Yet all those self righteous MPs interviewed at the Commons telling the news what a great job they had done by voting against the WA. Their actions have led to no deal pure and simple. I hold Yvette Cooper most liable. She thought she was being so clever. The look on her face when Boris was at the Dispatch Box telling her that he would definitely leave on the 31/10/2019 come what may told a story. The WA, though not perfect, was always going to be the best that we would get from the EU. Parliament should have resoundingly voted for it.
A lot of people are getting what they claim they least want, due to their intransigence.
This may sound insensitive, but aren't you as guilty as the Johnsonites of putting ideology before pragmatism?
Your dilemma starts with the profoundly unpragmatic (and, to me, unConservative) fixation with delivering "the referendum result" No previous British government in history has chained itself so foolishly, and all our problems start with this preposterously unBritish obsession.
True: today';s Tory party has made things worse by allowing an extremist cabal to define what that result was. But there is reasonable evidence the population has moved on from its views in June 2016 - and by refusing to accept a referendum rerun (or a clear restatement of the fundamental British constitutional rule that: Parliament decides, not a glorified opinion poll), you've painted yourself into an impossible position.
No sensible party will court you as long as you remain wedded to a - frankly - pig-headed and unBritish obsession with trying to tell Britain what it was thinking on one day three years ago. That's how America misrules itself.
17.6 million people voted to leave. The WA would have left on good terms with a probable very close Norwegian style relationship post transition, the only serious remainer arguments I've heard against it being we give up some control - well has Norway's economy died on the rocks with their lack of control ? Remoaners, and I am going to use the remoaner term here for yourself being unhappy with a very mild form of leave are just as responsible as Farage, Boris and Banks for pushing this country to the brink of a potentially economy trashing No Deal Exit. Like all those Labour MPs who refused to vote for the WA through their ridiculous tribalism this position is contemptible.
Yep. This.
And, FWIW, I don’t agree it was Norway. It was much closer to what Alastair Meeks described as a managed Hard Brexit, with political independence and freedom of action in services, digital, financial regulation and immigration, but staying part of the single market for goods with very close customs alignment on that.
That is why the WA could not be divorced from the PD. A PD that was significantly softer, with Single Market alignment and Customs Union might have passed the Commons. May and the Tories could not be trusted on these so the opposition were right to vote against.
All water under the bridge now. The loonies are now in charge.
The opposition would have voted down any agreement reached by the previous administration, regardless of content.
If the conservative party dies will the country be any worse off ?
Actually yes (even if I wouldn’t vote for it) is the answer but not this current manifestation, there will always be a need for a sane Centre right party to reduce the risk of far right nationalism taking over. ....... but something obviously went wrong somewhere this time
As you say ther will be a need for a centre right party in some guise, it will benefit to some extemt by not being the Tories. The tribal voting of the last 100 years will start to die off.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
This may sound insensitive, but aren't you as guilty as the Johnsonites of putting ideology before pragmatism?
Your dilemma starts with the profoundly unpragmatic (and, to me, unConservative) fixation with delivering "the referendum result" No previous British government in history has chained itself so foolishly, and all our problems start with this preposterously unBritish obsession.
True: today';s Tory party has made things worse by allowing an extremist cabal to define what that result was. But there is reasonable evidence the population has moved on from its views in June 2016 - and by refusing to accept a referendum rerun (or a clear restatement of the fundamental British constitutional rule that: Parliament decides, not a glorified opinion poll), you've painted yourself into an impossible position.
No sensible party will court you as long as you remain wedded to a - frankly - pig-headed and unBritish obsession with trying to tell Britain what it was thinking on one day three years ago. That's how America misrules itself.
17.6 million people voted to leave. The WA would have left on good terms with a probable very close Norwegian style relationship post transition, the only serious remainer arguments I've heard against it being we give up some control - well has Norway's economy died on the rocks with their lack of control ? Remoaners, and I am going to use the remoaner term here for yourself being unhappy with a very mild form of leave are just as responsible as Farage, Boris and Banks for pushing this country to the brink of a potentially economy trashing No Deal Exit. Like all those Labour MPs who refused to vote for the WA through their ridiculous tribalism this position is contemptible.
Yep. This.
And, FWIW, I don’t agree it was Norway. It was much closer to what Alastair Meeks described as a managed Hard Brexit, with political independence and freedom of action in services, digital, financial regulation and immigration, but staying part of the single market for goods with very close customs alignment on that.
That is why the WA could not be divorced from the PD. A PD that was significantly softer, with Single Market alignment and Customs Union might have passed the Commons. May and the Tories could not be trusted on these so the opposition were right to vote against.
All water under the bridge now. The loonies are now in charge.
The opposition would have voted down any agreement reached by the previous administration, regardless of content.
If the conservative party dies will the country be any worse off ?
No. There is a time for everything, and all political parties run their course, eventually.
yes, the conservatives have lost their abiliy to compromise, pragmatism is dead. In such circumstances its not possible to run a broiad church party. Labour is heading the same way.
This may sound insensitive, but aren't you as guilty as the Johnsonites of putting ideology before pragmatism?
Your dilemma starts with the profoundly unpragmatic (and, to me, unConservative) fixation with delivering "the referendum result" No previous British government in history has chained itself so foolishly, and all our problems start with this preposterously unBritish obsession.
True: today';s Tory party has made things worse by allowing an extremist cabal to define what that result was. But there is reasonable evidence the population has moved on from its views in June 2016 - and by refusing to accept a referendum rerun (or a clear restatement of the fundamental British constitutional rule that: Parliament decides, not a glorified opinion poll), you've painted yourself into an impossible position.
No sensible party will court you as long as you remain wedded to a - frankly - pig-headed and unBritish obsession with trying to tell Britain what it was thinking on one day three years ago. That's how America misrules itself.
Much more fundamentally unConservative was the decision to join the EC in 1972. That was a very radical break with all that the Conservatives had believed in, prior to that point, done because the party was terrified of our trade unions and the Soviet Union.
For many Conservatives, leaving the EU is like restoring the monarchy in 1660.
Given Macmillan applied back in 1961, that is a radically eccentric view of what is ‘unConservative’
And, was wrong to do so. He was searching for a substitute for the Empire.
Yes, Britain never really was a nation state in the normal sense. It has always been part of a greater international organisation and structure. The disintegration of the United Kingdom and emergence of English nationalism is the next step.
It has long been a thing. It is just that they were from the other side of the debate before and so everyone thought they could be ignored.
What is a thing now is PB ex-Tories who think they had some god given right to expect the party to continue to follow the same failed policies and alienate a large majority of the population and who now want to write articles about how terrible it is that they have had to leave their particular little club.
I highly doubt that anyone will win the next election. We'll end up with multiple blocks in the Commons looking to find a route towards working together. Neither Tory nor Labour Parties in their current form seem willing to compromise even with themselves, so my conclusion is the parties split.
I could have hung around to wait for a Labour split and gone with the sane wing. I am still receiving well argued missives as to why I should resume work and put the crazies to the sword. I just don't want to any more.
Query - when you leave the Tory party do you leave leave? I cut up my Labour membership card, said "I quit" on social media and cancelled my direct debit. Yet I am still a member under rules which do not allow any member to leave other than by means of exclusion. Non-payment of subs for 6 months is automatic exclusion, so unless I get expelled in the meantime (such as declaring for or joining the Tories) I remain a member until early 2020...
I didn’t know you’d quit. Congratulations. You are free!!!!
However, you can never leave the Labour Party. I am still getting all my CLP literature, messages from the Great Leader, stuff from the regional organisation, and so on, and I resigned and stop paying subs well over a year ago.
I am also seriously thinking of leaving the Labour Party. Apart from anything else, it will save me a lot of money. I have had disagreements with the party leadership before [ in fact, under Ed I was very comfortable ] but the latest stance on Brexit I find deeply disturbing. When Rebecca Long Name comes and blurts out some utterly bewildering words , you have to suspect they [ Corbyn & co. ], whatever they say, are very comfortable with the UK leaving with No Deal.
Labour is so buggered. And it’s not just Brexit. McDonnell backing a new Scottish independence referendum has cost it all its Scottish seats - and probably a fair few in England, too.
McDonnell is just accepting political reality. If Holyrood votes for a further Sindyref, it is politically impossible to deny it.
Yeah, thinking the union can endure now is pure 22nd June 2016 thinking.
Politicians on all sides have been self centred and destructive
But sometimes when you can’t go back you only have to worry about the best way to move forward. (Paul Coelho)
Fine. We can argue the merits of the destination. My point is simply that a practical realist like our rcs might have focused more on the journey, which was always likely to be extremely problematic and damaging.
