Undefined discussion subject.
Comments
-
Something to do with the shoes, surely... ?TheScreamingEagles said:
You're telling me?OldKingCole said:
First rule of air-travel. Do NOT upset security staff. One does occasionally meet one who's happy and cheerful but it's rare.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's a Remainer.dyedwoolie said:
Gammon pushes his luck with the authorities and then cashes in for clickbaitTheScreamingEagles said:
POLICE STATE!williamglenn said:
I cannot explain why airport security staff keep on pulling me over.
0 -
If the people voted for political choice A, those who want political choice B will still try to achieve it. That's how all politics in a democracy works.TheAncientMariner said:If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.
In 2015, when the people voted for a Conservative government, the Labour party didn't shut up shop. No, it continued campaigning for what it believes in. In 1997, when the people voted in a Labour government, the Conservative party didn't shut up shop. It continued campaigning for what it believes in. When Eurosceptics have lost votes, they've kept pushing for us to leave the EU, for decades. When Europhiles lose votes, they'll keep pushing for us to stay in or have a close relationship.
What about we stop complaining that our political opponents try to achieve their ends?0 -
If only there was a *fairly* popular MP from the Leave side with the credentials to become Prime Minister, who could possibly peel away enough Leavers from Raab and then self-detonate... someone ruthless enough to run a kamikaze candidature for the Tory leadership... then they might get someone reasonable in.0
-
Steve Baker = Spanner
That is all.
0 -
Governments are elected every 4-5 years, and everyone accepts that. The referendum was sold to us by the PM who called it as a once in a generation decision.bondegezou said:
If the people voted for political choice A, those who want political choice B will still try to achieve it. That's how all politics in a democracy works.TheAncientMariner said:If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.
In 2015, when the people voted for a Conservative government, the Labour party didn't shut up shop. No, it continued campaigning for what it believes in. In 1997, when the people voted in a Labour government, the Conservative party didn't shut up shop. It continued campaigning for what it believes in. When Eurosceptics have lost votes, they've kept pushing for us to leave the EU, for decades. When Europhiles lose votes, they'll keep pushing for us to stay in or have a close relationship.
What about we stop complaining that our political opponents try to achieve their ends?0 -
My Gucci trainers do draw a lot of attention.Nigelb said:
Something to do with the shoes, surely... ?TheScreamingEagles said:
You're telling me?OldKingCole said:
First rule of air-travel. Do NOT upset security staff. One does occasionally meet one who's happy and cheerful but it's rare.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's a Remainer.dyedwoolie said:
Gammon pushes his luck with the authorities and then cashes in for clickbaitTheScreamingEagles said:
POLICE STATE!williamglenn said:
I cannot explain why airport security staff keep on pulling me over.0 -
My favourite was the fellow traveller whose baggage was thoroughly searched at Southampton. He had just come from South Africa and like me was going to Alderney.Nigelb said:
Something to do with the shoes, surely... ?TheScreamingEagles said:
You're telling me?OldKingCole said:
First rule of air-travel. Do NOT upset security staff. One does occasionally meet one who's happy and cheerful but it's rare.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's a Remainer.dyedwoolie said:
Gammon pushes his luck with the authorities and then cashes in for clickbaitTheScreamingEagles said:
POLICE STATE!williamglenn said:
I cannot explain why airport security staff keep on pulling me over.0 -
Give it a rest, we have been round this a thousand times !isam said:
Governments are elected every 4-5 years, and everyone accepts that. The referendum was sold to us by the PM who called it as a once in a generation decision.bondegezou said:
If the people voted for political choice A, those who want political choice B will still try to achieve it. That's how all politics in a democracy works.TheAncientMariner said:If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.
In 2015, when the people voted for a Conservative government, the Labour party didn't shut up shop. No, it continued campaigning for what it believes in. In 1997, when the people voted in a Labour government, the Conservative party didn't shut up shop. It continued campaigning for what it believes in. When Eurosceptics have lost votes, they've kept pushing for us to leave the EU, for decades. When Europhiles lose votes, they'll keep pushing for us to stay in or have a close relationship.
What about we stop complaining that our political opponents try to achieve their ends?0 -
It's the people that conflate Elections governed by the FTPA with "Once in a generation" votes who need to give it a restIanB2 said:
Give it a rest, we have been round this a thousand times !isam said:
Governments are elected every 4-5 years, and everyone accepts that. The referendum was sold to us by the PM who called it as a once in a generation decision.bondegezou said:
If the people voted for political choice A, those who want political choice B will still try to achieve it. That's how all politics in a democracy works.TheAncientMariner said:If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.
In 2015, when the people voted for a Conservative government, the Labour party didn't shut up shop. No, it continued campaigning for what it believes in. In 1997, when the people voted in a Labour government, the Conservative party didn't shut up shop. It continued campaigning for what it believes in. When Eurosceptics have lost votes, they've kept pushing for us to leave the EU, for decades. When Europhiles lose votes, they'll keep pushing for us to stay in or have a close relationship.
What about we stop complaining that our political opponents try to achieve their ends?0 -
And you are still wrong. Perhaps it is you who should give it a rest instead.IanB2 said:
Give it a rest, we have been round this a thousand times !isam said:
Governments are elected every 4-5 years, and everyone accepts that. The referendum was sold to us by the PM who called it as a once in a generation decision.bondegezou said:
If the people voted for political choice A, those who want political choice B will still try to achieve it. That's how all politics in a democracy works.TheAncientMariner said:If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.
In 2015, when the people voted for a Conservative government, the Labour party didn't shut up shop. No, it continued campaigning for what it believes in. In 1997, when the people voted in a Labour government, the Conservative party didn't shut up shop. It continued campaigning for what it believes in. When Eurosceptics have lost votes, they've kept pushing for us to leave the EU, for decades. When Europhiles lose votes, they'll keep pushing for us to stay in or have a close relationship.
What about we stop complaining that our political opponents try to achieve their ends?0 -
One to put on the ERG Christmas lists:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Chaucer-Marion-Turner/dp/0691160090/
You don't get much more English than Chaucer.0 -
Raab is a moron.
He seems not to understand that once we crash out - in 10 days time - there is no WA to be renegotiated. We are a third country then, no different - as a matter of EU law - to Zimbabwe.0 -
The WA is a moral obscenity though.GIN1138 said:
The best bet would be just to pass the WA without any PD and then we decide where we want to go next with the trade arrangements through a general election.Pro_Rata said:Friday: What I think government should move/do = Approval for WA, but request further negotiation on PD to make CU central objective.
0 -
I suspect that Passport Control will have a very different version of the storywilliamglenn said:0 -
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
.
