Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories seem determined to blow up their own party

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited September 2 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories seem determined to blow up their own party

Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s new administration has so far moved with speed and determination. That’s one reason why so many commentators seem taken in by its impression of tough-minded resolve and tactical acumen. But we shouldn’t be fooled. There are huge risks in the approach that Johnson and his right-hand man Dominic Cummings are taking, and they have made a series of mistakes that might give their opponents the last laugh.

Read the full story here


«13456789

Comments

  • first
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 954
    It looks very much as if we are heading for a General Election. It will probably be voted through this week, or conceivably early next.

    Along with others on here I suggested some months ago that an autumn GE was odds-on but events since muddied the waters. It now looks pretty inevitable. Perhaps Corbyn could have strung out the Conservatives for a while and seen Johnson's star fall further but he now looks likely to throw his weight behind an election vote. This may have been the Cummings strategy all along. Cummings is fired by his narcissistic self-belief because of the Leave win. This reminds me very much of Cameron's self-belief that following Scottish IndyRef he would perform a similar feat with the EU Vote. Hubris.

    It's a high risk strategy for both Johnson and Corbyn. But perhaps for the country's sake there's no alternative.

    How ironic if the winner is Jo Swinson.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    Third! Like Lab in GE19!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,791
    Fourth like the Greens in the EU election 2019!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    And thanks to Prof O’Hara for such a comprehensive tour d’horizon!
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 12,786
    Jeremy Corbyn is 5/2 against being next prime minister but it might be worth thinking about what might be the price of SNP or LibDem support after an inconclusive election. Gordon Brown offered to resign in 2010 in a bid to woo Nick Clegg. Would the yellow parties insist on a new leader as the price of a minority Labour government?

    If you think there is anything in that then shop around, as prices on Labour figures like Starmer and RLB vary by 100 per cent or more between different bookmakers.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    The question Prof O’Hara does not address (quite appropriately for reasons of space) is “what is their alternative?”

    Have Johnson/Cummings chosen the least worst option if their objective is to deliver BREXIT?

    If they genuinely believe Remainers within and without Parliament are effectively blocking renegotiation by the EU, what else should they do?

    Their renegotiation aim of WA minus Back Stop is the only thing the House has voted in favour of.

    What will more delay lead to other than further uncertainty?

    One thing I am sure of - this House is no longer fit for purpose and the sooner it - and its Speaker - are replaced, the better. As for which government that leads to - who the heck knows?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 12,786
    What if this isn't a Brexit election? Elections are often not decided on the "right" issues. Ask Theresa May, or Ted Heath, or Boris's own Winston Churchill.

    Labour won't want it to be, and Boris and Cummings are furiously shaking the magic money tree to shoot Labour's foxes on the NHS, schools, crime and so on. More importantly, Number 10 wants an election just after Brexit has happened but before project fear is seen to have had a point after all.

    The fringe parties like BXP and the LibDems might be caught out here, if even single-issue voters see Brexit as a fait accompli.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 50,091

    One thing I am sure of - this House is no longer fit for purpose and the sooner it - and its Speaker - are replaced, the better. As for which government that leads to - who the heck knows?

    On the contrary, we have a PM who is hell bent on causing widespread food and medicine shortages, and will ignore the law to do so.

    The House, and Speaker, are doing all they can to prevent this.

    That is exactly their purpose.


  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    Scott_P said:

    One thing I am sure of - this House is no longer fit for purpose and the sooner it - and its Speaker - are replaced, the better. As for which government that leads to - who the heck knows?

    On the contrary, we have a PM who is hell bent on causing widespread food and medicine shortages, and will ignore the law to do so.
    What is their solution?

    Not that one!

    Not that one neither!

    No!

    Something Else!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566
    An excellent article, Professor.
    It is a model of sense, but I do not expect it to be uncontentious.
  • A great article, hard to find fault with it.
    A few questions for the PB brains trust:
    1) is a pre-Oct 31 election locked on now? Oct 17?
    2) what is the Tories' Brexit policy in this election? No deal?
    3) would a Tory no deal platform be necessary or sufficient to get BXP to stand aside?
    4) do the Tories allow 20 MPs to get deselected just before the election? Would the incumbents run as independent Conservatives?
    5) how can the Tories possibly think they will win this election given (a) Scotland, (b) deselections and (c) either they run on no deal (unpopular with electorate) or risk activating BXP?
    I know that Cummings has spent the summer gaming every scenario like the Very Clever Person he is while us mere mortals were on the beach, but I can't figure out what he thinks he's doing.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 12,786

    What if this isn't a Brexit election? Elections are often not decided on the "right" issues. Ask Theresa May, or Ted Heath, or Boris's own Winston Churchill.

    Labour won't want it to be, and Boris and Cummings are furiously shaking the magic money tree to shoot Labour's foxes on the NHS, schools, crime and so on. More importantly, Number 10 wants an election just after Brexit has happened but before project fear is seen to have had a point after all.

    The fringe parties like BXP and the LibDems might be caught out here, if even single-issue voters see Brexit as a fait accompli.

    Speaking of Labour foxes, DC's reached for his shotgun before breakfast with the announcement that new teachers will get more money.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49547040
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    edited September 2

    A great article, hard to find fault with it.
    A few questions for the PB brains trust:
    1) is a pre-Oct 31 election locked on now? Oct 17?
    2) what is the Tories' Brexit policy in this election? No deal?
    3) would a Tory no deal platform be necessary or sufficient to get BXP to stand aside?
    4) do the Tories allow 20 MPs to get deselected just before the election? Would the incumbents run as independent Conservatives?
    5) how can the Tories possibly think they will win this election given (a) Scotland, (b) deselections and (c) either they run on no deal (unpopular with electorate) or risk activating BXP?
    I know that Cummings has spent the summer gaming every scenario like the Very Clever Person he is while us mere mortals were on the beach, but I can't figure out what he thinks he's doing.

    Not the “brains trust” but here’s my tuppence worth.

    1) Yes - any attempt to hold it after Oct 31 would be a “constitutional outrage” unlike the current row which JRM described as “gamesmanship”.

    2) WA minus back stop - only thing HoC has voted in favour of. If the EU won’t accept that don’t blame us.

    3) BXP will go for it whatever - down to Farage’s ego.

    4) It’s a right old mess - likely to benefit the opposition if they do run as “Independent Conservatives”. But at least what remains of the party will be “united” - unlike Labour....

    5) However big a mess the Tories are in Labour are in a potentially worse mess - not sure their Brexit equivocation can survive a GE campaign with Leading ShadCab advocating Remain. And then there’s Corbyn.

    And 6) LibDems should run on a “Remain” platform - put Labour on the spot.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    Labour goes into an October election with

    1. Corbyn as their offering for PM
    2. No credible Brexit policy
    3. No credible action on anti-semitism

    The timing is not exactly propitious. But the only thing that has kept them together has been the end point of a general election. They can hardly flinch from it now.
  • eekeek Posts: 5,520

    What if this isn't a Brexit election? Elections are often not decided on the "right" issues. Ask Theresa May, or Ted Heath, or Boris's own Winston Churchill.

    Labour won't want it to be, and Boris and Cummings are furiously shaking the magic money tree to shoot Labour's foxes on the NHS, schools, crime and so on. More importantly, Number 10 wants an election just after Brexit has happened but before project fear is seen to have had a point after all.

    The fringe parties like BXP and the LibDems might be caught out here, if even single-issue voters see Brexit as a fait accompli.

    Speaking of Labour foxes, DC's reached for his shotgun before breakfast with the announcement that new teachers will get more money.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49547040
    So that’s most of the new education budget spent before it’s actually been announced.

    Oh and teachers were probably not the best use of that money but hey it’s just a bribe.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,312

    Labour goes into an October election with

    1. Corbyn as their offering for PM
    2. No credible Brexit policy
    3. No credible action on anti-semitism

    The timing is not exactly propitious. But the only thing that has kept them together has been the end point of a general election. They can hardly flinch from it now.

    But the Conservatives are not in much of a better state. Boris et al threatening deselection for voting against the government after their repeated voting against the government on the same issue - sometimes for decades - is hilarious.

    The Brexiteres are undemocratic scum. Shame on them, and shame on the once-great Conservative Party for putting such scum in power.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 5,378
    Impressive thread header, great that pb.com exposes us to new writers like this.
    I've added his blog to my reading list.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 1,123
    *If* there is an election in the next couple of months: hundreds of years of FPTP seems to have left everyone that either
    i) the Labour party is in chaos, the tories are a shoe in or
    ii) the Conservative party is in chaos, Labour are a shoe in.