Whilst you might say that of others who may have threatened or posited their resignation in various circumstances but then failed to carry through, I suggest that is unfair in David’s case. He has reasonably widely known as a Conservative supporter and has had the confidence and strength of feeling to set out his reasons and to put them into the public arena. There is no real upside for him, other than his knowing that he has stuck by his own principles and has done his bit to stimulate a wider debate. He is likely burning some bridges by doing so and to dismiss him simply as signalling is wrong.
As mentioned - stayed through 3 years of the awful May and quits after a week of Boris on the basis of paper rumours.
Hardly a sound evidence based approach.
May attempted to deliver a managed Brexit; Johnson (and particularly his fan club in government) is rejoicing in the prospect of No Deal. That is the evidence.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
This may sound insensitive, but aren't you as guilty as the Johnsonites of putting ideology before pragmatism?
Your dilemma starts with the profoundly unpragmatic (and, to me, unConservative) fixation with delivering "the referendum result" No previous British government in history has chained itself so foolishly, and all our problems start with this preposterously unBritish obsession.
True: today';s Tory party has made things worse by allowing an extremist cabal to define what that result was. But there is reasonable evidence the population has moved on from its views in June 2016 - and by refusing to accept a referendum rerun (or a clear restatement of the fundamental British constitutional rule that: Parliament decides, not a glorified opinion poll), you've painted yourself into an impossible position.
No sensible party will court you as long as you remain wedded to a - frankly - pig-headed and unBritish obsession with trying to tell Britain what it was thinking on one day three years ago. That's how America misrules itself.
17.6 million people voted to leave. The WA would have left on good terms with a probable very close Norwegian style relationship post transition, the only serious remainer arguments I've heard against it being we give up some control - well has Norway's economy died on the rocks with their lack of control ? Remoaners, and I am going to use the remoaner term here for yourself being unhappy with a very mild form of leave are just as responsible as Farage, Boris and Banks for pushing this country to the brink of a potentially economy trashing No Deal Exit. Like all those Labour MPs who refused to vote for the WA through their ridiculous tribalism this position is contemptible.
Yep. This.
And, FWIW, I don’t agree it was Norway. It was much closer to what Alastair Meeks described as a managed Hard Brexit, with political independence and freedom of action in services, digital, financial regulation and immigration, but staying part of the single market for goods with very close customs alignment on that.
That is why the WA could not be divorced from the PD. A PD that was significantly softer, with Single Market alignment and Customs Union might have passed the Commons. May and the Tories could not be trusted on these so the opposition were right to vote against.
All water under the bridge now. The loonies are now in charge.
The opposition would have voted down any agreement reached by the previous administration, regardless of content.
As you said, the opposition dug two graves.
That's going to be bloody crowded. Two graves for c. 65 million of us?
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
I think you’re being very unfair on David. He really isn’t like that.
I’m upset and shocked too but we don’t need to snipe at him. He’ll feel awful as it is.
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
David Howard (fleetingly of this parish) on R4 just before the 0700 news explaining why the speaker allowing an emergency debate and suspension of SO24 are key to MPs taking control of the agenda and stopping a no deal exit.
I was supposed to be on to explain why Martha was wrong to say in her introduction to her interview with Jonathan Sumption yesterday that before the Fixed-term Parliaments Act a vote of no confidence led automatically to an election (fall of Baldwin in 1924, Lascelles/'Senex' letter of 1950 and all that). But apparently it's No Deal Brexit day on the BBC so interest in history has been abandoned in favour of fevered speculation about the future!
Our politics is becoming so fevered because, unusually, all sides are trying to talk up the prospect of no deal. I am still on the other side of the bet.
The most surprising thing from Sumption yesterday was his assertion that HMQ is required to take and follow advice from her government, and her government only. Rather than the trio of officials that I thought were in place supposedly feeding her impartial and considered advice.
If the conservative party dies will the country be any worse off ?
No. There is a time for everything, and all political parties run their course, eventually.
yes, the conservatives have lost their abiliy to compromise, pragmatism is dead. In such circumstances its not possible to run a broiad church party. Labour is heading the same way.
Labour got there first! Both parties are set-up for a post-UK, English future.
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
I think you’re being very unfair on David. He really isn’t like that.
I’m upset and shocked too but we don’t need to snipe at him. He’ll feel awful as it is.
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
Yet all those self righteous MPs interviewed at the Commons telling the news what a great job they had done by voting against the WA. Their actions have led to no deal pure and simple. I hold Yvette Cooper most liable. She thought she was being so clever. The look on her face when Boris was at the Dispatch Box telling her that he would definitely leave on the 31/10/2019 come what may told a story. The WA, though not perfect, was always going to be the best that we would get from the EU. Parliament should have resoundingly voted for it.
A lot of people are getting what they claim they least want, due to their intransigence.
What I can't believe is that they did not see this situation coming. If May could not get the WA through then the Tories were bound to lurch more to the right. The much better political play for Labour would have been to have voted for the WA. This would have meant the DUP would have withdrawn support for the Govt, the ERG would have gone nuts, making a General Election much more likely, and Labour in a much stronger position. Labour's actions surrounding the WA have led them to their current predicament in the polls. I truly think JC wants a no deal and his party had stupidly allowed it to happen.
Mr. Brooke, I'd suggest the country being led by a man who marches under Stalin banners would not be an improvement.
I'd also ask again what those MPs so aghast that the consequences of their actions are approaching intend to do. Suppose Johnson actually brought back May's deal. Would they back it?
This may sound insensitive, but aren't you as guilty as the Johnsonites of putting ideology before pragmatism?
Your dilemma starts with the profoundly unpragmatic (and, to me, unConservative) fixation with delivering "the referendum result" No previous British government in history has chained itself so foolishly, and all our problems start with this preposterously unBritish obsession.
True: today';s Tory party has made things worse by allowing an extremist cabal to define what that result was. But there is reasonable evidence the population has moved on from its views in June 2016 - and by refusing to accept a referendum rerun (or a clear restatement of the fundamental British constitutional rule that: Parliament decides, not a glorified opinion poll), you've painted yourself into an impossible position.
No sensible party will court you as long as you remain wedded to a - frankly - pig-headed and unBritish obsession with trying to tell Britain what it was thinking on one day three years ago. That's how America misrules itself.
17.6 million people voted to leave. The WA would have left on good terms with a probable very close Norwegian style relationship post transition, the only serious remainer arguments I've heard against it being we give up some control - well has Norway's economy died on the rocks with their lack of control ? Remoaners, and I am going to use the remoaner term here for yourself being unhappy with a very mild form of leave are just as responsible as Farage, Boris and Banks for pushing this country to the brink of a potentially economy trashing No Deal Exit. Like all those Labour MPs who refused to vote for the WA through their ridiculous tribalism this position is contemptible.
Yep. This.
And, FWIW, I don’t agree it was Norway. It was much closer to what Alastair Meeks described as a managed Hard Brexit, with political independence and freedom of action in services, digital, financial regulation and immigration, but staying part of the single market for goods with very close customs alignment on that.
That is why the WA could not be divorced from the PD. A PD that was significantly softer, with Single Market alignment and Customs Union might have passed the Commons. May and the Tories could not be trusted on these so the opposition were right to vote against.
All water under the bridge now. The loonies are now in charge.
The opposition would have voted down any agreement reached by the previous administration, regardless of content.
He did describe himself as a "Remainer" late on the last thread - which in itself is remarkable given his strenuous efforts to resist @topping and others pinning that badge on him.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
I think you’re being very unfair on David. He really isn’t like that.
I’m upset and shocked too but we don’t need to snipe at him. He’ll feel awful as it is.
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
Am struggling to see an evidence based argument.
Any time a senior figure within a government starts speculating on how they can subvert the democratic and/or constitutional process to stay in office should scare the living shite out of any democrat. Certainly it should cause them to walk away from the government in question.
You may say Cummings is being misunderstood. I say that he's dangerous, duplicitous, and despite @rcs1000, I also maintain from bitter personal experience he's thick as pigshit and as arrogant as Trotsky. He's more than capable of trying it. Indeed, the mere fact that such a loathsome, dangerous and dishonest figure is in a senior position should set alarm bells ringing all over the country. I wouldn't trust him to run a village post office, yet he is in effect one of the most powerful men in the land.
As was noted upthread, if Corbyn or Milne had speculated aloud in this fashion, good Conservatives would rightly go ballistic. Why should it be different just because Johnson wears a blue rosette?
Mr. Brooke, I'd suggest the country being led by a man who marches under Stalin banners would not be an improvement.
I'd also ask again what those MPs so aghast that the consequences of their actions are approaching intend to do. Suppose Johnson actually brought back May's deal. Would they back it?
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
The followiest of followers follows.
In a decision as difficult as this that is just plainly unkind and unnnecessary
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
And now I really am falling off my chair.
I do sympathise with anyone who breaks up any kind of long term relationship.
It may be cold comfort to you (and David), but you join the ranks of most of the rest of the public, most of whom never affiliate to a political party and few of whom feel strongly attached to one. After a while, you enjoy the sense of independence.
