What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow ratification of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
They could actually pass the deal in principle but amend the legislation to state that this doesn’t nullify the Benn Act as officially this is not yet a concluded deal, that only happens when the full legal text is done and signed off by both sides .
Why should MPs remove the Benn Act when things could still unravel .
What is your point? Does "winners" negate the force of "cheating racist"?
My point is that those that lost the referendum are still in the denial stage about the causes of the defeat.
I urge them to look for more sensible explanations other than degenerating 17.4 million of their fellow souls that share the Uk.
We're crystal clear why we lost. Too many of those 17.4m were and likely still are thick as mince.
The GFC was caused by people with Oxbridge degrees and Harvard MBAs. Blokes in white vans with plumbing diplomas might have managed the economy better..
Yebbut they often make a hell of a dog's breakfast of the plumbing.
As I said below, though, their VAT expertise could be of great use to the Treasury.
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow ratification of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".
It would be perfect to many
It's not completely outside the realms of possibility that Boris will try to get this in there. It makes sense for the insistence we WILL be leaving one way or another and has the added virtue of being his own Benn Act. Effectively.
Conjecture. But everything at the moment is conjecture.
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".
The answer is within your words! Its Boris or bust
Dominic Grieve just seemed to suggest on the BBC that if a second referendum resulted in Remain that Leavers would be entitled to then campaign to get a majority for us to leave without a third referendum.
Leaving the EU seems to be obviously within the rights of a majority government so clearly they would? But entitled or not there's bound to be at least some kind of a market for brexit after it loses a (hypothetical) second referendum and I'd have thought they'd campaign on enacting the first one and ignoring the second rather than making if the best of three.
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
They could actually pass the deal in principle but amend the legislation to state that this doesn’t nullify the Benn Act as officially this is not yet a concluded deal, that only happens when the full legal text is done and signed off by both sides .
Why should MPs remove the Benn Act when things could still unravel .
Well I'd expect the government to word the bill in such a way as to nullify Benn or amend it to allow BJ to ask for a short technical extension. It's up to MPs to vote the deal down if they want to play the 'we dont trust him' card and sell that as valid to a weary electorate
Be careful about associating yourself with the slogan “Britain First”
Brexit was certainly not a vote for that agenda (even though some of that ilk may have supported Brexit l)
Not everyone who voted for Brexit is a racist, but every racist voted for Brexit.
Evidence please
This is a statement that can be falsified more easily than it can be verified, so evidence to the contrary please. E.g. any prominent or well known far right, xenophobic, British nationalist or racist person who has advocated for continued UK EU membership? I genuinely don't know of any but if you do - you do seem to know a lot of interesting people - I'd be glad to hear about it.
You made the accusation
But I suspect that some anti-Semites on the left voted to remain
That's a fair point, but for reference we were talking about racism. If we're agreed that antisemitism is racism -- and I do agree -- I never again want to hear anybody tell me that islamophobia isn't.
Well it's complicated by the fact that Jewish beliefs are, in the main albeit not exclusively, associated with Jews (either Israeli Jews or people of Jewish descent with other nationalities).
Islamic beliefs are not tied to nationality or race to that extend.
(In any event, trying to split hairs between different types of discrimination is a futile pursuit. That being said, there is a tendency among some - not suggesting you - to call legitimate anti-radical-Islam measures as "islamophobia")
How come the Extinction Rebellion morons have suddenly been cleared from the streets just because Her Majesty is travelling around London?
It's almost like the the Parliament/Government/Police wants ER out of the way they can get them out of the way?
Its raining apparently
XR have been out in the rain all week; I think this is an instance of the police being told the pols want a good photo opp, so get the plebs out of the road, like they did with the homeless before the royal weddings...
How come the Extinction Rebellion morons have suddenly been cleared from the streets just because Her Majesty is travelling around London?
It's almost like when Parliament/Government/Police wants ER out of the way they can get them out of the way?
