politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How the papers reporting Johnson’s big gamble
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How the papers reporting Johnson’s big gamble
politicalbetting.com is proudly powered by WordPress with "Neat!" theme. Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It really doesn’t do that. actually that’s the main take out being missed isn't it? Cummings, Boris and their Lap Mogg have left the door open for the rebels to come in and thwart them.
Even though they can, I am that damn sure they won’t.
Rory Bremner done a skit many years ago, Geoff Boycott inspecting the pitch before England’s batting, digging a key in, creating rough, telling us that’s a bad bit of rough to bat on, real sticky wicket is that. Concluding with a big grin and a bloody lovely. Translate this to the opposition parties letting Boris go out there, and then exploiting the sticky wicket he ends up batting on.
It’s the one thing we can all agree on, once Boris no deals us, the honouring of the 2016 vote is done, it’s laid to rest. But anyone believe that’s really the end of it for a generation? This is the bit we won’t agree on: what happens to Johnson’s Tory Party in this new landscape where the momentum switches to the nature of the deal with EU, enshrined by a confirmatory referendum. It’s an un-playable wicket in my mind. Boris gives too much away, The Brexit Party squeezes him, doesn’t move enough the pro EU parties squeeze him not least because the Conservative party always supplied a pro EU PM and cabinet, how many million pro EU conservatives can he afford to lose? And if Boris carries too much blame for any pain with his no deal he sheds voters in all directions.
I don’t see sunny uplands for Boris once he achieves no deal brexit. In fact this will lose the conservatives many voters for a generation, if not ever.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1166855993910800384?s=20
The opposition, including sadly the supposedly independent Speaker, have set aside rules and conventions in order to get what they wanted. Why would the government stand still while the opposition tears up the rule book?
In one way I think the origins for today trace back to when serious accusations were getting made against Bercow but Remainers chose to keep him because he would side with them down the track.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1166284493004689408?s=20
Knowing where that 13% is lcoated is vital to understanding how the election plays out.
Does anyone think we're not going to have an election this year ?
1. Perogation is quite within the gift of the government. If the Members of Parliament don't want to be perogued, it's very easy, they have time to VoNC the government. They can kick the current government out, but they can't direct it.
Where I would have a problem would be if the government was VoNCed at the beginning of September, and Boris Johnson used his powers to ensure that the election was pushed to October 31st or into November.
2. It's politically risky. Boris Johnson has taken full responsibility for No Deal (if that happens) by doing this. I am not one of these people who think that "if the sky doesn't fall in, it will be fine for the government". People vote according to their own personal circumstances. If you lose your home or your job, then the fact that food and medicine didn't become scarce in the country at large will be scant consolation.
3. It probably makes the EU slightly more likely to deal, as it emphasises the seriousness of Boris's desire to leave. But the problem I've always had is that I think the EU is essentially rudderless until 1 November when the new Commission is sworn in. I think if the exit date was 31 December, then doing this would probably result in the EU scrambling. But there's no one at the EU to scramble right now. And Macron and Merkel have their own issues. So, while it may make a deal more likely, it doesn't make it a lot more likely.
Labour plus LDs plus Greens = 47%.
These motions are not meant to be amended. And yet, on Wednesday morning, it emerged that speaker John Bercow had, entirely without precedent, accepted an amendment to what is meant to be an unamendable motion.
The amendment, by Remainer Tory MP Dominic Grieve, would force the government, when it inevitably loses its vote next week, to come back to the Commons with a new plan of action within just three days, not 21 days.....
What had emerged earlier in the morning is that, when Dominic Grieve had first sought to make his amendment, Bercow had been advised by his clerks that he should not accept it, but he chose to anyway. When Andrea Leadsom asked him to publish the advice he had received and Bercow, naturally, refused, the house went wild.......
I lost count of the number of times he was hopelessly skewered, by Leadsom, by Jacob Rees-Mogg, by Iain Duncan Smith, and by many others, to whom he could only say, “I will reflect on that.”.....
