politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » And so the “meaningful vote” issue gets put back into the bill
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » And so the “meaningful vote” issue gets put back into the bill by the Lords
New Lords defeat for government on Brexit 'meaningful vote' amendment https://t.co/QfOQmitOuC
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Now let us see whether the Anglo-French Dominic Grieve continues to serve his other country.
For all the outrage some will have at this. if the Commons do indeed accept it this time, which seems to be at least possible, then parliament's will will have been done, in unorthodox fashion. If it is the will of the Commons to say no to this then they will say no again. If it they say yes, then the will of the Commons will have changed.
The questions are if the Commons rebels will take on the government this time, and if they don't (or it is not enough) how much more will the Lords push it?
More generally, whether something is a constitutional crisis or not I would think partially comes down to if enough people, if the right place, are convinced it is one, even if by the letter it should not be.
Oh dear, out comes the knee-jerk response "let's have 100, 200 or 500 new peers" to ensure the Government gets its way.
If we get to January 2019 and there's no deal, I think we'd all like to know what the Government's plans are. As for an actual Treaty, what's wrong with the closest scrutiny of such a deal ?
Hurrah for Harry Kane and the House of Lords.
We could be within 48hrs of the end of the May government. Or The Good Ship May could just sail on serenely...
I think we can be reasonably sure that there is no majority for:
crashing out
revoking A50
holding a referendum
making Corbyn PM
Deposing Theresa May as Tory leader
holding a general election
EEA
Border in Ireland.
I do wonder whether Dominic Grieve may have somewhat over reached himself. No surprise that he wakes up in a cold sweat - he could be left holding the baby.
Fife
Nottinghamshire
Staffordshire
Cambridgeshire
Herefordshire
Surrey
Kent
A somewhat unimpressive seven.
Theresa May raising taxes is always a sure fire winner.
https://twitter.com/BBCHelenaLee/status/1008820477534535680
It's tantamount to endorsing the view that 'it's not what you say it's how you say it'.
I reckon:
HMQ - LEAVE
Phil - LEAVE
Harry - LEAVE
Camilla - LEAVE
Vs
Charles - REMAIN
William - REMAIN
Kate - REMAIN
#FamilyAtWar
Belgium will be a tougher test. We need Three oints on Sunday.
What is Parliament going to say 'May go back to the EU and try and get the Canada style FTA you are trying to negotiate with the EU anyway?'
Some sides present as owning patriotism. Others present as owning decency (I always remember learning learning through a PPB that Martin Freeman supports Labour because he was raised to be decent. If only more parents had raised their kids to be decent). Others present as owning common sense.
And of course Labour can get away with meddling in the NHS more than the Tories, who can get away with meddling with the armed forces than Labour. How the sides present as 'owning' certain issues is pretty silly, of course it is, but it's party of the party political game.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/angela-merkel-down-to-the-count/
Maybe I am being unfair as she does have those dedicated Brexit advocates playing for her. Mind you to give a sporting analogy Johnson, Fox and Davis are not the winning side of 1966 but the team that failed to qualify in 1994!
Anyway - GOOD to see an ENGLAND WIN, shame we cannot have one off the Football field in the realms of politics.
The idea that anything has succeeded or backfired amongst the public at large is for the birds. It was about setting up a position where a few Labour MPs abstain in the Lords ping pong amnendment vote. And a couple of wavering Tories stay onside.
The weekend destroyed Greive’s last hope of suceeding with his silly amendment. Good.
TM: It was just a loose conversation about something we have to try. There was no real commitment to it.
PM: Do you think he was in favour of it?
TM: I think he was open to the experiment.
I mean, if it’s true (that’s a big if), it’s not really a massive Pro Brexit stance. Reminds me a lot of The Sun’s claim the Queen supported Brexit a few years earlier.
What they do mind and their children mind is the government taxing the value of their properties when they die which they intend to pass onto their children which for some who are not high earners may be the only way they will get on the housing ladder. The dementia tax was a disaster as it effectively would have reversed Osborne's popular inheritance tax cut if you needed personal care at home for dementia
As I understand it the consequences of taking strong cannabis affect those in their late teens and early twenties. The sorts of mental health issues affecting the young affect them in the years to ca. 23/24. The 18 year old dividing line is a fiction which does not correspond to underlying reality. This should not be ignored when making policy in this most sensitive of areas.
And if harmless cannabis is sold by Boots, do you think drug dealers are going to stop selling the stronger stuff? We do need to get real about this.
Our current laws may not work. That doesn’t mean that decriminalisation is the answer and won’t have different - but equally harmful - consequences. There may well be no good answers to these problems.
