politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The betting markets respond to Johnson’s Charles the First Mov
Comments
-
Says expert on screwed up mindsetTGOHF said:0 -
Three years? Parliament sat during the 2017 election campaign? Summer 2017, summer 2018?TGOHF said:0 -
0
-
No the jurisdiction of the Scottish Courts applies to the UK government if it has effect in Scotland. Nothing to do with the Queen. More to do with the earlier success in the revocation case and the fact that these proceedings were already ongoing with reasonably developed pleadings etc allowing the arguments to be canvassed in a focused way.eek said:
Because the Queen and so the Privy council are currently in Scotland..Gallowgate said:0 -
You bloody well know why ! But you were for the EEA remember ?TGOHF said:
0 -
Lol!AlastairMeeks said:
There are some smart cookies out there on PB.
I used to think I knew a lot about Double tax Treaties until I got into a late nite discussion on here with an Oxford Don and an FT Journalist.
It was a chastening experience.0 -
If it was a manifesto commitment fair enough, Corbyn was elected on it just as the British people voted to Leave the EU.surbiton19 said:
In both cases it would be MPs blocking the will of the people. Boris is right to be prepared to prorogue Parliament in such a circumstance0 -
A random thought - the Royals ought to be shit scared of the NHS top trump card: let's take all the money we give to randy Andy and Di-hater Charles and give it to the NHS.
So that's the destruction of Union and the monarchy baked in by lack of foresight on the part of David Cameron. Well done him.0 -
The location of the Queen is of no relevance to the case.Byronic said:eek said:
Because the Queen and so the Privy council are currently in Scotland..Gallowgate said:
Ah, ta.
The reality is that they have been preparing this for the Scottish courts for some time - whether they think that gives them a legal advantage is for others to say.0 -
Across all media the response to the Charles the First move has been simply furious.
BoJo has rolled the dice but it is NOT looking good. He will have to back off.0 -
Where the government is very vulnerable on any legal challenge is the why question. Why is this prorogation unusually long? The only answer is one that reflects its own lack of control of Parliament. Should the courts assist the executive in avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny? It’s very hard to see why that should be a permissible reason for proroguing.0
-
Petition not to prorogue parliament over 100k now
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157?fbclid=IwAR0xZDEcMTEMXUJ6Ipm10EOt8SkWZL5IuEK8rceZPhuoRtyqvOCk-C-vbnA
Whereas this one to prorogue parliament has 20 signatures lol.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/2690540 -
Why was it wrong to vote LEAVE back in 2016?HYUFD said:
If it was a manifesto commitment fair enough, Corbyn was elected on it just as the British people voted to Leave the EU.surbiton19 said:
In both cases it would be MPs blocking the will of the people. Boris is right to be prepared to prorogue Parliament in such a circumstance0 -
Boris won't prorogue parliament.
He just wants Bercow, Grieve and all the others to block the prorogue... so he can tell the public he has exhausted every option, been blocked from Brexiting by undemocratic Remainers, and then call a GE asking for a mandate.0 -
Can Boris call a GE as early as Sept 3rd?
I doubt Boris would want to give parliament a week to some how stop his plans.
0 -
I think the better point is that if prorogation was a day or 2 to give us a new session and the opportunity to reconsider May's deal there would be very little fuss about this. It's the 4 weeks at a critical time that is the problem.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Three years? Parliament sat during the 2017 election campaign? Summer 2017, summer 2018?TGOHF said:1 -
Were all Corbynites now Comrade.isam said:Correlation is not causation ☝🏻
https://twitter.com/spajw/status/1166666244449329152?s=210 -
Well, if they can't, they won't win the contract.eristdoof said:
As if the US is able to provide cheap health services!Burgessian said:
Don't understand all this stuff about handing over NHS to the Americans. The NHS is a state-run organisation which enters contracts with private suppliers for some goods and some services. However clinical staff are, and will continue to be, directly employed. Does the NHS develop and manufacture all the drugs it uses? If US companies can more effectively compete to provide services what's the problem?PClipp said:MarqueeMark said: We will never go back in. Why? The NHS. It top trumps everything.
Anyone proposing to rejoin gets asked this on every doorstep: "So, which hopsitals are you going to close to pay for our massive annual fees?"
Would there still be massive fees? This Conservative government is hell-bent on wrecking the economy, so we will undoubtedly be considerably poorer - as we are already. The EU will probably be subsidising us.
