politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The next Speaker
Comments
-
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
0 -
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
A veto on the advice of ministers is not though and the PM is simply the most senior of her ministers.AlastairMeeks said:
The point being that a veto on the advice of a Prime Minister is literally without precedent.Philip_Thompson said:
Hence why I used the word government. She did have a government did she not?AlastairMeeks said:
Queen Anne did not have a Prime Minister.Philip_Thompson said:
AFAIK Queen Anne is the most recent precedent, which AFAIK is the most recent time that Parliament has passed a bill that the government then wanted to veto.DougSeal said:
Is there a precedent for a Prime Minister advising the Queen not to give assent to a bill passed by the legislature? To my knowledge there is none, the issue has never arisen, and those in the know are deeply divided as to whether it could happen. You want to pour petrol on the flames of a constitutional crisis? That’s how you do it.Philip_Thompson said:
Quite reasonable for Boris to do that if he has the Confidence of the House.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
If he doesn't, MPs should say so.
Petrol has been getting poured all year and neither side wants to be the side to lose.
I can't think of any precedent where the PM would want to veto a bill Parliament has passed. We are in unprecedented waters.0 -
American and German global multinationals don't have the same level of investment or interest in the consequences to Britain and it's domestic citizens from the catastrophe of a Corbyn Government.DecrepitJohnL said:
They aren't thinking clearly but seem to believe (incorrectly) they can ride out the rest.0 -
Labour who up until 24 hours ago were apparently desperate for a GE....GIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?1 -
So absolutely no reason to give the Prime Minister a sweeping new executive power that has never been sought before.Philip_Thompson said:
A veto on the advice of ministers is not though and the PM is simply the most senior of her ministers.AlastairMeeks said:
The point being that a veto on the advice of a Prime Minister is literally without precedent.Philip_Thompson said:
Hence why I used the word government. She did have a government did she not?AlastairMeeks said:
Queen Anne did not have a Prime Minister.Philip_Thompson said:
AFAIK Queen Anne is the most recent precedent, which AFAIK is the most recent time that Parliament has passed a bill that the government then wanted to veto.DougSeal said:
Is there a precedent for a Prime Minister advising the Queen not to give assent to a bill passed by the legislature? To my knowledge there is none, the issue has never arisen, and those in the know are deeply divided as to whether it could happen. You want to pour petrol on the flames of a constitutional crisis? That’s how you do it.Philip_Thompson said:
Quite reasonable for Boris to do that if he has the Confidence of the House.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
If he doesn't, MPs should say so.
Petrol has been getting poured all year and neither side wants to be the side to lose.
I can't think of any precedent where the PM would want to veto a bill Parliament has passed. We are in unprecedented waters.0 -
I'm not assuming anything about what Corbyn personally wants regarding Brexit, I think he is not driving the show on Brexit as he could not force such an outcome on his party even if he wants to. Boris cannot force no deal on his party and a lot more of them want it or could tolerate it than in Labour.Casino_Royale said:
One example: Corbyn would do his utmost (for ideogical reasons) to inhibit aspects of the work of our security services from day one, and start to dismantle parts of our military. He would ignore advice and warnings that conflicted with his worldview. He'd share confidential advice with our ebemeies. He'd undermine NATO. He could easily get people killed.kle4 said:
Oh, they don't have the same effect, but the impact seems little different.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, there's very much certainly a difference.kle4 said:
I see no dlly to either outcome.Casino_Royale said:
That's xit is crazy but it's still better than putting Corbyn in charge of Britain for even 5 minutes.AndyJS said:"At the end of the day it’s a no-deal Brexit or Jeremy Corbyn
Daniel Finkelstein
Leaving the EU without an agreement will damage the country but it’s still just about preferable to the alternative" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/at-the-end-of-the-day-its-no-deal-or-corbyn-k6wg69tzt
If you can't see one you're not looking or thinking hard enough, and falling back on whataboutism instead (because it's easier).
I'm sorry, ack a no deal Brexit.
He would quickly move to nationalisations and currency controls. He would try an emergency budget and confiscate whatever assets he could. Including your pension. He would tax your income heavily and your house.
The Conservatives would never do any of that (even for a No Deal Brexit, which you're assuming Corbyn also secretly doesn't want) so I wouldn't put the man anywhere near Downing Street under any circumstances.
And I didn't say he would not be an awful PM. I assume he will be, although you seem to assume he will have a massive majority to do a lot of things, or face no difficulty in trying so many things. If we've already no dealed there's not much we can do, but if an election is about whether we no deal or not, I think an awful lot of people will consider holding their nose when it comes to Corbyn. I won't, but I don't even need to since, as I said, I live in a safe seat - I voted Tory precisely so I could be considered responsible if they cocked things up.
And I could not afford a house, if it matters.0 -
I have a feeling Thornberry was talking out of her ample arse, and Corbyn and McDonnell will rein her in tomorrowGIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
If Labour wins this Surrender Bill, then they will accept a proposed GE, thereafter.0 -
Not really. That concept was only in its embryonic stage. The monarch was still the Chief Executive (as theoretically she is now) and the situation was still more like it is in the States today, the Head of Government and the Head of State was the same person. Yes, ministries were starting to emerge, but modern conventions only solidified under the Hanovers.Philip_Thompson said:
Hence why I used the word government. She did have a government did she not?AlastairMeeks said:
Queen Anne did not have a Prime Minister.Philip_Thompson said:
AFAIK Queen Anne is the most recent precedent, which AFAIK is the most recent time that Parliament has passed a bill that the government then wanted to veto.DougSeal said:
Is there a precedent for a Prime Minister advising the Queen not to give assent to a bill passed by the legislature? To my knowledge there is none, the issue has never arisen, and those in the know are deeply divided as to whether it could happen. You want to pour petrol on the flames of a constitutional crisis? That’s how you do it.Philip_Thompson said:
Quite reasonable for Boris to do that if he has the Confidence of the House.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
If he doesn't, MPs should say so.
