Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Anecdote alert - The verdict on my local anti-Brexit whatsapp group - which includes a number of Lib Dems - seems to be that Swinson was too categoric in her rejection of Corbyn's letter and should have left herself more wriggle room.
I think there might be the numbers for a VONC. It’ll be tight though.
What I don’t think there is at the moment are votes for an alternative government. Good luck persuading Corbyn and the Labour front bench to back an alternative figure to such a degree that the monarch can say with certainty they command the confidence of the House.
In which case there would be a GE, with Boris choosing the date of the GE.
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Yep, very persuasive that Corbyn as PM is far too big a risk to contemplate.
So have the Lib Dems now officially flipped from being a "We must stop Brexit" party to a "We must stop Corbyn" party?
Bollocks. Read the header there simply aren't the numbers there. This is a total spoof story
Corbyn has rattled your cage and Swinson. Also taken the Johnson love in of the mainstream news channels. Even the most anti Corbyn people , can see that .
The only way there isn't enough numbers for VoNC will be due to the infamous CHUKs who are basically Tories. There are, at least, 5 Tories who will vote for a VoNC because they have burnt their boats.
It's a big step to vonc the party under whose banner you were elected.
If it was me as an MP contemplating such a thing then I'd have to resign and seek re-election. There's no time for that though, and as such abstaining has to be the limit.
How do you explain then what Soubry, Wollaston and Allen are up to ?
They're taking big steps.
If they wish to actually vote against the party for which they were elected then they need to seek re-election. I think they know that, but Soubry may not.
Prentice did that in March 1979 - and in so doing brought down the Callaghan Government!
Frank Maguire brought down the Callaghan government - by "abstaining in person"!
As did Gerry Fitt by abstaining. Prentice,though, had been elected as a Labour MP.Personally I am surprised that, thereafter, he was not treated as a Parliamentary leper - like Peter Griffiths following his election for Smethwick in 1964. Nobody should have paired with him - and his life made utterly unbearable if necessary to the extent of a breakdown in his health.
Bullying isn’t approved of these days
But Prentice acted dishonourably and should have been denied any consideration by those whom he had betrayed.
I was a toddler at the time
From Wikipedia it looks like he was deselected in 1975, appealed to the NEC and was rejected in 1977 so resigned from the party. Why did Labour deserve his loyalty?
His constituents had no wish to be represented by a Tory MP - and he made no effort to respect their views.
The Labour Party had indicated that they believed he shouldn't be a Labour MP
I think there might be the numbers for a VONC. It’ll be tight though.
What I don’t think there is at the moment are votes for an alternative government. Good luck persuading Corbyn and the Labour front bench to back an alternative figure to such a degree that the monarch can say with certainty they command the confidence of the House.
In which case there would be a GE, with Boris choosing the date of the GE.
Yes, and why Id rank no deal at at least an 80% chance at the moment.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
The choice is Brexit OR Corbyn. That has been obvious for a long time.
The only real question is whether we get Brexit AND Corbyn.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
The only way there isn't enough numbers for VoNC will be due to the infamous CHUKs who are basically Tories. There are, at least, 5 Tories who will vote for a VoNC because they have burnt their boats.
It's a big step to vonc the party under whose banner you were elected.
If it was me as an MP contemplating such a thing then I'd have to resign and seek re-election. There's no time for that though, and as such abstaining has to be the limit.
How do you explain then what Soubry, Wollaston and Allen are up to ?
They're taking big steps.
If they wish to actually vote against the party for which they were elected then they need to seek re-election. I think they know that, but Soubry may not.
Prentice did that in March 1979 - and in so doing brought down the Callaghan Government!
Frank Maguire brought down the Callaghan government - by "abstaining in person"!
As did Gerry Fitt by abstaining. Prentice,though, had been elected as a Labour MP.Personally I am surprised that, thereafter, he was not treated as a Parliamentary leper - like Peter Griffiths following his election for Smethwick in 1964. Nobody should have paired with him - and his life made utterly unbearable if necessary to the extent of a breakdown in his health.