I highly doubt that anyone will win the next election. We'll end up with multiple blocks in the Commons looking to find a route towards working together. Neither Tory nor Labour Parties in their current form seem willing to compromise even with themselves, so my conclusion is the parties split.
I could have hung around to wait for a Labour split and gone with the sane wing. I am still receiving well argued missives as to why I should resume work and put the crazies to the sword. I just don't want to any more.
Query - when you leave the Tory party do you leave leave? I cut up my Labour membership card, said "I quit" on social media and cancelled my direct debit. Yet I am still a member under rules which do not allow any member to leave other than by means of exclusion. Non-payment of subs for 6 months is automatic exclusion, so unless I get expelled in the meantime (such as declaring for or joining the Tories) I remain a member until early 2020...
I didn’t know you’d quit. Congratulations. You are free!!!!
However, you can never leave the Labour Party. I am still getting all my CLP literature, messages from the Great Leader, stuff from the regional organisation, and so on, and I resigned and stop paying subs well over a year ago.
I am also seriously thinking of leaving the Labour Party. Apart from anything else, it will save me a lot of money. I have had disagreements with the party leadership before [ in fact, under Ed I was very comfortable ] but the latest stance on Brexit I find deeply disturbing. When Rebecca Long Name comes and blurts out some utterly bewildering words , you have to suspect they [ Corbyn & co. ], whatever they say, are very comfortable with the UK leaving with No Deal.
Labour is so buggered. And it’s not just Brexit. McDonnell backing a new Scottish independence referendum has cost it all its Scottish seats - and probably a fair few in England, too.
McDonnell is just accepting political reality. If Holyrood votes for a further Sindyref, it is politically impossible to deny it.
As an Irish Republican of long-standing, and a member of the far-left to boot, the demise of the UK is a long-term goal for McDonnell. There was no need to say what he said, especially without having discussed it with Scottish Labour first. All that said - you are correct. The UK is done. It is an inevitable part of our Brexit journey and of the ending of the delusions of our English nationalist rulers. I look forward to Johnson’s face the day after the Scots have voted to leave.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
The followiest of followers follows.
We should congratulate Big_G for playing Bozo to David's Davis.
Yet all those self righteous MPs interviewed at the Commons telling the news what a great job they had done by voting against the WA. Their actions have led to no deal pure and simple. I hold Yvette Cooper most liable. She thought she was being so clever. The look on her face when Boris was at the Dispatch Box telling her that he would definitely leave on the 31/10/2019 come what may told a story. The WA, though not perfect, was always going to be the best that we would get from the EU. Parliament should have resoundingly voted for it.
A lot of people are getting what they claim they least want, due to their intransigence.
The fat lady hasn't sung yet. The Brexit brand is getting so toxic that it might soon be impossible to deliver in any form.
David Howard (fleetingly of this parish) on R4 just before the 0700 news explaining why the speaker allowing an emergency debate and suspension of SO24 are key to MPs taking control of the agenda and stopping a no deal exit.
I was supposed to be on to explain why Martha was wrong to say in her introduction to her interview with Jonathan Sumption yesterday that before the Fixed-term Parliaments Act a vote of no confidence led automatically to an election (fall of Baldwin in 1924, Lascelles/'Senex' letter of 1950 and all that). But apparently it's No Deal Brexit day on the BBC so interest in history has been abandoned in favour of fevered speculation about the future!
Our politics is becoming so fevered because, unusually, all sides are trying to talk up the prospect of no deal. I am still on the other side of the bet.
The most surprising thing from Sumption yesterday was his assertion that HMQ is required to take and follow advice from her government, and her government only. Rather than the trio of officials that I thought were in place supposedly feeding her impartial and considered advice.
Yes I was surprised by that. It's a massive over-simplification. As the Lascelles letter makes clear, these are personal prerogatives and HMQ will come to her own conclusions.
It's crucial to understand that a PM who has lost a vote of no confidence is not entitled to have his or her advice accepted without question, for the simple reason that the government is no longer a responsible government.
In addition, as the Cabinet Manual implies, the PM can only advise if HMQ asks for advice. She doesn't have to ask.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
The followiest of followers follows.
In a decision as difficult as this that is just plainly unkind and unnnecessary
Mr. Brooke, I'd suggest the country being led by a man who marches under Stalin banners would not be an improvement.
I'd also ask again what those MPs so aghast that the consequences of their actions are approaching intend to do. Suppose Johnson actually brought back May's deal. Would they back it?
But there's the thing, Morris - I detest the far left as much as the next person, and after a lifetime in London politics have probably seen more of them close up than most PB'ers.
But I'd be willing to vote for a Corbynite now if it were the only way in my seat to stop these crazed Tories from destroying everything around them. Just the same as I once voted for Bozo (2nd pref) in order to stop mad Ken from being our Mayor.
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
"Virtue signalling" is a lazy term that aims to delegitimise principle.
Devastating critique of the Party from a conservative point of view. The Lib Dems are the clear conservative option these days, curiously, including keeping the United Kingdom intact.
Not lazy, so much as ideological - though the adoption of an ideology does tend to indicate a lazy intellect. It’s a term appropriated from perfectly respectable signalling theory by the alt right, which they deploy as a means of abuse, should they encounter any statement of principle that upsets them.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
And now I really am falling off my chair.
I do sympathise with anyone who breaks up any kind of long term relationship.
It may be cold comfort to you (and David), but you join the ranks of most of the rest of the public, most of whom never affiliate to a political party and few of whom feel strongly attached to one. After a while, you enjoy the sense of independence.
I am sure you are right Alastair
I have tried to give Boris a chance but David's article coincided with Dominic Cummings arrogant attitude 'live' on Sky and I just cannot be a party to Cummings attitude or no deal
David Howard (fleetingly of this parish) on R4 just before the 0700 news explaining why the speaker allowing an emergency debate and suspension of SO24 are key to MPs taking control of the agenda and stopping a no deal exit.
I was supposed to be on to explain why Martha was wrong to say in her introduction to her interview with Jonathan Sumption yesterday that before the Fixed-term Parliaments Act a vote of no confidence led automatically to an election (fall of Baldwin in 1924, Lascelles/'Senex' letter of 1950 and all that). But apparently it's No Deal Brexit day on the BBC so interest in history has been abandoned in favour of fevered speculation about the future!
Our politics is becoming so fevered because, unusually, all sides are trying to talk up the prospect of no deal. I am still on the other side of the bet.
The most surprising thing from Sumption yesterday was his assertion that HMQ is required to take and follow advice from her government, and her government only. Rather than the trio of officials that I thought were in place supposedly feeding her impartial and considered advice.
Yes I was surprised by that. It's a massive over-simplification. As the Lascelles letter makes clear, these are personal prerogatives and HMQ will come to her own conclusions.
It's crucial to understand that a PM who has lost a vote of no confidence is not entitled to have his or her advice accepted without question, for the simple reason that the government is no longer a responsible government.
In addition, as the Cabinet Manual implies, the PM can only advise if HMQ asks for advice. She doesn't have to ask.
Although I think the last time the sovereign failed to ask for advice from a PM willing to offer it was in 1894.
That said, it's never really been tested because up until now all our other PMs have been vaguely sane.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
The followiest of followers follows.
In a decision as difficult as this that is just plainly unkind and unnnecessary
David Howard (fleetingly of this parish) on R4 just before the 0700 news explaining why the speaker allowing an emergency debate and suspension of SO24 are key to MPs taking control of the agenda and stopping a no deal exit.
I was supposed to be on to explain why Martha was wrong to say in her introduction to her interview with Jonathan Sumption yesterday that before the Fixed-term Parliaments Act a vote of no confidence led automatically to an election (fall of Baldwin in 1924, Lascelles/'Senex' letter of 1950 and all that). But apparently it's No Deal Brexit day on the BBC so interest in history has been abandoned in favour of fevered speculation about the future!
Our politics is becoming so fevered because, unusually, all sides are trying to talk up the prospect of no deal. I am still on the other side of the bet.
The most surprising thing from Sumption yesterday was his assertion that HMQ is required to take and follow advice from her government, and her government only. Rather than the trio of officials that I thought were in place supposedly feeding her impartial and considered advice.
Yes I was surprised by that. It's a massive over-simplification. As the Lascelles letter makes clear, these are personal prerogatives and HMQ will come to her own conclusions.
It's crucial to understand that a PM who has lost a vote of no confidence is not entitled to have his or her advice accepted without question, for the simple reason that the government is no longer a responsible government.
In addition, as the Cabinet Manual implies, the PM can only advise if HMQ asks for advice. She doesn't have to ask.
It would be a brave monarch who acted without first seeking advice, however. (edit/ especially as she is sufficiently skilled to be giving it at the same time as seeking it. The one advantage we do have is that all sides respect HMQ. The mere hint that she might act contrary to a government's advice ought to be enough to get any PM to reconsider. People v Parliament is much safer ground than "People" v HMQ).