Petrol has been getting poured all year and neither side wants to be the side to lose.0 -
That's the one.numbertwelve said:
Labour who up until 24 hours ago were apparently desperate for a GE....GIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
0 -
It wouldn't be changed, not formally anyway. Boris might indicate that his preferred date is X, but then when he gets the writ issued it says Y.anothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
Cummings must have a master strategy to deal with tonight's defeat, I just can't think what it might be.0
-
Nothing is being given, if the power exists it still exists even if it hasn't been required in a very long time.AlastairMeeks said:
So absolutely no reason to give the Prime Minister a sweeping new executive power that has never been sought before.Philip_Thompson said:
A veto on the advice of ministers is not though and the PM is simply the most senior of her ministers.AlastairMeeks said:
The point being that a veto on the advice of a Prime Minister is literally without precedent.Philip_Thompson said:
Hence why I used the word government. She did have a government did she not?AlastairMeeks said:
Queen Anne did not have a Prime Minister.Philip_Thompson said:
AFAIK Queen Anne is the most recent precedent, which AFAIK is the most recent time that Parliament has passed a bill that the government then wanted to veto.DougSeal said:
Is there a precedent for a Prime Minister advising the Queen not to give assent to a bill passed by the legislature? To my knowledge there is none, the issue has never arisen, and those in the know are deeply divided as to whether it could happen. You want to pour petrol on the flames of a constitutional crisis? That’s how you do it.Philip_Thompson said:
Quite reasonable for Boris to do that if he has the Confidence of the House.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
If he doesn't, MPs should say so.
Petrol has been getting poured all year and neither side wants to be the side to lose.
I can't think of any precedent where the PM would want to veto a bill Parliament has passed. We are in unprecedented waters.
In Queen Anne's day ministers had that power. Has anything changed constitutionally to prevent ministers from still having that power?0 -
Do you have a family history that connects to England? I'm 1/8th Scottish - my good side obviously, but also my family name. I like that, and I'm proud of the adventure that my ancestors took.StuartDickson said:
Nothing is forever.HYUFD said:
The people of Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 using that popular sovereignty principleStuartDickson said:
English constitutional principle: parliamentary sovereignty.Richard_Tyndall said:
Nope. He just gave the electorate a choice. It is the Remainers who have chosen to ignore that choice and so undermine the basic principles of democracy. I assume ftom your comments a future Parliament should ignore any future Indy ReferendumStuartDickson said:
It was a Tory who did the sowing: David Cameron.Richard_Tyndall said:
There have been plenty of us warning this would happen for months. I go further and say if Brexit is dead then so is democracy in this country. You will reap what you sowed.StuartDickson said:
A first? First time I’ve seen a Leaver admit that Brexit is dead.Richard_Tyndall said:
The Renainers really are dumb. They are going to kill Brexit just in time for a major recession which every Leave supporting politician will take great pleasure in pinning on them. So with economic hardship and a betrayal narrative we are going to see a huge increase in support for the real extremist parties and a backlash against the politicians like you can't imagine.rcs1000 said:As an aside, the Markit PMIs are sub 50 now in:
the US
the UK
the Eurozone
Canada
Mexico
Japan
China is marginally above.
If you want to have an election, I'd have it now. Because those PMIs tend to lead changes in unemployment rates by six months.
Scottish constitutional principle: popular sovereignty.
You stick to your principles. We’ll stick to ours.
If the SNP (which I believe you told me is your party) get their wish then I presume there will be some degree of regret too.
What does the best case look like for Scotland in 50 years time?
(My view is it's whatever is the best case for London, but then I'd be casting adrift nations such as Iceland. So I know I'm partly wrong.)0 -
Didn't it become a possible issue during Foot and Mouth? I remember there were discussions about moving the election date because of restrictions on movement in the countrysideanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
Weak. You've defaulted to partisan mode.StuartDickson said:
A Tory calling someone else myopic, isolationist and an ideologue. Folk in glass houses...Casino_Royale said:
A step on the journey you will fail to take unless you can bury your myopic isolationist ideology.StuartDickson said:
Stopping No Deal Brexit is merely a step on the journey. We have bigger, more important goals. Pursuing, always, the interests of the Scottish nation.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, but this vote is about stopping a No Deal Brexit.StuartDickson said:
We aim to dissolve the Union, not repair it.Casino_Royale said:Jesus. Fucking Ian Blackford.
I know he's SNP but every time he stands up it's Scotland this.. Scotland that.. Pushing SNP propaganda and attack lines.
Always divides the House rather than seeking to influence it to his greater advantage.
Are the SNP interested in reaching out to stop that across party lines,or not?
I'd like to say I'm surprised but I'm not. I'll take it as a complement as you only ever turn to this when you sense you're losing the argument.
And you are.0 -
We’re talking about an extension. The people have not spoken on the issue of an extension. Opinion polls don’t count.HYUFD said:
I am saying the Queen should resist the coup to defy the Leave vote and deny the will of the peopleDougSeal said:
That’s absurd. YouGov and Survation are fine organisation but are you seriously suggesting that the Queen should withold consent to a bill passed by the legislature based on an opinion poll? Seriously? That’s insane.HYUFD said:
It wouldn't when voters opposed further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.dyedwoolie said:
Refusal of royal assent would be the end of monarchy, or the catalyst that begins that endingnumbertwelve said:
That would be unprecedented and severely undermine the monarchy. I hope Liz tells him where to go.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
Indeed Monarchists, the Queen's base, voted 56% Leave while republicans voted 65% Remain.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/05/18/who-are-monarchists
The Queen rightly should not aid the Commons defy the will of the people0 -
Blair moved the 2001 local elections mid campaign due to foot and mouth, it requires a black swan to have any legitimacyanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
There’s no point even discussing the hypothetical veto until it does or doesn’t happen.0
-
The firm of the motion to Parliament for an early General Election just says (under FTPA) "on a day to be appointed by Her Majesty" which would be on advice from her PM. So the actual date never goes to Parliament. It would be highly, highly irregular for Johnson to say in Parliament " and I'll advise Liz to go for 14th" then change his mind. But we live in highly, highly irregular times.anothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
Given this they are fritGIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/11689502274260746271 -
So you, as a diehard remainer and (I'm guessing) monarchist, will be a bit of an oddity.HYUFD said:
How can you have a monarchy defying the will of the people and 17 million people and aiding a coup by die hard Remainers to refuse to implement the will of the people?dyedwoolie said:
No, once that cat is out of the bag it's too late. It makes the monarchy unsustainable, how can you have am unelected hereditary monarch refusing to enact law passed by her subjects elected representatives? There a reason nobody since Anne has done soHYUFD said:
It wouldn't when voters oppose further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.dyedwoolie said:
Refusal of royal assent would be the end of monarchy, or the catalyst that begins that endingnumbertwelve said:
That would be unprecedented and severely undermine the monarchy. I hope Liz tells him where to go.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
The Queen rightly should not aid the Commons defy the will of the people
In the civil war we are now beginning most Monarchists are on the Leave side, most Republicans on the die hard Remainer side and it will now continue in that vein0 -
Theres consent withholding which has precedent and assent refusal which doesn'tGallowgate said:There’s no point even discussing the hypothetical veto until it does or doesn’t happen.
