One thing Farage has got spot on is setting up his new party in a completely undemocratic fashion. Party democracy as practised in the main parties has been hugely damaging for the country.
“The Conservatives are up 3 points to 35% of the vote, while the Brexit party is down 3 points to 13%. The Liberal Democrats are up 2 points to 17% while Labour is down 1 point to 25%.”
Electoral Calculus gives a Tory landslide and a Tory majority of 104 with this evening's Opinium.
You just know that Labour will spend more time in the coming election campaign attacking the Lib Dems than the Tories.
The LDs are more of a threat long term to Corbyn Labour than the Tories as the Brexit Party were more of a threat long term to the Tories than Corbyn Labour
“The Conservatives are up 3 points to 35% of the vote, while the Brexit party is down 3 points to 13%. The Liberal Democrats are up 2 points to 17% while Labour is down 1 point to 25%.”
Electoral Calculus gives a Tory landslide and a Tory majority of 104 with this evening's Opinium.
Tory gains in Scotland at the SNP’s expense again!!!
Even if the Tories lost all 13 Scottish seats to the SNP they would still have a majority of 78 with Opinium according to Electoral Calculus
A model showing Tory gains in Scotland at the SNP’s expense is not reliable. Clearly, a 10 point lead is enough for the Tories to win, but by how much is pure guesswork.
IANAL but it looks to me like the Rebel Alliance have committed treason felony, according to the Act of 1848, which makes it a crime to “wage war against the sovereign” - by word, deed or act - “in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament.”
If we’re going to lock up the Prime Minister on the basis of a strange new law thrown together last week, then we definitely need to jail the Rebel Alliance on the basis of a fundamental law, which has been in force since the mid 19th century.
Surely you realise that if you write posts like this, then everyone can see you're a nutter?
You are free to call me a nutter, of course, but you’re not free to dispute the wording of the Treason Felony Act of 1848. Which, prima facie, has the ‘Rebel Alliance’ bang to rights.
Neither are you free to disregard its subsequent interpretation. Nutter.
The thing with the polls is you have to remember the poll shifts lag the events, not the other way round.
I'll try again since my computer threw a wobbly.
The Tory vote share held up remarkably well right up until the original extension in March and only then did it drop off a cliff. It's been rebounding since Boris was appointed and was making lots of "can do" comments and speeches.
If he does have to end up asking for an extension because Parliament makes him, I wouldn't be surprised to see the polling repeating that.
IANAL but it looks to me like the Rebel Alliance have committed treason felony, according to the Act of 1848, which makes it a crime to “wage war against the sovereign” - by word, deed or act - “in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament.”
If we’re going to lock up the Prime Minister on the basis of a strange new law thrown together last week, then we definitely need to jail the Rebel Alliance on the basis of a fundamental law, which has been in force since the mid 19th century.
Have you been giving legal advice to Dom? Apparently he's found out that Boris won't have to ask for an extension after all, so perhaps incarcerating the Rebel Alliance for treason is part of it.
Given the number of Conservative MPs leaving/dismissed, is there a chance of TIG getting bigger again given I doubt the LDs would be willing to give them all candidacies both as it would upset present candidates and branches and laying themselves open to calls from Labour of being “mini-me tories” again?
Given the number of Conservative MPs leaving/dismissed, is there a chance of TIG getting bigger again given I doubt the LDs would be willing to give them all candidacies both as it would upset present candidates and branches and laying themselves open to calls from Labour of being “mini-me tories” again?
The voting records of some of those newly-LibDem Tories are going to be a gift to Labour......
IANAL but it looks to me like the Rebel Alliance have committed treason felony, according to the Act of 1848, which makes it a crime to “wage war against the sovereign” - by word, deed or act - “in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament.”
If we’re going to lock up the Prime Minister on the basis of a strange new law thrown together last week, then we definitely need to jail the Rebel Alliance on the basis of a fundamental law, which has been in force since the mid 19th century.
Have you been giving legal advice to Dom? Apparently he's found out that Boris won't have to ask for an extension after all, so perhaps incarcerating the Rebel Alliance for treason is part of it.
It's hard to imagine now, but it wasn't all that long ago we were looking with amusement and incredulity at the chants of "lock her up!" heard across the pond.