A friend of mine said he had to shave off his beard every time he travelled abroad. "I'm not stupid" he said.TheScreamingEagles said:
My Gucci trainers do draw a lot of attention.Nigelb said:
Something to do with the shoes, surely... ?TheScreamingEagles said:
You're telling me?OldKingCole said:
First rule of air-travel. Do NOT upset security staff. One does occasionally meet one who's happy and cheerful but it's rare.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's a Remainer.dyedwoolie said:
Gammon pushes his luck with the authorities and then cashes in for clickbaitTheScreamingEagles said:
POLICE STATE!williamglenn said:
I cannot explain why airport security staff keep on pulling me over.0 -
Take out the "or without" from your sentence and it becomes nonsenseRichard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
Just like the Brexiteers have overlooked the first referendum which was supposed to settle the matter for all time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
The European Council decision on extension already rules out changing the withdrawal agreement.Cyclefree said:Raab is a moron.
He seems not to understand that once we crash out - in 10 days time - there is no WA to be renegotiated. We are a third country then, no different - as a matter of EU law - to Zimbabwe.
https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/XT-20006-2019-INIT/en/pdf
Such an extension excludes any re-opening of the Withdrawal Agreement. Any unilateral commitment, statement or other act by the United Kingdom should be compatible with the letter and the spiritof the Withdrawal Agreement.0 -
No to any so called converts to the Leave cause .
Any new PM has to be a Leaver who will own the consequences and not allow the Tory nutjobs to blame their “not a true believer status “.
Of course these so called believers only want the job when they can avoid most of the flak . Spineless gutless chancers who deserve contempt .0 -
At least elected governments get a chance to implement their policies.bondegezou said:
If the people voted for political choice A, those who want political choice B will still try to achieve it. That's how all politics in a democracy works.TheAncientMariner said:If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.
In 2015, when the people voted for a Conservative government, the Labour party didn't shut up shop. No, it continued campaigning for what it believes in. In 1997, when the people voted in a Labour government, the Conservative party didn't shut up shop. It continued campaigning for what it believes in. When Eurosceptics have lost votes, they've kept pushing for us to leave the EU, for decades. When Europhiles lose votes, they'll keep pushing for us to stay in or have a close relationship.
What about we stop complaining that our political opponents try to achieve their ends?
Imagine for a moment a scenario where a Conservative government took office in 2010, yet was not allowed to pass any legislative or fiscal measure to take effect before 2013 so that the policies of the previous government continued in the meantime, at which point the Speaker dismissed the government on the grounds that the opinion polls had moved ever so slightly against it and he had decided that the opposition should take over and continue where they left off.
That is what it must feel like to be a supporter of Leave nearly 3 years on from the referendum.0 -
Michael Portillonico67 said:No to any so called converts to the Leave cause .
Any new PM has to be a Leaver who will own the consequences and not allow the Tory nutjobs to blame their “not a true believer status “.
Of course these so called believers only want the job when they can avoid most of the flak . Spineless gutless chancers who deserve contempt . 0 -
I generally find myself in complete agreement with your incisive analyses Ms Cyclefree but in this case I do not follow the logic - seems more likely to me that May will seek a long extension and then submit her resignation immediately. The EU will accept that her departure represents the major political shift they are looking for as a condition of granting the extension.Cyclefree said:
You are being uncharacteristically optimistic.AlastairMeeks said:
Personally I think they're right not to be panicking just now. The Letwin process (another good name for an airport novel) is being followed and yesterday's indicative votes were a lot more illuminating than I had expected. Two options command real support in Parliament - a lot more than Theresa May's deal. If those three are put through from judges' houses to the live show next Monday, we can reasonably hope matters will become a bit clearer still then.matt said:
Are MPs panicking yet? 9 hours away and my distanced impression is that they all still believe their right and all is required is every other MP to understand this.AlastairMeeks said:
You're not making me feel better. Imagine being a backbencher who hadn't held a position and those two had. It would be practically defamatory.Sean_F said:
Mark Francois was a Minister of State in the previous government.AlastairMeeks said:
This man was a minister of the crown in the present government. That is terrifying.Sean_F said:
The account of Steve Baker's rant at the meeting is one of the funniest things I've read.AlastairMeeks said:
I think even with the DUP on board there are over 30 unreconciled Tories. Read the account of Steve Baker addressing the ERG and ask yourself how likely he is to change what we can politely call his mind. He is far from alone.DavidL said:There was some speculation yesterday that the DUP might simply abstain in MV3. Their statement didn't indicate that but if they did does anyone have a feel for whether enough ERG members have now changed their position?
Last time out May lost by 149. 10 abstentions brings the margin of defeat down to 139. That means 70 switchers. That seems a lot.
I am assuming that we crash out with No Deal on 12 April, which is the Friday before Palm Sunday and Holy Week. Somehow that feels appropriate. We are in need of miracles.
Ultimately the extension will lead to continued membership, either because Brexit will be formally reversed or through a form of BINO that will be very close to full membership.0 -
The European Community ceased to be in 1993.MikeSmithson said:
Just like the Brexiteers have overlooked the first referendum which was supposed to settle the matter for all time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
How? If we have a referendum between ratification of the WA and revocation of Article 50, there's nothing to obfuscate or delay.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
Any new PM needs to be someone who puts the interests of the country - rather than his or her party - first.nico67 said:No to any so called converts to the Leave cause .
Any new PM has to be a Leaver who will own the consequences and not allow the Tory nutjobs to blame their “not a true believer status “.
Of course these so called believers only want the job when they can avoid most of the flak . Spineless gutless chancers who deserve contempt .
Fat chance.0 -
40 years ago today!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_vote_of_no_confidence_in_the_Callaghan_ministry0 -
Yes, that is what it feels like.Wulfrun_Phil said:
At least elected governments get a chance to implement their policies.bondegezou said:
If the people voted for political choice A, those who want political choice B will still try to achieve it. That's how all politics in a democracy works.TheAncientMariner said:If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.
In 2015, when the people voted for a Conservative government, the Labour party didn't shut up shop. No, it continued campaigning for what it believes in. In 1997, when the people voted in a Labour government, the Conservative party didn't shut up shop. It continued campaigning for what it believes in. When Eurosceptics have lost votes, they've kept pushing for us to leave the EU, for decades. When Europhiles lose votes, they'll keep pushing for us to stay in or have a close relationship.
What about we stop complaining that our political opponents try to achieve their ends?
Imagine for a moment a scenario where a Conservative government took office in 2010, yet was not allowed to pass any legislative or fiscal measure to take effect before 2013 so that the policies of the previous government continued in the meantime, at which point the Speaker dismissed the government on the grounds that the opinion polls had moved ever so slightly against it and he had decided that the opposition should take over and continue where they left off.
That is what it must feel like to be a supporter of Leave nearly 3 years on from the referendum.0 -
I see there is yet another presidental candidate...0
-
Mr. grss, the police trying to enforce social norms rather than the law is ridiculous. It also rather harms their case that they have insufficient resources if an inspector has time to waste ringing someone up for being mean on the internet.0
-
I thought Santa Claus travels Reindeer ClassTOPPING said:.