0 -
The Local elections were moved I think.Richard_Tyndall said:
Didn't it become a possible issue during Foot and Mouth? I remember there were discussions about moving the election date because of restrictions on movement in the countrysideanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
The "are you seeing this shit" expression on Letwin's face while Bill Cash is speaking is absolutely priceless.
And it's slightly hilarious that Cash thinks now is a helpful time to make a generic anti-Europe speech. As if any MPs in the chamber are going to think "you know what, I was pro-Europe, but hearing this now from Bill, I'm completely convinced and am going to vote against".0 -
Still are. In theory. Just as until 24 hours ago the Tories were not desperate for one. In theory.numbertwelve said:
Labour who up until 24 hours ago were apparently desperate for a GE....GIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
I assume they are just hoping for BXP to flare up again to help them out. Will Farage and co oblige?
0 -
Surely easily covered by tacking on an amendment to a simple majority bill naming a date?RobD said:
It wouldn't be changed, not formally anyway. Boris might indicate that his preferred date is X, but then when he gets the writ issued it says Y.anothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
Boris has proven with his prorogation that he cannot be trusted. The man couldn't lie straight in bed.dyedwoolie said:
Blair moved the 2001 local elections mid campaign due to foot and mouth, it requires a black swan to have any legitimacyanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
I don't misunderstand their role at all. I just believe they are fundementally dishonest and act in their own interests and in support of their own beliefs even when they have said the exact opposite to get elected. MPs will never support a deal now they think they can safely ignore the referendum. One reason amongst many why they are unfit for public office.stodge said:
It's my turn to disagree. MPs are representatives not delegates. Within the remit is the key part about using their judgement in the interests of the safety of the UK. There are clearly those who view No Deal as contrary to the better interests of the UK - that doesn't mean they don't support leaving the EU, just not on this basis.Richard_Tyndall said:
I disagree. Remember I have always favoured the EFTA route out of the EU and the idea of a long, slow process with safeguards to make sure it could not be undermined. I supported May's deal in spite of its flaws.
But I genuinely believe the aim of the majority of the House is to somehow reverse the referendum result whikst avoiding getting blamed for it. Indeed plenty of those who once dishonestly claimed to support the result of the referendum are now quite open in their support for cancelling it.
What reason should anyone have to trust any if these people voting against No Deal tonight when so many of them have already broken their promises to their own electorates.
It's this misunderstanding of an MP's role which poisons the debate. MPs can't be mandated - even if a majority of their constituents, for example, supported restoring the death penalty for the murder of a Police Officer, the MP isn't obliged to follow that if their conscience doesn't permit it.
I still believe there is a deal to be done but it may require starting all over again and being a lot clearer about Ulster and what we want. Go back to Theresa May's Lancaster House speech and you realise it's all generalities and platitudes - the real hard work hadn't been done before we jumped into A50 and I think her supporters believed with a landslide she could get any Deal she dished up through Parliament.0 -
I'd not be surprised if Boris' new puppy was accidentally decapitated whilst fetching a stick, necessitating him to advise Liz that a regrettable six week delay would be appropriate.dyedwoolie said:
Blair moved the 2001 local elections mid campaign due to foot and mouth, it requires a black swan to have any legitimacyanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
So we limp on to 2022 with no majority for anything in parliament?Foxy said:
Boris has proven with his prorogation that he cannot be trusted. The man couldn't lie straight in bed.dyedwoolie said:
Blair moved the 2001 local elections mid campaign due to foot and mouth, it requires a black swan to have any legitimacyanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
I don't think that particular motion can be amended, but you could have a one line bill.dyedwoolie said:
Surely easily covered by tacking on an amendment to a simple majority bill naming a date?RobD said:
It wouldn't be changed, not formally anyway. Boris might indicate that his preferred date is X, but then when he gets the writ issued it says Y.anothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
LOL. Yet more Remoaner lies.Alistair said:
The referendum was advisory. If it had been binding the result would have been annulled by the courts. Due to Leave cheating.Richard_Tyndall said:
Nope. He just gave the electorate a choice. It is the Remainers who have chosen to ignore that choice and so undermine the basic principles of democracy. I assume ftom your comments a future Parliament should ignore any future Indy ReferendumStuartDickson said:
It was a Tory who did the sowing: David Cameron.Richard_Tyndall said:
There have been plenty of us warning this would happen for months. I go further and say if Brexit is dead then so is democracy in this country. You will reap what you sowed.StuartDickson said:
A first? First time I’ve seen a Leaver admit that Brexit is dead.Richard_Tyndall said:
The Renainers really are dumb. They are going to kill Brexit just in time for a major recession which every Leave supporting politician will take great pleasure in pinning on them. So with economic hardship and a betrayal narrative we are going to see a huge increase in support for the real extremist parties and a backlash against the politicians like you can't imagine.rcs1000 said:As an aside, the Markit PMIs are sub 50 now in:
the US
the UK
the Eurozone
Canada
Mexico
Japan
China is marginally above.
If you want to have an election, I'd have it now. Because those PMIs tend to lead changes in unemployment rates by six months.0 -
If we leave with no deal according to Bill we will eliminate the deficit with the EU.El_Capitano said:The "are you seeing this shit" expression on Letwin's face while Bill Cash is speaking is absolutely priceless.
And it's slightly hilarious that Cash thinks now is a helpful time to make a generic anti-Europe speech. As if any MPs in the chamber are going to think "you know what, I was pro-Europe, but hearing this now from Bill, I'm completely convinced and am going to vote against".