    Which opinion you hold will depend of which of the two parties you would rather see win.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,988
    Good morning, everyone.

    Good article. Being high-handed if you've got two-thirds on your side can work. In a very tightly contested matter, you may well just drive away potential and actual supporters.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696

    Labour goes into an October election with

    1. Corbyn as their offering for PM
    2. No credible Brexit policy
    3. No credible action on anti-semitism

    The timing is not exactly propitious. But the only thing that has kept them together has been the end point of a general election. They can hardly flinch from it now.

    But the Conservatives are not in much of a better state. Boris et al threatening deselection for voting against the government after their repeated voting against the government on the same issue - sometimes for decades - is hilarious.

    The Brexiteres are undemocratic scum. Shame on them, and shame on the once-great Conservative Party for putting such scum in power.
    But they are in a better state. They have a significant lead in the polls. That could be a massive lead depending on what happens to the current Brexit Party vote. (And if they want Brexit but don't want THIS Brexit, then they really aren't much more than a well-heeled anarchist grouping).

    And much as many people here might not like him, in Boris they have a leader who is appearing to listen, to act, to be upbeat, to try to do the right thing - and get Brexit over the line. And from what I am hearing, people have warmed to that.

    A resut like 38 C, 23 Lab, 17 LD would give Boris a very healthy majority to get on and do stuff.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 1,123
    A plausible* outcome is:
    The Conservatives under Boris have the most seats but even with the DUP reach 310 MPs (and assuming the "Boris Conservatives" win all the challenges against newly independent Conservatives)
    The Labour party are a comfortable second and
    Lab+SNP+LD have over 325 MPs.

    This would be a really difficult situation for the HoC to cope with, and I could easily see that Swinson says the LDs will support Labour but not with Corbyn as PM.


    *Plausible does not mean my prediction, but it is a scenario that must be taken seriously.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 1,398
    edited September 2
    I wonder, if the aim is for a GE without No Deal blocked, whether we could see a super rapid dissolution before anti No Deal legislation passes. BBC suggest that even on fast track the legislation would require a sitting on Monday 9th.

    In which case, we could be looking at a GE as early as somewhere between Oct 10th and Oct 15th?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,081
    edited September 2

    Scott_P said:

    One thing I am sure of - this House is no longer fit for purpose and the sooner it - and its Speaker - are replaced, the better. As for which government that leads to - who the heck knows?

    On the contrary, we have a PM who is hell bent on causing widespread food and medicine shortages, and will ignore the law to do so.
    What is their solution?

    Not that one!

    Not that one neither!

    No!

    Something Else!
    Solutions currently open to the PM that don't end in No Deal are:

    * Current WA subject to binding referendum vs Remain, if he whips for it then it'll pass parliament
    * Put the WA in the manifesto and call a GE
    * Put the NI-only backstop in the manifesto and call a GE asking for a mandate that doesn't depend on the DUP
    * All-party committee to decide a softer brexit of the kind that nearly passed as an indicative vote, and would have passed with government support, and ask the EU to reopen negotiations without TMay's red lines. (Probably won't work but you never know.)
    * Just extend and wait for something to change of its own accord
    * Fuck everything, MV4
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,312

    Labour goes into an October election with

    1. Corbyn as their offering for PM
    2. No credible Brexit policy
    3. No credible action on anti-semitism

    The timing is not exactly propitious. But the only thing that has kept them together has been the end point of a general election. They can hardly flinch from it now.

    But the Conservatives are not in much of a better state. Boris et al threatening deselection for voting against the government after their repeated voting against the government on the same issue - sometimes for decades - is hilarious.

    The Brexiteres are undemocratic scum. Shame on them, and shame on the once-great Conservative Party for putting such scum in power.
    But they are in a better state. They have a significant lead in the polls. That could be a massive lead depending on what happens to the current Brexit Party vote. (And if they want Brexit but don't want THIS Brexit, then they really aren't much more than a well-heeled anarchist grouping).

    And much as many people here might not like him, in Boris they have a leader who is appearing to listen, to act, to be upbeat, to try to do the right thing - and get Brexit over the line. And from what I am hearing, people have warmed to that.

    A resut like 38 C, 23 Lab, 17 LD would give Boris a very healthy majority to get on and do stuff.
    So they're undemocratic scum who are in a better state than a party mired in anti-Semitism from it's rotting head down.

    That's not a great selling-point.

    And there is always the Lib Dems for the conscientious, moral voter. ;)
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 3,168
    Pro_Rata said:

    I wonder, if the aim is for a GE without No Deal blocked, whether we could see a super rapid dissolution before anti No Deal legislation passes. BBC suggest that even on fast track the legislation would require a sitting on Monday 9th.

    In which case, we could be looking at a GE as early as somewhere between Oct 10th and Oct 15th?

    The Commons doesn’t have to vote for a GE. They could insist that Boris extends A50 first.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 1,123

    Labour goes into an October election with

    1. Corbyn as their offering for PM
    2. No credible Brexit policy
    3. No credible action on anti-semitism

    The timing is not exactly propitious. But the only thing that has kept them together has been the end point of a general election. They can hardly flinch from it now.

    But the Conservatives are not in much of a better state. Boris et al threatening deselection for voting against the government after their repeated voting against the government on the same issue - sometimes for decades - is hilarious.

    The Brexiteres are undemocratic scum. Shame on them, and shame on the once-great Conservative Party for putting such scum in power.
    But they are in a better state. They have a significant lead in the polls. That could be a massive lead depending on what happens to the current Brexit Party vote. (And if they want Brexit but don't want THIS Brexit, then they really aren't much more than a well-heeled anarchist grouping).

    And much as many people here might not like him, in Boris they have a leader who is appearing to listen, to act, to be upbeat, to try to do the right thing - and get Brexit over the line. And from what I am hearing, people have warmed to that.

    A resut like 38 C, 23 Lab, 17 LD would give Boris a very healthy majority to get on and do stuff.
    If the Conservatives manage to get 38% in the coming election then they have earned the right to lead the UK into a no deal brexit. I cannot see that happening.

    If the Conservatives do hold an election promising either "WA without backstop (impossible)" or no-deal then a lot of 2017 conservative voters in the central wing will not vote tory this time.


  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626
    Mr O’Hara seems to be suggesting that Mrs May II in the shape of Mordant would be the answer.

    Did he miss the EU elections ?

    Worrying about the long term when the party could be finished within 3 months is for the birds.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 1,123
    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696

    Labour goes into an October election with

    1. Corbyn as their offering for PM
    2. No credible Brexit policy
    3. No credible action on anti-semitism

    The timing is not exactly propitious. But the only thing that has kept them together has been the end point of a general election. They can hardly flinch from it now.

    But the Conservatives are not in much of a better state. Boris et al threatening deselection for voting against the government after their repeated voting against the government on the same issue - sometimes for decades - is hilarious.

    The Brexiteres are undemocratic scum. Shame on them, and shame on the once-great Conservative Party for putting such scum in power.
    But they are in a better state. They have a significant lead in the polls. That could be a massive lead depending on what happens to the current Brexit Party vote. (And if they want Brexit but don't want THIS Brexit, then they really aren't much more than a well-heeled anarchist grouping).

    And much as many people here might not like him, in Boris they have a leader who is appearing to listen, to act, to be upbeat, to try to do the right thing - and get Brexit over the line. And from what I am hearing, people have warmed to that.

    A resut like 38 C, 23 Lab, 17 LD would give Boris a very healthy majority to get on and do stuff.
    So they're undemocratic scum who are in a better state than a party mired in anti-Semitism from it's rotting head down.

    That's not a great selling-point.

    And there is always the Lib Dems for the conscientious, moral voter. ;)
    "undemocratic scum"? Well, it's an assertion. Unsupported. I'm not sure what more you want of democracy than it delivering a working majority.

    Oh, I see - a working majority YOU LIKE....
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,193
    edited September 2

    Pro_Rata said:

    I wonder, if the aim is for a GE without No Deal blocked, whether we could see a super rapid dissolution before anti No Deal legislation passes. BBC suggest that even on fast track the legislation would require a sitting on Monday 9th.

    In which case, we could be looking at a GE as early as somewhere between Oct 10th and Oct 15th?