That sort of thing could never happen here, we said. We do politics differently, we said. Well, here we are.
Given the number of Conservative MPs leaving/dismissed, is there a chance of TIG getting bigger again given I doubt the LDs would be willing to give them all candidacies both as it would upset present candidates and branches and laying themselves open to calls from Labour of being “mini-me tories” again?
The voting records of some of those newly-LibDem Tories are going to be a gift to Labour......
They would certainly seem to me to be a double-edged sword and very likely to staunch the present Lab to LD drift although it would possibly accentuate Con to LD.
Given the number of Conservative MPs leaving/dismissed, is there a chance of TIG getting bigger again given I doubt the LDs would be willing to give them all candidacies both as it would upset present candidates and branches and laying themselves open to calls from Labour of being “mini-me tories” again?
The voting records of some of those newly-LibDem Tories are going to be a gift to Labour......
They would certainly seem to me to be a double-edged sword and very likely to staunch the present Lab to LD drift although it would possibly accentuate Con to LD.
If you honestly believe that the average voter knows diddly squat about a single mp thinks then you may be mistaken. The problems come internally within the host party. Given the problems are mainly around the gay marriage bill the incomes will have to demonstrate their credentials over time. I think we are trying to build a new broad center coalition which is pro EU, pro environment, pro education and strongly for electoral reform.
Avenue: 52 for reselection, 25 for open selection Central: 0 for reselection, 2 for open selection Orchard Park: 4 for reselection, 7 for open selection North Carr: 4 for reselection, 7 for open selection West Carr: 3 for reselection, 0 for open selection University: 6 for reselection, 3 for open selection Kingswood: 2 for reselection, 1 for open selection
OK, it doesn't look as an organized attempt to deselect. Barely anyone showed up in the trigger ballot meetings. And it seems Diana Johnson hasn't done anything to get out her supporters. Quite too nonchalant on her part.
One thing I have never grasped is why the hardest europhobes seem to also be the hardest anti Scots independence. Richard Tyndall is the honourable exception.
Nats and the EU are high tax, high spend , puritanical, meddling, authoritarian- and socialist.
You wouldn’t be happy to see Scotland follow an Estonian economic model?
Under the SNP - no chance . Venezuela is their closest model. Or Cuba.
You really are funny.
This quality of Unionist debate is bog standard in Scotland. They have zero policy platform to promote, so they just hurl preposterous abuse. Before Venezuela they were banging on about the Yugoslav war. Cuba is a perennial favourite.
They think they’re being clever, but what they are really doing is betraying their profound hatred (often self-hatred). They really do think that Scotland is a basket case and that Scots are complete morons. And then they wonder why they’ve been out of power in Edinburgh for 12 years, with no end in sight.
They are very comfortable with a high tax, high spend, puritanical, meddling and authoritarian Conservative government in London, but the prospect of vibrant, open, innovative, multi-party democracy in Edinburgh horrifies them.
Excellent captaincy I must say by Tim Paine, other captains would probably be more nervous about leaving anything under 400 for England to chase after Headingley.
Given the number of Conservative MPs leaving/dismissed, is there a chance of TIG getting bigger again given I doubt the LDs would be willing to give them all candidacies both as it would upset present candidates and branches and laying themselves open to calls from Labour of being “mini-me tories” again?
The voting records of some of those newly-LibDem Tories are going to be a gift to Labour......
They would certainly seem to me to be a double-edged sword and very likely to staunch the present Lab to LD drift although it would possibly accentuate Con to LD.
If you honestly believe that the average voter knows diddly squat about a single mp thinks then you may be mistaken. The problems come internally within the host party. Given the problems are mainly around the gay marriage bill the incomes will have to demonstrate their credentials over time. I think we are trying to build a new broad center coalition which is pro EU, pro environment, pro education and strongly for electoral reform.
I have no doubt your party is attempting to align itself with those policies but when Labour deliver election leaflets saying the only non-Tory vote is for them then I certainly believe that will concern Lab-LD switchers in the constituency concerned.