A friend of mine said he had to shave off his beard every time he travelled abroad. "I'm not stupid" he said.TheScreamingEagles said:
My Gucci trainers do draw a lot of attention.Nigelb said:
Something to do with the shoes, surely... ?TheScreamingEagles said:
You're telling me?OldKingCole said:
First rule of air-travel. Do NOT upset security staff. One does occasionally meet one who's happy and cheerful but it's rare.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's a Remainer.dyedwoolie said:
Gammon pushes his luck with the authorities and then cashes in for clickbaitTheScreamingEagles said:
POLICE STATE!williamglenn said:
I cannot explain why airport security staff keep on pulling me over.
0 -
Most PMs won't see the difference and quite rightly too actually.Cyclefree said:
Any new PM needs to be someone who puts the interests of the country - rather than his or her party - first.nico67 said:No to any so called converts to the Leave cause .
Any new PM has to be a Leaver who will own the consequences and not allow the Tory nutjobs to blame their “not a true believer status “.
Of course these so called believers only want the job when they can avoid most of the flak . Spineless gutless chancers who deserve contempt .
Fat chance.
The way I see it is that whether we end up like Norway, Switzerland or Canada the UK will be fine. The EU is not the end of the world.
If we end up like Venezuela we won't be fine.
Anything that stops Corbyn is for the good of the country.
[Corbynistas will no doubt have the same logic but with names changed]0 -
...and how Farage pretty much said he would start agitating for another referendum had they lost the last one. I personally think the previous referendum (with all its flaws) should be enacted, but it is for parliament to decide how. There then should be a further referendum on negotiations to re-join in 5 years, next time with clear alternatives. Surely that will be "democratic"? Academic of course, because the EU probably won't want us back, but we can but try. We will be the hokey cokey member!MikeSmithson said:
Just like the Brexiteers have overlooked the first referendum which was supposed to settle the matter for all time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
Satire is different from endorsement (if that is the point you're trying to make)Pulpstar said:
Springtime for Hitler.148grss said:
I mean, I'm pretty anti police, but I'm also pretty anti people being god awful on the internet.malcolmg said:
Another example, police now interfering on people's political opinionsTheWhiteRabbit said:
Pretty obvious not everything that happened is reflected in the articleTheScreamingEagles said:
POLICE STATE!williamglenn said:
https://twitter.com/HarryTheOwl/status/1110503943245688832
We have two options: social stigma, or legal recourse. If people keep telling everyone that social stigma is = censorship, then legal recourse is all their is. I don't think people should be able to go on the internet and say "political speech" about things that are clearly bad. "All black people should be enslaved again" should not be okay to say. "Gas the Jews" should not be okay. "Trans people don't exist" similarly. Medical understanding of trans people has been around for ~100 years, and a cultural understanding for a lot longer (Native American customs, Torahnic Judaism, and many other non European cultures have a history of accepting non binary and trans people throughout history). Indeed, the first book burnings by the Nazis were of doctors who were studying trans medicine. All speech is political. "Bring the Caliphate to the Infidel" is political; it is also god awful and shouldn't be tolerated.
Although there is a very good argument for why some art that does portray these sorts of things should try better to not look so... cool. The Producers provides material that only mocks Nazis, and cannot be coopted by the movement in a positive light, whereas something like Fight Club, which is obviously anti toxic masculinity, has provided a blue print for toxicity within certain circles (it popularised the snowflake epithet as well)0 -
The first referendum on our membership of the European Union was held in 2016.MikeSmithson said:
Just like the Brexiteers have overlooked the first referendum which was supposed to settle the matter for all time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
Really? A bad night for the Tories here is 10 losses out of 13 defences. None of them look safe right now. Are we typical?Sean_F said:
Still, it isn't 1995 in local government terms (it might be 1991 or 1999). Most councillors can be pretty sure of being re-elected.bunnco said:What you also need to remember is that 5400 Conservative Councillors are defending their own seats on May 2nd in the local elections. And a further 4000-ish are standing in seats the Party does not currently hold. It's the biggest election in the local election cycle because a large number of smaller districts are standing.
Say the number is 9000 Conservatives standing. That's probably 10pc of the party membership. Many have spouses as members. And the activists will also be helping out too.
Somewhere between 20-25% of the total membership and over half the Member activists. That is quite a constituency within the party - all of whom will have a vote.
The Golf Club bores never help, armchair Generals who can pontificate but wouldn't what to do with know a letterbox at 100 paces if given 200 leaflets to deliver. They're too busy posting online when everyone else is hard at work!
Most of those 9000 Council candidates, their families and activist friends are in despair. Upto half the part's membership. Leaflets are on hold. Canvassing isn't happening.
And I'm not sure that these real grassroots be quite so enthusiastic to back a hardliner as the betting market indicates given that they have made their own seats so vulnerable.
Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot.
0 -
If Corbyn does get in, it will be because the Conservatives lost their one big USP; the grown up party that looks after the economy through providing stable conditions for business. Brexit fanatics have thoroughly burned that hard won USP. Now they are just a pathetic bunch of White English nationalists wearing blasers and brogues.Philip_Thompson said:
Most PMs won't see the difference and quite rightly too actually.Cyclefree said:
Any new PM needs to be someone who puts the interests of the country - rather than his or her party - first.nico67 said:No to any so called converts to the Leave cause .
Any new PM has to be a Leaver who will own the consequences and not allow the Tory nutjobs to blame their “not a true believer status “.
Of course these so called believers only want the job when they can avoid most of the flak . Spineless gutless chancers who deserve contempt .
Fat chance.
The way I see it is that whether we end up like Norway, Switzerland or Canada the UK will be fine. The EU is not the end of the world.
If we end up like Venezuela we won't be fine.
Anything that stops Corbyn is for the good of the country.
[Corbynistas will no doubt have the same logic but with names changed]0 -
Part of me blames Farage for quitting so soon after the referendum.; He should have known that the Remain leaning HofC would try to block Brexit. I listened to this very interesting and entertaining interview of Patrick O'Flynn by Matt Forde earlier this week. O'Flynn says that UKIP tried to fight the 2017 GE but what did they have to say when the Tories were wearing UKIPs clothes other than "We thought of it first"?
https://player.fm/series/the-political-party/show-85-patrick-oflynn
Also shines a light into why UKIPpers have left, and why they've had so many leaders in the last three years0 -
He's neither old nor fat enough to compete with Trump.FrancisUrquhart said:I see there is yet another presidental candidate...