Had anyone told the British public they will be forbidden to buy EU goods? Or will the pound be so weak they won't be able to afford anything not grown locally?0 -
It’s been established the date of the election can be fixed via a Bill that amends the FTPA. If offered that, Labour needs to be careful. You can’t accuse the Gvt of a Coup if you’ve voted not to have an election, unless you have a very good excuse (like gameplaying with the date).0
-
But Cash gets to hear the rich and pleasant sound of his own voice reverberating around the Commons, so very much job done as far as he's concerned.El_Capitano said:The "are you seeing this shit" expression on Letwin's face while Bill Cash is speaking is absolutely priceless.
And it's slightly hilarious that Cash thinks now is a helpful time to make a generic anti-Europe speech. As if any MPs in the chamber are going to think "you know what, I was pro-Europe, but hearing this now from Bill, I'm completely convinced and am going to vote against".0 -
How many MPs voted for Article 50, voted against the withdrawal agreement all three times, and are now voting to block no deal?
They should all lose their jobs.0 -
Seems that way but the lead was much bigger in 2017 and jezza was well up for it.Norm said:
Given this they are fritGIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/1168950227426074627
The change from 2017 to now is very odd. Maybe its because they can't play the "we'll respect the refernedum" card in their northern leave seats this time?0 -
Is there any scenario in which tonight's defeat WOULDN'T have happened? The entire reason May didn't achieve anything is because every time she tried, one wing of her Party would scare her off. Boris has drawn the lesson that the correct (but inevitably dangerous) solution is to say to one wing "You're not coming for me, I'm coming for you", cast them off, and then win the subsequent election.AndyJS said:Cummings must have a master strategy to deal with tonight's defeat, I just can't think what it might be.
Of course, he needs to get to that election to carry out the strategy, but Labour cowardice will also rebound badly on them.1 -
The only option where I prefer remain is against no deal. How is wanting to leave with a deal a diehard remainer? I may as well start calling you a speedboat, it has as much basis in reality and the English language.HYUFD said:
Nope, Corbyn will never get a majority Government, indeed Swinson now leads Corbyn as preferred PM.noneoftheabove said:
The only possible way this country will deliver a majority Corbyn govt is no deal.Casino_Royale said:
That's my view.AndyJS said:"At the end of the day it’s a no-deal Brexit or Jeremy Corbyn
Daniel Finkelstein
Leaving the EU without an agreement will damage the country but it’s still just about preferable to the alternative" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/at-the-end-of-the-day-its-no-deal-or-corbyn-k6wg69tzt
No Deal Brexit is crazy but it's still better than putting Corbyn in charge of Britain for even 5 minutes.
No Deal Brexit is major collateral damage in ideogically pursuing a single policy. Corbyn is a political, economic, security and social nuclear suicide weapon who'd actively seek to tear down as much as he could, rather than mitigate it.
The choice is not no deal vs Corbyn but no deal followed by a Corbyn majority govt vs a Corbyn coalition govt.
That is where the conservatives have led us. A triumphant achievements thinks the party cheerleader!
The only way Corbyn becomes PM is by listening to diehard Remainers like you, splitting the Leave vote between the Brexit Party and the Tories under FPTP and allowing Corbyn in the back door1 -
Good job that is not up to you.TrèsDifficile said:How many MPs voted for Article 50, voted against the withdrawal agreement all three times, and are now voting to block no deal?
They should all lose their jobs.0 -
That is simply not the case. The constitutional conventions that we now operate under had not fully formed by then. Only a few years earlier her predecessor, William III, vetoed six bills, five of them public bills - the Judges, Royal Mines, Triennial, Place, and MP Qualifications Bills. The last was in 1696. The constitution has changed significantly since then.Philip_Thompson said:
Nothing is being given, if the power exists it still exists even if it hasn't been required in a very long time.AlastairMeeks said:
So absolutely no reason to give the Prime Minister a sweeping new executive power that has never been sought before.Philip_Thompson said:
A veto on the advice of ministers is not though and the PM is simply the most senior of her ministers.AlastairMeeks said:
The point being that a veto on the advice of a Prime Minister is literally without precedent.Philip_Thompson said:
Hence why I used the word government. She did have a government did she not?AlastairMeeks said:
Queen Anne did not have a Prime Minister.Philip_Thompson said:
AFAIK Queen Anne is the most recent precedent, which AFAIK is the most recent time that Parliament has passed a bill that the government then wanted to veto.DougSeal said:
Is there a precedent for a Prime Minister advising the Queen not to give assent to a bill passed by the legislature? To my knowledge there is none, the issue has never arisen, and those in the know are deeply divided as to whether it could happen. You want to pour petrol on the flames of a constitutional crisis? That’s how you do it.Philip_Thompson said:
Quite reasonable for Boris to do that if he has the Confidence of the House.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
If he doesn't, MPs should say so.
Petrol has been getting poured all year and neither side wants to be the side to lose.
I can't think of any precedent where the PM would want to veto a bill Parliament has passed. We are in unprecedented waters.
In Queen Anne's day ministers had that power. Has anything changed constitutionally to prevent ministers from still having that power?0 -
No, but they've spoken on the issue of leaving the EU.DougSeal said:
We’re talking about an extension. The people have not spoken on the issue of an extension. Opinion polls don’t count.HYUFD said:
I am saying the Queen should resist the coup to defy the Leave vote and deny the will of the peopleDougSeal said:
That’s absurd. YouGov and Survation are fine organisation but are you seriously suggesting that the Queen should withold consent to a bill passed by the legislature based on an opinion poll? Seriously? That’s insane.HYUFD said:
It wouldn't when voters opposed further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.dyedwoolie said:
Refusal of royal assent would be the end of monarchy, or the catalyst that begins that endingnumbertwelve said:
That would be unprecedented and severely undermine the monarchy. I hope Liz tells him where to go.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
Indeed Monarchists, the Queen's base, voted 56% Leave while republicans voted 65% Remain.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/05/18/who-are-monarchists
The Queen rightly should not aid the Commons defy the will of the people0 -
Lady on bbc saying that they've hit their heads on the nail.
Might finish up being one of the least odd comments of the evening.0 -
Not that long, but lets discuss a date when Brexit is out of the way.dyedwoolie said:
So we limp on to 2022 with no majority for anything in parliament?Foxy said:
Boris has proven with his prorogation that he cannot be trusted. The man couldn't lie straight in bed.dyedwoolie said:
Blair moved the 2001 local elections mid campaign due to foot and mouth, it requires a black swan to have any legitimacyanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.