ER are morons? or ER is a moron?
HMQ's mode of transport is very eco-friendly. They shouldn't have a problem with it. And they can take home the horse sh*t to upscale into a table-lamp or vase.
How come the Extinction Rebellion morons have suddenly been cleared from the streets just because Her Majesty is travelling around London?
It's almost like when Parliament/Government/Police wants ER out of the way they can get them out of the way?
I first read that 'ER' as meaning 'Elizabeth Regina" and wondered why parliament/government/police wanted her out of the way. Seemed a bit harsh and uncalled for!
How come the Extinction Rebellion morons have suddenly been cleared from the streets just because Her Majesty is travelling around London?
It's almost like when Parliament/Government/Police wants ER out of the way they can get them out of the way?
ER are morons? or ER is a moron?
HMQ's mode of transport is very eco-friendly. They shouldn't have a problem with it. And they can take home the horse sh*t to upscale into a table-lamp or vase.
Makes good compost (apparently, I have no personal knowledge of this...)
The office I'm working in - half way around the world - has BBC News on in their lobby, showing the Queen's Speech. Lots of passers-by with very bemused looks on their faces at the spectacle.
The office I'm working in - half way around the world - has BBC News on in their lobby, showing the Queen's Speech. Lots of passers-by with very bemused looks on their faces at the spectacle.
The office I'm working in - half way around the world - has BBC News on in their lobby, showing the Queen's Speech. Lots of passers-by with very bemused looks on their faces at the spectacle.
We may have totally lost the plot over the past three years but we can still put on a bloody good show when we want to.
Off topic. At Shannon airport the departures area has a display of photos of famous arrivals at the airport. Just as you enter the area for pre clearing US immigration there is a huge picture of Fidel Castro. That is some impressive Irish trolling.
Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?
That would be a surreal experience indeed.
I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
.. If there is no agreed legal text of a WA then there can't be a MV. If a MV isn't carried then the Benn Act kicks in unless the Commons agrees No Deal. Amending either the Benn Act or the MV requirement needs primary legislation which there is no time or majority for.
Boris could put down a Commons motion on the draft terms of anything agreed in principle at EUCO and there may be a political case for doing so ( as well as risks ) but unless it's a MV or Benn Act resolution to support No Deal then the Benn Act requirement to seek an extension kicks in.
How come the Extinction Rebellion morons have suddenly been cleared from the streets just because Her Majesty is travelling around London?
It's almost like when Parliament/Government/Police wants ER out of the way they can get them out of the way?
I first read that 'ER' as meaning 'Elizabeth Regina" and wondered why parliament/government/police wanted her out of the way. Seemed a bit harsh and uncalled for!
If she said she didnt want Brexit the government would evict her sharpish!
I don’t think we are actually disagreeing that much
You say members of a community should get to vote. I believe that members of a demos should get to vote.
A demos is - I believe - different to “people who happen to live in an area”
To be a member of a demos you have to be qualified as such. Those criteria change over time, but fundamentally if you are not qualified from birth you must make a conscious choice to join.
I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)
Re your point on commonwealth voting - fundamentally it’s a hang over from the principle of Civitas Romanus Sum - I am a Roman Citizen. Due to a strange intellectual psychodrama the Brits regarded themselves as the inheritors of the Roman Empire. If you were a Citizen of the Empire you had the right to vote in U.K. elections and when the Empire was dissolved it was decided to retain that principle. On Ireland it was explained on the last thread: it is nothing to do with the GFA but rather a legacy of our long and complex history)
How do you reconcile that with the principle of “no taxation without representation”?
Partly because that was a specific slogan at the time where people being taxed were not represented in parliament at all.
Even in the UK people who cannot vote (e.g. children, criminals and peers) pay VAT etc.
In the case of resident non-citizens there is a clear pathway to obtaining the vote
(As an aside, I have no issue with resident non-citizens electing local councils, because their remit is largely practical. For Westminster it can be citizens and the Commonwealth/Irish voters). For referendums and other "rule-setting" votes it should be strictly citizens only).