In any case, the NHS will by then have been handed over to the Americans, so it will be totally unaffordable and completely destroyed.0 -
Thankyou, yes I knew this was in the offing for the last few monthsBig_G_NorthWales said:
I think Boris is far from frit.Gallowgate said:Sturgeon calling Boris frit and rightly so.
He has taken an enormous gamble staking everything on challenging the HOC.
Sir Anthony Seldon has just said on Sky that Boris either wins this and becomes another Thatcher/Churchill or loses everything
It has astounded me and must apologise to HYUFD who maintained he would do this and I rejected his confidence. HYUFD was correct0 -
It is shorter than Major's prorogation. And that wasn't subject to legal challenge. He just used it to avoid scrutiny of the Cash for Questions scandal.AlastairMeeks said:Where the government is very vulnerable on any legal challenge is the why question. Why is this prorogation unusually long? The only answer is one that reflects its own lack of control of Parliament. Should the courts assist the executive in avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny? It’s very hard to see why that should be a permissible reason for proroguing.
0 -
Bercow has made the biggest mistake. Exploding with anger at the “constitutional outrage”??? He’s finished after all this. His theoretical impartiality is gone forever.Cicero said:Across all media the response to the Charles the First move has been simply furious.
BoJo has rolled the dice but it is NOT looking good. He will have to back off.
He should have expressed measured concern with a hint of concealed menace.0 -
It is interesting to see the howling rage of remainers at what they consider unconstitutional and undemocratic.
It would seem to me that there was no such outrage at the 3 years spent playing games in the hope of overturning the democratic will of 17m+ voters.
I'm afraid that it will look very much like "What's good for the goose..." to the vast majority of decent people.
0 -
Oh well if you’ve said it, it must be true.Byronic said:
Bercow has made the biggest mistake. Exploding with anger at the “constitutional outrage”??? He’s finished after all this. His theoretical impartiality is gone forever.Cicero said:Across all media the response to the Charles the First move has been simply furious.
BoJo has rolled the dice but it is NOT looking good. He will have to back off.
He should have expressed measured concern with a hint of concealed menace.0 -
Rubbish, as a President and his entourage would take most of the money now spent on the royal family while losing the tax revenue from the tourists.Ishmael_Z said:A random thought - the Royals ought to be shit scared of the NHS top trump card: let's take all the money we give to randy Andy and Di-hater Charles and give it to the NHS.
So that's the destruction of Union and the monarchy baked in by lack of foresight on the part of David Cameron. Well done him.
With only 46% of Scots backing independence in the latest Ashcroft poll that is not clear either0 -
All claims of this government for the democratic legitimacy for their Brexit policy are dead.1
-
If he stands for No Deal he loses IMOFenster said:Boris won't prorogue parliament.
He just wants Bercow, Grieve and all the others to block the prorogue... so he can tell the public he has exhausted every option, been blocked from Brexiting by undemocratic Remainers, and then call a GE asking for a mandate.
0 -
Get back to me when it gets over 17 millionisam said:Correlation is not causation ☝🏻
https://twitter.com/spajw/status/1166666244449329152?s=210 -
Was revocation not enough? Or even Donoghue-v-Stephenson?surbiton19 said:0 -
MONARCHY = SOCIALISM!HYUFD said:
Rubbish, as a President and his entourage would take most of the money now spent on the royal family while losing the tax revenue from the tourists.Ishmael_Z said:A random thought - the Royals ought to be shit scared of the NHS top trump card: let's take all the money we give to randy Andy and Di-hater Charles and give it to the NHS.
So that's the destruction of Union and the monarchy baked in by lack of foresight on the part of David Cameron. Well done him.
With only 46% of Scots backing independence in the latest Ashcroft poll that is not clear either0 -
There was a 1:1 correlation, and also a clear causal relationship, between isam posting "Correlation is not causation" and me laughing.eristdoof said:
He wasn't claiming Causation, and I don't think you know what correlation is.isam said:Correlation is not causation ☝🏻
In other words, I think he was joking.0 -
Yes, that’s correct.Gallowgate said:
Oh well if you’ve said it, it must be true.Byronic said:
Bercow has made the biggest mistake. Exploding with anger at the “constitutional outrage”??? He’s finished after all this. His theoretical impartiality is gone forever.Cicero said:Across all media the response to the Charles the First move has been simply furious.