Given the number of Conservative MPs leaving/dismissed, is there a chance of TIG getting bigger again given I doubt the LDs would be willing to give them all candidacies both as it would upset present candidates and branches and laying themselves open to calls from Labour of being “mini-me tories” again?
The voting records of some of those newly-LibDem Tories are going to be a gift to Labour......
They would certainly seem to me to be a double-edged sword and very likely to staunch the present Lab to LD drift although it would possibly accentuate Con to LD.
If you honestly believe that the average voter knows diddly squat about a single mp thinks then you may be mistaken. The problems come internally within the host party. Given the problems are mainly around the gay marriage bill the incomes will have to demonstrate their credentials over time. I think we are trying to build a new broad center coalition which is pro EU, pro environment, pro education and strongly for electoral reform.
I have no doubt your party is attempting to align itself with those policies but when Labour deliver election leaflets saying the only non-Tory vote is for them then I certainly believe that will concern Lab-LD switchers in the constituency concerned.
That wasn’t the point it was about individual MPs impacting lab lib dem switchers. I hope where there is a ‘sane’ remain mp in a lab con marginal then it may be better for them to vote labour, the definition of sane is open to interpretation but I would vote for Benn and Starmer
What a bunch of tossers. They could "stop the coup" by allowing the prime minister to call an election.
Surely they aren't still going on with "Stop The Coup" when they are expicitly denying themselves the chance to "Stop The Coup" with a general election?
What a bunch of tossers. They could "stop the coup" by allowing the prime minister to call an election.
Surely they aren't still going on with "Stop The Coup" when they are expicitly denying themselves the chance to "Stop The Coup" with a general election?
Owen Jones was there so, ya know, top notch people
What a bunch of tossers. They could "stop the coup" by allowing the prime minister to call an election.
Surely they aren't still going on with "Stop The Coup" when they are expicitly denying themselves the chance to "Stop The Coup" with a general election?
I'm afraid so. The headline on that article is "Anti-Brexit protesters decry Johnson's 'coup'" and all the premade signs the protesters are waving contain the hashtag #stopthecoup...
Not many would-be dictators offer their opponents a general election. Now I almost want Boris to surround Heathrow Airport with tanks on general principle. If we're going to have a coup, we might as well have a real one. It may yet be the only way to actually deliver brexit...
Another Labour Leaver is leaving. On the one hand that means they have nothing to lose and can keep voting with the Govrrnment on Brexit. On the other hand if they are replaced with more loyalist and/or europhile candidates it causes Boris more problems if the election results in another hung parliament. The same for several ex Labour Independents ( Austin and Lewis )
Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.
Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.
He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
That's not true. It was denied in 1707.
Everything is a formality until it isn't.
It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
I'm really tired of hearing this idiotic statement. The role of the Speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members. He can conform to precedent or move forward as he interprets the will of the House.
But two can play at that game.
The role of the speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members.
The role of the monarch is to act on the advice of her ministers, as chosen and given confidence by Parliament.
If her ministers advise to refuse consent then why should the Queen not follow her minister's advise?
You are free to call me a nutter, of course, but you’re not free to dispute the wording of the Treason Felony Act of 1848. Which, prima facie, has the ‘Rebel Alliance’ bang to rights.
Show Trials for the leaders of the remainer traitors in parliament.
Truth & Reconciliation Commission for the rest of the country.
Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.
Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.
He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
That's not true. It was denied in 1707.
Everything is a formality until it isn't.
It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
I'm really tired of hearing this idiotic statement. The role of the Speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members. He can conform to precedent or move forward as he interprets the will of the House.
But two can play at that game.
The role of the speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members.
The role of the monarch is to act on the advice of her ministers, as chosen and given confidence by Parliament.
If her ministers advise to refuse consent then why should the Queen not follow her minister's advise?
Not if she has any sense. And she has.
People were saying HMQ wouldn't approve prorogation and she did it unquestioningly.
HMQ has always taken her ministers advise. If the privy council says to refuse assent then how and why would she approve it?