Lets see how mucky this "clean Brexit" is.0 -
Probably a good job it's not up to you either.Gallowgate said:
Good job that is not up to you.TrèsDifficile said:How many MPs voted for Article 50, voted against the withdrawal agreement all three times, and are now voting to block no deal?
They should all lose their jobs.0 -
@HYUFD is going through a difficult period as he realises the party he hitherto supported no longer represents his views.noneoftheabove said:
The only option I prefer remain to is no deal, how is wanting to leave with a deal a diehard remainer? I may as well start calling you a speedboat, it has as much basis in reality and the English language.HYUFD said:
Nope, Corbyn will never get a majority Government, indeed Swinson now leads Corbyn as preferred PM.noneoftheabove said:
The only possible way this country will deliver a majority Corbyn govt is no deal.Casino_Royale said:
That's my view.AndyJS said:"At the end of the day it’s a no-deal Brexit or Jeremy Corbyn
Daniel Finkelstein
Leaving the EU without an agreement will damage the country but it’s still just about preferable to the alternative" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/at-the-end-of-the-day-its-no-deal-or-corbyn-k6wg69tzt
No Deal Brexit is crazy but it's still better than putting Corbyn in charge of Britain for even 5 minutes.
No Deal Brexit is major collateral damage in ideogically pursuing a single policy. Corbyn is a political, economic, security and social nuclear suicide weapon who'd actively seek to tear down as much as he could, rather than mitigate it.
The choice is not no deal vs Corbyn but no deal followed by a Corbyn majority govt vs a Corbyn coalition govt.
That is where the conservatives have led us. A triumphant achievements thinks the party cheerleader!
The only way Corbyn becomes PM is by listening to diehard Remainers like you, splitting the Leave vote between the Brexit Party and the Tories under FPTP and allowing Corbyn in the back door
He is casting around for an alternative party to support.0 -
I can’t believe Rees-Mogg is adopting his usual pose on the front bench too.
https://twitter.com/rhodri/status/1168972605107384326?s=210 -
What's the normal timetable for Royal Assent?
Not sure it's always requested immediately - think sometimes several Bills get Royal Assent at once.
So could Govt just delay the "application" for Royal Assent rather than actually formally blocking it?0 -
If the electiondate 14th October is defined in law then it can't be changed unless the law is changed? Boris can't change it on a whim?Foxy said:
Boris has proven with his prorogation that he cannot be trusted. The man couldn't lie straight in bed.dyedwoolie said:
Blair moved the 2001 local elections mid campaign due to foot and mouth, it requires a black swan to have any legitimacyanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.
If there's a Black swan" event Parliament would have to be recalled mid-campaign to change the law.
This is all bullshit. 0 -
2035 looks good.Foxy said:
Not that long, but lets discuss a date when Brexit is out of the way. ..dyedwoolie said:
So we limp on to 2022 with no majority for anything in parliament?Foxy said:
Boris has proven with his prorogation that he cannot be trusted. The man couldn't lie straight in bed.dyedwoolie said:
Blair moved the 2001 local elections mid campaign due to foot and mouth, it requires a black swan to have any legitimacyanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
-
Exactly!TrèsDifficile said:
Probably a good job it's not up to you either.Gallowgate said:
Good job that is not up to you.TrèsDifficile said:How many MPs voted for Article 50, voted against the withdrawal agreement all three times, and are now voting to block no deal?
They should all lose their jobs.0 -
Parliament has made it clear it will not accept Brexit. It will continually delay. Unacceptable to the majority I'd guessFoxy said:
Not that long, but lets discuss a date when Brexit is out of the way.dyedwoolie said:
So we limp on to 2022 with no majority for anything in parliament?Foxy said:
Boris has proven with his prorogation that he cannot be trusted. The man couldn't lie straight in bed.dyedwoolie said:
Blair moved the 2001 local elections mid campaign due to foot and mouth, it requires a black swan to have any legitimacyanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.
Lets see how mucky this "clean Brexit" is.0 -
Straw man. We’re talking about an extension. In your own words “It wouldn't when voters opposed further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.”kyf_100 said:
No, but they've spoken on the issue of leaving the EU.DougSeal said:
We’re talking about an extension. The people have not spoken on the issue of an extension. Opinion polls don’t count.HYUFD said:
I am saying the Queen should resist the coup to defy the Leave vote and deny the will of the peopleDougSeal said:
That’s absurd. YouGov and Survation are fine organisation but are you seriously suggesting that the Queen should withold consent to a bill passed by the legislature based on an opinion poll? Seriously? That’s insane.HYUFD said:
It wouldn't when voters opposed further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.dyedwoolie said:
Refusal of royal assent would be the end of monarchy, or the catalyst that begins that endingnumbertwelve said:
That would be unprecedented and severely undermine the monarchy. I hope Liz tells him where to go.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
Indeed Monarchists, the Queen's base, voted 56% Leave while republicans voted 65% Remain.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/05/18/who-are-monarchists
The Queen rightly should not aid the Commons defy the will of the people0 -
I'm getting my hair cut that year. Can we make it 2038?Nigelb said:
2035 looks good.Foxy said:
Not that long, but lets discuss a date when Brexit is out of the way. ..dyedwoolie said:
So we limp on to 2022 with no majority for anything in parliament?Foxy said:
Boris has proven with his prorogation that he cannot be trusted. The man couldn't lie straight in bed.dyedwoolie said:
Blair moved the 2001 local elections mid campaign due to foot and mouth, it requires a black swan to have any legitimacyanothernick said:
I had no idea the PM had the power to shift a GE date after it had been fixed. Has it ever happened? Under what law is this possible?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
In most circumstances, it wouldn't matter if they trusted him on the precise date. But in this situation, it's crucial.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
However, bearing in mind Johnson's record of duplicity on prorogation and just about everything else he clearly cannot be trusted on this.0 -
It's only temporary. As soon as there is an extension signed, sealed and delivered, they will back a general election.GIN1138 said:
Seems that way but the lead was much bigger in 2017 and jezza was well up for it.Norm said:
Given this they are fritGIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/1168950227426074627
The change from 2017 to now is very odd. Maybe its because they can't play the "we'll respect the refernedum" card in their northern leave seats this time?