0 -
I agree but police calling round because they are saying a man is not a woman is taking the biscuit. Are their not enough real crimes , ie like the daily stream of knife murders , that they could perhaps be looking at.148grss said:
I mean, I'm pretty anti police, but I'm also pretty anti people being god awful on the internet.malcolmg said:
Another example, police now interfering on people's political opinionsTheWhiteRabbit said:
Pretty obvious not everything that happened is reflected in the articleTheScreamingEagles said:
POLICE STATE!williamglenn said:
https://twitter.com/HarryTheOwl/status/1110503943245688832
We have two options: social stigma, or legal recourse. If people keep telling everyone that social stigma is = censorship, then legal recourse is all their is. I don't think people should be able to go on the internet and say "political speech" about things that are clearly bad. "All black people should be enslaved again" should not be okay to say. "Gas the Jews" should not be okay. "Trans people don't exist" similarly. Medical understanding of trans people has been around for ~100 years, and a cultural understanding for a lot longer (Native American customs, Torahnic Judaism, and many other non European cultures have a history of accepting non binary and trans people throughout history). Indeed, the first book burnings by the Nazis were of doctors who were studying trans medicine. All speech is political. "Bring the Caliphate to the Infidel" is political; it is also god awful and shouldn't be tolerated.0 -
The only way to overturn a referendum is to elect a government committed to doing so, otherwise we will be having 4-5 refs a decade.Nigel_Foremain said:
...and how Farage pretty much said he would start agitating for another referendum had they lost the last one. I personally think the previous referendum (with all its flaws) should be enacted, but it is for parliament to decide how. There then should be a further referendum on negotiations to re-join in 5 years, next time with clear alternatives. Surely that will be "democratic"? Academic of course, because the EU probably won't want us back, but we can but try. We will be the hokey cokey member!MikeSmithson said:
Just like the Brexiteers have overlooked the first referendum which was supposed to settle the matter for all time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
I'm afraid I don't share your optimism. Let's make the most favourable assumption, that one of the options (say the Customs Union one) somehow gets support with a decent majority next Monday. What happens next to turn that into a solution? Firstly it requires the executive to do something it is not only dead set against, but also is even more strongly opposed by much of the governing party.AlastairMeeks said:Personally I think they're right not to be panicking just now. The Letwin process (another good name for an airport novel) is being followed and yesterday's indicative votes were a lot more illuminating than I had expected. Two options command real support in Parliament - a lot more than Theresa May's deal. If those three are put through from judges' houses to the live show next Monday, we can reasonably hope matters will become a bit clearer still then.
Secondly it requires a series of steps including renegotiation with the EU and a series of votes in parliament, which would require Labour whipping in favour to get the government out of the hole - is that likely?
Thirdly, if there's no election, we'd still have the hung parliament and we'd almost certainly have a new PM who is more ERG-friendly than Theresa May - is that new PM really going to be able to deliver a much softer Brexit even if he or she wanted to? Alternatively, if here is an election is anything much going to change?
The process just looks too flaky for it to be something which would resolve the situation. At best it looks as though it would simply prolong the chaos.0 -
It has always just been about ego for Farage, just as it is for Boris Johnson. Farage only joined UKIP because he was turned down by the Conservatives. That was back in the day when it was a sensible party of right of centre moderatesisam said:Part of me blames Farage for quitting so soon after the referendum.; He should have known that the Remain leaning HofC would try to block Brexit. I listened to this very interesting and entertaining interview of Patrick O'Flynn by Matt Forde earlier this week. O'Flynn says that UKIP tried to fight the 2017 GE but what did they have to say when the Tories were wearing UKIPs clothes other than "We thought of it first"?
https://player.fm/series/the-political-party/show-85-patrick-oflynn
Also shines a light into why UKIPpers have left, and why they've had so many leaders in the last three years0 -
Awesome social network analytics map of the indicative votes last night:
https://surfdrive.surf.nl/files/index.php/s/SXE72AWUNavenYs/download0 -
That is just silly pedantry.Philip_Thompson said:
The first referendum on our membership of the European Union was held in 2016.MikeSmithson said:
Just like the Brexiteers have overlooked the first referendum which was supposed to settle the matter for all time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/1110947705633849350
0 -
The idea that people who hold strong views will just back down if they lose a vote is, at best, naive. Remainers appear to be the only politically engaged people in the world who are expected to just give up. In many countries in the world the losing side would resort to unlawful measures to achieve their results. Remainers seek lawful methods to do so but are held to an even higher standard than that. They are expected to treat a three year old vote as a Holy Writ that must, under all circumstances, be respected, whatever the intervening events. Similarly there are still Irish Republicans out there who feel the same way about the 1919 General Election - holding that no subsequent vote can be valid until the Republic they say it ratified is implemented. Both are at the wrong end of the argument.Philip_Thompson said:
The first referendum on our membership of the European Union was held in 2016.MikeSmithson said:
Just like the Brexiteers have overlooked the first referendum which was supposed to settle the matter for all time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
So we have a government motion about the EU tomorrow, presumably MV3. Tomorrow will be a morning session and will confirm with the speakers ruling. Sounds like the statement was put together at the last minute.
And easter recess looking unlikely (or at least to be shorter)
0 -
-
Can they split the WDA and the PDIanB2 said:So we have a government motion about the EU tomorrow, presumably MV3
0 -
Labour will always find a reason to vote against it. It's what oppositions do. It's either the wrong kind of customs union, or fails to satisfy a new half dozen set of requirements.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'm afraid I don't share your optimism. Let's make the most favourable assumption, that one of the options (say the Customs Union one) somehow gets support with a decent majority next Monday. What happens next to turn that into a solution? Firstly it requires the executive to do something it is not only dead set against, but also is even more strongly opposed by much of the governing party.AlastairMeeks said:Personally I think they're right not to be panicking just now. The Letwin process (another good name for an airport novel) is being followed and yesterday's indicative votes were a lot more illuminating than I had expected. Two options command real support in Parliament - a lot more than Theresa May's deal. If those three are put through from judges' houses to the live show next Monday, we can reasonably hope matters will become a bit clearer still then.
Secondly it requires a series of steps including renegotiation with the EU and a series of votes in parliament, which would require Labour whipping in favour to get the government out of the hole - is that likely?
Thirdly, if there's no election, we'd still have the hung parliament and we'd almost certainly have a new PM who is more ERG-friendly than Theresa May - is that new PM really going to be able to deliver a much softer Brexit even if he or she wanted to? Alternatively, if here is an election is anything much going to change?
The process just looks too flaky for it to be something which would resolve the situation. At best it looks as though it would simply prolong the chaos.0 -
-
It still is. May is further left than all the Tory leaders since Heath.Nigel_Foremain said:
It has always just been about ego for Farage, just as it is for Boris Johnson. Farage only joined UKIP because he was turned down by the Conservatives. That was back in the day when it was a sensible party of right of centre moderatesisam said:Part of me blames Farage for quitting so soon after the referendum.; He should have known that the Remain leaning HofC would try to block Brexit. I listened to this very interesting and entertaining interview of Patrick O'Flynn by Matt Forde earlier this week. O'Flynn says that UKIP tried to fight the 2017 GE but what did they have to say when the Tories were wearing UKIPs clothes other than "We thought of it first"?
https://player.fm/series/the-political-party/show-85-patrick-oflynn
Also shines a light into why UKIPpers have left, and why they've had so many leaders in the last three years
Certainly it is closer to the centre right than Labour is to being a party of the centre left.