    The Commons doesn’t have to vote for a GE. They could insist that Boris extends A50 first.
    They really can't if he doesn't want to, and it's obvious that he doesn't.

    They can pass a motion telling him to, he can ignore it as it has no legal force.

    They could maybe pass a law, insisting he asks, but it requires the consent of all EU27 countries, and if he doesn't want one he can ask for one in a fashion that will be refused.

    Or he could just ignore the law regardless, what is parliament going to do? Tell his mum ?

    If the commons wants an extension, there is only 1 route to it, VONC Boris and appoint another executive to do their bidding.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626

    Scott_P said:

    One thing I am sure of - this House is no longer fit for purpose and the sooner it - and its Speaker - are replaced, the better. As for which government that leads to - who the heck knows?

    On the contrary, we have a PM who is hell bent on causing widespread food and medicine shortages, and will ignore the law to do so.
    What is their solution?

    Not that one!

    Not that one neither!

    No!

    Something Else!
    Solutions currently open to the PM that don't end in No Deal are:

    * Current WA subject to binding referendum vs Remain, if he whips for it then it'll pass parliament
    * Put the WA in the manifesto and call a GE
    * Put the NI-only backstop in the manifesto and call a GE asking for a mandate that doesn't depend on the DUP
    * All-party committee to decide a softer brexit of the kind that nearly passed as an indicative vote, and would have passed with government support, and ask the EU to reopen negotiations without TMay's red lines. (Probably won't work but you never know.)
    * Just extend and wait for something to change of its own accord
    * Fuck everything, MV4
    All of the above see the Cons polling at sub 20%.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 15,940
    eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    Quite right. We also know that Boris is quite capable of not saying what he means or meaning what he says. And of deciding he really meant something else.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,081
    edited September 2
    TGOHF said:


    All of the above see the Cons polling at sub 20%.

    I think that overstates the case but the point I'm making is that there are plenty of ways to get Brexit done without No Deal, it's absolutely false to suggest nobody has come up with an alternative.

    It may be hard to come up with an alternative *that will be good for the Conservative Party's polling in the next few weeks* but that's a different question.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 1,510
    edited September 2
    If there IS a GE it will be one of the most fascinating in decades. So many variables:

    1. Will the Tories be able to make the breakthrough in northern leave seats currently held by Labour that they threatened to do in GE2017?

    2. Will the Lib Dem resurgence see Tory losses in the South?

    3. Will the Lib Dem resurgence see Labour and Tory losses in London?

    4. Will Boris actually keep his seat?! (assuming he’s not parachuted into some vacating MPs fiefdom, that is).

    5. Will the Tories return to panda status in Scotland or can some of them cling on?

    6. How will the DUP fare in Northern Ireland?

    It might be complete and utter chaos but for politics nerds it’s better than Christmas.
  • Thanks Prof. Nice to have you aboard. Put on your life jacket and enjoy the voyage!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696

    Pro_Rata said:

    I wonder, if the aim is for a GE without No Deal blocked, whether we could see a super rapid dissolution before anti No Deal legislation passes. BBC suggest that even on fast track the legislation would require a sitting on Monday 9th.

    In which case, we could be looking at a GE as early as somewhere between Oct 10th and Oct 15th?

    The Commons doesn’t have to vote for a GE. They could insist that Boris extends A50 first.
    They really can't if he doesn't want to, and it's obvious that he doesn't.

    They can pass a motion telling him to, he can ignore it as it has no legal force.

    They could maybe pass a law, insisting he asks, but it requires the consent of all EU27 countries, and if he doesn't want one he can ask for one in a fashion that will be refused.

    Or he could just ignore the law regardless, what is parliament going to do? Tell his mum ?

    If the commons wants an extension, there is only 1 route to it, VONC Boris and appoint another executive to do their bidding.
    And the only alternative executive realistically on offer is headed by Jeremy Corbyn.....
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    Pro_Rata said:

    I wonder, if the aim is for a GE without No Deal blocked, whether we could see a super rapid dissolution before anti No Deal legislation passes. BBC suggest that even on fast track the legislation would require a sitting on Monday 9th.

    In which case, we could be looking at a GE as early as somewhere between Oct 10th and Oct 15th?

    The Commons doesn’t have to vote for a GE. They could insist that Boris extends A50 first.
    They really can't if he doesn't want to, and it's obvious that he doesn't.

    They can pass a motion telling him to, he can ignore it as it has no legal force.

    They could maybe pass a law, insisting he asks, but it requires the consent of all EU27 countries, and if he doesn't want one he can ask for one in a fashion that will be refused.

    Or he could just ignore the law regardless, what is parliament going to do? Tell his mum ?

    If the commons wants an extension, there is only 1 route to it, VONC Boris and appoint another executive to do their bidding.
    And the only alternative executive realistically on offer is headed by Jeremy Corbyn.....
    Its getting to the point that even Jeremy Corbyn is better than your shower of hypocritical and lying tw*ts.
  • eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    I agree and in Scotland it is even more complex. I cannot see the Scottish courts allowing Boris to run roughshod over the Scottish parliament. This will create a scenario where there is almost no way to implement no deal in Scotland. The country is almost fully united in not agreeing with the English Tory plan. Even the Scottish tories.

    Some Scottish and N Irish backstop is my initial thought as where we are heading but who knows
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 1,510
    TGOHF said:
    What is the point? I can see the logic behind extending for another referendum, but a short extension just gets us back to going through all this again in two months time (in the run up to Christmas to boot).
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 15,940

    TGOHF said:
    What is the point? I can see the logic behind extending for another referendum, but a short extension just gets us back to going through all this again in two months time (in the run up to Christmas to boot).
    Seconded.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,256
    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    One thing I am sure of - this House is no longer fit for purpose and the sooner it - and its Speaker - are replaced, the better. As for which government that leads to - who the heck knows?

    On the contrary, we have a PM who is hell bent on causing widespread food and medicine shortages, and will ignore the law to do so.
    What is their solution?

    Not that one!

    Not that one neither!

    No!

    Something Else!
    Solutions currently open to the PM that don't end in No Deal are:

    * Current WA subject to binding referendum vs Remain, if he whips for it then it'll pass parliament
    * Put the WA in the manifesto and call a GE
    * Put the NI-only backstop in the manifesto and call a GE asking for a mandate that doesn't depend on the DUP
    * All-party committee to decide a softer brexit of the kind that nearly passed as an indicative vote, and would have passed with government support, and ask the EU to reopen negotiations without TMay's red lines. (Probably won't work but you never know.)
    * Just extend and wait for something to change of its own accord
    * Fuck everything, MV4
    All of the above see the Cons polling at sub 20%.
    Not sure English Tories are bothered if the backstop is applied in NI.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,470
    The problem for the Tories .

    The only way to completely nullify the Brexit Party in a general election is to have a manifesto of no deal .

    That will drive away more moderate Tories especially those who voted Remain or want to leave with a deal .

    For Labour what do they do ? A full on Remain position sheds Leavers , a fudge of agreeing a new deal means that’s still a Brexit position for Remainers .

    A new deal and then a second vote Remain. or deal opens up lots of questions as to how many Labour MPs will trash their own parties deal and campaign for Remain.

    The Lib Dems have the easiest message . As do the other total Remain parties . Equally the Brexit Party is also clear .

    The election looks very difficult to call and even more so until the manifestos have been published .
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,312

    Labour goes into an October election with

    1. Corbyn as their offering for PM
    2. No credible Brexit policy
    3. No credible action on anti-semitism

    The timing is not exactly propitious. But the only thing that has kept them together has been the end point of a general election. They can hardly flinch from it now.

    But the Conservatives are not in much of a better state. Boris et al threatening deselection for voting against the government after their repeated voting against the government on the same issue - sometimes for decades - is hilarious.

    The Brexiteres are undemocratic scum. Shame on them, and shame on the once-great Conservative Party for putting such scum in power.
    But they are in a better state. They have a significant lead in the polls. That could be a massive lead depending on what happens to the current Brexit Party vote. (And if they want Brexit but don't want THIS Brexit, then they really aren't much more than a well-heeled anarchist grouping).

    And much as many people here might not like him, in Boris they have a leader who is appearing to listen, to act, to be upbeat, to try to do the right thing - and get Brexit over the line. And from what I am hearing, people have warmed to that.