I'm not certain Johnson will still want one, but we'll see. It might be out of his hands.0 -
Nevertheless I'd take that lead at this stage. In 2017 Corbyn and the Tories themselves via their idiotic manifesto successfully deflected attention away from the EU so it was virtually a non-issue. That won't happen this time.GIN1138 said:
Seems that way but the lead was much bigger in 2017 and jezza was well up for it.Norm said:
Given this they are fritGIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/1168950227426074627
The change from 2017 to now is very odd. Maybe its because they can't play the "we'll respect the refernedum" card in their northern leave seats this time?0 -
Is that Nadine sitting with him?williamglenn said:I can’t believe Rees-Mogg is adopting his usual pose on the front bench too.
https://twitter.com/rhodri/status/1168972605107384326?s=21 0 -
OK to expand, the tories main strength over the last few decades has been economic competence and stable government. When no deal is shit and has been delivered shambolically to an arbitrary date of the moody French presidents choosing with those USPs well and truly surrendered, voters will clamber out of their trenches and head for the opposition, any opposition.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, and that disproves my point how?noneoftheabove said:
Because no deal is shit.Casino_Royale said:
What makes you think the dials will shift following No Deal?noneoftheabove said:
The only possible way this country will deliver a majority Corbyn govt is no deal.Casino_Royale said:
That's my view.AndyJS said:"At the end of the day it’s a no-deal Brexit or Jeremy Corbyn
Daniel Finkelstein
Leaving the EU without an agreement will damage the country but it’s still just about preferable to the alternative" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/at-the-end-of-the-day-its-no-deal-or-corbyn-k6wg69tzt
No Deal Brexit is crazy but it's still better than putting Corbyn in charge of Britain for even 5 minutes.
No Deal Brexit is major collateral damage in ideogically pursuing a single policy. Corbyn is a political, economic, security and social nuclear suicide weapon who'd actively seek to tear down as much as he could, rather than mitigate it.
The choice is not no deal vs Corbyn but no deal followed by a Corbyn majority govt vs a Corbyn coalition govt.
That is where the conservatives have led us. A triumphant achievements thinks the party cheerleader!
Views are so entrenched now that I wouldn't expect meaningful movement on it for months after a No Deal Brexit. Everyone has their pantomime villains to blame (which won't be them) and will be looking for evidence to validate their confirmation bias.0 -
Yes,a constitutional blockage ought to have a constitutional unblock, not a legislative unblock.numbertwelve said:
Another reason why FTPA is a ridiculous piece of legislation.Drutt said:
If it doesn't require Queen's Consent then the prerogative power is unaffected by the legislation. The PM could say he'd ignore it in so far as prerogative power was being exercised. That's why he said he'd uphold the constitution and the law when asked earlier. The only constitutional remedy would be a VoNC.Philip_Thompson said:
Speaker determines if a bill requires royal consent. If it does the PM advises HMQ whether to grant consent or not.Chris said:
Well, in any case royal consent and royal assent are two different things, and as far as I know the speaker isn't involved in either.Philip_Thompson said:
This bill arguably affects royal prerogative.Chris said:
I think you're confusing royal consent for legislation that affects the royal prerogative with royal assent for legislation in general. They are two different things.dyedwoolie said:
If he ruled benn cannot be refused consent as it does not infringe royal prerogative that could be challenged in courtNigelb said:
Which one indeed ?dyedwoolie said:
Which one? Yes in theory to most things thoughralphmalph said:Quick question, if the Govts decision to prorogue can be taken to court, Can The Speakers decision also be taken to court?
Most probably cannot - if he is supported by a majority in the House, which determines its own procedures, it’s hard to see how that might be justiciable outside of the House.
If this bill requires consent and Bercow says so then Boris can veto it via withholding consent. If it should require consent but Bercow claims it doesn't, it is hard to see how that can be remedied.0 -
I think those might be HYUFD's words...DougSeal said:
Straw man. We’re talking about an extension. In your own words “It wouldn't when voters opposed further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.”kyf_100 said:
No, but they've spoken on the issue of leaving the EU.DougSeal said:
We’re talking about an extension. The people have not spoken on the issue of an extension. Opinion polls don’t count.HYUFD said:
I am saying the Queen should resist the coup to defy the Leave vote and deny the will of the peopleDougSeal said:
That’s absurd. YouGov and Survation are fine organisation but are you seriously suggesting that the Queen should withold consent to a bill passed by the legislature based on an opinion poll? Seriously? That’s insane.HYUFD said:
It wouldn't when voters opposed further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.dyedwoolie said:
Refusal of royal assent would be the end of monarchy, or the catalyst that begins that endingnumbertwelve said:
That would be unprecedented and severely undermine the monarchy. I hope Liz tells him where to go.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
Indeed Monarchists, the Queen's base, voted 56% Leave while republicans voted 65% Remain.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/05/18/who-are-monarchists
The Queen rightly should not aid the Commons defy the will of the people0 -
We will give you a chance to confirm that you still want to leaveGIN1138 said:
Seems that way but the lead was much bigger in 2017 and jezza was well up for it.Norm said:
Given this they are fritGIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/1168950227426074627
The change from 2017 to now is very odd. Maybe its because they can't play the "we'll respect the refernedum" card in their northern leave seats this time?0 -
Late to the party but interesting thread header @Philip_Thompson, many thanks.
It's good to get a Leaver written thread header, even if it's not directly about Brexit. For what's it's worth I suspect Bercow might stand and win in an early GE.0 -
Remain cheating was presumably fine and dandy.Richard_Tyndall said:
LOL. Yet more Remoaner lies.Alistair said:
The referendum was advisory. If it had been binding the result would have been annulled by the courts. Due to Leave cheating.Richard_Tyndall said:
Nope. He just gave the electorate a choice. It is the Remainers who have chosen to ignore that choice and so undermine the basic principles of democracy. I assume ftom your comments a future Parliament should ignore any future Indy ReferendumStuartDickson said:
It was a Tory who did the sowing: David Cameron.Richard_Tyndall said:
There have been plenty of us warning this would happen for months. I go further and say if Brexit is dead then so is democracy in this country. You will reap what you sowed.StuartDickson said:
A first? First time I’ve seen a Leaver admit that Brexit is dead.Richard_Tyndall said:
The Renainers really are dumb. They are going to kill Brexit just in time for a major recession which every Leave supporting politician will take great pleasure in pinning on them. So with economic hardship and a betrayal narrative we are going to see a huge increase in support for the real extremist parties and a backlash against the politicians like you can't imagine.rcs1000 said:As an aside, the Markit PMIs are sub 50 now in:
the US
the UK
the Eurozone
Canada
Mexico
Japan
China is marginally above.