BoJo has rolled the dice but it is NOT looking good. He will have to back off.
He should have expressed measured concern with a hint of concealed menace.0 -
No.HYUFD said:
If it was a manifesto commitment fair enough, Corbyn was elected on it just as the British people voted to Leave the EU.surbiton19 said:
In both cases it would be MPs blocking the will of the people. Boris is right to be prepared to prorogue Parliament in such a circumstance
We do not have a Presidential system (and even then, for a President to bypass the legislature in a Presidential system is controversial).
We have a Parliamentary system. Parliament decides.
Whatever Miliband might think, manifestos are not carved in stone and MPs must be allowed to exercise their authority - and then be held responsible for what they choose to do with that authority.0 -
But what about the people in Curry's Office?!!Cicero said:Across all media the response to the Charles the First move has been simply furious.
BoJo has rolled the dice but it is NOT looking good. He will have to back off.0 -
Yes, seems to me like there are two possibilities here.Scott_P said:
Either Boris intends to implement a catastrophic No Deal at any cost because he's gone mad.
Or this is about forcing parliament to choose between No Deal or Theresa's WA.
I'm edging towards the latter. The recent spin we got from the euro-sceptic press - Boris has forced the EU to abandon the backstop! - feels like a softening-up exercise for when they have to portray Boris's inevitable humiliation as a triumph.0 -
Why was it wrong to vote LEAVE back in 2016?HYUFD said:
Get back to me when it gets over 17 millionisam said:Correlation is not causation ☝🏻
https://twitter.com/spajw/status/1166666244449329152?s=210 -
Ah, that makes it OK then.oxfordsimon said:
It is shorter than Major's prorogation. And that wasn't subject to legal challenge. He just used it to avoid scrutiny of the Cash for Questions scandal.AlastairMeeks said:Where the government is very vulnerable on any legal challenge is the why question. Why is this prorogation unusually long? The only answer is one that reflects its own lack of control of Parliament. Should the courts assist the executive in avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny? It’s very hard to see why that should be a permissible reason for proroguing.
0 -
He's not doing it for that he's doing it to get on with his domestic agenda.HYUFD said:
If it was a manifesto commitment fair enough, Corbyn was elected on it just as the British people voted to Leave the EU.surbiton19 said:
In both cases it would be MPs blocking the will of the people. Boris is right to be prepared to prorogue Parliament in such a circumstance
Or are you saying he's a duplicitous little shit?0 -
I don't know whether this has already been said but surely the reason the Queen invariably accepts the advice of her first Minister is because he speaks for and has the confidence of Parliament. In this case it would be prudent of the Queen to ask him to confirm this is the case.1
-
Not saying it does - just putting things into a proper context is important.eristdoof said:
Ah, that makes it OK then.oxfordsimon said:
It is shorter than Major's prorogation. And that wasn't subject to legal challenge. He just used it to avoid scrutiny of the Cash for Questions scandal.AlastairMeeks said:Where the government is very vulnerable on any legal challenge is the why question. Why is this prorogation unusually long? The only answer is one that reflects its own lack of control of Parliament. Should the courts assist the executive in avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny? It’s very hard to see why that should be a permissible reason for proroguing.
0 -
We do not have one Turnip.oxfordsimon said:
She clearly doesn't understand our constitution.GIN1138 said:0 -
Anti-no-deal parties got over 17 million votes in 2017.HYUFD said:
Get back to me when it gets over 17 millionisam said:Correlation is not causation ☝🏻
https://twitter.com/spajw/status/1166666244449329152?s=210 -
There has to be the possibility that Johnson's action will make some Tory MPs and Change UK more receptive to having Corbyn as caretaker PM following a successful VNOC.0
-
English Court on holidays.Byronic said:
I’m a unionist. I am happy for an Edinburgh court to decide. I just don’t know why. I presume there is some practical reason. Scots plaintiffs?Gallowgate said:0 -
What a lot of cry babies Hammond, Grieve, Watson and Bercow are. All that’s happened is their plan to cancel the conference season has been foiled.
They had ample time to cancel the summer recess if it it’s that important for them to sit around and preen about Brexit for longer than they already have. But the call of the beach was too strong!