    A resut like 38 C, 23 Lab, 17 LD would give Boris a very healthy majority to get on and do stuff.
    So they're undemocratic scum who are in a better state than a party mired in anti-Semitism from it's rotting head down.

    That's not a great selling-point.

    And there is always the Lib Dems for the conscientious, moral voter. ;)
    "undemocratic scum"? Well, it's an assertion. Unsupported. I'm not sure what more you want of democracy than it delivering a working majority.

    Oh, I see - a working majority YOU LIKE....
    It's an accurate assertion.

    The government deselecting MPs for rebelling on an issue that they themselves rebelled against just a few months ago is the act of scum. And undemocratic scum at that, given the 2017 manifesto and the polling.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 7,308

    Pro_Rata said:

    I wonder, if the aim is for a GE without No Deal blocked, whether we could see a super rapid dissolution before anti No Deal legislation passes. BBC suggest that even on fast track the legislation would require a sitting on Monday 9th.

    In which case, we could be looking at a GE as early as somewhere between Oct 10th and Oct 15th?

    The Commons doesn’t have to vote for a GE. They could insist that Boris extends A50 first.
    They really can't if he doesn't want to, and it's obvious that he doesn't.

    They can pass a motion telling him to, he can ignore it as it has no legal force.

    They could maybe pass a law, insisting he asks, but it requires the consent of all EU27 countries, and if he doesn't want one he can ask for one in a fashion that will be refused.

    Or he could just ignore the law regardless, what is parliament going to do? Tell his mum ?

    If the commons wants an extension, there is only 1 route to it, VONC Boris and appoint another executive to do their bidding.
    "he could just ignore the law"
    Can politicians do that? Genuine question.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,988
    A short extension seems the most stupid of all worlds. No resolution, no time for significant change, continued uncertainty.

    Cui bono?

    Farage, probably.

    If they are after a short extension that points to it being the lowest common denominator behind the disparate anti-no deal MP groups.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,193

    Pro_Rata said:

    I wonder, if the aim is for a GE without No Deal blocked, whether we could see a super rapid dissolution before anti No Deal legislation passes. BBC suggest that even on fast track the legislation would require a sitting on Monday 9th.

    In which case, we could be looking at a GE as early as somewhere between Oct 10th and Oct 15th?

    The Commons doesn’t have to vote for a GE. They could insist that Boris extends A50 first.
    They really can't if he doesn't want to, and it's obvious that he doesn't.

    They can pass a motion telling him to, he can ignore it as it has no legal force.

    They could maybe pass a law, insisting he asks, but it requires the consent of all EU27 countries, and if he doesn't want one he can ask for one in a fashion that will be refused.

    Or he could just ignore the law regardless, what is parliament going to do? Tell his mum ?

    If the commons wants an extension, there is only 1 route to it, VONC Boris and appoint another executive to do their bidding.
    And the only alternative executive realistically on offer is headed by Jeremy Corbyn.....
    Indeed.

    Or, they could revoke, but I'm not sure the votes are there for it at present.

    Who knows where the numbers will fall if we get to 30th Oct, without a dissolution and no deal?

    All academic I think; I expect a dissolution within 96 hours.

  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    TGOHF said:
    What is the point? I can see the logic behind extending for another referendum, but a short extension just gets us back to going through all this again in two months time (in the run up to Christmas to boot).
    I think the idea is simply to knock Boris down a peg or two so he can focus on policy rather than bravado.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,791
    TGOHF said:
    Short extension? How about 1 day? :D
  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,106
    If a GE next month is now nailed on what on earth would be the outcome?

    I cant see anything other than an anti Tory rainbow coalition though goodness knows who would lead it given the antipathy to Corbyn outside Labour. And indeed within!

    If the country seems fooked under the current House I cant see the outcome of a GE putting us on a better footing.

    The nightmare worsens it seems. What a depressing read the last couple of threads have been....
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 12,167
    The hypocrisy of this government is remarkable. They need to deny themselves the whip before extending that to anyone else.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 26,673

    TGOHF said:
    What is the point? I can see the logic behind extending for another referendum, but a short extension just gets us back to going through all this again in two months time (in the run up to Christmas to boot).
    Go past 31 October and Boris Johnson has a whole different set of problems, apparently insoluble ones. And then everyone can agree to a general election.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780
    I wonder what Mr O'Hara would have written about Howe's 1981 budget? Surely there was a party throwing itself off the cliff in the mad pursuit of monetarism, against the advice of the famous 364 economists, with an MP crossing the floor and others walking out, dooming itself to never winning an election again or at best squeaking through one election on the back of divided opposition before its inevitable and final annihilation?

    What happened instead was the underlying inflation that had so dogged our economic performance for more than a decade was finally brought under control and unemployment fell sharply rather than the increase forecast. The ground was set for strong future economic growth and a new consensus was created that remained in place until the latter days of Brown's hubris.

    So let it be with Brexit. If we leave (and it is still not certain) there will be a new consensus and all to play for.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,193

    TGOHF said:
    What is the point? I can see the logic behind extending for another referendum, but a short extension just gets us back to going through all this again in two months time (in the run up to Christmas to boot).
    Passing a law stipulating him to "seek an extension" is insane, it requires the consent of the other party, which Boris can easily engineer the refusal of.

    If that's really the plan, then Boris has already won
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129
    edited September 2

    What if this isn't a Brexit election? Elections are often not decided on the "right" issues. Ask Theresa May, or Ted Heath, or Boris's own Winston Churchill.

    Labour won't want it to be, and Boris and Cummings are furiously shaking the magic money tree to shoot Labour's foxes on the NHS, schools, crime and so on. More importantly, Number 10 wants an election just after Brexit has happened but before project fear is seen to have had a point after all.

    The fringe parties like BXP and the LibDems might be caught out here, if even single-issue voters see Brexit as a fait accompli.

    Speaking of Labour foxes, DC's reached for his shotgun before breakfast with the announcement that new teachers will get more money.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49547040
    I wonder if he realises the implications for pension contributions? Looking at the sums, they're almost Corbynite - only the headline figure is considered, not the additions. A salary rise is only about two-thirds of the overall cost.

    In any case, I think most teachers at the moment would rather see more teachers than higher pay. Higher salaries might attract more recruits - but there seems a fair risk it will also force more cuts in school budgets elsewhere to pay for them.

    Edit - incidentally, as of this morning employer contributions to teacher pensions have increased by 40%.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,312
    nico67 said:

    The problem for the Tories .

    The only way to completely nullify the Brexit Party in a general election is to have a manifesto of no deal .

    That will drive away more moderate Tories especially those who voted Remain or want to leave with a deal .

    For Labour what do they do ? A full on Remain position sheds Leavers , a fudge of agreeing a new deal means that’s still a Brexit position for Remainers .

    A new deal and then a second vote Remain. or deal opens up lots of questions as to how many Labour MPs will trash their own parties deal and campaign for Remain.

    The Lib Dems have the easiest message . As do the other total Remain parties . Equally the Brexit Party is also clear .

    The election looks very difficult to call and even more so until the manifestos have been published .

    Yep. As far as I'm concerned it's impossible to forecast the result of an October GE at this stage.

    A HYUFD-style large Conservative majority is just about possible - and there are at least ways towards that, however unlikely they may be.

    So is a 2017-style surprise with a Labour majority (albeit realistically a small one). Given the current political chaos, it's amazing to think that Labour aren't dead certs - and that is a result of their massive weaknesses.

    The Lib Dems could sweep up as well, perhaps as a Lib Dem/SNP coalition (and what fun that would be). However much more likely is a high percentage and a few dozen seats.

    The winners are hard to discern through the smog of political uncertainty. The losers are east to discern - the great British public and democracy itself.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129
    Thank you for an excellent article Professor.

    There was a time when lunatics were barred from the political process. I can't help but feel they were much happier times!
  • ChrisChris Posts: 4,213

    eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    Quite right. We also know that Boris is quite capable of not saying what he means or meaning what he says. And of deciding he really meant something else.
    You mean he's a compulsive liar?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    edited September 2
    TGOHF said:
    What idiocy. People are going to lose their careers - just so they can point at Boris and say "Ha! October 31st "do or die" huh? Hahahaha....." Because nothing else material comes out of it. Maybe a few big investment opportunities get delayed. Or scrapped. But hey, point and laugh at Boris.

    Really, that just strengthens Boris - as he looks to camera and says "See what I'm up against folks?"