If you want to have an election, I'd have it now. Because those PMIs tend to lead changes in unemployment rates by six months.0 -
Depends on the Brexit supporting media.kle4 said:
Still are. In theory. Just as until 24 hours ago the Tories were not desperate for one. In theory.numbertwelve said:
Labour who up until 24 hours ago were apparently desperate for a GE....GIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
I assume they are just hoping for BXP to flare up again to help them out. Will Farage and co oblige?0 -
To be fair to Jezza, I think he is still “well up for it”. It’s the rest of his party that aren’t.GIN1138 said:
Seems that way but the lead was much bigger in 2017 and jezza was well up for it.Norm said:
Given this they are fritGIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/1168950227426074627
The change from 2017 to now is very odd. Maybe its because they can't play the "we'll respect the refernedum" card in their northern leave seats this time?
There are various reasons for this, firstly I think Jezza’s standing in the country is even weaker than it was than at the start of the campaign in 2017, the LD resurgence has spooked them, and as you say they’re going to find it a lot harder to sit on the Brexit fence this time now they’re staring down the barrel.
They could also be sitting on some internal polling that is, to put it mildly, sub-optimal.
1 -
Or nanny?GIN1138 said:
Is that Nadine sitting with him?williamglenn said:I can’t believe Rees-Mogg is adopting his usual pose on the front bench too.
https://twitter.com/rhodri/status/1168972605107384326?s=210 -
I thought the New Model HYUFD was a pikemen ?TOPPING said:
So you, as a diehard remainer and (I'm guessing) monarchist, will be a bit of an oddity.HYUFD said:
How can you have a monarchy defying the will of the people and 17 million people and aiding a coup by die hard Remainers to refuse to implement the will of the people?dyedwoolie said:
No, once that cat is out of the bag it's too late. It makes the monarchy unsustainable, how can you have am unelected hereditary monarch refusing to enact law passed by her subjects elected representatives? There a reason nobody since Anne has done soHYUFD said:
It wouldn't when voters oppose further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.dyedwoolie said:
Refusal of royal assent would be the end of monarchy, or the catalyst that begins that endingnumbertwelve said:
That would be unprecedented and severely undermine the monarchy. I hope Liz tells him where to go.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
The Queen rightly should not aid the Commons defy the will of the people
In the civil war we are now beginning most Monarchists are on the Leave side, most Republicans on the die hard Remainer side and it will now continue in that vein0 -
Sorry, yes, it’s late, I thought I was taking to himkyf_100 said:
I think those might be HYUFD's words...DougSeal said:
Straw man. We’re talking about an extension. In your own words “It wouldn't when voters opposed further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.”kyf_100 said:
No, but they've spoken on the issue of leaving the EU.DougSeal said:
We’re talking about an extension. The people have not spoken on the issue of an extension. Opinion polls don’t count.HYUFD said:
I am saying the Queen should resist the coup to defy the Leave vote and deny the will of the peopleDougSeal said:
That’s absurd. YouGov and Survation are fine organisation but are you seriously suggesting that the Queen should withold consent to a bill passed by the legislature based on an opinion poll? Seriously? That’s insane.HYUFD said:
It wouldn't when voters opposed further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.dyedwoolie said:
Refusal of royal assent would be the end of monarchy, or the catalyst that begins that endingnumbertwelve said:
That would be unprecedented and severely undermine the monarchy. I hope Liz tells him where to go.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
Indeed Monarchists, the Queen's base, voted 56% Leave while republicans voted 65% Remain.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/05/18/who-are-monarchists
The Queen rightly should not aid the Commons defy the will of the people0 -
Yes I think he hit his ceiling in 2017. But the opportunity for the Cons to shed votes is huge. I don't see a hugely different result, all told, if we have a GE soon.numbertwelve said:
To be fair to Jezza, I think he is still “well up for it”. It’s the rest of his party that aren’t.GIN1138 said:
Seems that way but the lead was much bigger in 2017 and jezza was well up for it.Norm said:
Given this they are fritGIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/1168950227426074627
The change from 2017 to now is very odd. Maybe its because they can't play the "we'll respect the refernedum" card in their northern leave seats this time?
There are various reasons for this, firstly I think Jezza’s standing in the country is even weaker than it was than at the start of the campaign in 2017, the LD resurgence has spooked them, and as you say they’re going to find it a lot harder to sit on the Brexit fence this time now they’re staring down the barrel.
They could also be sitting on some internal polling that is, to put it mildly, sub-optimal.0 -
Not sure. @Byronic was reporting Thornberry as saying Labour would NEVER agree to a Johnson election?OblitusSumMe said:
It's only temporary. As soon as there is an extension signed, sealed and delivered, they will back a general election.GIN1138 said:
Seems that way but the lead was much bigger in 2017 and jezza was well up for it.Norm said:
Given this they are fritGIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/1168950227426074627
The change from 2017 to now is very odd. Maybe its because they can't play the "we'll respect the refernedum" card in their northern leave seats this time?
I'm not certain Johnson will still want one, but we'll see. It might be out of his hands.
And why does Labour care so much about an extension if they think they will win the election?
Everything they are sayling and doing today looks like they've pretty given up on any chance at the election and are desperate to avoid it.
It looks strange.0 -
0
-
Rather unhelpfully for the government, there is now a prorogation happening next week, and I think assent is generally dealt with in the wash up.MikeL said:What's the normal timetable for Royal Assent?
Not sure it's always requested immediately - think sometimes several Bills get Royal Assent at once.
So could Govt just delay the "application" for Royal Assent rather than actually formally blocking it?1 -
It looks like JRM is putting his ear to a speaker, which is more challenging when you are very tall.GIN1138 said:
Is that Nadine sitting with him?williamglenn said:I can’t believe Rees-Mogg is adopting his usual pose on the front bench too.
https://twitter.com/rhodri/status/1168972605107384326?s=210 -
Is @HYUFD now saying the Queen should ignore the HoC?0
-
So the BBC is now reporting that the government is trying to prevent the bill getting through the Lords by tabling 90 amendments to the business motion.0
-
Completely agree.TrèsDifficile said:How many MPs voted for Article 50, voted against the withdrawal agreement all three times, and are now voting to block no deal?