0 -
Johnson is trying to provoke an election.0
-
"MarqueeMark said:
We will never go back in. Why? The NHS. It top trumps everything.TheScreamingEagles said:I suspect Boris Johnson will win a snap election and deliver a No Deal Brexit.
But by 2024 a party committee will win a majority on a platform to take us back in the EU without a referendum.
Pro EU people will ultimately end up thanking Boris Johnson for his actions.
We all know Leave would not have won the referendum if they had promised No Deal.
Anyone proposing to rejoin gets asked this on every doorstep: "So, which hopsitals are you going to close to pay for our massive annual fees?"
None - Corbyn can reply "scrap Trident instead, any spare money goes to building useful RN warships"0 -
-
The problem Bercow has is that he has already been involved in changing the rules of parliament to stop Brexit, so him complaining that prorogation is being done to allow Brexit rings hollow.Byronic said:
Bercow has made the biggest mistake. Exploding with anger at the “constitutional outrage”??? He’s finished after all this. His theoretical impartiality is gone forever.Cicero said:Across all media the response to the Charles the First move has been simply furious.
BoJo has rolled the dice but it is NOT looking good. He will have to back off.
He should have expressed measured concern with a hint of concealed menace.0 -
Bercow doesn't have to be impartial - his loyalty is to the House, not the government.Byronic said:
Bercow has made the biggest mistake. Exploding with anger at the “constitutional outrage”??? He’s finished after all this. His theoretical impartiality is gone forever.Cicero said:Across all media the response to the Charles the First move has been simply furious.
BoJo has rolled the dice but it is NOT looking good. He will have to back off.
He should have expressed measured concern with a hint of concealed menace.0 -
Since no one challenged the prorogation then (presumably because no one cared enough), the lack of challenge tells us nothing useful.oxfordsimon said:
It is shorter than Major's prorogation. And that wasn't subject to legal challenge. He just used it to avoid scrutiny of the Cash for Questions scandal.AlastairMeeks said:Where the government is very vulnerable on any legal challenge is the why question. Why is this prorogation unusually long? The only answer is one that reflects its own lack of control of Parliament. Should the courts assist the executive in avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny? It’s very hard to see why that should be a permissible reason for proroguing.
0 -
How many turnips *do* we have?malcolmg said:
We do not have one Turnip.oxfordsimon said:
She clearly doesn't understand our constitution.0 -
Actually you may well be right there... I'd enjoy watching @HYUFD spin that one!Stark_Dawning said:
Yes, seems to me like there are two possibilities here.Scott_P said:
Either Boris intends to implement a catastrophic No Deal at any cost because he's gone mad.
Or this is about forcing parliament to choose between No Deal or Theresa's WA.
I'm edging towards the latter. The recent spin we got from the euro-sceptic press - Boris has forced the EU to abandon the backstop! - feels like a softening-up exercise for when they have to portray Boris's inevitable humiliation as a triumph.0 -
Going into a 2hr film. Will be disappointed if it's not over 1million before I leave tbhBenpointer said:Petition not to prorogue parliament over 100k now
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157?fbclid=IwAR0xZDEcMTEMXUJ6Ipm10EOt8SkWZL5IuEK8rceZPhuoRtyqvOCk-C-vbnA
Whereas this one to prorogue parliament has 20 signatures lol.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/2690540 -
They could always have voted on the WA again if the votes to pass it were there, since they could amend standing orders to allow it .Scott_P said:0 -
But is Corbyn smart enough not to give him one?Jonathan said:Johnson is trying to provoke an election.
0 -
Quite. The length of session point is true but nothing at all to do with why this is happening, its insulting to pretend it is even if we accept some of the outrage as overblown.Peter_the_Punter said:
Don't pull our plonkers, Dan. You know what this is about as well as we do.TGOHF said:0 -
He won't - he'll stand for a tougher renegotiation in the hope of winning a majority. If he wins a decent majority then he can renegotiate with No Deal as a real possibility.bigjohnowls said:
If he stands for No Deal he loses IMOFenster said:Boris won't prorogue parliament.
He just wants Bercow, Grieve and all the others to block the prorogue... so he can tell the public he has exhausted every option, been blocked from Brexiting by undemocratic Remainers, and then call a GE asking for a mandate.
I don't blame Boris for his stance. The tits fell off the Brexit horse when Theresa May - who in my view was absolutely fucking useless - lost her majority.