0 -
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:0 -
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:0 -
https://youtu.be/wxpYW_w5pgoPulpstar said:
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:0 -
No its not. The European Community of 1975 and the European Union of 2016 are not the same thing and there's more than just a name that's different.Nigel_Foremain said:
That is just silly pedantry.Philip_Thompson said:
The first referendum on our membership of the European Union was held in 2016.MikeSmithson said:
Just like the Brexiteers have overlooked the first referendum which was supposed to settle the matter for all time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
As always, the golden rule with Brexit is that only May is bluffing in any given situation.Pulpstar said:
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:
I guess we do now have to add some ERGers to that, but as a bloc they're still holding firm enough to effectively pose the same level of difficulty.0 -
To be honest I think the problem with Mike's post isn't the difference between the EC and EU, it's the idea that we shouldn't be able to change our minds 40+ years laterPhilip_Thompson said:
No its not. The European Community of 1975 and the European Union of 2016 are not the same thing and there's more than just a name that's different.Nigel_Foremain said:
That is just silly pedantry.Philip_Thompson said:
The first referendum on our membership of the European Union was held in 2016.MikeSmithson said:
Just like the Brexiteers have overlooked the first referendum which was supposed to settle the matter for all time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
There's no need to make a list, Hansard has the 93 names here:TheScreamingEagles said:
This morning I made a list of Tory MPs I could not vote for.Scott_P said:
Except like the Tory Party itself, PB Tories are no longer one tribe...DecrepitJohnL said:pb Tories for the past few years: Corbynistas plan mass deselections of Labour MPs; Corbyn will sell out Northern Ireland to his IRA mates.
pb Tories for the past few months: deselect the ERG/Remoaners; get shot of Northern Ireland and Scotland.
It was close to three figures.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-27/division/D23CDA5C-4B12-46CF-915D-AA6C93A5DB0E/EUExitDayAmendment?outputType=Party
0 -
GIN1138 said:
The best bet would be just to pass the WA without any PD and then we decide where we want to go next with the trade arrangements through a general election.
Same parliamentary arithmetic though:
DUP say no because it's the only word they know.
10-20 ERG ultras say no because they hate Europe above all else.
5ish Tory remainers, TIG and plenty Labour backbenchers say no because they love Europe above all else.
Corbyn says no because he won't agree to anything the Tories propose, regardless what it is.
0 -
40 years ago, it was the Nationalist MPs who were playing silly games. Because of them, Thatcher came to power!Pulpstar said:
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_vote_of_no_confidence_in_the_Callaghan_ministry#Irish_Nationalists0 -
Reminder that the Guardian are projecting a majority of 42 AGAINST May's deal (and even that's making the generous assumption that Jacob Rees-Mogg and friends will vote for it):-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2019/mar/27/can-you-get-mays-deal-through-meaningful-vote-30 -
If a form of WA passes without the DUP holding the balance, even given their 30+ strong caucus, then the DUP bluff is only truly called at a subsequent VONC. And that may well not be a bluff either.Pulpstar said:
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:0 -
It was a mischievous comment. I am not in favour of referenda. Look at the total mess this one has made, and the fact that those in favour of whichever side of the debate find ways to claim it says things it does not or that the natural conclusion of this means this or that. It is a nonsense to be obsessing of our EU membership when we have so many democratic deficits with our own domestic system. Perhaps we should call Brexit the opiate of the masses.isam said:
The only way to overturn a referendum is to elect a government committed to doing so, otherwise we will be having 4-5 refs a decade.Nigel_Foremain said:
...and how Farage pretty much said he would start agitating for another referendum had they lost the last one. I personally think the previous referendum (with all its flaws) should be enacted, but it is for parliament to decide how. There then should be a further referendum on negotiations to re-join in 5 years, next time with clear alternatives. Surely that will be "democratic"? Academic of course, because the EU probably won't want us back, but we can but try. We will be the hokey cokey member!MikeSmithson said:
Just like the Brexiteers have overlooked the first referendum which was supposed to settle the matter for all time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Yep. They have absolutely no interest in democracy, only in staying part of the EU with or without the support of the people.TheAncientMariner said:
If we had a 2nd referendum and if the people confirmed they wished to leave then the Remainers would still obfuscate and try and delay matters.williamglenn said:
It was a great speech.Pulpstar said:
Did Ma Beckett realy get through her speech without giving that particular game away ? If so impressive obfuscation.
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/11109477056338493500 -
There'd possibly be a 3rd Labour name on that division too if he wasn't leader under Hoey and Campbell..Richard_Nabavi said:
There's no need to make a list, Hansard has the 93 names here:TheScreamingEagles said:
This morning I made a list of Tory MPs I could not vote for.Scott_P said:
Except like the Tory Party itself, PB Tories are no longer one tribe...DecrepitJohnL said:pb Tories for the past few years: Corbynistas plan mass deselections of Labour MPs; Corbyn will sell out Northern Ireland to his IRA mates.
pb Tories for the past few months: deselect the ERG/Remoaners; get shot of Northern Ireland and Scotland.
It was close to three figures.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-27/division/D23CDA5C-4B12-46CF-915D-AA6C93A5DB0E/EUExitDayAmendment?outputType=Party0 -
So they’re going to have a vote on whether to have another meaningful vote ! Lmao !0
-
I'd fully expect them to VONC the Gov't if the deal passes on Lab abstentions and ERG switchers.Pro_Rata said:
If a form of WA passes without the DUP holding the balance, even given their 30+ strong caucus, then the DUP bluff is only truly called at a subsequent VONC. And that may well not be a bluff either.Pulpstar said:
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:0 -
Awesome social network analytics map of the indicative votes last night:
https://surfdrive.surf.nl/files/index.php/s/SXE72AWUNavenYs/download
..........Indeed, might help with anyone missing from TSEs list.
0 -
The problem for PC Plod is that if a crime is reported, they have to investigate, and that does include a certain amount of rudeness on the net. Most is prerty trivial, but in amongst it are some serious threats.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. grss, the police trying to enforce social norms rather than the law is ridiculous. It also rather harms their case that they have insufficient resources if an inspector has time to waste ringing someone up for being mean on the internet.
0 -
I cannot see Bercow allowing thatnico67 said:So they’re going to have a vote on whether to have another meaningful vote ! Lmao !