Bullying isn’t approved of these days
Didn't Reg Prentice defect to the Tories because he was pro-Europe ?
He was facing deselection in his Newham constituency. His subsequent behaviour vindicated his critics within the CLP - and he had received active support from Labour moderates such as Roy Jenkins and Tom Jackson. In the early 1970s, Prentice had been an Anti-Marketeer.
So what was the issue which led to all this malarkey ? Apart from Dick Taverne I cannot think of anyone else jumping ship.
Basically, the same forces that led to the formation of the SDP, but that happened a few years too late for him. Tribal Labour see both things as straightforward betrayal, of course.
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Anecdote alert - The verdict on my local anti-Brexit whatsapp group - which includes a number of Lib Dems - seems to be that Swinson was too categoric in her rejection of Corbyn's letter and should have left herself more wriggle room.
From her letter, I expect she realised that herself as soon as she had made her categoric statement.
Today was very dispiriting. I'd say NO Deal Brexit is now nailed on unless Johnson himself doesn't want it. As far as the Remainers in Parliament are concerned, "piss-up" and "brewery" comes to mind.
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Yep, very persuasive that Corbyn as PM is far too big a risk to contemplate.
So have the Lib Dems now officially flipped from being a "We must stop Brexit" party to a "We must stop Corbyn" party?
Bollocks. Read the header there simply aren't the numbers there. This is a total spoof story
As several people have already pointed out, in the header you confuse a vote of confidence in Corbyn and a vote of no confidence in Johnson.
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Yep, very persuasive that Corbyn as PM is far too big a risk to contemplate.
So have the Lib Dems now officially flipped from being a "We must stop Brexit" party to a "We must stop Corbyn" party?
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Anecdote alert - The verdict on my local anti-Brexit whatsapp group - which includes a number of Lib Dems - seems to be that Swinson was too categoric in her rejection of Corbyn's letter and should have left herself more wriggle room.
From her letter, I expect she realised that herself as soon as she had made her categoric statement.
A minor embarrassment, but recoverable...
Liberals are used to turning 180 degrees and lying through their teeth, easy for her. She is a duffer.
I don't think 14 Tories supporting a VONC is out of the question.
A handful yes. 14 I think highly unlikely.
Backing a VONC in your own party is the parliamentary equivalent of pushing the big red button: you can threaten it and stomp your feet, but at 1 minute to midnight are you ready to push it?
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Yep, very persuasive that Corbyn as PM is far too big a risk to contemplate.
So have the Lib Dems now officially flipped from being a "We must stop Brexit" party to a "We must stop Corbyn" party?
Bollocks. Read the header there simply aren't the numbers there. This is a total spoof story
Would that be Bollocks to Corbyn?
The only bollock today was the one Swinson dropped with her response to Jezza.
And our good host on here I thought he was more astute than that.
The only way there isn't enough numbers for VoNC will be due to the infamous CHUKs who are basically Tories. There are, at least, 5 Tories who will vote for a VoNC because they have burnt their boats.
It's a big step to vonc the party under whose banner you were elected.
If it was me as an MP contemplating such a thing then I'd have to resign and seek re-election. There's no time for that though, and as such abstaining has to be the limit.
How do you explain then what Soubry, Wollaston and Allen are up to ?
They're taking big steps.
If they wish to actually vote against the party for which they were elected then they need to seek re-election. I think they know that, but Soubry may not.
Prentice did that in March 1979 - and in so doing brought down the Callaghan Government!
Frank Maguire brought down the Callaghan government - by "abstaining in person"!
As did Gerry Fitt by abstaining. Prentice,though, had been elected as a Labour MP.Personally I am surprised that, thereafter, he was not treated as a Parliamentary leper - like Peter Griffiths following his election for Smethwick in 1964. Nobody should have paired with him - and his life made utterly unbearable if necessary to the extent of a breakdown in his health.