The only way out now is a new GE. Boris knows that and is doing his best to lay the groundwork for one.
It might work, it might fail, but presenting himself as a guy willing to be friendly with Europe but tough on the EU isn't a bad plan, IMO.0 -
The Conservative manifesto on which Johnson was elected stated as follows:HYUFD said:
If it was a manifesto commitment fair enough, Corbyn was elected on it just as the British people voted to Leave the EU.surbiton19 said:
In both cases it would be MPs blocking the will of the people. Boris is right to be prepared to prorogue Parliament in such a circumstance
"We need to deliver a SMOOTH and ORDERLY departure from the European Union"
"The Conservatives will deliver the best possible DEAL for Britain as we leave the European Union"
"Only the Conservative Party can... negotiate the best possible DEAL for our country"
"We believe it is necessary to agree the terms of our future partnership alongside our withdrawal".
I recommend you read it... all cracking stuff.1 -
It's quite an arcane subject and I don't pretend to have studied it in detail but the traditional view used to be that the procedures of the Commons were matters for the Commons and no one else. I will no doubt learn tomorrow but I am struggling to see what the "wrong" that is being sought to be prevented is, at least in law.AlastairMeeks said:Where the government is very vulnerable on any legal challenge is the why question. Why is this prorogation unusually long? The only answer is one that reflects its own lack of control of Parliament. Should the courts assist the executive in avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny? It’s very hard to see why that should be a permissible reason for proroguing.
My guess is that the Court will say, well if Parliament wants to prevent this they can do so next week. But I may be wrong. The courts have been more ready to intervene in recent times as in the Miller case (although that was about changes to our domestic law, not Parliamentary procedure).0 -
40,000 signatures in last 15 minutesHYUFD said:
Get back to me when it gets over 17 millionisam said:Correlation is not causation ☝🏻
https://twitter.com/spajw/status/1166666244449329152?s=210 -
Idiots. And they'll be the first against the wall when Citizen Boris decides to make it permanent and restore the death penalty for 'treason'.HYUFD said:0 -
They move in three[1]: the horsey has to jump over the prawns. Obvs.DavidL said:
My pieces sat in 3 dimensions but I take the point that they moved in 2.Pulpstar said:
Where are you getting the 4th dimension fromDavidL said:So if we assume that this is 4D Chess (is there any other kind, the whole point of chess being to calculate what the board will look like at some point in the future)
? Chess is a well defined problem on a 2D plane 
[1] OK, as it involves motion thru time, also four. We happy now?
0 -
Oh god are we now going to get the borefest of a signature count update every 15mins ala the clarkson one and the last anti-brexit one.0
-
Clearly the best path of action. I hope all sides come back from the brink and realise that no war can ever be won by permanent suppression of their opponents. We will have to come to a compromise eventually, so why destroy each other before we realise this?kle4 said:
They could always have voted on the WA again if the votes to pass it were there, since they could amend standing orders to allow it .Scott_P said:0 -
Momentous day here, could be looked back on the beginning of the end of BoJo and Brexit. Or just the end of the beginning...0
-
Election was in 2017, that was only two years.kle4 said:
Quite. The length of session point is true but nothing at all to do with why this is happening, its insulting to pretend it is even if we accept some of the outrage as overblown.Peter_the_Punter said:
Don't pull our plonkers, Dan. You know what this is about as well as we do.TGOHF said:0 -
P7 of the 2017 Conservative manifesto 'We will get on with the job and take Britain out of the European Union.'SirNorfolkPassmore said:
The Conservative manifesto on which Johnson was elected stated as follows:HYUFD said:
If it was a manifesto commitment fair enough, Corbyn was elected on it just as the British people voted to Leave the EU.surbiton19 said:
In both cases it would be MPs blocking the will of the people. Boris is right to be prepared to prorogue Parliament in such a circumstance
"We need to deliver a SMOOTH and ORDERLY departure from the European Union"
"The Conservatives will deliver the best possible DEAL for Britain as we leave the European Union"
"Only the Conservative Party can... negotiate the best possible DEAL for our country"
"We believe it is necessary to agree the terms of our future partnership alongside our withdrawal".
I recommend you read it... all cracking stuff.
The Tory government produced a Deal, a majority of diehard Remainers voted it down 3 times, a majority of Leavers voted for it, so No Deal it has to be if the EU will not agree an amended Deal minus the backstop which is the only Deal MPs have voted for.