0 -
Well they are politicians and politicians generally consider issues in the round in order to gain greatest overall advantage. At some point the DUP may twig that they are at a maximum of influence, especially if the HoC finds some way through. Support TM's deal and they sail on as kingmakers. Blow it for her, and they lose that and much else besides for the people they purport to represent in NI.Pulpstar said:
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:
I still think some kind of whole-UK backstop would bring them on board but then as @Richard_Nabavi has pointed out the mechanics are working against everything apart from May's deal atm.0 -
Melanie Onn looks OK 0
-
The logical conclusion if the government will not implement the policy that it has been instructed to implement by the House of Commons on the most pressing subject of the day is that the government is replaced, in the short term at least, to deal with that policy requirement. That could be done fairly quickly. It might even have a Conservative in the top job.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'm afraid I don't share your optimism. Let's make the most favourable assumption, that one of the options (say the Customs Union one) somehow gets support with a decent majority next Monday. What happens next to turn that into a solution? Firstly it requires the executive to do something it is not only dead set against, but also is even more strongly opposed by much of the governing party.AlastairMeeks said:Personally I think they're right not to be panicking just now. The Letwin process (another good name for an airport novel) is being followed and yesterday's indicative votes were a lot more illuminating than I had expected. Two options command real support in Parliament - a lot more than Theresa May's deal. If those three are put through from judges' houses to the live show next Monday, we can reasonably hope matters will become a bit clearer still then.
Secondly it requires a series of steps including renegotiation with the EU and a series of votes in parliament, which would require Labour whipping in favour to get the government out of the hole - is that likely?
Thirdly, if there's no election, we'd still have the hung parliament and we'd almost certainly have a new PM who is more ERG-friendly than Theresa May - is that new PM really going to be able to deliver a much softer Brexit even if he or she wanted to? Alternatively, if here is an election is anything much going to change?
The process just looks too flaky for it to be something which would resolve the situation. At best it looks as though it would simply prolong the chaos.
0 -
No. The DUP don't do bluff.Pulpstar said:
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:
Their position is entirely predictable and has been predicted here many times in the past. The PM should follow PB - it's a better source of advice than the fools in the cabinet.0 -
Perhaps that’s the only way to get the vote , it’s rumoured the AG spoke to Bercow .Big_G_NorthWales said:
I cannot see Bercow allowing thatnico67 said:So they’re going to have a vote on whether to have another meaningful vote ! Lmao !
0 -
Okay, so that's the logical conclusion. What about what would actually happen?AlastairMeeks said:
The logical conclusion if the government will not implement the policy that it has been instructed to implement by the House of Commons on the most pressing subject of the day is that the government is replaced, in the short term at least, to deal with that policy requirement. That could be done fairly quickly. It might even have a Conservative in the top job.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'm afraid I don't share your optimism. Let's make the most favourable assumption, that one of the options (say the Customs Union one) somehow gets support with a decent majority next Monday. What happens next to turn that into a solution? Firstly it requires the executive to do something it is not only dead set against, but also is even more strongly opposed by much of the governing party.AlastairMeeks said:Personally I think they're right not to be panicking just now. The Letwin process (another good name for an airport novel) is being followed and yesterday's indicative votes were a lot more illuminating than I had expected. Two options command real support in Parliament - a lot more than Theresa May's deal. If those three are put through from judges' houses to the live show next Monday, we can reasonably hope matters will become a bit clearer still then.
Secondly it requires a series of steps including renegotiation with the EU and a series of votes in parliament, which would require Labour whipping in favour to get the government out of the hole - is that likely?
Thirdly, if there's no election, we'd still have the hung parliament and we'd almost certainly have a new PM who is more ERG-friendly than Theresa May - is that new PM really going to be able to deliver a much softer Brexit even if he or she wanted to? Alternatively, if here is an election is anything much going to change?
The process just looks too flaky for it to be something which would resolve the situation. At best it looks as though it would simply prolong the chaos.0 -
True in theory, but it falls down when you start proposing a specific implementation of the idea, unless a large contingent splits from Labour and a large contingent splits from the Tories or somehow manages to boot out the hardline Brexiteers. Neither looks plausible to me.AlastairMeeks said:The logical conclusion if the government will not implement the policy that it has been instructed to implement by the House of Commons on the most pressing subject of the day is that the government is replaced, in the short term at least, to deal with that policy requirement. That could be done fairly quickly. It might even have a Conservative in the top job.
0 -
Seems to be a lot of speculation and confusion. Probably will be cleared up in the next hour or sonico67 said:
Perhaps that’s the only way to get the vote , it’s rumoured the AG spoke to Bercow .Big_G_NorthWales said:
I cannot see Bercow allowing thatnico67 said:So they’re going to have a vote on whether to have another meaningful vote ! Lmao !
0 -
Wouldn't the House have to unite around a replacement PM though? Who would command that breadth of respect?AlastairMeeks said:
The logical conclusion if the government will not implement the policy that it has been instructed to implement by the House of Commons on the most pressing subject of the day is that the government is replaced, in the short term at least, to deal with that policy requirement. That could be done fairly quickly. It might even have a Conservative in the top job.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'm afraid I don't share your optimism. Let's make the most favourable assumption, that one of the options (say the Customs Union one) somehow gets support with a decent majority next Monday. What happens next to turn that into a solution? Firstly it requires the executive to do something it is not only dead set against, but also is even more strongly opposed by much of the governing party.AlastairMeeks said:Personally I think they're right not to be panicking just now. The Letwin process (another good name for an airport novel) is being followed and yesterday's indicative votes were a lot more illuminating than I had expected. Two options command real support in Parliament - a lot more than Theresa May's deal. If those three are put through from judges' houses to the live show next Monday, we can reasonably hope matters will become a bit clearer still then.
Secondly it requires a series of steps including renegotiation with the EU and a series of votes in parliament, which would require Labour whipping in favour to get the government out of the hole - is that likely?
Thirdly, if there's no election, we'd still have the hung parliament and we'd almost certainly have a new PM who is more ERG-friendly than Theresa May - is that new PM really going to be able to deliver a much softer Brexit even if he or she wanted to? Alternatively, if here is an election is anything much going to change?
The process just looks too flaky for it to be something which would resolve the situation. At best it looks as though it would simply prolong the chaos.0 -
It's a vote to change standing orders - if that vote wins the Meaningful vote can take place otherwise it fails without any vote..Big_G_NorthWales said:
I cannot see Bercow allowing thatnico67 said:So they’re going to have a vote on whether to have another meaningful vote ! Lmao !
0 -
Wasn't it an Irish Nationalist beimng missing that caused the problem?Sunil_Prasannan said:
40 years ago, it was the Nationalist MPs who were playing silly games. Because of them, Thatcher came to power!Pulpstar said:
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_vote_of_no_confidence_in_the_Callaghan_ministry#Irish_Nationalists
0 -
They do not think that way and are fixated on their ancient cause, they will not dump their cause for any gain , they are not like the Westminster Tories, Labour or Lib Dems. Rightly or wrongly they have their principles and stick to them unlike the cretinous greedy grasping unprincipled lying cheating toerags at Westminster ( SNP excluded ).TOPPING said:
Well they are politicians and politicians generally consider issues in the round in order to gain greatest overall advantage. At some point the DUP may twig that they are at a maximum of influence, especially if the HoC finds some way through. Support TM's deal and they sail on as kingmakers. Blow it for her, and they lose that and much else besides for the people they purport to represent in NI.Pulpstar said:
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:
I still think some kind of whole-UK backstop would bring them on board but then as @Richard_Nabavi has pointed out the mechanics are working against everything apart from May's deal atm.0 -
A fair summation. Part of the problem is that all of those groups are trying to achieve their own aims and making up faux objections. Mr Thicky is the most disingenuous of the lot; he is manufacturing objections because he thinks it is the best way to destroy the Conservative Party, which is a fairly easy calculation even for someone of his limited intellect .Andrew said:GIN1138 said:
The best bet would be just to pass the WA without any PD and then we decide where we want to go next with the trade arrangements through a general election.