The “oh let’s decriminalise because what we have doesn’t work” brigade are being a bit too pat and superficial in their analysis and prescriptions. Always easy to criticise what we have. A damn sight more difficult to come up with something better. And change is not always - or even necessarily - for the better.
PS The last three sentences could apply to Brexit.
Irony is not dead, I see.
Not to mention pick-your-own are doing a roaring trade from what I've seen and heard.
On a more serious note if there does turn out to be a shortage of agricultural labourers in 2019 (which I very much doubt) farmer will have had three years to invest in equipment replacements and / or convert their output to something less labour intensive.
18-24 year olds voted for Corbyn a year ago, so it turns out you don’t know much about your wife’s generation at all. They also voted for Remain as well, so they are traitors by your assertions as well.
I've never felt inclined to use the stuff myself, but I confess while you are usually able to persuade me to pretty much any position I'm not really feeling very swayed from the 'we can probably make it work' side of the argument, since your case seems to boil down to 'It is more damaging than some say' (perhaps, but several places in the world appear to disagree that that means it cannot be managed), 'we don't know what the consequences might be therefore we should do nothing' (on which basis we'd never do anything). Your counter arguments seem to be as superficial as some of the arguments, for once.
If they send it (or something to the effect) back a third time, then they really have nothing to back up why they did so.
If you are not too hung over you can check the stat here
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-october-1974
Cameron came close in 2010, the Tories getting 30% of 18 to 24 year olds to 31% for Brown's Labour and 30% for Clegg's LDs
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-october-1974
Given the Royal family's obvious links to the Anglosphere and the Commonwealth it's inevitable they have had conflicted loyalties since 1973 when we essentially turned our back on the latter for Brussels. Whether Prince William or George eventually become Kings of Jamaica, Australia, NZ and Canada of course is harder to say.
Play nice everybody, good night.
If there is a strawberry shortage the entire tournament may have to be cancelled next year!
I think this is something that needs a Royal Commission with evidence taken etc. I don’t know what the answer is so am not really trying to persuade to any one course of action. I have concerns and worry about laws being changed on the basis of sentiment rather than evidence. That is really my point. If change is needed it needs to be for the better and be based on evidence and with properly enforced safeguards. So I am open to persuasion - if sceptical.
I would only say that I have majored on the mental health angle because I have seen close up what this means in practice. It is not pretty. And I feel cross about those who ignore the very real consequences for the vulnerable which they don’t have to live with while spouting their love for libertarianism.
A legislature wjich lost control of Brexit when it squandered the Supreme Court ruling and an Executive that lost control of Brexit when it invoked A50 without a plan. Both now squabbling for control over each other because neither has control over the other. The EU will decide what deal it will offer ( in light of our Red lines ) then we'll take it as we've no choice.
In addition I'm not convinced Corbyn wants to defeat May over Grieve 2. Look at the size of the Labour EEA rebellion on the Leave side as well as Remain. Grieve and the Lord's are too be saluted for doing their jobs. But it really doesn't matter very much at all in terms of where Brexit goes. I just wish I liked Football as I suspect an England world cup win would have more practical impact on the Brexit outcome than Grieve 2.
And since the Queen is immortal they may be waiting a long time.
You will of course be dead before you find out what your wife will be like when she grows up.
Thats a bit cruel to say the least
Ever the gent, eh, Big_G?
Hope so !!
Did you enjoy (or endure) the football?
.................................................................................
It was poor and rather funny with the penalty and I doubt it heralds and all conquering England march to the final
Gen-Z is generally regarded to be the children on Gen-X and they're born from the mid-1990's to mid-2000's (although there is no clearly defined end date for Gen-Z yet)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Z
So a 22 year old would be born around 1996 making them very early Gen-Z.
You'd better get Wikipedia corrected...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennials
"There are no precise dates for when this cohort starts or ends; demographers and researchers typically use the early 1980s as starting birth years and the mid-1990s to early 2000s as ending birth years.
So yes, as 1995 baby she’s a millennial. A lot of the early Gen Z estimates mainly start at 1996, and even then many others seem fall between 1998-2000.
Ever the gent, eh, Big_G?
Hope so !!
Did you enjoy (or endure) the football?
.................................................................................
It was poor and rather funny with the penalty and I doubt it heralds and all conquering England march to the final'
Looking at the draw after Germany lost we might be better off going through runners up, if we win the group we likely face Germany or Brazil in the quarter finals as runners up we likely face Mexico (though Mexico could keep up their form of course)
Don't you mean House of Unelected Has-Beens?
Gen Z doesn’t have a determined start date, let alone a determined end state. The earliest start dates are mainly placed at 1996, but others - such a as Pew Research - place the start date at 1997/8. Some place it at 2000. It’s very rare that it gets placed at 1995 - which is when SeanT’s wife is born.