0 -
This, plus a side of "most people find it hard to get outraged about things they can't spell."CaptainBuzzkill said:It is interesting to see the howling rage of remainers at what they consider unconstitutional and undemocratic.
It would seem to me that there was no such outrage at the 3 years spent playing games in the hope of overturning the democratic will of 17m+ voters.
I'm afraid that it will look very much like "What's good for the goose..." to the vast majority of decent people.0 -
Are they obliged under law to provide a reason? Genuine question.AlastairMeeks said:Where the government is very vulnerable on any legal challenge is the why question. Why is this prorogation unusually long? The only answer is one that reflects its own lack of control of Parliament. Should the courts assist the executive in avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny? It’s very hard to see why that should be a permissible reason for proroguing.
0 -
"... a need for a Prime Minister to suspend his own parliament because he seems to lack a majority for his key policy – the approach to Brexit – is not exactly a sign of strength, to put it mildly." Holger Schmieding, Berenberg (German Bank).0
-
Anyway, kids, I am proroguing my current PB session. Play nicely.0
-
Most of the prorogation is during recess for conference. It costs 4 days of parliament sitting.DavidL said:
I think the better point is that if prorogation was a day or 2 to give us a new session and the opportunity to reconsider May's deal there would be very little fuss about this. It's the 4 weeks at a critical time that is the problem.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Three years? Parliament sat during the 2017 election campaign? Summer 2017, summer 2018?TGOHF said:
Only 100% above your acceptable amount!0 -
For all that I disagree with Boris doing this, Major is the last person who should be criticising him since he used the same tactic to avoid nothing more than personal and party embarrassment.Scott_P said:0 -
How many turnips do you have, then?malcolmg said:
We do not have one Turnip.oxfordsimon said:
She clearly doesn't understand our constitution.GIN1138 said:
Edit: never mind, beaten to it.0 -
The EU response is clearly coming from a rattled place.0
-
This seems like the best argument for Remainers. Has there ever been one over 5 weeks?surbiton19 said:0 -
And his impartiality does not matter- his impartiality is preserving him at present.Gabs2 said:
The problem Bercow has is that he has already been involved in changing the rules of parliament to stop Brexit, so him complaining that prorogation is being done to allow Brexit rings hollow.Byronic said:
Bercow has made the biggest mistake. Exploding with anger at the “constitutional outrage”??? He’s finished after all this. His theoretical impartiality is gone forever.Cicero said:Across all media the response to the Charles the First move has been simply furious.
BoJo has rolled the dice but it is NOT looking good. He will have to back off.
He should have expressed measured concern with a hint of concealed menace.0 -
Bercow is loyal to only one thing. That is Bercow. When it suits his agenda he has no respect for the rules of the Commons - he has demonstrated that very clearly.Stark_Dawning said:
Bercow doesn't have to be impartial - his loyalty is to the House, not the government.Byronic said:
Bercow has made the biggest mistake. Exploding with anger at the “constitutional outrage”??? He’s finished after all this. His theoretical impartiality is gone forever.Cicero said:Across all media the response to the Charles the First move has been simply furious.
BoJo has rolled the dice but it is NOT looking good. He will have to back off.
He should have expressed measured concern with a hint of concealed menace.0 -
How long did he do it for? Was there a legal challenge back then?Richard_Tyndall said:
For all that I disagree with Boris doing this, Major is the last person who should be criticising him since he used the same tactic to avoid nothing more than personal and party embarrassment.Scott_P said:0 -
I do wonder if remainer mp's would still vote down May's deal if they could go back in time.
I suspect they would wave it through with gusto.0 -
Indeed. And those two examples show how pointless these petitions are. They always feel slightly sad.FrancisUrquhart said:Oh god are we now going to get the borefest of a signature count update every 15mins ala the clarkson one and the last anti-brexit one.