    We need an election. We need a significantly new Parliament.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 26,673
    DavidL said:

    I wonder what Mr O'Hara would have written about Howe's 1981 budget? Surely there was a party throwing itself off the cliff in the mad pursuit of monetarism, against the advice of the famous 364 economists, with an MP crossing the floor and others walking out, dooming itself to never winning an election again or at best squeaking through one election on the back of divided opposition before its inevitable and final annihilation?

    What happened instead was the underlying inflation that had so dogged our economic performance for more than a decade was finally brought under control and unemployment fell sharply rather than the increase forecast. The ground was set for strong future economic growth and a new consensus was created that remained in place until the latter days of Brown's hubris.

    So let it be with Brexit. If we leave (and it is still not certain) there will be a new consensus and all to play for.

    What do you imagine this new consensus is going to look like after leaving? Because right now I don’t see any grounds for expecting any kind of consensus.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 10,549

    Pro_Rata said:

    I wonder, if the aim is for a GE without No Deal blocked, whether we could see a super rapid dissolution before anti No Deal legislation passes. BBC suggest that even on fast track the legislation would require a sitting on Monday 9th.

    In which case, we could be looking at a GE as early as somewhere between Oct 10th and Oct 15th?

    The Commons doesn’t have to vote for a GE. They could insist that Boris extends A50 first.
    They really can't if he doesn't want to, and it's obvious that he doesn't.

    They can pass a motion telling him to, he can ignore it as it has no legal force.

    They could maybe pass a law, insisting he asks, but it requires the consent of all EU27 countries, and if he doesn't want one he can ask for one in a fashion that will be refused.

    Or he could just ignore the law regardless, what is parliament going to do? Tell his mum ?

    If the commons wants an extension, there is only 1 route to it, VONC Boris and appoint another executive to do their bidding.
    And the only alternative executive realistically on offer is headed by Jeremy Corbyn.....
    Indeed.

    Or, they could revoke, but I'm not sure the votes are there for it at present.

    Who knows where the numbers will fall if we get to 30th Oct, without a dissolution and no deal?

    All academic I think; I expect a dissolution within 96 hours.

    Revoke is the best policy, and the only one in the gift of a new PM.

    After that we have plenty of time to re-think and re-invoke with a new negotiating position.

    Meanwhile Cummings wants to purge the Mensheviks.
  • eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    Quite right. We also know that Boris is quite capable of not saying what he means or meaning what he says. And of deciding he really meant something else.
    He's winging it, like he's winged every serious job in his life.

    It's pointless trying to figure what he 'thinks' because that assumes he actually thinks something.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780

    eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    I agree and in Scotland it is even more complex. I cannot see the Scottish courts allowing Boris to run roughshod over the Scottish parliament. This will create a scenario where there is almost no way to implement no deal in Scotland. The country is almost fully united in not agreeing with the English Tory plan. Even the Scottish tories.

    Some Scottish and N Irish backstop is my initial thought as where we are heading but who knows
    I really don't know what you are talking about. The Scottish Parliament has absolutely nothing to do with tomorrow's court case.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129
    Chris said:

    eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    Quite right. We also know that Boris is quite capable of not saying what he means or meaning what he says. And of deciding he really meant something else.
    You mean he's a compulsive liar?
    Not just a compulsive liar.

    To quote Agatha Christie, a fluent, compulsive and habitual liar.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,470

    nico67 said:

    The problem for the Tories .

    The only way to completely nullify the Brexit Party in a general election is to have a manifesto of no deal .

    That will drive away more moderate Tories especially those who voted Remain or want to leave with a deal .

    For Labour what do they do ? A full on Remain position sheds Leavers , a fudge of agreeing a new deal means that’s still a Brexit position for Remainers .

    A new deal and then a second vote Remain. or deal opens up lots of questions as to how many Labour MPs will trash their own parties deal and campaign for Remain.

    The Lib Dems have the easiest message . As do the other total Remain parties . Equally the Brexit Party is also clear .

    The election looks very difficult to call and even more so until the manifestos have been published .

    Yep. As far as I'm concerned it's impossible to forecast the result of an October GE at this stage.

    A HYUFD-style large Conservative majority is just about possible - and there are at least ways towards that, however unlikely they may be.

    So is a 2017-style surprise with a Labour majority (albeit realistically a small one). Given the current political chaos, it's amazing to think that Labour aren't dead certs - and that is a result of their massive weaknesses.

    The Lib Dems could sweep up as well, perhaps as a Lib Dem/SNP coalition (and what fun that would be). However much more likely is a high percentage and a few dozen seats.

    The winners are hard to discern through the smog of political uncertainty. The losers are east to discern - the great British public and democracy itself.
    Agreed . I have absolutely no clue how this will turn out . Manifestos though will help if we get to an election.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129
    DavidL said:

    eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    I agree and in Scotland it is even more complex. I cannot see the Scottish courts allowing Boris to run roughshod over the Scottish parliament. This will create a scenario where there is almost no way to implement no deal in Scotland. The country is almost fully united in not agreeing with the English Tory plan. Even the Scottish tories.

    Some Scottish and N Irish backstop is my initial thought as where we are heading but who knows
    I really don't know what you are talking about. The Scottish Parliament has absolutely nothing to do with tomorrow's court case.
    I would assume it's a reference to the Scottish Executive being booted out of UK/EU negotiations on fisheries etc.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 4,213
    edited September 2

    Pro_Rata said:

    I wonder, if the aim is for a GE without No Deal blocked, whether we could see a super rapid dissolution before anti No Deal legislation passes. BBC suggest that even on fast track the legislation would require a sitting on Monday 9th.

    In which case, we could be looking at a GE as early as somewhere between Oct 10th and Oct 15th?

    The Commons doesn’t have to vote for a GE. They could insist that Boris extends A50 first.
    They really can't if he doesn't want to, and it's obvious that he doesn't.

    They can pass a motion telling him to, he can ignore it as it has no legal force.

    They could maybe pass a law, insisting he asks, but it requires the consent of all EU27 countries, and if he doesn't want one he can ask for one in a fashion that will be refused.

    Or he could just ignore the law regardless, what is parliament going to do? Tell his mum ?
    He could ignore the law in the same way that you or I could ignore the law. What could anyone do to stop us?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566
    ydoethur said:

    What if this isn't a Brexit election? Elections are often not decided on the "right" issues. Ask Theresa May, or Ted Heath, or Boris's own Winston Churchill.

    Labour won't want it to be, and Boris and Cummings are furiously shaking the magic money tree to shoot Labour's foxes on the NHS, schools, crime and so on. More importantly, Number 10 wants an election just after Brexit has happened but before project fear is seen to have had a point after all.

    The fringe parties like BXP and the LibDems might be caught out here, if even single-issue voters see Brexit as a fait accompli.

    Speaking of Labour foxes, DC's reached for his shotgun before breakfast with the announcement that new teachers will get more money.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49547040
    I wonder if he realises the implications for pension contributions? Looking at the sums, they're almost Corbynite - only the headline figure is considered, not the additions. A salary rise is only about two-thirds of the overall cost.

    In any case, I think most teachers at the moment would rather see more teachers than higher pay. Higher salaries might attract more recruits - but there seems a fair risk it will also force more cuts in school budgets elsewhere to pay for them.

    Edit - incidentally, as of this morning employer contributions to teacher pensions have increased by 40%.
    Of course.
    But do you seriously believe any of these shiny announcements will actually be enacted unmodified, even in the event of the Tories having a majority sufficient to present something of more substance than the Potemkin Queen’s Speech currently scheduled ?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129
    Foxy said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    I wonder, if the aim is for a GE without No Deal blocked, whether we could see a super rapid dissolution before anti No Deal legislation passes. BBC suggest that even on fast track the legislation would require a sitting on Monday 9th.

    In which case, we could be looking at a GE as early as somewhere between Oct 10th and Oct 15th?

    The Commons doesn’t have to vote for a GE. They could insist that Boris extends A50 first.
    They really can't if he doesn't want to, and it's obvious that he doesn't.

    They can pass a motion telling him to, he can ignore it as it has no legal force.

    They could maybe pass a law, insisting he asks, but it requires the consent of all EU27 countries, and if he doesn't want one he can ask for one in a fashion that will be refused.

    Or he could just ignore the law regardless, what is parliament going to do? Tell his mum ?

    If the commons wants an extension, there is only 1 route to it, VONC Boris and appoint another executive to do their bidding.
    And the only alternative executive realistically on offer is headed by Jeremy Corbyn.....
    Indeed.