Another Labour Leaver is leaving. On the one hand that means they have nothing to lose and can keep voting with the Govrrnment on Brexit. On the other hand if they are replaced with more loyalist and/or europhile candidates it causes Boris more problems if the election results in another hung parliament. The same for several ex Labour Independents ( Austin and Lewis )
Another Labour Leaver is leaving. On the one hand that means they have nothing to lose and can keep voting with the Govrrnment on Brexit. On the other hand if they are replaced with more loyalist and/or europhile candidates it causes Boris more problems if the election results in another hung parliament. The same for several ex Labour Independents ( Austin and Lewis )
OTOH The Tories are more leave now.
The parties like the country are polarised. The election will be won by whoever can unite their side of the divide.
Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.
Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.
He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
That's not true. It was denied in 1707.
Everything is a formality until it isn't.
It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
I'm really tired of hearing this idiotic statement. The role of the Speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members. He can conform to precedent or move forward as he interprets the will of the House.
But two can play at that game.
The role of the speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members.
The role of the monarch is to act on the advice of her ministers, as chosen and given confidence by Parliament.
If her ministers advise to refuse consent then why should the Queen not follow her minister's advise?
Not if she has any sense. And she has.
People were saying HMQ wouldn't approve prorogation and she did it unquestioningly.
HMQ has always taken her ministers advise. If the privy council says to refuse assent then how and why would she approve it?
Privy council my arse pull the other one after last week
Another Labour Leaver is leaving. On the one hand that means they have nothing to lose and can keep voting with the Govrrnment on Brexit. On the other hand if they are replaced with more loyalist and/or europhile candidates it causes Boris more problems if the election results in another hung parliament. The same for several ex Labour Independents ( Austin and Lewis )
Once Brexit is done this will be a huge problem for Labour.
They are going to be find themselves in the crowded rejoin space with the LD's, Greens, PC, SNP.
They will all be gutting each other out whilst there will only be one realistic choice for those who do not want to rejoin the EU.
What a bunch of tossers. They could "stop the coup" by allowing the prime minister to call an election.
The hardcore Remainer cause has been captured by the radical left - Momentum etc.
Politicians like Soubry are foolish to be associated with them.
Not really, Momentum don't really care about Brexit, they would be happy with a Labour Brexit Deal and socialism.
It is Blairites and Cameroons and the LDs who are diehard Remainers on the whole along with the SNP
If you read the report it specifically mentions Momentum. They may not care about Brexit, but they love having a ruck with “evil Tories”
Maybe but they are aligning with Remainers as a means to an end, a Corbyn government not with the end goal of reversing Brexit and staying in the EU like the Blairites, LDs and Cameroons
His seat will be a top Tory target anyway - he was toast.
With Mann, De Piero and Farrelly all going, this very strongly suggests that they are expecting Labour losses in the Midlands Leaver seats.
The Labour party is alo being tilted unequivcably remain as the Tories face leave. The big two are making sure of ~ 50% voting blocks between them...
I think that is right. It is an existential threat for Labour.
Labour can't allow the LibDems to take 20 per cent of the vote, just as the Tories couldn't allow TBP to take 20 per cent. There will be no 'Remainer Pact'.
What a bunch of tossers. They could "stop the coup" by allowing the prime minister to call an election.
The hardcore Remainer cause has been captured by the radical left - Momentum etc.
Politicians like Soubry are foolish to be associated with them.
Not really, Momentum don't really care about Brexit, they would be happy with a Labour Brexit Deal and socialism.
It is Blairites and Cameroons and the LDs who are diehard Remainers on the whole along with the SNP
If you read the report it specifically mentions Momentum. They may not care about Brexit, but they love having a ruck with “evil Tories”
Having spent three years scorning it, Momentum has finally realised it has allowed a huge movement - and one with a large central database - to build up with no far-left input or control. It is belatedly and unsuccessfully trying to play catch up. Look at the turnout for its demo today compared to those organised by the People's Vote campaign. This is the reason why you can expect Labour not to allow £3 votes in the next leadership election.
No. All this because MPs forgot they were delegated to represent their constituents and not their own personal wishes and desires.
I know you all love to quote Burke on this as if he is some sort of prophet but it is worth remembering that Burke's actions based on his own philosophy ruined the businesses and lives of many of those he represented and led to him being thrown out of office 2 years later.
In the end you can make all these claims about 'delegates' rather than 'representatives' but most of the time it is just a smoke screen for MPs doing what they want and sod their constituents.