Bullying isn’t approved of these days
Didn't Reg Prentice defect to the Tories because he was pro-Europe ?
He was facing deselection in his Newham constituency. His subsequent behaviour vindicated his critics within the CLP - and he had received active support from Labour moderates such as Roy Jenkins and Tom Jackson. In the early 1970s, Prentice had been an Anti-Marketeer.
So what was the issue which led to all this malarkey ? Apart from Dick Taverne I cannot think of anyone else jumping ship.
Basically, the same forces that led to the formation of the SDP, but that happened a few years too late for him. Tribal Labour see both things as straightforward betrayal, of course.
Labour should react with the measured calm that I displayed when Mark Reckless defected.
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Anecdote alert - The verdict on my local anti-Brexit whatsapp group - which includes a number of Lib Dems - seems to be that Swinson was too categoric in her rejection of Corbyn's letter and should have left herself more wriggle room.
From her letter, I expect she realised that herself as soon as she had made her categoric statement.
A minor embarrassment, but recoverable...
Liberals are used to turning 180 degrees and lying through their teeth, easy for her. She is a duffer.
Shouldn't you be hiding under your bed?? It's a full moon tonight Malcolm
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Yep, very persuasive that Corbyn as PM is far too big a risk to contemplate.
So have the Lib Dems now officially flipped from being a "We must stop Brexit" party to a "We must stop Corbyn" party?
At this moment, they do not trust Corbyn to stop Brexit because the terms he is proposing are less than watertight.
They are right not to trust him.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
Exactly. Maybe Brexit is not such a big matter that I felt we the public had been led to believe. Davey, who is my MP and who I do not like as a Constituency MP [ I have personal experience ] , certainly has more gravitas and I'm sure would have responded to Corbyn in a more considered manner as did Grieve, Lucas, Sturgeon and the PC Leader. Even Wollaston later.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
If Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate, then one potential alternative is off the table.
Has anyone considered that if there’s one thing worse than no deal Brexit, it’s no deal Brexit happening, or about to happen, in the run up to an election. If it’s going to happen we need a Government in place fully focussed on dealing with the consequences, not totally distracted by fighting an election. There are also other possible Parliamentary routes to preventing no deal, or at least potentially forcing Johnson to act illegally to allow it to happen.
And i’m not sure people are right in assuming that Johnson will definitely follow through. Of course if we have an election it may be taken out of his hands to prevent it.
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Yep, very persuasive that Corbyn as PM is far too big a risk to contemplate.
So have the Lib Dems now officially flipped from being a "We must stop Brexit" party to a "We must stop Corbyn" party?
Why must we choose? I agree with both...
And of course, it's quite possible at this rate that you'll end up with neither.
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Yep, very persuasive that Corbyn as PM is far too big a risk to contemplate.
So have the Lib Dems now officially flipped from being a "We must stop Brexit" party to a "We must stop Corbyn" party?
Why must we choose? I agree with both...
But there may come a point at which you have to choose which is the greater priority.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
Not necessarily - there is also the legislation route.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
Has anyone considered that if there’s one thing worse than no deal Brexit, it’s no deal Brexit happening, or about to happen, in the run up to an election. If it’s going to happen we need a Government in place fully focussed on dealing with the consequences, not totally distracted by fighting an election. There are also other possible Parliamentary routes to preventing no deal, or at least potentially forcing Johnson to act illegally to allow it to happen.
And i’m not sure people are right in assuming that Johnson will definitely follow through. Of course if we have an election it may be taken out of his hands to prevent it.
You are looking at things sanely and in the national interest though.
If Boris has to fight a GE he cannot fight it on the basis of a delay to Brexit. That sees the Tories annihilated.
So he only has one option left: the “look BP voters, I delivered what you wanted” gambit.
The only way there isn't enough numbers for VoNC will be due to the infamous CHUKs who are basically Tories. There are, at least, 5 Tories who will vote for a VoNC because they have burnt their boats.
It's a big step to vonc the party under whose banner you were elected.