    Or, they could revoke, but I'm not sure the votes are there for it at present.

    Who knows where the numbers will fall if we get to 30th Oct, without a dissolution and no deal?

    All academic I think; I expect a dissolution within 96 hours.

    Revoke is the best policy, and the only one in the gift of a new PM.

    After that we have plenty of time to re-think and re-invoke with a new negotiating position.

    Meanwhile Cummings wants to purge the Mensheviks.
    A good analogy, because of course the Mensheviks, despite the name, were a majority of the RSDLP. They just didn't have the ruthlessness of their opponents, including late convert Trotsky.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780

    Labour goes into an October election with

    1. Corbyn as their offering for PM
    2. No credible Brexit policy
    3. No credible action on anti-semitism

    The timing is not exactly propitious. But the only thing that has kept them together has been the end point of a general election. They can hardly flinch from it now.

    But the Conservatives are not in much of a better state. Boris et al threatening deselection for voting against the government after their repeated voting against the government on the same issue - sometimes for decades - is hilarious.

    The Brexiteres are undemocratic scum. Shame on them, and shame on the once-great Conservative Party for putting such scum in power.
    But they are in a better state. They have a significant lead in the polls. That could be a massive lead depending on what happens to the current Brexit Party vote. (And if they want Brexit but don't want THIS Brexit, then they really aren't much more than a well-heeled anarchist grouping).

    And much as many people here might not like him, in Boris they have a leader who is appearing to listen, to act, to be upbeat, to try to do the right thing - and get Brexit over the line. And from what I am hearing, people have warmed to that.

    A resut like 38 C, 23 Lab, 17 LD would give Boris a very healthy majority to get on and do stuff.
    So they're undemocratic scum who are in a better state than a party mired in anti-Semitism from it's rotting head down.

    That's not a great selling-point.

    And there is always the Lib Dems for the conscientious, moral voter. ;)
    "undemocratic scum"? Well, it's an assertion. Unsupported. I'm not sure what more you want of democracy than it delivering a working majority.

    Oh, I see - a working majority YOU LIKE....
    It's an accurate assertion.

    The government deselecting MPs for rebelling on an issue that they themselves rebelled against just a few months ago is the act of scum. And undemocratic scum at that, given the 2017 manifesto and the polling.
    No its not, its the action of party discipline. If the Tories are not going to be perpetually in office but not in power they need to take these steps. The fact that May wimped out of taking them when she was in charge does not make it any less necessary.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    What if this isn't a Brexit election? Elections are often not decided on the "right" issues. Ask Theresa May, or Ted Heath, or Boris's own Winston Churchill.

    Labour won't want it to be, and Boris and Cummings are furiously shaking the magic money tree to shoot Labour's foxes on the NHS, schools, crime and so on. More importantly, Number 10 wants an election just after Brexit has happened but before project fear is seen to have had a point after all.

    The fringe parties like BXP and the LibDems might be caught out here, if even single-issue voters see Brexit as a fait accompli.

    Speaking of Labour foxes, DC's reached for his shotgun before breakfast with the announcement that new teachers will get more money.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49547040
    I wonder if he realises the implications for pension contributions? Looking at the sums, they're almost Corbynite - only the headline figure is considered, not the additions. A salary rise is only about two-thirds of the overall cost.

    In any case, I think most teachers at the moment would rather see more teachers than higher pay. Higher salaries might attract more recruits - but there seems a fair risk it will also force more cuts in school budgets elsewhere to pay for them.

    Edit - incidentally, as of this morning employer contributions to teacher pensions have increased by 40%.
    Of course.
    But do you seriously believe any of these shiny announcements will actually be enacted unmodified, even in the event of the Tories having a majority sufficient to present something of more substance than the Potemkin Queen’s Speech currently scheduled ?
    Of course not. I do hope somebody will point it out - but after Corbyn got away with murder on his costings in 2017 that may be a bold hope.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566
    ydoethur said:

    Chris said:

    eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    Quite right. We also know that Boris is quite capable of not saying what he means or meaning what he says. And of deciding he really meant something else.
    You mean he's a compulsive liar?
    Not just a compulsive liar.

    To quote Agatha Christie, a fluent, compulsive and habitual liar.
    It’s not so much a compulsion as a reflex action.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 4,213
    ydoethur said:

    Chris said:

    eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    Quite right. We also know that Boris is quite capable of not saying what he means or meaning what he says. And of deciding he really meant something else.
    You mean he's a compulsive liar?
    Not just a compulsive liar.

    To quote Agatha Christie, a fluent, compulsive and habitual liar.
    And a fecund stupid liar.
  • If a GE next month is now nailed on what on earth would be the outcome?

    I cant see anything other than an anti Tory rainbow coalition though goodness knows who would lead it given the antipathy to Corbyn outside Labour. And indeed within!

    If the country seems fooked under the current House I cant see the outcome of a GE putting us on a better footing.

    The nightmare worsens it seems. What a depressing read the last couple of threads have been....

    I'm sure I'm missing something, but how does this GE come about?
    Wouldn't the smart thing be to let a minority government twist in the wind for a bit, especially if it forces them to reveal a bit more of their Brexit hand?
    They can take the high ground of not wanting instability in the crucial month of October.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129
    DavidL said:

    No its not, its the action of party discipline. If the Tories are not going to be perpetually in office but not in power they need to take these steps. The fact that May wimped out of taking them when she was in charge does not make it any less necessary.

    Think how different life would be right now if May had, on losing the first vote, stripped the ERG of the whip, extended A50, and then called an election with all candidates pledged to vote for her deal and otherwise we would leave without one.

    She wouldn't have won a majority, but she would probably still have been in government and Boris, Mogg, Baker, Francois, Patel and Raab would have been finished.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 4,213
    DavidL said:

    Labour goes into an October election with

    1. Corbyn as their offering for PM
    2. No credible Brexit policy
    3. No credible action on anti-semitism

    The timing is not exactly propitious. But the only thing that has kept them together has been the end point of a general election. They can hardly flinch from it now.

    But the Conservatives are not in much of a better state. Boris et al threatening deselection for voting against the government after their repeated voting against the government on the same issue - sometimes for decades - is hilarious.

    The Brexiteres are undemocratic scum. Shame on them, and shame on the once-great Conservative Party for putting such scum in power.
    But they are in a better state. They have a significant lead in the polls. That could be a massive lead depending on what happens to the current Brexit Party vote. (And if they want Brexit but don't want THIS Brexit, then they really aren't much more than a well-heeled anarchist grouping).

    And much as many people here might not like him, in Boris they have a leader who is appearing to listen, to act, to be upbeat, to try to do the right thing - and get Brexit over the line. And from what I am hearing, people have warmed to that.

    A resut like 38 C, 23 Lab, 17 LD would give Boris a very healthy majority to get on and do stuff.
    So they're undemocratic scum who are in a better state than a party mired in anti-Semitism from it's rotting head down.

    That's not a great selling-point.

    And there is always the Lib Dems for the conscientious, moral voter. ;)
    "undemocratic scum"? Well, it's an assertion. Unsupported. I'm not sure what more you want of democracy than it delivering a working majority.

    Oh, I see - a working majority YOU LIKE....
    It's an accurate assertion.

    The government deselecting MPs for rebelling on an issue that they themselves rebelled against just a few months ago is the act of scum. And undemocratic scum at that, given the 2017 manifesto and the polling.
    No its not, its the action of party discipline. If the Tories are not going to be perpetually in office but not in power they need to take these steps. The fact that May wimped out of taking them when she was in charge does not make it any less necessary.
    We'll see.

    But to my mind this is starting to have a tinge of "I will do such things—What they are yet I know not, but they shall be The terrors of the earth" about it.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    I agree and in Scotland it is even more complex. I cannot see the Scottish courts allowing Boris to run roughshod over the Scottish parliament. This will create a scenario where there is almost no way to implement no deal in Scotland. The country is almost fully united in not agreeing with the English Tory plan. Even the Scottish tories.