0 -
I think that the Conference Season should also be at least truncated this year as well. 3 years of doing next to nothing makes this pretty urgent now.philiph said:
Most of the prorogation is during recess for conference. It costs 4 days of parliament sitting.DavidL said:
I think the better point is that if prorogation was a day or 2 to give us a new session and the opportunity to reconsider May's deal there would be very little fuss about this. It's the 4 weeks at a critical time that is the problem.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Three years? Parliament sat during the 2017 election campaign? Summer 2017, summer 2018?TGOHF said:
Only 100% above your acceptable amount!0 -
He has no impartiality - he is Speaker of the House of Commons. Constitutionally he represents the Commons in its relations with the Crown, so he absolutely is partial, biased towards representing the will, opinions and rights of parliament.Byronic said:
Bercow has made the biggest mistake. Exploding with anger at the “constitutional outrage”??? He’s finished after all this. His theoretical impartiality is gone forever.Cicero said:Across all media the response to the Charles the First move has been simply furious.
BoJo has rolled the dice but it is NOT looking good. He will have to back off.
He should have expressed measured concern with a hint of concealed menace.
Again, what happens when the executive requests Her Majesty prorogues parliament and parliament refuses and continues to sit? Because if I read this correctly that is the stand-off to come1 -
I don't think the word "clearly" is achieving its goal in that sentence.CaptainBuzzkill said:The EU response is clearly coming from a rattled place.
0 -
The general point about length not his getting the length wrong.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Election was in 2017, that was only two years.kle4 said:
Quite. The length of session point is true but nothing at all to do with why this is happening, its insulting to pretend it is even if we accept some of the outrage as overblown.Peter_the_Punter said:
Don't pull our plonkers, Dan. You know what this is about as well as we do.TGOHF said:0 -
No Government control of most of the economy is socialism, not a hereditary constitutional monarch as Head of StateSunil_Prasannan said:
MONARCHY = SOCIALISM!HYUFD said:
Rubbish, as a President and his entourage would take most of the money now spent on the royal family while losing the tax revenue from the tourists.Ishmael_Z said:A random thought - the Royals ought to be shit scared of the NHS top trump card: let's take all the money we give to randy Andy and Di-hater Charles and give it to the NHS.
So that's the destruction of Union and the monarchy baked in by lack of foresight on the part of David Cameron. Well done him.
With only 46% of Scots backing independence in the latest Ashcroft poll that is not clear either0 -
Yes that's what I meant all along. Obviously. :-)viewcode said:
They move in three[1]: the horsey has to jump over the prawns. Obvs.DavidL said:
My pieces sat in 3 dimensions but I take the point that they moved in 2.Pulpstar said:
Where are you getting the 4th dimension fromDavidL said:So if we assume that this is 4D Chess (is there any other kind, the whole point of chess being to calculate what the board will look like at some point in the future)
? Chess is a well defined problem on a 2D plane
[1] OK, as it involves motion thru time, also four. We happy now?0 -
I wouldn't argue against that, although there is a part of me that says the less parliament does the better for all of us.DavidL said:
I think that the Conference Season should also be at least truncated this year as well. 3 years of doing next to nothing makes this pretty urgent now.philiph said:
Most of the prorogation is during recess for conference. It costs 4 days of parliament sitting.DavidL said:
I think the better point is that if prorogation was a day or 2 to give us a new session and the opportunity to reconsider May's deal there would be very little fuss about this. It's the 4 weeks at a critical time that is the problem.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Three years? Parliament sat during the 2017 election campaign? Summer 2017, summer 2018?TGOHF said:
Only 100% above your acceptable amount!0 -
I doubt it. They knew no deal was a risk if they said no but held out. As of now both no deal and remain are possible just as they wanted, so it has gone as expected. If they were willing to deal to avoid no deal we'd not be hear now.CaptainBuzzkill said:I do wonder if remainer mp's would still vote down May's deal if they could go back in time.
I suspect they would wave it through with gusto.0 -
Imagine you're the barrister in front of an eminent judge with limited patience. Your opposite number is alleging that you're doing this to frustrate democracy. The judge peers over his varifocals and says:kle4 said:
Are they obliged under law to provide a reason? Genuine question.AlastairMeeks said:Where the government is very vulnerable on any legal challenge is the why question. Why is this prorogation unusually long? The only answer is one that reflects its own lack of control of Parliament. Should the courts assist the executive in avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny? It’s very hard to see why that should be a permissible reason for proroguing.
"So, Mr 4, why is your client taking such an unusually long period of time for prorogation at such a hectic period in British politics against a tight deadline?"
The response "I'm not at liberty to say" is not really going to cut it.0 -
Yes 1997. When Major arranged a 6 week oneGabs2 said:
This seems like the best argument for Remainers. Has there ever been one over 5 weeks?surbiton19 said:0