If it was me as an MP contemplating such a thing then I'd have to resign and seek re-election. There's no time for that though, and as such abstaining has to be the limit.
How do you explain then what Soubry, Wollaston and Allen are up to ?
They're taking big steps.
If they wish to actually vote against the party for which they were elected then they need to seek re-election. I think they know that, but Soubry may not.
Prentice did that in March 1979 - and in so doing brought down the Callaghan Government!
Frank Maguire brought down the Callaghan government - by "abstaining in person"!
As did Gerry Fitt by abstaining. Prentice,though, had been elected as a Labour MP.Personally I am surprised that, thereafter, he was not treated as a Parliamentary leper - like Peter Griffiths following his election for Smethwick in 1964. Nobody should have paired with him - and his life made utterly unbearable if necessary to the extent of a breakdown in his health.
Bullying isn’t approved of these days
Didn't Reg Prentice defect to the Tories because he was pro-Europe ?
He was facing deselection in his Newham constituency. His subsequent behaviour vindicated his critics within the CLP - and he had received active support from Labour moderates such as Roy Jenkins and Tom Jackson. In the early 1970s, Prentice had been an Anti-Marketeer.
So what was the issue which led to all this malarkey ? Apart from Dick Taverne I cannot think of anyone else jumping ship.
Basically, the same forces that led to the formation of the SDP, but that happened a few years too late for him. Tribal Labour see both things as straightforward betrayal, of course.
Labour should react with measured calm that I displayed when Mark Reckless defected.
Today was very dispiriting. I'd say NO Deal Brexit is now nailed on unless Johnson himself doesn't want it. As far as the Remainers in Parliament are concerned, "piss-up" and "brewery" comes to mind.
From the latest bit of nonsense this evening, it doesn't look as though Johnson doesn't want it.
I think the words that come to my mind are "headless" and "chickens".
The only way there isn't enough numbers for VoNC will be due to the infamous CHUKs who are basically Tories. There are, at least, 5 Tories who will vote for a VoNC because they have burnt their boats.
It's a big step to vonc the party under whose banner you were elected.
If it was me as an MP contemplating such a thing then I'd have to resign and seek re-election. There's no time for that though, and as such abstaining has to be the limit.
How do you explain then what Soubry, Wollaston and Allen are up to ?
They're taking big steps.
If they wish to actually vote against the party for which they were elected then they need to seek re-election. I think they know that, but Soubry may not.
Prentice did that in March 1979 - and in so doing brought down the Callaghan Government!
Frank Maguire brought down the Callaghan government - by "abstaining in person"!
As did Gerry Fitt by abstaining. Prentice,though, had been elected as a Labour MP.Personally I am surprised that, thereafter, he was not treated as a Parliamentary leper - like Peter Griffiths following his election for Smethwick in 1964. Nobody should have paired with him - and his life made utterly unbearable if necessary to the extent of a breakdown in his health.
Bullying isn’t approved of these days
But Prentice acted dishonourably and should have been denied any consideration by those whom he had betrayed.
I was a toddler at the time
From Wikipedia it looks like he was deselected in 1975, appealed to the NEC and was rejected in 1977 so resigned from the party. Why did Labour deserve his loyalty?
His constituents had no wish to be represented by a Tory MP - and he made no effort to respect their views.
The Labour Party had indicated that they believed he shouldn't be a Labour MP
But he had not been expelled. No MP has a divine right to be reselected- and his subsequent behaviour fully justified the efforts to remove him. He was thoroughly unprincipled and self serving.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
Not necessarily - there is also the legislation route.
Do you really think this hopeless shower are capable of achieving that?
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
Not necessarily - there is also the legislation route.
Do you really think this hopeless shower are capable of achieving that?
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
If Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate, then one potential alternative is off the table.
Where the f**** are you getting "Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate" from?
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
If Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate, then one potential alternative is off the table.
Where the f**** are you getting "Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate" from?
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
Not necessarily - there is also the legislation route.