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
I think you’re being very unfair on David. He really isn’t like that.
I’m upset and shocked too but we don’t need to snipe at him. He’ll feel awful as it is.
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
Am struggling to see an evidence based argument.
Any time a senior figure within a government starts speculating on how they can subvert the democratic and/or constitutional process to stay in office should scare the living shite out of any democrat. Certainly it should cause them to walk away from the government in question.
You may say Cummings is being misunderstood. I say that he's dangerous, duplicitous, and despite @rcs1000, I also maintain from bitter personal experience he's thick as pigshit and as arrogant as Trotsky. He's more than capable of trying it. Indeed, the mere fact that such a loathsome, dangerous and dishonest figure is in a senior position should set alarm bells ringing all over the country. I wouldn't trust him to run a village post office, yet he is in effect one of the most powerful men in the land.
As was noted upthread, if Corbyn or Milne had speculated aloud in this fashion, good Conservatives would rightly go ballistic. Why should it be different just because Johnson wears a blue rosette?
Because no one seriously believes he'd do it just to cling to power. It's short term measures to force us out of Europe, without which the Tory party gets destroyed at the next election anyway. It's like criticising a surgeon for cutting his patients open.
A reassuring post. Too much Alice in Wonderland at the moment. Don't ever change TGOHF or we'll all have to.
A memorable header David. Up there with Alastair's 'Argentinian' one mentioned by cyclefree yesterday. There have been many good ones but few that will be remembered in years to come. I think this will.
Good God. Whatever my political differences with David that conservatives of the calibre of David are leaving the Conservative Party is a portent of how deep an abyss we are in. I sense this at a deep and psychosomatic level now and on a daily basis. As I reevaluate my own political options I consider things previously unthinkable. I know we are heading for national disaster but actions like David's really bring it home. Good God.
Agree with this
I hardly come on here now or even read the papers because it's all so depressing.
Hard Brexit or Hard Corbyn. A tough choice. We might well get both anyway. And a dissolved Union to boot.
Politicians on all sides have been self centred and destructive
But sometimes when you can’t go back you only have to worry about the best way to move forward. (Paul Coelho)
Fine. We can argue the merits of the destination. My point is simply that a practical realist like our rcs might have focused more on the journey, which was always likely to be extremely problematic and damaging.
I disagree. Of course there were always going to be challenges but if the WA had been approved a year ago there wouldn’t have been much damage
A reassuring post. Too much Alice in Wonderland at the moment. Don't ever change TGOHF or we'll all have to.
A memorable header David. Up there with Alastair's 'Argentinian' one mentioned by cyclefree yesterday. There have been many good ones but few that will be remembered in years to come. I think this will.
Today's, and Richard Nabavi's header a couple of weeks ago, are important in their own right. The Conservative party glacier is calving.
I highly doubt that anyone will win the next election. We'll end up with multiple blocks in the Commons looking to find a route towards working together. Neither Tory nor Labour Parties in their current form seem willing to compromise even with themselves, so my conclusion is the parties split.
I could have hung around to wait for a Labour split and gone with the sane wing. I am still receiving well argued missives as to why I should resume work and put the crazies to the sword. I just don't want to any more.
Query - when you leave the Tory party do you leave leave? I cut up my Labour membership card, said "I quit" on social media and cancelled my direct debit. Yet I am still a member under rules which do not allow any member to leave other than by means of exclusion. Non-payment of subs for 6 months is automatic exclusion, so unless I get expelled in the meantime (such as declaring for or joining the Tories) I remain a member until early 2020...
I didn’t know you’d quit. Congratulations. You are free!!!!
However, you can never leave the Labour Party. I am still getting all my CLP literature, messages from the Great Leader, stuff from the regional organisation, and so on, and I resigned and stop paying subs well over a year ago.
I am also seriously
Labour is so buggered. And it’s not just Brexit. McDonnell backing a new Scottish independence referendum has cost it all its Scottish seats - and probably a fair few in England, too.
McDonnell is just accepting political reality. If Holyrood votes for a further Sindyref, it is politically impossible to deny it.
As an Irish Republican of long-standing, and a member of the far-left to boot, the demise of the UK is a long-term goal for McDonnell. There was no need to say what he said, especially without having discussed it with Scottish Labour first. All that said - you are correct. The UK is done. It is an inevitable part of our Brexit journey and of the ending of the delusions of our English nationalist rulers. I look forward to Johnson’s face the day after the Scots have voted to leave.
You may be correct, but implicit in your argument, is that Scots should have a veto over political decisions that the English (and Welsh) favour, and that is unsustainable in the long run.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
And now I really am falling off my chair.
I do sympathise with anyone who breaks up any kind of long term relationship.
It may be cold comfort to you (and David), but you join the ranks of most of the rest of the public, most of whom never affiliate to a political party and few of whom feel strongly attached to one. After a while, you enjoy the sense of independence.
I am sure you are right Alastair
I have tried to give Boris a chance but David's article coincided with Dominic Cummings arrogant attitude 'live' on Sky and I just cannot be a party to Cummings attitude or no deal
Be sure to write a letter to CCHQ, however short. Reports of resignations will surely feed through into the party's evaluation of events.
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
I think you’re being very unfair on David. He really isn’t like that.
I’m upset and shocked too but we don’t need to snipe at him. He’ll feel awful as it is.
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
Am struggling to see an evidence based argument.
Any time a senior figure within a government starts speculating on how they can subvert the democratic and/or constitutional process to stay in office should scare the living shite out of any democrat. Certainly it should cause them to walk away from the government in question.
You may say Cummings is being misunderstood. I say that he's dangerous, duplicitous, and despite @rcs1000, I also maintain from bitter personal experience he's thick as pigshit and as arrogant as Trotsky. He's more than capable of trying it. Indeed, the mere fact that such a loathsome, dangerous and dishonest figure is in a senior position should set alarm bells ringing all over the country. I wouldn't trust him to run a village post office, yet he is in effect one of the most powerful men in the land.
As was noted upthread, if Corbyn or Milne had speculated aloud in this fashion, good Conservatives would rightly go ballistic. Why should it be different just because Johnson wears a blue rosette?
Because no one seriously believes he'd do it just to cling to power. It's short term measures to force us out of Europe, without which the Tory party gets destroyed at the next election anyway. It's like criticising a surgeon for cutting his patients open.
A surgeon who cut his patient open with no plan as to what to do next would be in court fairly sharply, particularly doing it without anaesthetic or consent!
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
And now I really am falling off my chair.
I do sympathise with anyone who breaks up any kind of long term relationship.
It may be cold comfort to you (and David), but you join the ranks of most of the rest of the public, most of whom never affiliate to a political party and few of whom feel strongly attached to one. After a while, you enjoy the sense of independence.
I am sure you are right Alastair
I have tried to give Boris a chance but David's article coincided with Dominic Cummings arrogant attitude 'live' on Sky and I just cannot be a party to Cummings attitude or no deal
I agree with David's reasoning, but I will stick around a bit long, I think.
The new regime is going to be tested to destruction sooner rather than later.
I don't do nearly the amount of campaigning/party work that David (and I guess Richard) does, so sitting on my ass is pretty much usual as far as my membership is concerned.
I've said for years that the Conservative party was not fit for purpose.
But its ridiculous to claim that there was 'fiscal prudence' from the Cameron government when it borrowed hundreds of billions more than it said it would, ran the annual current account deficit to over £100bn at its end and introduced the twin monstrosities of triple lock pensions and tripled student fees.
There was never any 'fiscal prudence' when it came to spending money on what Cameron and Osborne wanted. Just as there wasn't when it came to spending money on what Brown wanted and wont be when it comes to spending money on what Boris and Corbyn want.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
And now I really am falling off my chair.
I do sympathise with anyone who breaks up any kind of long term relationship.
It may be cold comfort to you (and David), but you join the ranks of most of the rest of the public, most of whom never affiliate to a political party and few of whom feel strongly attached to one. After a while, you enjoy the sense of independence.
I am sure you are right Alastair
I have tried to give Boris a chance but David's article coincided with Dominic Cummings arrogant attitude 'live' on Sky and I just cannot be a party to Cummings attitude or no deal
Be sure to write a letter to CCHQ, however short. Reports of resignations will surely feed through into the party's evaluation of events.
I shall be writing to CCHQ with copies to my local association and AMs
Politicians on all sides have been self centred and destructive
But sometimes when you can’t go back you only have to worry about the best way to move forward. (Paul Coelho)
Fine. We can argue the merits of the destination. My point is simply that a practical realist like our rcs might have focused more on the journey, which was always likely to be extremely problematic and damaging.
I disagree. Of course there were always going to be challenges but if the WA had been approved a year ago there wouldn’t have been much damage
True (noting that the WA is simply base camp on a long and arduous climb), but then the willingness of the hard leavers to sabotage any sort of compromise Brexit wasn't unforeseeable, was it?