Dominic Grieve just seemed to suggest on the BBC that if a second referendum resulted in Remain that Leavers would be entitled to then campaign to get a majority for us to leave without a third referendum.
Leaving the EU seems to be obviously within the rights of a majority government so clearly they would? But entitled or not there's bound to be at least some kind of a market for brexit after it loses a (hypothetical) second referendum and I'd have thought they'd campaign on enacting the first one and ignoring the second rather than making if the best of three.
Yes, they'd be entirely entitled to do that. Second ref remain would simply annul the first, not resolve the issue for all time, any more than the original ref 40 years ago.
There seems to be a feeling on here amongst some that this makes Brexit inevitable at some point - Tories will have Brexit in manifesto and they will win a majority at some point. Not sure myself - most people really don't (and never did) have Brexit as a top level issue and I'm not sure the electorate will want to reopen it again once resolved, whichever way*. It might depend on Labour** - if they were more centrist at that point then Brexit in the Tory manifesto could push a lot of potential voters to Labour, even while hoovering up some of the 15% or so for whom Brexiting seems the primary issue (Brexit party polls). The Conservatives are (historically) good at pragmatism and adopting policies to get elected, so Brexit may also get dropped f it doesn't look like it will bring electoral success.
*I'd also not expect a rejoin after Brexit for at least a decade, unless Brexit went very wrong. I don't think there will be an appetite to revisit it again soon.
**Or LD if they were seen as a credible alternative at that point
Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?
That would be a surreal experience indeed.
I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.
Probably just a side-effect of being 93, but HM's tone and general demeanour gives me the impression she could insert "yeah, whatevs" after any of these commitments without missing a beat.
Final sentence "Can't imagine any of this old bollocks will make it through anyway. Seeya for Jez's version when I'm back from Sandringham. Don't even think about disrupting my turkey".
The Guardian is flagging up comments from DUP MP Jim Shannon to the Irish Times. They appear to harden the DUP stance on Boris' proposal. Though without fuller context it's hard to be definitive.
Boris and Swinson make a lovely couple at the front there Corbyn has fucked off by the looks of BBC coverage
Edit: Got my Sturgeons and Swinsons mixed up - nevertheless I'll let the next thought stand
Sturgeon seems to have remembered she is leading the Scottish Nationalist Party, not "remains little helpers in Scotland" recently. She's been reminding Blackford of the same slowly recently.
Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?
That would be a surreal experience indeed.
I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.
Probably just a side-effect of being 93, but HM's tone and general demeanour gives me the impression she could insert "yeah, whatevs" after any of these commitments without missing a beat.
Final sentence "Can't imagine any of this old bollocks will make it through anyway. Seeya for Jez's version when I'm back from Sandringham. Don't even think about disrupting my turkey".
That was the conservative manifesto posing as the Queens Speech
The Guardian is flagging up comments from DUP MP Jim Shannon to the Irish Times. They appear to harden the DUP stance on Boris' proposal. Though without fuller context it's hard to be definitive.
The DUP should be reminded that NI as a whole voted to remain by 56% to 44%.
Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?
That would be a surreal experience indeed.
I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.
Probably just a side-effect of being 93, but HM's tone and general demeanour gives me the impression she could insert "yeah, whatevs" after any of these commitments without missing a beat.
Final sentence "Can't imagine any of this old bollocks will make it through anyway. Seeya for Jez's version when I'm back from Sandringham. Don't even think about disrupting my turkey".
That was the conservative manifesto posing as the Queens Speech
Which is what happens when the Opposition won't raise a vote of confidence.
Three weeks from now we'll be getting the Conservative tax cuts manifesto to go alongside today's document, if the opposition continue to do nothing except procrastinate.
The Guardian is flagging up comments from DUP MP Jim Shannon to the Irish Times. They appear to harden the DUP stance on Boris' proposal. Though without fuller context it's hard to be definitive.