I was actually quoting Churchill, not Burke but that doesn't matter much.
To be honest, MPs, once elected, can do whatever they like and it's really only their Party that keeps them "in check" via the power of the Whip.
A referendum is not an election - my area, Newham, voted 53-47 to Remain and my MP, Stephen Timms, voted against the invoking of A50 etc. He was representing his constituents and the result of the referendum in his area if not nationally but the 47% who voted Leave in Newham aren't represented at all.
Referenda are ultimately divisive and counter-productive and, apart from local issues, probably don't work in a parliamentary democracy. Clement Attlee saw their dangers as have others.
The nation has had to endure this pain because the Conservative Party was unable to resolve its own internal divisions and decided asking the public would somehow lead to a resolution.
Referendums work perfectly well if the politicians abide by them. On the other hand our Parliamentary system has been failing for decades and is unfit for purpose.
Yes, Rory's right. They're starting to sound scary.
Tbf if there were secret talks between the EU and the rebels and action agreed to subvert the UK government's position then it is collusion with a foreign power. The government are the only people that can negotiate with the EU. The language is of course deliberately provocative and not necessary
Weren't they just checking that the EU would indeed grant an extension if one was requested? If anything they were being helpful to Boris - no point losing him his majority if No Deal was nailed on anyway. Boris and Cummings should be thanking them for injecting a bit of clarity and thoroughness.
The EU is not a foreign power. We are members.
The EU is a foreign power for these purposes, the EU's constitution makes this clear. We are not a part of the 27.
We’re all citizens of that ‘foreign power’.
Not by choice. Many of us consider their position little different to that of an occupying power.
Not sure what relevance that has.
It shows they have gone mental, and are living in la la land
Funny you and your fellow travellers seem to think the same thing about Scotland and the English. At least I am consistent in my beliefs.
Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.
Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.
He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
That's not true. It was denied in 1707.
Everything is a formality until it isn't.
It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
I'm really tired of hearing this idiotic statement. The role of the Speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members. He can conform to precedent or move forward as he interprets the will of the House.
But two can play at that game.
The role of the speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members.
The role of the monarch is to act on the advice of her ministers, as chosen and given confidence by Parliament.
If her ministers advise to refuse consent then why should the Queen not follow her minister's advise?
Not if she has any sense. And she has.
People were saying HMQ wouldn't approve prorogation and she did it unquestioningly.
HMQ has always taken her ministers advise. If the privy council says to refuse assent then how and why would she approve it?
Privy council my arse pull the other one after last week
Privy Council is constitutionally how HMQ gets her advice from ministers, what do you mean by "my arse pull the other one"?
If the Privy Council says "don't assent to this" then why would HMQ assent to it?
Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.
Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.
He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
That's not true. It was denied in 1707.
Everything is a formality until it isn't.
It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
I'm really tired of hearing this idiotic statement. The role of the Speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members. He can conform to precedent or move forward as he interprets the will of the House.
But two can play at that game.
The role of the speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members.
The role of the monarch is to act on the advice of her ministers, as chosen and given confidence by Parliament.
If her ministers advise to refuse consent then why should the Queen not follow her minister's advise?
Not if she has any sense. And she has.
People were saying HMQ wouldn't approve prorogation and she did it unquestioningly.
HMQ has always taken her ministers advise. If the privy council says to refuse assent then how and why would she approve it?
Privy council my arse pull the other one after last week
Privy Council is constitutionally how HMQ gets her advice from ministers, what do you mean by "my arse pull the other one"?
If the Privy Council says "don't assent to this" then why would HMQ assent to it?
In your scenario, Privy Council basically means the PM.
I think the we are going to break him and trap him in number 10 comments seeping out from opposition mps plus the 'we will decide when you get to vote' stuff ultimately is very counter productive to them. Its goading the electorate into backing the beleaguered PM and showing parliament who is really sovereign. The anger is real.
Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.
Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.
He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
That's not true. It was denied in 1707.
Everything is a formality until it isn't.
It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
I'm really tired of hearing this idiotic statement. The role of the Speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members. He can conform to precedent or move forward as he interprets the will of the House.
But two can play at that game.