    Some Scottish and N Irish backstop is my initial thought as where we are heading but who knows
    I really don't know what you are talking about. The Scottish Parliament has absolutely nothing to do with tomorrow's court case.
    I would assume it's a reference to the Scottish Executive being booted out of UK/EU negotiations on fisheries etc.
    That's not a part of the court case either. May made an incredible number of mistakes and one of the more serious was the failure to build any form of consensus some of which could have been achieved if the regional Parliaments had been invited (along with the opposition in Parliament) to play a role in shaping our negotiating position with the EU. That failure got us into this mess but the courts did nothing which is entirely correct. They are not there to play politics.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    Chris said:

    DavidL said:

    Labour goes into an October election with

    1. Corbyn as their offering for PM
    2. No credible Brexit policy
    3. No credible action on anti-semitism

    The timing is not exactly propitious. But the only thing that has kept them together has been the end point of a general election. They can hardly flinch from it now.

    But the Conservatives are not in much of a better state. Boris et al threatening deselection for voting against the government after their repeated voting against the government on the same issue - sometimes for decades - is hilarious.

    The Brexiteres are undemocratic scum. Shame on them, and shame on the once-great Conservative Party for putting such scum in power.
    But they are in a better state. They have a significant lead in the polls. That could be a massive lead depending on what happens to the current Brexit Party vote. (And if they want Brexit but don't want THIS Brexit, then they really aren't much more than a well-heeled anarchist grouping).

    And much as many people here might not like him, in Boris they have a leader who is appearing to listen, to act, to be upbeat, to try to do the right thing - and get Brexit over the line. And from what I am hearing, people have warmed to that.

    A resut like 38 C, 23 Lab, 17 LD would give Boris a very healthy majority to get on and do stuff.
    So they're undemocratic scum who are in a better state than a party mired in anti-Semitism from it's rotting head down.

    That's not a great selling-point.

    And there is always the Lib Dems for the conscientious, moral voter. ;)
    "undemocratic scum"? Well, it's an assertion. Unsupported. I'm not sure what more you want of democracy than it delivering a working majority.

    Oh, I see - a working majority YOU LIKE....
    It's an accurate assertion.

    The government deselecting MPs for rebelling on an issue that they themselves rebelled against just a few months ago is the act of scum. And undemocratic scum at that, given the 2017 manifesto and the polling.
    No its not, its the action of party discipline. If the Tories are not going to be perpetually in office but not in power they need to take these steps. The fact that May wimped out of taking them when she was in charge does not make it any less necessary.
    We'll see.

    But to my mind this is starting to have a tinge of "I will do such things—What they are yet I know not, but they shall be The terrors of the earth" about it.
    Nah. Just The terrors of the Left.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,081


    I'm sure I'm missing something, but how does this GE come about?
    Wouldn't the smart thing be to let a minority government twist in the wind for a bit, especially if it forces them to reveal a bit more of their Brexit hand?
    They can take the high ground of not wanting instability in the crucial month of October.

    Yup, especially since the government has set the alibi up for Labour by shutting down parliament during the time when it could otherwise be voting for an election.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 9,171
    An excellent header, Professor. Thank you.

    When I first saw polling data cited, for a fleeting moment I thought that HYUFD might be the author, but then I realised that the article was making a coherent argument so knew it couldn't be.
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 72
    I think that's the likeliest option too.

    But how do you then get Labour to dump a leader who's just "led" the party to something close to victory? It'd take weeks going on months for a leadership contest - and the current Labour membership would probably vote Corbyn back.

    Is it even possible for Labour to keep Corbyn as leader, but have (say) Starmer as PM? Because - Sturgeon not being an MP - the only acceptable alternative would be Swinson as PM of a coalition in which the LDs were the minority party.

    Which, to put it politely, would be a turnup for the books
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,084

    If a GE next month is now nailed on what on earth would be the outcome?

    I cant see anything other than an anti Tory rainbow coalition though goodness knows who would lead it given the antipathy to Corbyn outside Labour. And indeed within!

    If the country seems fooked under the current House I cant see the outcome of a GE putting us on a better footing.

    The nightmare worsens it seems. What a depressing read the last couple of threads have been....

    I'm sure I'm missing something, but how does this GE come about?
    Wouldn't the smart thing be to let a minority government twist in the wind for a bit, especially if it forces them to reveal a bit more of their Brexit hand?
    They can take the high ground of not wanting instability in the crucial month of October.
    I am with this point of view..i do not think we are on the verge of a GE just the perception of one.
    We will know more by midnight tomorrow probably when we see just how far Bercow is prepared to go to frustrate Boris.
  • ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    I agree and in Scotland it is even more complex. I cannot see the Scottish courts allowing Boris to run roughshod over the Scottish parliament. This will create a scenario where there is almost no way to implement no deal in Scotland. The country is almost fully united in not agreeing with the English Tory plan. Even the Scottish tories.

    Some Scottish and N Irish backstop is my initial thought as where we are heading but who knows
    I really don't know what you are talking about. The Scottish Parliament has absolutely nothing to do with tomorrow's court case.
    I would assume it's a reference to the Scottish Executive being booted out of UK/EU negotiations on fisheries etc.

    No deal Brexit has all sorts of implications on the Scottish government doing its job. Health care for example is run by it. The courts politically cannot be seen to ignore this as they risk losing their jobs. They will probably set the UK government a set of actions to take which it is unlikely they can comply with.

    In Scotland the power of Boris is quickly evaporating and no one here will put their heads over tte parapets to support him. I assume David L is not based in Scotland.


  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780

    DavidL said:

    I wonder what Mr O'Hara would have written about Howe's 1981 budget? Surely there was a party throwing itself off the cliff in the mad pursuit of monetarism, against the advice of the famous 364 economists, with an MP crossing the floor and others walking out, dooming itself to never winning an election again or at best squeaking through one election on the back of divided opposition before its inevitable and final annihilation?

    What happened instead was the underlying inflation that had so dogged our economic performance for more than a decade was finally brought under control and unemployment fell sharply rather than the increase forecast. The ground was set for strong future economic growth and a new consensus was created that remained in place until the latter days of Brown's hubris.

    So let it be with Brexit. If we leave (and it is still not certain) there will be a new consensus and all to play for.

    What do you imagine this new consensus is going to look like after leaving? Because right now I don’t see any grounds for expecting any kind of consensus.
    Nor did anyone in 1981. It may not happen, history doesn't exactly repeat itself. But the prognostications of doom are overstated.

    To give you a more serious answer I expect that we will end up with a much closer relationship with the EU than many ERG types now think, that we will find what we have more valuable than what we might get and work to keep as much of it as possible, that the closeness of our relationship with the EU will vary depending upon the flavour of our governments but that there will be a wariness about getting caught up in the machinations of EU institutions again.
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 72
    eristdoof said:

    This would be a really difficult situation for the HoC to cope with, and I could easily see that Swinson says the LDs will support Labour but not with Corbyn as PM.

    I think that's the likeliest option too.

    But how do you then get Labour to dump a leader who's just "led" the party to something close to victory? It'd take weeks going on months for a leadership contest - and the current Labour membership would probably vote Corbyn back.

    Is it even possible for Labour to keep Corbyn as leader, but have (say) Starmer as PM? Because - Sturgeon not being an MP - the only acceptable alternative would be Swinson as PM of a coalition in which the LDs were the minority party.

    Which, to put it politely, would be a turnup for the books
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    No its not, its the action of party discipline. If the Tories are not going to be perpetually in office but not in power they need to take these steps. The fact that May wimped out of taking them when she was in charge does not make it any less necessary.

    Think how different life would be right now if May had, on losing the first vote, stripped the ERG of the whip, extended A50, and then called an election with all candidates pledged to vote for her deal and otherwise we would leave without one.

    She wouldn't have won a majority, but she would probably still have been in government and Boris, Mogg, Baker, Francois, Patel and Raab would have been finished.
    Yep, to rule is to decide. She didn't.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    Flanner said:

    eristdoof said:

    This would be a really difficult situation for the HoC to cope with, and I could easily see that Swinson says the LDs will support Labour but not with Corbyn as PM.

    I think that's the likeliest option too.

    But how do you then get Labour to dump a leader who's just "led" the party to something close to victory? It'd take weeks going on months for a leadership contest - and the current Labour membership would probably vote Corbyn back.

    Is it even possible for Labour to keep Corbyn as leader, but have (say) Starmer as PM? Because - Sturgeon not being an MP - the only acceptable alternative would be Swinson as PM of a coalition in which the LDs were the minority party.

    Which, to put it politely, would be a turnup for the books
    Paging malc....

    "Swinson? Turnip for the books more like..."
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 9,171

    TGOHF said:
    What idiocy. People are going to lose their careers - just so they can point at Boris and say "Ha! October 31st "do or die" huh? Hahahaha....." Because nothing else material comes out of it. Maybe a few big investment opportunities get delayed. Or scrapped. But hey, point and laugh at Boris.