The DUP should be reminded that NI as a whole voted to remain by 56% to 44%.
How's that any different to suggesting the Lib Dems be reminded that the UK as a whole voted to leave, or that GB as a whole voted to leave?
The DUPs represents leave voters, their own voters voted to leave even if they were a minority overall.
What is your point? Does "winners" negate the force of "cheating racist"?
My point is that those that lost the referendum are still in the denial stage about the causes of the defeat.
I urge them to look for more sensible explanations other than degenerating 17.4 million of their fellow souls that share the Uk.
We're crystal clear why we lost. Too many of those 17.4m were and likely still are thick as mince.
Well as long as you cling to that view you won’t enjoy the future.
I will enjoy the future tremendously. But my enjoyment of it or otherwise doesn't alter the simple fact that plenty of those 17.4m leave voters were dumb. Not all of course. But far too many, including perhaps some of those will be adversely affected by their very own vote. Who knows.
To be fair, a lot of the 16m remain voters were dumb as well.
In fact, I would go so far as to say that almost 50% of the UK population is of below average intelligence.
Mr. Divvie, you realise there was a once-in-a-generation referendum on Scottish independence, right?
And the 'sovereign will of the Scottish people' that Sturgeon likes to pretend she cares about was to stay in the UK.
Still, at least the SNP are consistent. They want to ignore what the Scots want for Scotland and what the British want for the UK.
The will of the people of Scotland was to stay in the UK, and so in the UK Scotland stayed.
The will of the Scottish people in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s and 2010s was not to have a Conservative government. Yet the Conservative & Unionist party kept standing up for what they believe in, standing in every Scottish constituency. The Scottish people are not conservative, but the Conservatives have every right to stand for their vision. The Scottish people didn't want independence, but the SNP and Greens have every right to stand for their vision.
Voters choose their local representative not their government.
In each of the decades that you cite, the MPs returned by Scottish voters to Westminster accurately reflects the results in each of the constituencies
Her quip really wasn't helpful. Anyway hopefully it won't hurt her campaign too much. If she ends up being the nominee I'd vote for her, just, over Trump.
There are very few undecideds in the culture war, just those who are more or less motivated to vote. It's a boat race not a tug of war.
I doubt the quip will make the slightest difference to voter identification. It may persuade more on both sides to vote.
(It was a well-delivered, but hardly original, put-down.)
It was also nothing remotely like calling a quarter of all voters "deplorables" and shouldn't be compared to that at all. Deplorables was a terrible gaffe, that joke was not.
No, but the willingness to snark (theoretically) at a voter is symptomatic of the way they view the voters with these views.
The Guardian is flagging up comments from DUP MP Jim Shannon to the Irish Times. They appear to harden the DUP stance on Boris' proposal. Though without fuller context it's hard to be definitive.
The DUP should be reminded that NI as a whole voted to remain by 56% to 44%.
How's that any different to suggesting the Lib Dems be reminded that the UK as a whole voted to leave, or that GB as a whole voted to leave?
The DUPs represents leave voters, their own voters voted to leave even if they were a minority overall.
Because the Backstop is (or will be) NI-specific, no?
Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?
That would be a surreal experience indeed.
I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.
Boris should probably chalk it up as a victory that she didn't call in sick and ask Chas to read it out. Or Andrew.
They could have dusted off one of the Queen Mum or D of E excuses (slight head cold etc) without anyone except *every conspiracy theorist on Twitter* batting an eyelid.
Has “People’s Vote” been officially dropped for “Confirmatory Referendum”?
Can’t we just call a spade a spade and call it the Losers Revote?
The basic problem Leavers have is that the more the public have seen of their plans, the less they like them. They have abjectly failed to create a consensus.
Their lack of introspection about this failure is the most enduring mystery of Brexit for me.