It was, in short, a foul spectacle. And it should be repeated that Bercow only remains in his post because certain Labour MPs, most notably Margaret Beckett, were at least brave enough to admit last year that they were happy to overlook serious bullying allegations against him because they consider him an ally on Brexit, and they want him in post for scenes just like this.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/john-bercow-brexit-speaker-grieve-amendment-commons-mps-bullying-a8719641.html
https://www.abc.net.au/news/
https://www.theglobeandmail.com
https://www.nzherald.co.nz
https://twitter.com/JustineGreening/status/1166640411458363392?s=20
Those who are not planning to stand at the next GE (Bebb, Letwin, ???) have nothing to lose.
Others who harbour any hope of being candidates at the next GE would need to consider their options very carefully.
But what he did seems merely to be allowing the majority of parliament to express themselves, in contravention of precedent. A mistake certainly. That seems rather less serious an offence than shutting down parliament to avoid scrutiny.
Remember, support for independence was at 28% before the last referendum, and ended up at 45%. So, we are quite happy to be going into the next referendum starting at 50%.
https://twitter.com/MattCartoonist/status/1166758239964454913
Who can stop Brexit?
1. Ed Davey
2. Vicky Pollard
Then they might have got a more sensible result.
In the medium term, the events of the past 12 months may lead to a written constitution
So it's:
Biden
Booker
Buttigieg
Castro
Harris
KLOBUCHAR
O'Rourke
Sanders
Warren
Yang
https://ballotpedia.org/Democratic_presidential_primary_debate_(September_12-13,_2019)
I think they're still doing two nights so it should be quite a bit more manageable.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157.json
British citizens living abroad, surely not
Actually, I don't think that bill is passed. So it wouldn't meet the criteria for an enacted piece of legislation.
Of the other potential members, we can also write off the SNP because they've no real incentive to co-operate with the (Unionist) Lib Dems, have no need to in any event, and already control most of the seats in Scotland so can't make much more of a contribution regardless. The Lib Dems, Greens and Plaid could do a Brecon and try to thrash out some sort of arrangement not to stand against each other, but that's unlikely to make much of a difference in more than a small handful of constituencies.
Hardcore Remain voters are, of course, perfectly capable of making tactical judgments without direction from the parties, but we have to question how many of them there are, where might their input prove decisive, and how aware of their local circumstances are they? Furious Labour-voting Remainers could very well harm their own cause defecting to the Lib Dems in some seats as they do to help it in others.
Issues are:
* It needs Tory rebels
* Tory rebels would prefer to legislate to instruct Johnson to seek an extension. But it's not clear there's time next week to pass that, especially as Government loyalists can filibuster it in the Lords. After prorogation, the Bill falls and would have to start again.
* A VONC that fails will strengthen Johnson.
* A VONC that succeeds without an alternative PM lined up leads directly to the Shambolic Rebels vs Heroic PM election that Johnson wants
The way through is therefore:
1. Try to seize the agenda for legislation next week.
2. If it doesn't pass, consider a VONC on Thursday (but worry about point 4)
3. More probably, introduce a VONC in mid-October AND agree with a budding caretaker PM to seek an extension to Oct 31 while a referendum or an election is held.
Agreeing the caretaker and agreeing whether his job is to call a referendum or an election first is the tricky bit. I think next week is too soon for that, but it might well work in mid-October.
And even allowing for recess, the length of the prorogation is entirely unnecessary.
The arguments attempting to justify this are absolutely disingenuous.
https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05923
The Government has said that it remains committed to ending the 15-year limit.
I don't want to sign twice as that feeds the distractors, but if my "first signature" wasn't counted then I have a UK Postcode I can use.
What's not happening right now is any move between Labour and the Conservatives, which is the normal pattern of a GE
Last time it would not take my Spanish post code so didn’t try this time
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/analysis-how-boris-johnson-suspend-parliament_uk_5d66fb41e4b022fbceb5b235