEagles said:Actually the SNP might be talking shite about the Sewel convention.
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006624383237083136?s=21
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006624784459948032?s=21
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006625295514861568?s=21
https://twitter.com/proftomkins/status/1006625973792624640?s=210 -
Or just call a result based on the shouts - when Bercow was 're-elected' it was by acclamation and unanimity was claimed rather than actual.RobD said:
As I said, the Speaker can ask members to stand/sit to indicate their support.justin124 said:
I am sure he would - but procedurely I don't think the Divisions could be avoided if SNP MPs were to shout 'Noe' when the question is put by him to the House.RobD said:
I think the Speaker would have a thing or two to say about it, it isn't just the SNP's "appetite" that matters.justin124 said:
There were at least two Divisions in the middle of the - I think - 1988 Budget Speech which delayed the proceedings for over 45 minutes. Only the SNP appetite would be relevant here. How disruptive do they wish to be? Irish Nationalists proved very disruptive in the late 19th century.RobD said:
I thought the Speaker could ask members to stand/sit to indicate their support? It would be obvious if a majority supported the motion. Anyway, after the first division, if there was one, I suspect there would be no appetite among other members for it to continue.justin124 said:
It would mean a Division.When Salmond and his colleagues did this in the middle of the Budget speech there were only a handful of SNP members.RobD said:
Suspect that the vote would not require a division. The SNP members can only shout so hard.justin124 said:
Indeed - but they could have pushed it further. Had the SNP Leader refused to leave when so ordered, the Speaker would have had to put a motion to the House and that could have taken almost half an hour. Then at the end of that Division a second SNP MP gets up to make the same point and the entire process has to be followed all over again. I recall one of Nigel Lawson's later Budget Speeches being disrupted in this way in the late 1980s when Alex Salmond and other SNP MPs forced such divisions in the middle of the Speech. 35 MPs could potentially cauise a lot of procedural mayhem - if sufficiently determined!RobD said:
While exciting, it was only a couple of minutes before they were ejected.justin124 said:I wonder what would be the impact of the SNP deciding to behave like this at every PMQs? Or indeed in the middle of every debate relating to Brexit simply to cause chaos on the floor of the House?
Bercow was clearly on the verge of calling a vote today when it initially appeared that Blackford was refusing to depart.0 -
Greece was smart enough not to leave...RoyalBlue said:It’s plain as day that the EU thinks we’re just another Greece; an upstart peripheral state that needs to be brought to heel with a smack on the nose.
0 -
Perhaps we’re “unworthy of Brexit”.RoyalBlue said:It’s plain as day that the EU thinks we’re just another Greece; an upstart peripheral state that needs to be brought to heel with a smack on the nose.
https://capx.co/another-nail-in-the-coffin-for-a-meaningful-brexit/
Is the British system worthy of the trust and admiration Brexiteers have given it? If not, maybe the coalitions in the Brexit 2.0 fight might be very different and support for a fuller pro-EU engagement, euro, Schengen, elected President and all might come right back onto the agenda.
Some, even amongst formerly keen Brexiteers, may declare that if Britain is not worthy of Brexit, we should become fully part of Europe instead.0 -
As I've said before I'd pull the plug on NATO and spend our financial contribution on the NHS and maybe getting some aircraft's to go on those Carriers...notme said:
Wasnt the point of continued contributions to account for particular programmes that still had time to run. To block us access is an act of aggression. We must retaliate if that is their position.CarlottaVance said:0 -
We agree on a lot of things. I want an EEA Brexit and am very pro free movement and the benefits of immigration. I suspect that is just the tip.if the iceberg.Foxy said:
I think that I must be hallucinating. I don't think we have ever agreed!Richard_Tyndall said:
100% Agree. This and the Henry VIII clause are ridiculous power grabs off the back of Brexit and do massive harm to the process.Foxy said:To me this seems epic mismanagement by the May team. If they had arranged for all repatriated EU functions such as Farming, Fisheries, Environment etc to Holyrood rather than Westminster, they would flip a large part of the SNP on the subject of Brexit.
A similar arrangement in Wales and NI would most likely be well recieved too, and in NI substantially resolve the Irish border issue. A devolved NI taking control of agriculture could make a policy of alignment with the RoI a local matter.
Stuff their mouths with gold! as Nye Bevan might suggest.0 -
Having seen the hoo-ha in the Commons today, I'm surprised there were chants of "you don't know what you're doing" when Bercow was consulting the bloke in front of him. I'm even more surprised that there weren't chants of "is there a fire drill?" as the SNP walked out.0
-
Commons spat between Caroline Flint and Anna Soubry:
"Soubry adds she is "appalled" Flint has "stood up and not understood and appreciated the considerable value that immigrants have brought to our country".
"These are human beings," she continues.
A visibly furious Flint intervenes on Soubry and states: "I made very clear that I wasn't against all immigration and I also said very clearly that nor are my constituents, but they want to feel that we have better systems in place, that they feel it is fair and managed and that is something they haven't felt for a long time.""
https://news.sky.com/story/pmqs-live-theresa-may-and-jeremy-corbyn-spar-over-brexit-bill-114034200 -
Integration without codetermination, as the Norwegians call it.Richard_Tyndall said:I want an EEA Brexit
0 -
0
-
The SNP were hollow and pathetic today. Is this the best they can do?CarlottaVance said:
I don't think it will help their cause apart from the headbangers who go on and on about Scotland becoming Independent.
I dislike all this Constitutional stuff as the bread and butter issues are neglected and Governments get away with selling the population short.0
This discussion has been closed.