I find all this talk nothing but a charade if Mike is right. If there isn't a majority to VoNC Johnson, then the whole game is up anyway. So what's the point of all these Parliamentary gymnastics ?
There are too many MPs with vested interests. None more so than the 5 CHUKs who are looking at unemployment if there is a GE. Umunna, Wollaston and possibly Allen have given themselves a reasonable chance of hanging on. If No Deal Brexit does happen, I am not sure Swinson can survive against the SNP.
Lib Dem’s could be on the verge of taking many dozens of seats off Tories at next election through mass transfer of ex-Tory voters. Ex Tory voters who will be implacably opposed to Corbyn as PM. And even as supposedly “temporary PM” he would yield considerable powers. And in the aftermath of a massively hung parliament will be immovable.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
Not necessarily - there is also the legislation route.
Do you really think this hopeless shower are capable of achieving that?
You’re going to have to be a bit more specific.
Do you really think this hopeless shower of anti-No-Deal MPs are capable of achieving an extension by legislative means?
The only way there isn't enough numbers for VoNC will be due to the infamous CHUKs who are basically Tories. There are, at least, 5 Tories who will vote for a VoNC because they have burnt their boats.
It's a big step to vonc the party under whose banner you were elected.
If it was me as an MP contemplating such a thing then I'd have to resign and seek re-election. There's no time for that though, and as such abstaining has to be the limit.
How do you explain then what Soubry, Wollaston and Allen are up to ?
They're taking big steps.
If they wish to actually vote against the party for which they were elected then they need to seek re-election. I think they know that, but Soubry may not.
Prentice did that in March 1979 - and in so doing brought down the Callaghan Government!
Frank Maguire brought down the Callaghan government - by "abstaining in person"!
As did Gerry Fitt by abstaining. Prentice,though, had been elected as a Labour MP.Personally I am surprised that, thereafter, he was not treated as a Parliamentary leper - like Peter Griffiths following his election for Smethwick in 1964. Nobody should have paired with him - and his life made utterly unbearable if necessary to the extent of a breakdown in his health.
Bullying isn’t approved of these days
Didn't Reg Prentice defect to the Tories because he was pro-Europe ?
He was facing deselection in his Newham constituency. His subsequent behaviour vindicated his critics within the CLP - and he had received active support from Labour moderates such as Roy Jenkins and Tom Jackson. In the early 1970s, Prentice had been an Anti-Marketeer.
So what was the issue which led to all this malarkey ? Apart from Dick Taverne I cannot think of anyone else jumping ship.
Basically, the same forces that led to the formation of the SDP, but that happened a few years too late for him. Tribal Labour see both things as straightforward betrayal, of course.
Labour should react with the measured calm that I displayed when Mark Reckless defected.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
If Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate, then one potential alternative is off the table.
Where the f**** are you getting "Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate" from?
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Anecdote alert - The verdict on my local anti-Brexit whatsapp group - which includes a number of Lib Dems - seems to be that Swinson was too categoric in her rejection of Corbyn's letter and should have left herself more wriggle room.
From her letter, I expect she realised that herself as soon as she had made her categoric statement.
A minor embarrassment, but recoverable...
Liberals are used to turning 180 degrees and lying through their teeth, easy for her. She is a duffer.
Shouldn't you be hiding under your bed?? It's a full moon tonight Malcolm
I don't think 14 Tories supporting a VONC is out of the question.
Will they then put Jez into power?
They will no be putting Corbyn into power. How do you not get that. Corbyn does not have a Majority in the HoC,
What’s the point of passing a VoNC if there is no alternative to Johnson to put in place? An election then puts us on an almost unavoidable course to no deal, with even Johnson not able to prevent it.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
If Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate, then one potential alternative is off the table.
Where the f**** are you getting "Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate" from?
He literally said he wants to be PM today.
Oh wow! Who'd have thought the leader of the Labour Party wanted to be prime minister?
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Yep, very persuasive that Corbyn as PM is far too big a risk to contemplate.