They should all lose their jobs.0 -
He evidently failed to land a blow on EU-consorting JRM. Although perhaps he did wound him and hence it hurts JRM to sit down properly.Nigelb said:
I thought the New Model HYUFD was a pikemen ?TOPPING said:
So you, as a diehard remainer and (I'm guessing) monarchist, will be a bit of an oddity.HYUFD said:
How can you have a monarchy defying the will of the people and 17 million people and aiding a coup by die hard Remainers to refuse to implement the will of the people?dyedwoolie said:
No, once that cat is out of the bag it's too late. It makes the monarchy unsustainable, how can you have am unelected hereditary monarch refusing to enact law passed by her subjects elected representatives? There a reason nobody since Anne has done soHYUFD said:
It wouldn't when voters oppose further extension by 47% to 41% with Survation at the weekend and backed the Queen asserting to proroguing Parliament by a 20% margin.dyedwoolie said:
Refusal of royal assent would be the end of monarchy, or the catalyst that begins that endingnumbertwelve said:
That would be unprecedented and severely undermine the monarchy. I hope Liz tells him where to go.Danny565 said:Apparently, the latest wheeze is that, even if Parliament passes the No Deal Bill, Boris will just stop Her Maj from signing it anyway.
The Queen rightly should not aid the Commons defy the will of the people
In the civil war we are now beginning most Monarchists are on the Leave side, most Republicans on the die hard Remainer side and it will now continue in that vein0 -
Even though I disagree with Ken Clarke on our EU membership, I have much respect for his path through this. Iirc, he voted against A50, for the WA all three times, and is set to vote against the government tonight.TrèsDifficile said:How many MPs voted for Article 50, voted against the withdrawal agreement all three times, and are now voting to block no deal?
They should all lose their jobs.1 -
Sad he doesn't realise his career is already over.Scott_P said:0 -
-
That’s a matter for their constituents, not executive fiat by angry Leavers.Gabs2 said:
Completely agree.TrèsDifficile said:How many MPs voted for Article 50, voted against the withdrawal agreement all three times, and are now voting to block no deal?
They should all lose their jobs.0 -
Ol’ Toenails returneth!surbiton19 said:0 -
Jeremy has taken a tip from Dominic and wargamed it.GIN1138 said:
Not sure. @Byronic was reporting Thornberry as saying Labour would NEVER agree to a Johnson election?OblitusSumMe said:
It's only temporary. As soon as there is an extension signed, sealed and delivered, they will back a general election.GIN1138 said:
Seems that way but the lead was much bigger in 2017 and jezza was well up for it.Norm said:
Given this they are fritGIN1138 said:
Unless the polls start showing something like Lab 45% and Con 30% I fear cowardly Labour are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to a general election.Byronic said:Thornberry on BBC apparently saying that Labour will never trust a Boris request for a GE. As he might shift the date.
How does that work? Labour will never go for an election, ever?
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/1168950227426074627
The change from 2017 to now is very odd. Maybe its because they can't play the "we'll respect the refernedum" card in their northern leave seats this time?
I'm not certain Johnson will still want one, but we'll see. It might be out of his hands.
And why does Labour care so much about an extension if they think they will win the election?
Everything they are sayling and doing today looks like they've pretty given up on any chance at the election and are desperate to avoid it.
It looks strange.0 -
-
Grieve roasting JRM here. JRM's insouciant "lying on the front bench" is not a good look.
Truly hoping that Theresa May gets the whip withdrawn this evening: that would be Banter Heuristic par excellence.0 -
Why do I get the feeling that we'll see a switch around from when a remainery Lords was trying to frustrate the Commons and were feted as great heroes and lots of amendments was condemned by the government as perfidy, and now the government will defend glorious amendments and the Lords seek to curtail debate?Chris said:So the BBC is now reporting that the government is trying to prevent the bill getting through the Lords by tabling 90 amendments to the business motion.
0 -
We're all allowed an opinion, even if we're not as important as you.AlastairMeeks said:
That’s a matter for their constituents, not executive fiat by angry Leavers.Gabs2 said:
Completely agree.TrèsDifficile said:How many MPs voted for Article 50, voted against the withdrawal agreement all three times, and are now voting to block no deal?
They should all lose their jobs.1 -
They are mad. There are more votes tomorrow where some of the tory rebels might wobble ! but not going to happen if they kick them out.williamglenn said:0 -
I can't imagine Remainers would complain about amendments being tabled. Surely not.Chris said:So the BBC is now reporting that the government is trying to prevent the bill getting through the Lords by tabling 90 amendments to the business motion.
0 -
What are the chances that the HoL might actually block this bill?Nigelb said:
A simple motion to consider all 90 amendments together as one might deal with that.Chris said:So the BBC is now reporting that the government is trying to prevent the bill getting through the Lords by tabling 90 amendments to the business motion.
0 -
-
The UK should be quite happy to have another Scottish referendum. They could just refuse to have any deal that doesn't include Edinburgh being ruled by English law and be happy to extend forever.TGOHF said:
The Nat say its ok to ignore referendums - precedent set. Twice.Casino_Royale said:
A step on the journey you will fail to take unless you can bury your myopic isolationist ideology.StuartDickson said:
Stopping No Deal Brexit is merely a step on the journey. We have bigger, more important goals. Pursuing, always, the interests of the Scottish nation.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, but this vote is about stopping a No Deal Brexit.StuartDickson said:
We aim to dissolve the Union, not repair it.Casino_Royale said:Jesus. Fucking Ian Blackford.
I know he's SNP but every time he stands up it's Scotland this.. Scotland that.. Pushing SNP propaganda and attack lines.
Always divides the House rather than seeking to influence it to his greater advantage.
Are the SNP interested in reaching out to stop that across party lines,or not?0 -
We’ll all get a vote on it fairly soon.AlastairMeeks said:
That’s a matter for their constituents, not executive fiat by angry Leavers.Gabs2 said:
Completely agree.TrèsDifficile said:How many MPs voted for Article 50, voted against the withdrawal agreement all three times, and are now voting to block no deal?
They should all lose their jobs.
We can even campaign if we so wish.0 -