Brilliant article David and exactly describes my position. I first started canvassing for the Tories as a teenager in the 1960's but now can no longer belong to it. Feel politically homeless at present.
Mr. Recidivist, but by what Parliamentary means would that happen?
The government can't force through something that is widely unpopular. Remember the poll tax. As the current thread shows, even the governing party is crumbling in the face of this crisis. Its majority is hanging by a thread. Can we really go through with something so contentious against this backdrop? Remember most people no longer believe we are actually leaving.
A reassuring post. Too much Alice in Wonderland at the moment. Don't ever change TGOHF or we'll all have to.
A memorable header David. Up there with Alastair's 'Argentinian' one mentioned by cyclefree yesterday. There have been many good ones but few that will be remembered in years to come. I think this will.
Today's, and Richard Nabavi's header a couple of weeks ago, are important in their own right. The Conservative party glacier is calving.
err doesnt this simply mean the next leader will be even rightier ?
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
I think you’re being very unfair on David. He really isn’t like that.
I’m upset and shocked too but we don’t need to snipe at him. He’ll feel awful as it is.
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
Am struggling to see an evidence based argument.
Any time a senior figure within a government starts speculating on how they can subvert the democratic and/or constitutional process to stay in office should scare the living shite out of any democrat. Certainly it should cause them to walk away from the government in question.
You may say Cummings is being misunderstood. I say that he's dangerous, duplicitous, and despite @rcs1000, I also maintain from bitter personal experience he's thick as pigshit and as arrogant as Trotsky. He's more than capable of trying it. Indeed, the mere fact that such a loathsome, dangerous and dishonest figure is in a senior position should set alarm bells ringing all over the country. I wouldn't trust him to run a village post office, yet he is in effect one of the most powerful men in the land.
As was noted upthread, if Corbyn or Milne had speculated aloud in this fashion, good Conservatives would rightly go ballistic. Why should it be different just because Johnson wears a blue rosette?
Because no one seriously believes he'd do it just to cling to power. It's short term measures to force us out of Europe, without which the Tory party gets destroyed at the next election anyway. It's like criticising a surgeon for cutting his patients open.
You may not believe it. I am not so sure. If they can hang on to power to secure No Deal, they're quite capable of hanging on to it to try and avoid a Corbyn government.
David, your contributions to this site are one of the main reasons for coming here. However, on this occasion, I do not have very much sympathy for you.
When Theresa May became leader and PM she said that "no deal is better than a bad deal". You did not resign then. Furthermore, taking as fact an unattributed line in a newspaper to support your dislike for the current leader and PM is not something I would associate with a mind as sharp as yours.
I feel the same way towards pro-EU Tories as I do to moderate Labour members. You tolerated people in your party who held views that were incompatible with your own. You cannot complain when they take power. To be fair at least you have left the party rather than sniping as many moderate Labour MPs do. And given your talents I'd suggest that you would very much be an asset to another party.
I've said for years that the Conservative party was not fit for purpose.
But its ridiculous to claim that there was 'fiscal prudence' from the Cameron government when it borrowed hundreds of billions more than it said it would, ran the annual current account deficit to over £100bn at its end and introduced the twin monstrosities of triple lock pensions and tripled student fees.
There was never any 'fiscal prudence' when it came to spending money on what Cameron and Osborne wanted. Just as there wasn't when it came to spending money on what Brown wanted and wont be when it comes to spending money on what Boris and Corbyn want.
But then again why should I blame Cameron and Osborne for their lack of fiscal prudence.
This country doesn't want fiscal prudence - it wants more spending on 'people like us'.
And why not - the bankers got their bailout why shouldn't 'people like us' get the handouts as well.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
And now I really am falling off my chair.
I do sympathise with anyone who breaks up any kind of long term relationship.
It may be cold comfort to you (and David), but you join the ranks of most of the rest of the public, most of whom never affiliate to a political party and few of whom feel strongly attached to one. After a while, you enjoy the sense of independence.
I am sure you are right Alastair
I have tried to give Boris a chance but David's article coincided with Dominic Cummings arrogant attitude 'live' on Sky and I just cannot be a party to Cummings attitude or no deal
Be sure to write a letter to CCHQ, however short. Reports of resignations will surely feed through into the party's evaluation of events.
I shall be writing to CCHQ with copies to my local association and AMs
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
I think you’re being very unfair on David. He really isn’t like that.
I’m upset and shocked too but we don’t need to snipe at him. He’ll feel awful as it is.
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
Am struggling to see an evidence based argument.
Any time a senior figure within a government starts speculating on how they can subvert the democratic and/or constitutional process to stay in office should scare the living shite out of any democrat. Certainly it should cause them to walk away from the government in question.
You may say Cummings is being misunderstood. I say that he's dangerous, duplicitous, and despite @rcs1000, I also maintain from bitter personal experience he's thick as pigshit and as arrogant as Trotsky. He's more than capable of trying it. Indeed, the mere fact that such a loathsome, dangerous and dishonest figure is in a senior position should set alarm bells ringing all over the country. I wouldn't trust him to run a village post office, yet he is in effect one of the most powerful men in the land.
As was noted upthread, if Corbyn or Milne had speculated aloud in this fashion, good Conservatives would rightly go ballistic. Why should it be different just because Johnson wears a blue rosette?
Because no one seriously believes he'd do it just to cling to power. It's short term measures to force us out of Europe, without which the Tory party gets destroyed at the next election anyway. It's like criticising a surgeon for cutting his patients open.
A surgeon who cut his patient open with no plan as to what to do next would be in court fairly sharply, particularly doing it without anaesthetic or consent!
Gove's the anaesthetist and consent was given in 2016 so may be somewhat out of date. I know it's not a good analogy.
I've said for years that the Conservative party was not fit for purpose.
But its ridiculous to claim that there was 'fiscal prudence' from the Cameron government when it borrowed hundreds of billions more than it said it would, ran the annual current account deficit to over £100bn at its end and introduced the twin monstrosities of triple lock pensions and tripled student fees.
There was never any 'fiscal prudence' when it came to spending money on what Cameron and Osborne wanted. Just as there wasn't when it came to spending money on what Brown wanted and wont be when it comes to spending money on what Boris and Corbyn want.
Mr. Recidivist, but by what Parliamentary means would that happen?
The government can't force through something that is widely unpopular. Remember the poll tax. As the current thread shows, even the governing party is crumbling in the face of this crisis. Its majority is hanging by a thread. Can we really go through with something so contentious against this backdrop? Remember most people no longer believe we are actually leaving.
The key thing to await is for sitting Conservative MPs to make the same decision as DH, TSE, Big G etc. We may not have to wait much longer.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
The followiest of followers follows.
In a decision as difficult as this that is just plainly unkind and unnnecessary
Not at all. You’re a sheep.
And what are you ? A sheep worrier ?
Someone who makes his own mind up and doesn’t blow about with every change in the wind, and what’s popular on the given day.
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
I think you’re being very unfair on David. He really isn’t like that.
I’m upset and shocked too but we don’t need to snipe at him. He’ll feel awful as it is.
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
Am struggling to see an evidence based argument.
Any time a senior figure within a government starts speculating on how they can subvert the democratic and/or constitutional process to stay in office should scare the living shite out of any democrat. Certainly it should cause them to walk away from the government in question.
You may say Cummings is being misunderstood. I say that he's dangerous, duplicitous, and despite @rcs1000, I also maintain from bitter personal experience he's thick as pigshit and as arrogant as Trotsky. He's more than capable of trying it. Indeed, the mere fact that such a loathsome, dangerous and dishonest figure is in a senior position should set alarm bells ringing all over the country. I wouldn't trust him to run a village post office, yet he is in effect one of the most powerful men in the land.
As was noted upthread, if Corbyn or Milne had speculated aloud in this fashion, good Conservatives would rightly go ballistic. Why should it be different just because Johnson wears a blue rosette?
From Timothy & Hill to Cummings - why are senior Tories so easily enslaved to their advisers?
Thank you Mr H for sharing this with us; a big decision for a long-standing and prominent party member such as yourself.
Looks like you'll be voting 'None of the Above' next time around. Or maybe The Yorkshire Party?
Don’t encourage him. He previously said he’d wait until and if No Deal happened.
He’s only doing it today because he’s easily influenced and led by others. And he’s flounced off before, and he voted for Blair in 1997 and 2001 too. He has form and an over inflated opinion of his own self-importance dressed up in politeness.
David and Richard’s decisions are the ones to truly respect and regret.
The missing point about whether the Queen should seek and follow the advice of the outgoing PM, is that it is predicated on the outgoing PM being prepared to offer it! All the scenarios outlined seemed to be assuming that Johnson barricades the entrance to No. 10 and refuses to come out! If he won’t offer advice and/or accept the judgement of Parliament, then she has no alternative but to look elsewhere.