Same parliamentary arithmetic though:
DUP say no because it's the only word they know.
10-20 ERG ultras say no because they hate Europe above all else.
5ish Tory remainers, TIG and plenty Labour backbenchers say no because they love Europe above all else.
Corbyn says no because he won't agree to anything the Tories propose, regardless what it is.0 -
Seriously, am I missing something or does the political editor for the Times have no idea what's going on?Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:0 -
The Chinese company Huawei has been strongly criticised in a report by the body overseeing the security of its products in UK telecoms.
The report, issued by the National Cyber Security Centre, which is part of GCHQ, says it can provide "only limited assurance that the long-term security risks can be managed in the Huawei equipment currently deployed in the UK".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-477321390 -
Looking at this, the only way I see it going through is with the Kyle/Wilson amendment saying the deal gets passed only with a referendum.Danny565 said:Reminder that the Guardian are projecting a majority of 42 AGAINST May's deal (and even that's making the generous assumption that Jacob Rees-Mogg and friends will vote for it):-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2019/mar/27/can-you-get-mays-deal-through-meaningful-vote-3
If that happens, you flip the 71-strong "Labour for a People's Vote" bloc. The Labour frontbench and 168 Labour loyalists probably still vote against (they don't think a "Tory Brexit deal" should even go through to a referendum), and you probably also put the 43 Rees-Mogg "Wavering Brexiters" back on the opposing side. The deal goes through 326 to 312.0 -
Ken Clarke. It is unlikely to happen, but he has nothing to lose to lead a GNUStark_Dawning said:
Wouldn't the House have to unite around a replacement PM though? Who would command that breadth of respect?AlastairMeeks said:
The logical conclusion if the government will not implement the policy that it has been instructed to implement by the House of Commons on the most pressing subject of the day is that the government is replaced, in the short term at least, to deal with that policy requirement. That could be done fairly quickly. It might even have a Conservative in the top job.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'm afraid I don't share your optimism. Let's make the most favourable assumption, that one of the options (say the Customs Union one) somehow gets support with a decent majority next Monday. What happens next to turn that into a solution? Firstly it requires the executive to do something it is not only dead set against, but also is even more strongly opposed by much of the governing party.AlastairMeeks said:Personally I think they're right not to be panicking just now. The Letwin process (another good name for an airport novel) is being followed and yesterday's indicative votes were a lot more illuminating than I had expected. Two options command real support in Parliament - a lot more than Theresa May's deal. If those three are put through from judges' houses to the live show next Monday, we can reasonably hope matters will become a bit clearer still then.
Secondly it requires a series of steps including renegotiation with the EU and a series of votes in parliament, which would require Labour whipping in favour to get the government out of the hole - is that likely?
Thirdly, if there's no election, we'd still have the hung parliament and we'd almost certainly have a new PM who is more ERG-friendly than Theresa May - is that new PM really going to be able to deliver a much softer Brexit even if he or she wanted to? Alternatively, if here is an election is anything much going to change?
The process just looks too flaky for it to be something which would resolve the situation. At best it looks as though it would simply prolong the chaos.0 -
Labour have just said they are opposed and do not even know what they are opposing !!!!!eek said:
It's a vote to change standing orders - if that vote wins the Meaningful vote can take place otherwise it fails without any vote..Big_G_NorthWales said:
I cannot see Bercow allowing thatnico67 said:So they’re going to have a vote on whether to have another meaningful vote ! Lmao !
0 -
This is quite interesting . Just voting on the WA.
Because the point of contention is the future relationship . Any deal has to have the WA .
MPs need to wake up to reality .
0 -
Disappointed to see Mark Harper and Johnny Mercer in the 93.Richard_Nabavi said:
There's no need to make a list, Hansard has the 93 names here:TheScreamingEagles said:
This morning I made a list of Tory MPs I could not vote for.Scott_P said:
Except like the Tory Party itself, PB Tories are no longer one tribe...DecrepitJohnL said:pb Tories for the past few years: Corbynistas plan mass deselections of Labour MPs; Corbyn will sell out Northern Ireland to his IRA mates.
pb Tories for the past few months: deselect the ERG/Remoaners; get shot of Northern Ireland and Scotland.
It was close to three figures.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-27/division/D23CDA5C-4B12-46CF-915D-AA6C93A5DB0E/EUExitDayAmendment?outputType=Party
Less surprised to see most of the usual suspects there.0 -
That's a blow... what's Tracey Crouch doing on there!!! Shakes head....Richard_Nabavi said:
There's no need to make a list, Hansard has the 93 names here:TheScreamingEagles said:
This morning I made a list of Tory MPs I could not vote for.Scott_P said:
Except like the Tory Party itself, PB Tories are no longer one tribe...DecrepitJohnL said:pb Tories for the past few years: Corbynistas plan mass deselections of Labour MPs; Corbyn will sell out Northern Ireland to his IRA mates.
pb Tories for the past few months: deselect the ERG/Remoaners; get shot of Northern Ireland and Scotland.
It was close to three figures.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-27/division/D23CDA5C-4B12-46CF-915D-AA6C93A5DB0E/EUExitDayAmendment?outputType=Party0 -
Chris Lesley raising the point that both the WA and the PD have to be approved together. Section 13. 1. b) of the EU WA 2018 states:nico67 said:This is quite interesting . Just voting on the WA.
Because the point of contention is the future relationship . Any deal has to have the WA .
MPs need to wake up to reality .
"the negotiated withdrawal agreement and the framework for the future relationship have been approved by a resolution of the House of Commons on a motion moved by a Minister of the Crown,"
Does "a resolution" mean a single resolution - i.e. at the same time?
I could see both Remainers and the ERG challenging this.0 -
From the Conservative party alone:Stark_Dawning said:
Wouldn't the House have to unite around a replacement PM though? Who would command that breadth of respect?AlastairMeeks said:
The logical conclusion if the government will not implement the policy that it has been instructed to implement by the House of Commons on the most pressing subject of the day is that the government is replaced, in the short term at least, to deal with that policy requirement. That could be done fairly quickly. It might even have a Conservative in the top job.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'm afraid I don't share your optimism. Let's make the most favourable assumption, that one of the options (say the Customs Union one) somehow gets support with a decent majority next Monday. What happens next to turn that into a solution? Firstly it requires the executive to do something it is not only dead set against, but also is even more strongly opposed by much of the governing party.AlastairMeeks said:Personally I think they're right not to be panicking just now. The Letwin process (another good name for an airport novel) is being followed and yesterday's indicative votes were a lot more illuminating than I had expected. Two options command real support in Parliament - a lot more than Theresa May's deal. If those three are put through from judges' houses to the live show next Monday, we can reasonably hope matters will become a bit clearer still then.