It’s an glib comeback, but the lack of introspection about their failure to win the referendum from Remain extremists genuinely is mine. How can they not get it?
Just as an aside, the BBC's ridiculous. Apparently marathon news and American gymnastics come ahead of F1...
Been a big weekend for marathons.
Plus, which is more interesting? I could drive a F1 car as fast as Hamilton (OK, except round the corners). I doubt I could do half a Kosgei or Kipchoge speed, even on the straight bits.
Kipchoge's average speed was 13.1mph, which is faster than most people can run 100m - even fit amateur athletes can't keep up that pace for more than a minute or so.
Truly astounding. I remember reading somewhere that Usain Bolt may never have run a mile in his life, given he is geared to sprinting, but to consider someone can consistently run at regular person sprinting speed for 2 hours, well, its remarkable what the human body can manage.
I think he's faster than most regular people's sprinting speed.
I think someone said he did 17 seconds per 100m, which is about what I managed at Secondary School.
Yep, 17.01 for 100m, 422 times in a row!
Set the running machine at the gym to 20 and run for two hours... he’ll have been waiting for you a while at the end
Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?
That would be a surreal experience indeed.
I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.
Just as an aside, the BBC's ridiculous. Apparently marathon news and American gymnastics come ahead of F1...
Been a big weekend for marathons.
Plus, which is more interesting? I could drive a F1 car as fast as Hamilton (OK, except round the corners). I doubt I could do half a Kosgei or Kipchoge speed, even on the straight bits.
Kipchoge's average speed was 13.1mph, which is faster than most people can run 100m - even fit amateur athletes can't keep up that pace for more than a minute or so.
Truly astounding. I remember reading somewhere that Usain Bolt may never have run a mile in his life, given he is geared to sprinting, but to consider someone can consistently run at regular person sprinting speed for 2 hours, well, its remarkable what the human body can manage.
I think he's faster than most regular people's sprinting speed.
I think someone said he did 17 seconds per 100m, which is about what I managed at Secondary School.
Yep, 17.01 for 100m, 422 times in a row!
Set the running machine at the gym to 20 and run for two hours... he’ll have been waiting for you a while at the end
A number of years ago i went to the world cross country and seeing elite distance runjing in the flesh, i dont think i could sprint as fast as they were running even for 100m and they werent kipchoge...
Which century are we living in? The 21st or the 11th?
Preferred decade :.
Labour 1970s Tories 1950s Lib Dems 1860s DUP 1690s SNP 1300s Brexit party 60-50 BC
As the majority of Brexit voters seem to descended from Angles or Saxons, wouldn't they still have been in Germany in 60-50 BC? Or rather, perhaps, Germania!
Just as an aside, the BBC's ridiculous. Apparently marathon news and American gymnastics come ahead of F1...
Nobody seem so be mentioning that the 2 hour marathon was as contrived as Bannister's 4 minute mile in 1954
You must be fun at parties.
Could you outline the ways in which the kipchoge marathon was "contrived" in a way, that, say, the moon landings were not?
" To reduce aerodynamic resistance for Kipchoge, event organizers decided there would be a group of five pacemakers running in front of him in a V formation, according to Reuters. Kipchoge would run behind them, with two more runners following behind.
The pacers worked in teams, rotating in twice during each of the course’s 9.6-km (6-mile) laps. An electric car preceded the runners, projecting a system of lasers to show where the pacers should run."
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".
Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?
That would be a surreal experience indeed.
I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.
Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.
Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".
Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
Its amazing how many people seem to be unconcerned about Parliament being burnt to the ground.
Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?
That would be a surreal experience indeed.
I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.
Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.
Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
Possibly because its her job?
She gets to live in a luxurious palace and has to work one day a year and for that you wonder why she bothers?
Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.
Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
Frankly, every public engagement she does is poor compensation for inflicting Prince Andrew on the nation.
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".
Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
Its amazing how many people seem to be unconcerned about Parliament being burnt to the ground.
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".
Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
Its amazing how many people seem to be unconcerned about Parliament being burnt to the ground.
Comments
Why should MPs remove the Benn Act when things could still unravel .
Conjecture. But everything at the moment is conjecture.
Islamic beliefs are not tied to nationality or race to that extend.
(In any event, trying to split hairs between different types of discrimination is a futile pursuit. That being said, there is a tendency among some - not suggesting you - to call legitimate anti-radical-Islam measures as "islamophobia")
Will be his final QS of course. Will be the last time he does HMQ the amazing gift of allowing her to spend a few minutes in his company.
Bercow is pompous and full of himself but he pissed off the ERG big time so gets a pass from me .
Isn't it the People's Government?
I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.
If there is no agreed legal text of a WA then there can't be a MV. If a MV isn't carried then the Benn Act kicks in unless the Commons agrees No Deal. Amending either the Benn Act or the MV requirement needs primary legislation which there is no time or majority for.
Boris could put down a Commons motion on the draft terms of anything agreed in principle at EUCO and there may be a political case for doing so ( as well as risks ) but unless it's a MV or Benn Act resolution to support No Deal then the Benn Act requirement to seek an extension kicks in.
Even in the UK people who cannot vote (e.g. children, criminals and peers) pay VAT etc.
In the case of resident non-citizens there is a clear pathway to obtaining the vote
(As an aside, I have no issue with resident non-citizens electing local councils, because their remit is largely practical. For Westminster it can be citizens and the Commonwealth/Irish voters). For referendums and other "rule-setting" votes it should be strictly citizens only).
There seems to be a feeling on here amongst some that this makes Brexit inevitable at some point - Tories will have Brexit in manifesto and they will win a majority at some point. Not sure myself - most people really don't (and never did) have Brexit as a top level issue and I'm not sure the electorate will want to reopen it again once resolved, whichever way*. It might depend on Labour** - if they were more centrist at that point then Brexit in the Tory manifesto could push a lot of potential voters to Labour, even while hoovering up some of the 15% or so for whom Brexiting seems the primary issue (Brexit party polls). The Conservatives are (historically) good at pragmatism and adopting policies to get elected, so Brexit may also get dropped f it doesn't look like it will bring electoral success.
*I'd also not expect a rejoin after Brexit for at least a decade, unless Brexit went very wrong. I don't think there will be an appetite to revisit it again soon.
**Or LD if they were seen as a credible alternative at that point
Final sentence "Can't imagine any of this old bollocks will make it through anyway. Seeya for Jez's version when I'm back from Sandringham. Don't even think about disrupting my turkey".
Sturgeon seems to have remembered she is leading the Scottish Nationalist Party, not "remains little helpers in Scotland" recently. She's been reminding Blackford of the same slowly recently.
Three weeks from now we'll be getting the Conservative tax cuts manifesto to go alongside today's document, if the opposition continue to do nothing except procrastinate.
The DUPs represents leave voters, their own voters voted to leave even if they were a minority overall.
In fact, I would go so far as to say that almost 50% of the UK population is of below average intelligence.
In each of the decades that you cite, the MPs returned by Scottish voters to Westminster accurately reflects the results in each of the constituencies
From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.
https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
They could have dusted off one of the Queen Mum or D of E excuses (slight head cold etc) without anyone except *every conspiracy theorist on Twitter* batting an eyelid.
Labour 1970s
Tories 1950s
Lib Dems 1860s
DUP 1690s
SNP 1300s
Brexit party 60-50 BC
The pacers worked in teams, rotating in twice during each of the course’s 9.6-km (6-mile) laps. An electric car preceded the runners, projecting a system of lasers to show where the pacers should run."
Athletic feat, yes. Competitive event? Hardly.
https://twitter.com/damonwake/status/1183696157807140864
https://twitter.com/damonwake/status/1183696969467940864
Like hoof and hooves?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
She gets to live in a luxurious palace and has to work one day a year and for that you wonder why she bothers?