    Really, that just strengthens Boris - as he looks to camera and says "See what I'm up against folks?"

    We need an election. We need a significantly new Parliament.
    Surely Do-or-Die Bozo will have to resign if we don't leave at the end of October? That's what the 'Die' bit implies, no?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,312
    DavidL said:

    No its not, its the action of party discipline. If the Tories are not going to be perpetually in office but not in power they need to take these steps. The fact that May wimped out of taking them when she was in charge does not make it any less necessary.

    No, it really isn't. It's turning the Conservatives from a broad church to a narrowly-focused, one-issue campaign group - and one that I hope will soon be flushed down the sewer of history.

    I mean, the idea that Bone or JRM are more fit to be Conservative MP's than (say) Ken Clarke or Rory Stewart is laughable. Worse, one Brexit is over, the moderate voices will be gone, to be replaced with people with only one mindset. And given this act, they will all be yes-men and yes-women (if women are allowed in, that is).

    The Conservative Party will become a right-wing cesspit. The warning signs are already there, with good honourable members leaving (including some on here). The odds are the voters will follow.

    You might want to consider that 'discipline' is a rather loaded word.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    eristdoof said:

    I think a lot is going to develop this week. There are a lot of "known unknowns" and maybe a couple of "unknown unknowns" which will reveal themselves before next Monday. While lots of posters here (including me) like to hypothecate over the different scenarios, I can see that many posts are going to look very outdated very quickly.

    I agree and in Scotland it is even more complex. I cannot see the Scottish courts allowing Boris to run roughshod over the Scottish parliament. This will create a scenario where there is almost no way to implement no deal in Scotland. The country is almost fully united in not agreeing with the English Tory plan. Even the Scottish tories.

    Some Scottish and N Irish backstop is my initial thought as where we are heading but who knows
    I really don't know what you are talking about. The Scottish Parliament has absolutely nothing to do with tomorrow's court case.
    I would assume it's a reference to the Scottish Executive being booted out of UK/EU negotiations on fisheries etc.

    No deal Brexit has all sorts of implications on the Scottish government doing its job. Health care for example is run by it. The courts politically cannot be seen to ignore this as they risk losing their jobs. They will probably set the UK government a set of actions to take which it is unlikely they can comply with.

    In Scotland the power of Boris is quickly evaporating and no one here will put their heads over tte parapets to support him. I assume David L is not based in Scotland.


    LOL. I am a Scottish advocate who sat in a part of the hearing last week and read the written submissions of the petitioners. Lord Doherty will refuse the petition tomorrow. He probably spent most of his weekend preparing his draft.
  • PloppikinsPloppikins Posts: 105
    There is some irony in Corbyn, an extreme idealogue his entire life, triangulating and twisting Labs position on brexit. They have ended with a centrist position against Remain (LD) and Leave (Tory). However, by trying to appeal to all, they appeal to none.

    While the outcome of hypothetical Oct GE seems uncertain, I think it boils down to the issues. If BJ manages to make focus brexit, he wins (See polls). If like GE17 Corbyn gains traction on other issues I can see a Lab minority govt.

    Then, who is the better campaigner? Methinks Boris by a nose.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    No its not, its the action of party discipline. If the Tories are not going to be perpetually in office but not in power they need to take these steps. The fact that May wimped out of taking them when she was in charge does not make it any less necessary.

    Think how different life would be right now if May had, on losing the first vote, stripped the ERG of the whip, extended A50, and then called an election with all candidates pledged to vote for her deal and otherwise we would leave without one.

    She wouldn't have won a majority, but she would probably still have been in government and Boris, Mogg, Baker, Francois, Patel and Raab would have been finished.
    She was a weak, weak PM, taking such advice as she did from idiot advisors.

    Things at least look different with Boris.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 2,548

    TGOHF said:
    What idiocy. People are going to lose their careers - just so they can point at Boris and say "Ha! October 31st "do or die" huh? Hahahaha....." Because nothing else material comes out of it. Maybe a few big investment opportunities get delayed. Or scrapped. But hey, point and laugh at Boris.

    Really, that just strengthens Boris - as he looks to camera and says "See what I'm up against folks?"

    We need an election. We need a significantly new Parliament.
    Surely Do-or-Die Bozo will have to resign if we don't leave at the end of October? That's what the 'Die' bit implies, no?
    I think he was referring to us not him
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,074
    edited September 2

    The question Prof O’Hara does not address (quite appropriately for reasons of space) is “what is their alternative?”

    Have Johnson/Cummings chosen the least worst option if their objective is to deliver BREXIT?

    If they genuinely believe Remainers within and without Parliament are effectively blocking renegotiation by the EU, what else should they do?

    Their renegotiation aim of WA minus Back Stop is the only thing the House has voted in favour of.

    What will more delay lead to other than further uncertainty?

    One thing I am sure of - this House is no longer fit for purpose and the sooner it - and its Speaker - are replaced, the better. As for which government that leads to - who the heck knows?

    The next House will largely be made up of the same people, or very similar ones, possibly be of very similar political composition, and will have the same Speaker.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I wonder what Mr O'Hara would have written about Howe's 1981 budget? Surely there was a party throwing itself off the cliff in the mad pursuit of monetarism, against the advice of the famous 364 economists, with an MP crossing the floor and others walking out, dooming itself to never winning an election again or at best squeaking through one election on the back of divided opposition before its inevitable and final annihilation?

    What happened instead was the underlying inflation that had so dogged our economic performance for more than a decade was finally brought under control and unemployment fell sharply rather than the increase forecast. The ground was set for strong future economic growth and a new consensus was created that remained in place until the latter days of Brown's hubris.

    So let it be with Brexit. If we leave (and it is still not certain) there will be a new consensus and all to play for.

    What do you imagine this new consensus is going to look like after leaving? Because right now I don’t see any grounds for expecting any kind of consensus.
    Nor did anyone in 1981. It may not happen, history doesn't exactly repeat itself. But the prognostications of doom are overstated.

    To give you a more serious answer I expect that we will end up with a much closer relationship with the EU than many ERG types now think, that we will find what we have more valuable than what we might get and work to keep as much of it as possible, that the closeness of our relationship with the EU will vary depending upon the flavour of our governments but that there will be a wariness about getting caught up in the machinations of EU institutions again.
    And which party do you imagine might navigate their way to such a solution ?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780

    DavidL said:

    No its not, its the action of party discipline. If the Tories are not going to be perpetually in office but not in power they need to take these steps. The fact that May wimped out of taking them when she was in charge does not make it any less necessary.

    No, it really isn't. It's turning the Conservatives from a broad church to a narrowly-focused, one-issue campaign group - and one that I hope will soon be flushed down the sewer of history.

    I mean, the idea that Bone or JRM are more fit to be Conservative MP's than (say) Ken Clarke or Rory Stewart is laughable. Worse, one Brexit is over, the moderate voices will be gone, to be replaced with people with only one mindset. And given this act, they will all be yes-men and yes-women (if women are allowed in, that is).

    The Conservative Party will become a right-wing cesspit. The warning signs are already there, with good honourable members leaving (including some on here). The odds are the voters will follow.

    You might want to consider that 'discipline' is a rather loaded word.
    I am all in favour of broad churches on everything that is not central to your policy. But if you are to stand as a Conservative MP in a Conservative seat you need to support that central policy with your votes even if you try to temper it behind the scenes or argue for a change of direction. Otherwise you have no government as May demonstrated per adventure.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    kle4 said:

    The question Prof O’Hara does not address (quite appropriately for reasons of space) is “what is their alternative?”

    Have Johnson/Cummings chosen the least worst option if their objective is to deliver BREXIT?

    If they genuinely believe Remainers within and without Parliament are effectively blocking renegotiation by the EU, what else should they do?

    Their renegotiation aim of WA minus Back Stop is the only thing the House has voted in favour of.

    What will more delay lead to other than further uncertainty?

    One thing I am sure of - this House is no longer fit for purpose and the sooner it - and its Speaker - are replaced, the better. As for which government that leads to - who the heck knows?

    The next House will largely be made up of the same people, or very similar ones, possibly be of very similar political composition, and will have the same Speaker.
    I wouldn't make diary plans as Speaker into Novmber if I were Bercow.....
This discussion has been closed.