The role of the speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members.
The role of the monarch is to act on the advice of her ministers, as chosen and given confidence by Parliament.
If her ministers advise to refuse consent then why should the Queen not follow her minister's advise?
Not if she has any sense. And she has.
People were saying HMQ wouldn't approve prorogation and she did it unquestioningly.
HMQ has always taken her ministers advise. If the privy council says to refuse assent then how and why would she approve it?
Privy council my arse pull the other one after last week
Privy Council is constitutionally how HMQ gets her advice from ministers, what do you mean by "my arse pull the other one"?
If the Privy Council says "don't assent to this" then why would HMQ assent to it?
The privy council consist of a few more than the three that went to balmoral and is not restricted to current government ministers. I invite you to show me where that is where she must gets advice from government ministers to inform her decisions. if that really is the privy council then it’s not fit for purpose
Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.
Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.
He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
That's not true. It was denied in 1707.
Everything is a formality until it isn't.
It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
I'm really tired of hearing this idiotic statement. The role of the Speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members. He can conform to precedent or move forward as he interprets the will of the House.
But two can play at that game.
The role of the speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members.
The role of the monarch is to act on the advice of her ministers, as chosen and given confidence by Parliament.
If her ministers advise to refuse consent then why should the Queen not follow her minister's advise?
Not if she has any sense. And she has.
People were saying HMQ wouldn't approve prorogation and she did it unquestioningly.
HMQ has always taken her ministers advise. If the privy council says to refuse assent then how and why would she approve it?
Privy council my arse pull the other one after last week
Privy Council is constitutionally how HMQ gets her advice from ministers, what do you mean by "my arse pull the other one"?
If the Privy Council says "don't assent to this" then why would HMQ assent to it?
In your scenario, Privy Council basically means the PM.
Privy Council quorom is HMQ plus 3 Privy Councillors. In my scenario I expect it would be Jacob Rees Mogg (Lord President) and 2 others, probably PM and Secretary of State for Exiting the EU.
Boris should deny royal assent to the bill since the opposition have refused an election or VONC.
Let the opposition VONC him if they want assent given.
He can't. Royal assent is a formality. It is never denied. If Boris tried to drag the Queen into politics by asking her to refuse or delay assent to this bill he will, I am quite certain, be told where to go.
That's not true. It was denied in 1707.
Everything is a formality until it isn't.
It has been a formality for three centuries. For over a century the monarchy has kept itself out of politics. If you really think our current Queen will change that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Sadly, we are well past this argument, after Bercow overturned several centuries of precedent in how standing orders are treated.
I'm really tired of hearing this idiotic statement. The role of the Speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members. He can conform to precedent or move forward as he interprets the will of the House.
But two can play at that game.
The role of the speaker is to represent the interests of Parliament and its members.
The role of the monarch is to act on the advice of her ministers, as chosen and given confidence by Parliament.
If her ministers advise to refuse consent then why should the Queen not follow her minister's advise?
Not if she has any sense. And she has.
People were saying HMQ wouldn't approve prorogation and she did it unquestioningly.
HMQ has always taken her ministers advise. If the privy council says to refuse assent then how and why would she approve it?
Privy council my arse pull the other one after last week
Privy Council is constitutionally how HMQ gets her advice from ministers, what do you mean by "my arse pull the other one"?
If the Privy Council says "don't assent to this" then why would HMQ assent to it?
In your scenario, Privy Council basically means the PM.
Privy Council quorom is HMQ plus 3 Privy Councillors. In my scenario I expect it would be Jacob Rees Mogg (Lord President) and 2 others, probably PM and Secretary of State for Exiting the EU.
Yeah, but for all intents and purposes the advice is coming from the PM on such matters.
Comments
https://twitter.com/martinboon/status/1170383503055347712?s=20
Nutter.
The Tory vote share held up remarkably well right up until the original extension in March and only then did it drop off a cliff. It's been rebounding since Boris was appointed and was making lots of "can do" comments and speeches.