All very well but the Tories have traditionally been as much the parry if the nation state and the family as the party of business (Indeed in the 18th and 19th centuries the Tories were the party of the landed gentry and the Whigs and Liberals were the party of business and the merchant classes) the Tories only became the party of business as Labour, the party of socialism, replaced the Liberals in the 20th century as the main Tory opponents.
I would also point out that current polling clearly shows the Tories fate depends on delivering Brexit, if the Tories extend again they will be replaced by a populist Brexit Party as the main party of the right and fall to third.
I would also point out that while austerity was needed after the 2010 general election after 9 years the deficit has now fallen, as the 2017 general election showed voters were fed up of a diet of austerity and May's 'No magic money tree' statement and plans for higher taxes like the dementia tax and with Corbyn and May both Remainers and promising a similar direction on Brexit and Corbyn fighting an anti austerity line Labour almost won and the Tories lost their majority.
To win the next general election then the Tories need a Leaver to lead them ie Boris on a firm commitment to deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal and also to promise a clear tax cut, more money for the NHS etc line to have any chance of an overall majority
Mr. Recidivist, but by what Parliamentary means would that happen?
The government can't force through something that is widely unpopular. Remember the poll tax. As the current thread shows, even the governing party is crumbling in the face of this crisis. Its majority is hanging by a thread. Can we really go through with something so contentious against this backdrop? Remember most people no longer believe we are actually leaving.
The key thing to await is for sitting Conservative MPs to make the same decision as DH, TSE, Big G etc. We may not have to wait much longer.
The LibDems won Brecon because the incoming defections from previously Tory remainers were sufficient to counter those returning to the Tories from BXP Ltd. What we see on PB reflects the way many voters are thinking.
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
You're insecurity about vegans is another example of MikeSmithson's point - "a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge"
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
And now I really am falling off my chair.
I do sympathise with anyone who breaks up any kind of long term relationship.
It may be cold comfort to you (and David), but you join the ranks of most of the rest of the public, most of whom never affiliate to a political party and few of whom feel strongly attached to one. After a while, you enjoy the sense of independence.
I am sure you are right Alastair
I have tried to give Boris a chance but David's article coincided with Dominic Cummings arrogant attitude 'live' on Sky and I just cannot be a party to Cummings attitude or no deal
Be sure to write a letter to CCHQ, however short. Reports of resignations will surely feed through into the party's evaluation of events.
I shall be writing to CCHQ with copies to my local association and AMs
I’m sure they shall quake in their boots.
Baaaaaaaaah.
Maybe they won't and that is why I do not want to be a party to this madness
Mr. Recidivist, but by what Parliamentary means would that happen?
The government can't force through something that is widely unpopular. Remember the poll tax. As the current thread shows, even the governing party is crumbling in the face of this crisis. Its majority is hanging by a thread. Can we really go through with something so contentious against this backdrop? Remember most people no longer believe we are actually leaving.
But the Poll tax was forced through? Even if it was reversed a few years later.
All very well but the Tories have traditionally been as much the parry if the nation state and the family as the party of business (Indeed in the 18th and 19th centuries the Tories were the party of the landed gentry and the Whigs and Liberals were the party of business and the merchant classes) the Tories only became the party of business as Labour, the party of socialism, replaced the Liberals in the 20th century as the main Tory opponents.
I would also point out that current polling clearly shows the Tories fate depends on delivering Brexit, if the Tories extend again they will be replaced by a populist Brexit Party as the main party of the right and fall to third.
I would also point out that while austerity was needed after the 2010 general election after 9 years the deficit has now fallen, as the 2017 general election showed voters were fed up of a diet of austerity and May's 'No magic money tree' statement and plans for higher taxes like the dementia tax and with Corbyn and May both Remainers and promising a similar direction on Brexit and Corbyn fighting an anti austerity line Labour almost won and the Tories lost their majority.
To win the next general election then the Tories need a Leaver to lead them ie Boris on a firm commitment to deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal and also to promise a clear tax cut, more money for the NHS etc line to have any chance of an overall majority
Hypothetical polls like that are of far less value than you give to them. Things are moving so quickly and the unexpected may happen at any time. The chances of people's previous responses to hypothetical situations being of much relevance to wherever we are heading is slim.
All very well but the Tories have traditionally been as much the parry if the nation state and the family as the party of business (Indeed in the 18th and 19th centuries the Tories were the party of the landed gentry and the Whigs and Liberals were the party of business and the merchant classes) the Tories only became the party of business as Labour, the party of socialism, replaced the Liberals in the 20th century as the main Tory opponents.
I would also point out that current polling clearly shows the Tories fate depends on delivering Brexit, if the Tories extend again they will be replaced by a populist Brexit Party as the main party of the right and fall to third.
I would also point out that while austerity was needed after the 2010 general election after 9 years the deficit has now fallen, as the 2017 general election showed voters were fed up of a diet of austerity and May's 'No magic money tree' statement and plans for higher taxes like the dementia tax and with Corbyn and May both Remainers and promising a similar direction on Brexit and Corbyn fighting an anti austerity line Labour almost won and the Tories lost their majority.
To win the next general election then the Tories need a Leaver to lead them ie Boris on a firm commitment to deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal and also to promise a clear tax cut, more money for the NHS etc line to have any chance of an overall majority
HYUFD supports a football team, not a political party.
Thank you Mr H for sharing this with us; a big decision for a long-standing and prominent party member such as yourself.
Looks like you'll be voting 'None of the Above' next time around. Or maybe The Yorkshire Party?
Don’t encourage him. He previously said he’d wait until and if No Deal happened.
He’s only doing it today because he’s easily influenced and led by others. And he’s flounced off before, and he voted for Blair in 1997 and 2001 too. He has form and an over inflated opinion of his own self-importance dressed up in politeness.
David and Richard’s decisions are the ones to truly respect and regret.
I highly doubt that anyone will win the next election. We'll end up with multiple blocks in the Commons looking to find hy I should resume work main a member until early 2020...
I didn’t know you’d quit. Congratulations. You are free!!!!
However, you can never leave the Labour Party. I am still getting all my CLP literature, messages from the Great Leader, stuff from the regional organisation, and so on, and I resigned and stop paying subs well over a year ago.
I am also seriously thinking of leaving the Labour Party. Apart from
Labour is so buggered. And it’s not just Brexit. McDonnell backing a new Scottish independence referendum has cost it all its Scottish seats - and probably a fair few in England, too.
McDonnell is just accepting political reality. If Holyrood votes for a further Sindyref, it is politically impossible to deny it.
As an Irish Republican of long-standing, and a member of the far-left to boot, the demise of the UK is a long-term goal for McDonnell. There was no need to say what he said, especially without having discussed it with Scottish Labour first. All that said - you are correct. The UK is done. It is an inevitable part of our Brexit journey and of the ending of the delusions of our English nationalist rulers. I look forward to Johnson’s face the day after the Scots have voted to leave.
Even Ashcroft only has Yes on 46% ie just 1% more than 2014 even with No Deal Brexit looking likely and Boris PM, the main change from Brexit is some Remainer Unionists have moved to Don't Knows not Yes has a majority and as Quebec proved in 1995 Don't Knows tend to back the status quo in the end
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
Am struggling to see an evidence based argument.
Any time a senior figure within a government starts speculating on how they can subvert the democratic and/or constitutional process to stay in office should scare the living shite out of any democrat. Certainly it should cause them to walk away from the government in question.
You may say Cummings is being misunderstood. I say that he's dangerous, duplicitous, and despite @rcs1000, I also maintain from bitter personal experience he's thick as pigshit and as arrogant as Trotsky. He's more than capable of trying it. Indeed, the mere fact that such a loathsome, dangerous and dishonest figure is in a senior position should set alarm bells ringing all over the country. I wouldn't trust him to run a village post office, yet he is in effect one of the most powerful men in the land.
As was noted upthread, if Corbyn or Milne had speculated aloud in this fashion, good Conservatives would rightly go ballistic. Why should it be different just because Johnson wears a blue rosette?
Because no one seriously believes he'd do it just to cling to power. It's short term measures to force us out of Europe, without which the Tory party gets destroyed at the next election anyway. It's like criticising a surgeon for cutting his patients open.
You may not believe it. I am not so sure. If they can hang on to power to secure No Deal, they're quite capable of hanging on to it to try and avoid a Corbyn government.
Maybe. Personally I'd have thought self-professed Conservatives would have hung on till November just to make sure Johnson really was intent on steering the course they fear.
As far as I can tell, all he's actually done so far is find a whacking great ambiguity in the FTPA and announced his intention to exploit it. The Times has misunderstood, and now everyone's gone mad. Johnson is under no obligation to resign just because it buggers up Grieve's latest cunning plan to subvert the referendum result if he doesn't. If the Remain lobby want to remove Johnson without a GE then first they need a candidate with support from an actual majority of MPs.