Secondly it requires a series of steps including renegotiation with the EU and a series of votes in parliament, which would require Labour whipping in favour to get the government out of the hole - is that likely?
Thirdly, if there's no election, we'd still have the hung parliament and we'd almost certainly have a new PM who is more ERG-friendly than Theresa May - is that new PM really going to be able to deliver a much softer Brexit even if he or she wanted to? Alternatively, if here is an election is anything much going to change?
The process just looks too flaky for it to be something which would resolve the situation. At best it looks as though it would simply prolong the chaos.
a) Ken Clarke
b) Oliver Letwin
c) Dominic Grieve
Options from other parties are available.
The Prime Minister would need to consider her options carefully in practice if Parliament coalesces around another option. She might not want to implement it but she would be in contempt of Parliament if she didn't. Her choice would be whether to go against her own wishes or to facilitate the emergence of someone who could square the policy with their conscience. Or, I suppose, to try for a general election (good luck with that endeavour).0 -
The DUP and ERG true believers ARE opposed to the WA though. Labour aren't but they want Corbyn's Customs Union added on to the WA and will oppose a WA as it is a "blind Brexit" (Their words, not mine)nico67 said:This is quite interesting . Just voting on the WA.
Because the point of contention is the future relationship . Any deal has to have the WA .
MPs need to wake up to reality .0 -
The Commons always has that rightAlastairMeeks said:
The logical conclusion if the government will not implement the policy that it has been instructed to implement by the House of Commons on the most pressing subject of the day is that the government is replaced, in the short term at least, to deal with that policy requirement. That could be done fairly quickly. It might even have a Conservative in the top job.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'm afraid I don't share your optimism. Let's make the most favourable assumption, that one of the options (say the Customs Union one) somehow gets support with a decent majority next Monday. What happens next to turn that into a solution? Firstly it requires the executive to do something it is not only dead set against, but also is even more strongly opposed by much of the governing party.AlastairMeeks said:Personally I think they're right not to be panicking just now. The Letwin process (another good name for an airport novel) is being followed and yesterday's indicative votes were a lot more illuminating than I had expected. Two options command real support in Parliament - a lot more than Theresa May's deal. If those three are put through from judges' houses to the live show next Monday, we can reasonably hope matters will become a bit clearer still then.
Secondly it requires a series of steps including renegotiation with the EU and a series of votes in parliament, which would require Labour whipping in favour to get the government out of the hole - is that likely?
Thirdly, if there's no election, we'd still have the hung parliament and we'd almost certainly have a new PM who is more ERG-friendly than Theresa May - is that new PM really going to be able to deliver a much softer Brexit even if he or she wanted to? Alternatively, if here is an election is anything much going to change?
The process just looks too flaky for it to be something which would resolve the situation. At best it looks as though it would simply prolong the chaos.0 -
Told you she had piss poor judgment.Scrapheap_as_was said:
That's a blow... what's Tracey Crouch doing on there!!! Shakes head....Richard_Nabavi said:
There's no need to make a list, Hansard has the 93 names here:TheScreamingEagles said:
This morning I made a list of Tory MPs I could not vote for.Scott_P said:
Except like the Tory Party itself, PB Tories are no longer one tribe...DecrepitJohnL said:pb Tories for the past few years: Corbynistas plan mass deselections of Labour MPs; Corbyn will sell out Northern Ireland to his IRA mates.
pb Tories for the past few months: deselect the ERG/Remoaners; get shot of Northern Ireland and Scotland.
It was close to three figures.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-27/division/D23CDA5C-4B12-46CF-915D-AA6C93A5DB0E/EUExitDayAmendment?outputType=Party0 -
You know how departing PMs get their honours list, could May please have a 'remove the whip' list or actually why not kick upstairs the biggest bell-ends where they can get less TV coverage - Private Francois and Bellicose Bridgen would take a few weeks to understand they couldn't still be MPs....0
-
Frank Maguire came to Parliament to "abstain in person"!OldKingCole said:
Wasn't it an Irish Nationalist beimng missing that caused the problem?Sunil_Prasannan said:
40 years ago, it was the Nationalist MPs who were playing silly games. Because of them, Thatcher came to power!Pulpstar said:
The DUP aren't about to have any bluff called. Because remarkably enough, they aren't actually bluffing.Stereotomy said:
Only Labour, surely? The DUP are opposed to the WA itselfScott_P said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_vote_of_no_confidence_in_the_Callaghan_ministry#Irish_Nationalists
But Labour MP Alfred Broughton didn't vote due to ill health, heeding medical advice not to do so. He died a few days later.0 -
I'm calling it an undercover op to get the headbangers onside for her coronation as next PM.TheScreamingEagles said:
Told you she had piss poor judgment.Scrapheap_as_was said:
That's a blow... what's Tracey Crouch doing on there!!! Shakes head....Richard_Nabavi said:
There's no need to make a list, Hansard has the 93 names here:TheScreamingEagles said:
This morning I made a list of Tory MPs I could not vote for.Scott_P said:
Except like the Tory Party itself, PB Tories are no longer one tribe...DecrepitJohnL said:pb Tories for the past few years: Corbynistas plan mass deselections of Labour MPs; Corbyn will sell out Northern Ireland to his IRA mates.
pb Tories for the past few months: deselect the ERG/Remoaners; get shot of Northern Ireland and Scotland.
It was close to three figures.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-27/division/D23CDA5C-4B12-46CF-915D-AA6C93A5DB0E/EUExitDayAmendment?outputType=Party0 -
Just completely, off-the-wall mad. That 93 Conservative - Conservative - MPs would defy a three-line whip in order to vote for legal chaos in two days time is something I never thought I'd see. It's the kind of thing one might have expected from a couple of fringe nutjob bearded Marxists in the Labour Party twenty years. Now in this vote the same Marxists and the rest of the Labour Party are the ones acting as responsible MPs. What the hell has happened to the Conservative Party?TheScreamingEagles said:
Disappointed to see Mark Harper and Johnny Mercer in the 93.Richard_Nabavi said:
There's no need to make a list, Hansard has the 93 names here:TheScreamingEagles said:
This morning I made a list of Tory MPs I could not vote for.Scott_P said:
Except like the Tory Party itself, PB Tories are no longer one tribe...DecrepitJohnL said:pb Tories for the past few years: Corbynistas plan mass deselections of Labour MPs; Corbyn will sell out Northern Ireland to his IRA mates.
pb Tories for the past few months: deselect the ERG/Remoaners; get shot of Northern Ireland and Scotland.
It was close to three figures.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-27/division/D23CDA5C-4B12-46CF-915D-AA6C93A5DB0E/EUExitDayAmendment?outputType=Party
Less surprised to see most of the usual suspects there.0