So have the Lib Dems now officially flipped from being a "We must stop Brexit" party to a "We must stop Corbyn" party?
Why must we choose? I agree with both...
And of course, it's quite possible at this rate that you'll end up with neither.
People should not vote for things they do not want. Refuse the false forced choice.
The thread I'm most proud was the thread that said '"I can't say the word c**t but [Mark Reckless] is a f**king c**t who deserves a hot poker up his arse."
The thread I'm most proud was the thread that said '"I can't say the word c**t but [Mark Reckless] is a f**king c**t who deserves a hot poker up his arse."
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
If Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate, then one potential alternative is off the table.
Where the f**** are you getting "Corbyn is adamant he will not stand aside for a credible candidate" from?
Lib Dem’s could be on the verge of taking many dozens of seats off Tories at next election through mass transfer of ex-Tory voters. Ex Tory voters who will be implacably opposed to Corbyn as PM. And even as supposedly “temporary PM” he would yield considerable powers. And in the aftermath of a massively hung parliament will be immovable.
Which is exactly why Corby is not going to let anyone else head a caretaker Government.
Between them, Corby & Johnson control enough MPs to prevent anyone else becoming PM.
So. it really is a forced choice between No Deal Brexit or Corby.
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Yep, very persuasive that Corbyn as PM is far too big a risk to contemplate.
So have the Lib Dems now officially flipped from being a "We must stop Brexit" party to a "We must stop Corbyn" party?
Why must we choose? I agree with both...
And of course, it's quite possible at this rate that you'll end up with neither.
People should not vote for things they do not want. Refuse the false forced choice.
I look forward to their “ex SNP leader on trial for rape is boost for Indy ref 2! “ edition 😆
Struggling Harry , he has already won round one of the stitch up. Also he will play no part in the result, too many bad uns in the unionist camp for him to even register.
Header is spot on. VONC will not carry. Johnson is safe from that.
The truth is that there are many MPs who want to stop Brexit but are more concerned with stopping Corbyn being PM.
This means that Brexit is unlikely to be stopped.
Who to blame? Corbyn for being Corbyn? Or those pretending that stopping Brexit is their priority?
The latter will say the former.
That is my point. If the Devil could stop Brexit, I'd support him. Then we can remove him.
Quite. And even though I'm no Corbynista if allowing him to be a caretaker PM for a short time is the only way to stop no deal then so be it.
What if he reneged on it, once installed?
I said that this afternoon and was labelled an idiot. Just so you know to be prepared...
But it is exactly the sort of thing the duplicitous old bastard would do. He's as untrustworthy as he is stupid.
And that of course is why Swinson will not work with him on the rather ambiguous terms he's proposed.
So Swinson has had a great day then ?
Swinson who is relatively new to me-i'd never heard her speak until a couple of weeks ago-was very good today. I'd thought they'd chosen unwisely because at this time Davey's experience would be more useful. But she's surprisingly persuasive.
Yep, very persuasive that Corbyn as PM is far too big a risk to contemplate.
So have the Lib Dems now officially flipped from being a "We must stop Brexit" party to a "We must stop Corbyn" party?
At this moment, they do not trust Corbyn to stop Brexit because the terms he is proposing are less than watertight.
They are right not to trust him.
The idea that he'd enter number 10 then let No Deal, an outcome he and his party are opposed to, happen, so that he could immediately be vonced and get no GE (parliament would vote for confidence in a Tory) is ludicrous. You've totally drifted off into a fantasy realm if you think that's a sensible reason for the lib dems not to come to the table
When are the Govt sending out their information leaflets? Or have they abandoned them because they are unable to produce any that retain any serious factual basis?
Despite what Mike says, I do believe there are 10-20 Tory MPs who are willing to bring BoJo down. What they are not willing to do is put Corbyn into no. 10. But since, as you correctly point out, there aren't the numbers to do that, the rebels will think it's reasonably safe to act. (btw I bet one thing that encouraged Sarah Wollaston to join the LibDems was Jo Swinson's promise not to support a Corbyn premiership.)