He did describe himself as a "Remainer" late on the last thread - which in itself is remarkable given his strenuous efforts to resist @topping and others pinning that badge on him.
More interesting than the changing outlook of the Conservative party is the changing outlook of the 45% who support them and the Brexit Party. The Conservative party would not have changed outlook, if its support base had not changed outlook.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
The followiest of followers follows.
In a decision as difficult as this that is just plainly unkind and unnnecessary
Not at all. You’re a sheep.
And what are you ? A sheep worrier ?
Someone who makes his own mind up and doesn’t blow about with every change in the wind, and what’s popular on the given day.
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
I think you’re being very unfair on David. He really isn’t like that.
I’m upset and shocked too but we don’t need to snipe at him. He’ll feel awful as it is.
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
Am struggling to see an evidence based argument.
Any time a senior figure within a government starts speculating on how they can subvert the democratic and/or constitutional process to stay in office should scare the living shite out of any democrat. Certainly it should cause them to walk away from the government in question.
You may say Cummings is being misunderstood. I say that he's dangerous, duplicitous, and despite @rcs1000, I also maintain from bitter personal experience he's thick as pigshit and as arrogant as Trotsky. He's more than capable of trying it. Indeed, the mere fact that such a loathsome, dangerous and dishonest figure is in a senior position should set alarm bells ringing all over the country. I wouldn't trust him to run a village post office, yet he is in effect one of the most powerful men in the land.
As was noted upthread, if Corbyn or Milne had speculated aloud in this fashion, good Conservatives would rightly go ballistic. Why should it be different just because Johnson wears a blue rosette?
Because no one seriously believes he'd do it just to cling to power. It's short term measures to force us out of Europe, without which the Tory party gets destroyed at the next election anyway. It's like criticising a surgeon for cutting his patients open.
A surgeon who cut his patient open with no plan as to what to do next would be in court fairly sharply, particularly doing it without anaesthetic or consent!
And the adman who designed the side of that bus would never have been allowed to take it out of the paintshop
The missing point about whether the Queen should seek and follow the advice of the outgoing PM, is that it is predicated on the outgoing PM being prepared to offer it! All the scenarios outlined seemed to be assuming that Johnson barricades the entrance to No. 10 and refuses to come out! If he won’t offer advice and/or accept the judgement of Parliament, then she has no alternative but to look elsewhere.
HMQ is 93. Prince Philip is 98.
Surely in such circumstance HRH takes the advice of the Privy Council. Indeed isn't such advice what it is for?
This may sound insensitive, but aren't you as guilty as the Johnsonites of putting ideology before pragmatism?
Your dilemma starts with the profoundly unpragmatic (and, to me, unConservative) fixation with delivering "the referendum result" No previous British government in history has chained itself so foolishly, and all our problems start with this preposterously unBritish obsession.
True: today';s Tory party has made things worse by allowing an extremist cabal to define what that result was. But there is reasonable evidence the population has moved on from its views in June 2016 - and by refusing to accept a referendum rerun (or a clear restatement of the fundamental British constitutional rule that: Parliament decides, not a glorified opinion poll), you've painted yourself into an impossible position.
No sensible party will court you as long as you remain wedded to a - frankly - pig-headed and unBritish obsession with trying to tell Britain what it was thinking on one day three years ago. That's how America misrules itself.
17.6 million people voted to leave. The WA would have left on good terms with a probable very close Norwegian style relationship post transition, the only serious remainer arguments I've heard against it being we give up some control - well has Norway's economy died on the rocks with their lack of control ? Remoaners, and I am going to use the remoaner term here for yourself being unhappy with a very mild form of leave are just as responsible as Farage, Boris and Banks for pushing this country to the brink of a potentially economy trashing No Deal Exit. Like all those Labour MPs who refused to vote for the WA through their ridiculous tribalism this position is contemptible.
The scale of the constitutional disaster that is Brexit is insufficiently realised. There are no good, or in fact sustainable, solutions available to us right now. This includes a second referendum, cancellation and Norway. Norway requires accepting EU regulation and oversight with no input or debate. The UK isn't Norway and I don't see outsourcing a large chunk of our economic and diplomatic policy to a third party being acceptable, particularly in the light of that Leave vote. May's Deal wasn't Norway and implied a relatively hard Brexit once the unicorns are swept away. But like Norway it did accept a Withdrawal Agreement and transition period
A reassuring post. Too much Alice in Wonderland at the moment. Don't ever change TGOHF or we'll all have to.
A memorable header David. Up there with Alastair's 'Argentinian' one mentioned by cyclefree yesterday. There have been many good ones but few that will be remembered in years to come. I think this will.
Today's, and Richard Nabavi's header a couple of weeks ago, are important in their own right. The Conservative party glacier is calving.
err doesnt this simply mean the next leader will be even rightier ?
As per your logic, the consequence of Britain leaving the EU will be that the EU becomes yet more Eurocratic (it's already been happening in the interim). This does not seem a great development either, for either the EU or Britain.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David. Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision. I shall follow your resignation with my own later today I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave. It is a deeply depressing time
But the vote to leave was subverted before it even took place, Mr BigG. Thanks to the likes of ABDP Johnson and that unscrupulous Cummings, among others.
On topic, I’m not naturally a joiner of anything. But I recognise that for anyone who has committed themselves as deeply to a party as David Herdson has to the Conservatives, leaving it must be like a divorce.
Leaving my wife was easier for me than leaving the Conservative party.
You’ve left too?
Yes.
See my post at 6:50.
Woah. I missed that.
Shame. Hope you come back soon.
So do I.
Sadly I think it will take a while but we’re on course to put Corbyn in Number 10 and/or ensure we rejoin the EU and the Euro by the 2020s by the approach of Boris and the No Dealers.
No, extending Article 50 puts us on course to put Corbyn in No 10 and while we might rejoin the single market eventually we will not rejoin the EU and Euro
All very well but the Tories have traditionally been as much the parry if the nation state and the family as the party of business (Indeed in the 18th and 19th centuries the Tories were the party of the landed gentry and the Whigs and Liberals were the party of business and the merchant classes) the Tories only became the party of business as Labour, the party of socialism, replaced the Liberals in the 20th century as the main Tory opponents.
I would also point out that current polling clearly shows the Tories fate depends on delivering Brexit, if the Tories extend again they will be replaced by a populist Brexit Party as the main party of the right and fall to third.
I would also point out that while austerity was needed after the 2010 general election after 9 years the deficit has now fallen, as the 2017 general election showed voters were fed up of a diet of austerity and May's 'No magic money tree' statement and plans for higher taxes like the dementia tax and with Corbyn and May both Remainers and promising a similar direction on Brexit and Corbyn fighting an anti austerity line Labour almost won and the Tories lost their majority.
To win the next general election then the Tories need a Leaver to lead them ie Boris on a firm commitment to deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal and also to promise a clear tax cut, more money for the NHS etc line to have any chance of an overall majority
Hypothetical polls like that are of far less value than you give to them. Things are moving so quickly and the unexpected may happen at any time. The chances of people's previous responses to hypothetical situations being of much relevance to wherever we are heading is slim.
Also the subject of brexit is now rarely discussed openly, people are bored silly by it and when asked if leaving with no deal is acceptable then anything to get it over with is the answer not a considered view. If no deal gives no problems then yes Johnson will get his majority, if it’s a disaster then he will reap his reward and P45
A reassuring post. Too much Alice in Wonderland at the moment. Don't ever change TGOHF or we'll all have to.
A memorable header David. Up there with Alastair's 'Argentinian' one mentioned by cyclefree yesterday. There have been many good ones but few that will be remembered in years to come. I think this will.
Today's, and Richard Nabavi's header a couple of weeks ago, are important in their own right. The Conservative party glacier is calving.
err doesnt this simply mean the next leader will be even rightier ?
As per your logic, the consequence of Britain leaving the EU will be that the EU becomes yet more Eurocratic (it's already been happening in the interim). This does not seem a great development either, for either the EU or Britain.
It simply accelerates the underlying trend, the problem then becomes how much does this upset the membership
A reassuring post. Too much Alice in Wonderland at the moment. Don't ever change TGOHF or we'll all have to.
A memorable header David. Up there with Alastair's 'Argentinian' one mentioned by cyclefree yesterday. There have been many good ones but few that will be remembered in years to come. I think this will.
Today's, and Richard Nabavi's header a couple of weeks ago, are important in their own right. The Conservative party glacier is calving.
err doesnt this simply mean the next leader will be even rightier ?
As per your logic, the consequence of Britain leaving the EU will be that the EU becomes yet more Eurocratic (it's already been happening in the interim). This does not seem a great development either, for either the EU or Britain.