If he does have to end up asking for an extension because Parliament makes him, I wouldn't be surprised to see the polling repeating that.
https://twitter.com/bobscartoons/status/1170388122896601088?s=20
That sort of thing could never happen here, we said. We do politics differently, we said. Well, here we are.
https://twitter.com/78SoylentGreen/status/1170387937361584128?s=20
https://twitter.com/martinboon/status/1170383129334489088?s=21
Avenue: 52 for reselection, 25 for open selection
Central: 0 for reselection, 2 for open selection
Orchard Park: 4 for reselection, 7 for open selection
North Carr: 4 for reselection, 7 for open selection
West Carr: 3 for reselection, 0 for open selection
University: 6 for reselection, 3 for open selection
Kingswood: 2 for reselection, 1 for open selection
OK, it doesn't look as an organized attempt to deselect.
Barely anyone showed up in the trigger ballot meetings.
And it seems Diana Johnson hasn't done anything to get out her supporters. Quite too nonchalant on her part.
They think they’re being clever, but what they are really doing is betraying their profound hatred (often self-hatred). They really do think that Scotland is a basket case and that Scots are complete morons. And then they wonder why they’ve been out of power in Edinburgh for 12 years, with no end in sight.
They are very comfortable with a high tax, high spend, puritanical, meddling and authoritarian Conservative government in London, but the prospect of vibrant, open, innovative, multi-party democracy in Edinburgh horrifies them.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/07/anti-brexit-protesters-decry-johnsons-coup-in-london-and-leeds?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/1170395132690096130?s=20
Politicians like Soubry are foolish to be associated with them.
,
Boris with a landslide or well hung?
Not many would-be dictators offer their opponents a general election. Now I almost want Boris to surround Heathrow Airport with tanks on general principle. If we're going to have a coup, we might as well have a real one. It may yet be the only way to actually deliver brexit...
It is Blairites and Cameroons and the LDs who are diehard Remainers on the whole along with the SNP
Truth & Reconciliation Commission for the rest of the country.
HMQ has always taken her ministers advise. If the privy council says to refuse assent then how and why would she approve it?
The big two are making sure of ~ 50% voting blocks between them...
They are going to be find themselves in the crowded rejoin space with the LD's, Greens, PC, SNP.
They will all be gutting each other out whilst there will only be one realistic choice for those who do not want to rejoin the EU.
Labour can't allow the LibDems to take 20 per cent of the vote, just as the Tories couldn't allow TBP to take 20 per cent. There will be no 'Remainer Pact'.
I suspect this means Boris wins.
I would be shocked if we didn't get YouGov as well.
Not sure where the next labour one comes from but I’m sure momentum will throw out a few decent candidTes
If the Privy Council says "don't assent to this" then why would HMQ assent to it?
Looks like they realise what i've been saying all along is true.
Get yourself out and about with normal decent people and gauge the true anger at what remainer MPs are doing to our democracy.
Key:
A=previous poll, B=this poll, C=change since last poll, D=Con lead
Opinium:
A: Con32%, Lab26%, Lib15%, BXP16%
B: Con35%, Lab25%, Lib17%, BXP13%
C: Con+3%, Lab-1%, Lib+2%, BXP-3%
D 10%
Panelbase:
A: Con21%, Lab31%, Lib13%, BXP19%
B: Con31%. Lab28%, Lib19%, BXP15%
C: Co+10%, Lab-3%, Lib+6%, BXP-4%
D 3%
Survation:
A: Con31%, Lab24%, Lib21%, BXP14%
B: Con29%, Lab24%, Lib18%, BXP17%
C: Con-2%, Lab+0%, Lib-3%, BXP+3%
D 5%
YouGov:
A: Con35%, Lab25%, Lib16%, BXP11%
B: Con??%, Lab??%, Lib??%, BXP??%
C: Con??%, Lab??%, Lib??%, BXP??%
D ?%
Deltapoll:
A: Con35%, Lab24%, Lib18%, BXP14%
B: Con??%, Lab??%, Lib??%, BXP??%
C: Con??%, Lab??%, Lib??%, BXP??%
D ?%
A=previous poll, B=this poll, C=change since last poll, D=Con lead
Its goading the electorate into backing the beleaguered PM and showing parliament who is really sovereign.
The anger is real.
My hope of course is that this is a bigger problem for Remain than Leave but I wouldn't like to call it.