Now of course all this discussion is going on because of the risk of No Deal. And a Corbyn caretaker government isn't the only game in town. I sincerely believe that if, for example, we end up having an autumn General Election, parliament will find a way to force Boris to delay Brexit.
Wrong! Wollaston tonight said Corbyn was "the lesser of two evils".
The thread I'm most proud was the thread that said '"I can't say the word c**t but [Mark Reckless] is a f**king c**t who deserves a hot poker up his arse."
Vulgarity is nothing to be proud of.
It is, anyone who knows me knows that I seldom swear, and when I do it usually 'bugger' or 'balls' so for me to drop the f and c bombs means something really bad has happened.
Excellent day for Jo but it wasn't difficult to sidestep the Corbyn trap into which all the Conservatives hoped she would fall.
The response is to ratchet the pressure on Corbyn by offering someone else from the Labour side (Harman) she would consider and by adding Clarke it provides an irritation to Boris (never a bad thing).
The numbers have never been there for a GoNU - the Johnson and Corbyn loyalists are too numerous in the Commons for an alternative to have more than 100-150 MPs at the very most.
It's easy to say the price to stop No Deal is putting Corbyn into Downing Street but the Conservatives would use it against the LDs in any subsequent campaign so we'd get to a No Deal plus a decade or more of Conservative majority misrule.
No, if there's a route to avoiding No Deal it has to be without putting the Marxist Corbyn into Downing Street and it has ideally to humiliate Johnson - I suppose the best thing would be for Johnson himself to seek an extension proclaiming it "in the national interest". I doubt even he would be that stupid.
The only route I see is for the Commons to show its preference by voting for a further extension which Johnson will inevitably defy and if he calls a GE he will have to deal with the 30-40 Conservative rebels who are opposed to leaving without a Deal.
I suspect that if he did call an election then a considerable number of those 30 or 40 Conservative rebels would not be allowed to stand as Tories. A series of lightening deselections may well precede any election campaign.
When are the Govt sending out their information leaflets? Or have they abandoned them because they are unable to produce any that retain any serious factual basis?
Despite what Mike says, I do believe there are 10-20 Tory MPs who are willing to bring BoJo down. What they are not willing to do is put Corbyn into no. 10. But since, as you correctly point out, there aren't the numbers to do that, the rebels will think it's reasonably safe to act. (btw I bet one thing that encouraged Sarah Wollaston to join the LibDems was Jo Swinson's promise not to support a Corbyn premiership.)
Now of course all this discussion is going on because of the risk of No Deal. And a Corbyn caretaker government isn't the only game in town. I sincerely believe that if, for example, we end up having an autumn General Election, parliament will find a way to force Boris to delay Brexit.
Wrong! Wollaston tonight said Corbyn was "the lesser of two evils".
When are the Govt sending out their information leaflets? Or have they abandoned them because they are unable to produce any that retain any serious factual basis?
You just can't wait for them can you??? Try to hide your remainiac excitement at it all going wrong ; and just
When are the Govt sending out their information leaflets? Or have they abandoned them because they are unable to produce any that retain any serious factual basis?
You just can't wait for them can you??? Try to hide your remainiac excitement at it all going wrong ; and just
Stock up on canned goods
and hide under the table? I remember getting a leaflet like that when I was young.
Let's be more concrete - if they had to choose between preventing a No Deal Brexit and preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister, even for a few weeks, which would it be?
I had been under the impression until today that they considered nothing more important than preventing a No Deal Brexit.
At this moment, there is no guarantee that making Corbyn PM would change things. He has mouthed some platitidues but he doesn't have credibility on this issue and he is also not trustworthy.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
So No Deal it is, by the sound of it.
Not necessarily - there is also the legislation route.
Do you really think this hopeless shower are capable of achieving that?
You’re going to have to be a bit more specific.
Do you really think this hopeless shower of anti-No-Deal MPs are capable of achieving an extension by legislative means?