It simply accelerates the underlying trend, the problem then becomes how much does this upset the membership
What actually do you mean by the term virtue signalling? This is just a way of dismissing something uncomfortable that you don't want to acknowledge
His priority is to tell us he’s leaving and how he isn’t ghastly like them that the mob don’t like rather than dissect any fundamentals.
The argument that a week of Boris - who has implemented nothing is awful and 3 years of May was fine is laughable.
Reminds me of a joke -
How do you know someone is a vegan ?
Don’t worry they will have already told you.
I think you’re being very unfair on David. He really isn’t like that.
I’m upset and shocked too but we don’t need to snipe at him. He’ll feel awful as it is.
It’s not personal - but “3” - rumours of spending - this stuff has been going on for decades - a budget is a package not a leaked headline - and it hasn’t even happened yet.
Am struggling to see an evidence based argument.
Any time a senior figure within a government starts speculating on how they can subvert the democratic and/or constitutional process to stay in office should scare the living shite out of any democrat. Certainly it should cause them to walk away from the government in question.
You may say Cummings is being misunderstood. I say that he's dangerous, duplicitous, and despite @rcs1000, I also maintain from bitter personal experience he's thick as pigshit and as arrogant as Trotsky. He's more than capable of trying it. Indeed, the mere fact that such a loathsome, dangerous and dishonest figure is in a senior position should set alarm bells ringing all over the country. I wouldn't trust him to run a village post office, yet he is in effect one of the most powerful men in the land.
As was noted upthread, if Corbyn or Milne had speculated aloud in this fashion, good Conservatives would rightly go ballistic. Why should it be different just because Johnson wears a blue rosette?
From Timothy & Hill to Cummings - why are senior Tories so easily enslaved to their advisers?
Two words: "Alistair" and "Campbell".
Some more words: apparently that's the only way to get things done in Westminster these days.
Just to say, thanks for the comments, sympathy and understanding. I won't be responding individually (it'd take far too long and I don't have the time). Besides, I think I've probably covered the main points in the article / resignation letter.
David. Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision. I shall follow your resignation with my own later today I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave. It is a deeply depressing time
But the vote to leave was subverted before it even took place, Mr BigG. Thanks to the likes of ABDP Johnson and that unscrupulous Cummings, among others.
Specifically for this brexit mess, I have a notional unit of currency called the "Boris". It's 350 million quid.
Comments
What is a thing now is PB ex-Tories who think they had some god given right to expect the party to continue to follow the same failed policies and alienate a large majority of the population and who now want to write articles about how terrible it is that they have had to leave their particular little club.
Your decision and your article comprehensively demolishes the present path of the party and I applaud your decision.
I shall follow your resignation with my own later today
I, like you, will become homeless as I could never support Corbyn and his associates nor the lib dems as they try to subvert the vote to leave.
It is a deeply depressing time
Am struggling to see an evidence based argument.
The most surprising thing from Sumption yesterday was his assertion that HMQ is required to take and follow advice from her government, and her government only. Rather than the trio of officials that I thought were in place supposedly feeding her impartial and considered advice.
All major Western countries have a party like the Conservative party, even if ours struggles more with class based issues.
I'd also ask again what those MPs so aghast that the consequences of their actions are approaching intend to do. Suppose Johnson actually brought back May's deal. Would they back it?
It's a first straw in the wind....
If you like the open water then recommend you swim under and through
You may say Cummings is being misunderstood. I say that he's dangerous, duplicitous, and despite @rcs1000, I also maintain from bitter personal experience he's thick as pigshit and as arrogant as Trotsky. He's more than capable of trying it. Indeed, the mere fact that such a loathsome, dangerous and dishonest figure is in a senior position should set alarm bells ringing all over the country. I wouldn't trust him to run a village post office, yet he is in effect one of the most powerful men in the land.
As was noted upthread, if Corbyn or Milne had speculated aloud in this fashion, good Conservatives would rightly go ballistic. Why should it be different just because Johnson wears a blue rosette?
I do sympathise with anyone who breaks up any kind of long term relationship.
It may be cold comfort to you (and David), but you join the ranks of most of the rest of the public, most of whom never affiliate to a political party and few of whom feel strongly attached to one. After a while, you enjoy the sense of independence.
It's crucial to understand that a PM who has lost a vote of no confidence is not entitled to have his or her advice accepted without question, for the simple reason that the government is no longer a responsible government.
In addition, as the Cabinet Manual implies, the PM can only advise if HMQ asks for advice. She doesn't have to ask.
But I'd be willing to vote for a Corbynite now if it were the only way in my seat to stop these crazed Tories from destroying everything around them. Just the same as I once voted for Bozo (2nd pref) in order to stop mad Ken from being our Mayor.
It’s a term appropriated from perfectly respectable signalling theory by the alt right, which they deploy as a means of abuse, should they encounter any statement of principle that upsets them.
I have tried to give Boris a chance but David's article coincided with Dominic Cummings arrogant attitude 'live' on Sky and I just cannot be a party to Cummings attitude or no deal
That said, it's never really been tested because up until now all our other PMs have been vaguely sane.
A memorable header David. Up there with Alastair's 'Argentinian' one mentioned by cyclefree yesterday. There have been many good ones but few that will be remembered in years to come. I think this will.
I hardly come on here now or even read the papers because it's all so depressing.
Hard Brexit or Hard Corbyn. A tough choice. We might well get both anyway. And a dissolved Union to boot.
Grim....
Thank you Mr H for sharing this with us; a big decision for a long-standing and prominent party member such as yourself.
Looks like you'll be voting 'None of the Above' next time around. Or maybe The Yorkshire Party?
The new regime is going to be tested to destruction sooner rather than later.
I don't do nearly the amount of campaigning/party work that David (and I guess Richard) does, so sitting on my ass is pretty much usual as far as my membership is concerned.
But its ridiculous to claim that there was 'fiscal prudence' from the Cameron government when it borrowed hundreds of billions more than it said it would, ran the annual current account deficit to over £100bn at its end and introduced the twin monstrosities of triple lock pensions and tripled student fees.
There was never any 'fiscal prudence' when it came to spending money on what Cameron and Osborne wanted. Just as there wasn't when it came to spending money on what Brown wanted and wont be when it comes to spending money on what Boris and Corbyn want.
When Theresa May became leader and PM she said that "no deal is better than a bad deal". You did not resign then. Furthermore, taking as fact an unattributed line in a newspaper to support your dislike for the current leader and PM is not something I would associate with a mind as sharp as yours.
I feel the same way towards pro-EU Tories as I do to moderate Labour members. You tolerated people in your party who held views that were incompatible with your own. You cannot complain when they take power. To be fair at least you have left the party rather than sniping as many moderate Labour MPs do. And given your talents I'd suggest that you would very much be an asset to another party.
This country doesn't want fiscal prudence - it wants more spending on 'people like us'.
And why not - the bankers got their bailout why shouldn't 'people like us' get the handouts as well.
Baaaaaaaaah.
I have zero respect for those who do.
Don’t encourage him. He previously said he’d wait until and if No Deal happened.
He’s only doing it today because he’s easily influenced and led by others. And he’s flounced off before, and he voted for Blair in 1997 and 2001 too. He has form and an over inflated opinion of his own self-importance dressed up in politeness.
David and Richard’s decisions are the ones to truly respect and regret.
HMQ is 93. Prince Philip is 98.
I would also point out that current polling clearly shows the Tories fate depends on delivering Brexit, if the Tories extend again they will be replaced by a populist Brexit Party as the main party of the right and fall to third.
https://twitter.com/tianran/status/1157199736232927232?s=20
I would also point out that while austerity was needed after the 2010 general election after 9 years the deficit has now fallen, as the 2017 general election showed voters were fed up of a diet of austerity and May's 'No magic money tree' statement and plans for higher taxes like the dementia tax and with Corbyn and May both Remainers and promising a similar direction on Brexit and Corbyn fighting an anti austerity line Labour almost won and the Tories lost their majority.
To win the next general election then the Tories need a Leaver to lead them ie Boris on a firm commitment to deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal and also to promise a clear tax cut, more money for the NHS etc line to have any chance of an overall majority
As far as I can tell, all he's actually done so far is find a whacking great ambiguity in the FTPA and announced his intention to exploit it. The Times has misunderstood, and now everyone's gone mad. Johnson is under no obligation to resign just because it buggers up Grieve's latest cunning plan to subvert the referendum result if he doesn't. If the Remain lobby want to remove Johnson without a GE then first they need a candidate with support from an actual majority of MPs.
More interesting than the changing outlook of the Conservative party is the changing outlook of the 45% who support them and the Brexit Party. The Conservative party would not have changed outlook, if its support base had not changed outlook.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/a-united-ireland-would-be-a-different-state-leo-varadkar-warns-1.3978985?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/a-united-ireland-would-be-a-different-state-leo-varadkar-warns-1.3978985
Some more words: apparently that's the only way to get things done in Westminster these days.
It's 350 million quid.