You may recall I coined "Rule 1.1 as amended" (Not enough Tory No-Dealers have enough balls to make a difference) to cover this specific set of circumstances...
Despite what Mike says, I do believe there are 10-20 Tory MPs who are willing to bring BoJo down. What they are not willing to do is put Corbyn into no. 10. But since, as you correctly point out, there aren't the numbers to do that, the rebels will think it's reasonably safe to act. (btw I bet one thing that encouraged Sarah Wollaston to join the LibDems was Jo Swinson's promise not to support a Corbyn premiership.)
Now of course all this discussion is going on because of the risk of No Deal. And a Corbyn caretaker government isn't the only game in town. I sincerely believe that if, for example, we end up having an autumn General Election, parliament will find a way to force Boris to delay Brexit.
Wrong! Wollaston tonight said Corbyn was "the lesser of two evils".
She was trying to defuse Swinson not thought through immediate response. She should have waited and made a considered reply as Grieve, Lucas etc. did. And as Wollaston did in the evening.
When are the Govt sending out their information leaflets? Or have they abandoned them because they are unable to produce any that retain any serious factual basis?
You just can't wait for them can you??? Try to hide your remainiac excitement at it all going wrong ; and just
Stock up on canned goods
and hide under the table? I remember getting a leaflet like that when I was young.
No! You don't have to hide under that table; unless your a cybernat tonight cus it's full moon
I don't think 14 Tories supporting a VONC is out of the question.
Will they then put Jez into power?
They will no be putting Corbyn into power. How do you not get that. Corbyn does not have a Majority in the HoC,
What’s the point of passing a VoNC if there is no alternative to Johnson to put in place? An election then puts us on an almost unavoidable course to no deal, with even Johnson not able to prevent it.
If enough tories are going to vote against Johnson, then there will be an alternative to Corbyn.
Comments
Also taken the Johnson love in of the mainstream news channels.
Even the most anti Corbyn people , can see that .
The only real question is whether we get Brexit AND Corbyn.
There will be only one shot at changing the government. Putting Corbyn in, a man whose actions strongly suggests he is only interested in positioning himself according to how he bolsters his own political position and has consistently said we will be leaving the EU, carries high risks for a party determined to Remain. Putting in an ardent Remainer committed to a second referendum does not.
So your question is posing a false choice.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2013/09/02/book-review-crossing-the-floor-geoff-horn/
Basically, the same forces that led to the formation of the SDP, but that happened a few years too late for him.
Tribal Labour see both things as straightforward betrayal, of course.
A minor embarrassment, but recoverable...
She is a duffer.
Backing a VONC in your own party is the parliamentary equivalent of pushing the big red button: you can threaten it and stomp your feet, but at 1 minute to midnight are you ready to push it?
I thought he was more astute than that.
And i’m not sure people are right in assuming that Johnson will definitely follow through. Of course if we have an election it may be taken out of his hands to prevent it.
If Boris has to fight a GE he cannot fight it on the basis of a delay to Brexit. That sees the Tories annihilated.
So he only has one option left: the “look BP voters, I delivered what you wanted” gambit.
https://twitter.com/arrowjam/status/1162071313558753284
I think the words that come to my mind are "headless" and "chickens".
She now will consider a man as PM but not any in the cabinet?
Mental
There are too many MPs with vested interests. None more so than the 5 CHUKs who are looking at unemployment if there is a GE. Umunna, Wollaston and possibly Allen have given themselves a reasonable chance of hanging on.
If No Deal Brexit does happen, I am not sure Swinson can survive against the SNP.
I wonder how business would react? Can you imagine the response from the markets?
We are woefully unprepared
Good night.
Between them, Corby & Johnson control enough MPs to prevent anyone else becoming PM.
So. it really is a forced choice between No Deal Brexit or Corby.
There are no more unicorns. They're all dead.
For some unfathomable reason, I though of that when Jo Swinson turned down Corbyn's offer....
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1162000736559013889
Stock up on canned goods
Oh !