Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » No-vember election. A betting tip

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited September 6 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » No-vember election. A betting tip

Picture: On the pavement in Parliament Square. Credit John Rentoul.

Read the full story here


«13456710

Comments

  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,351
    First like the Opposition parties!

    How many elections have happened between November to March over the years?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489
    When is Boris handing in his homework to Mrs Merkel?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 10,549

    When is Boris handing in his homework to Mrs Merkel?

    The dog ate it...

    If BoZo was serious, he would be burning the midnight oil in London and Brussels trying to find a replacement for the backstop, rather than interviewing on Scottish hillsides.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,021
    Two articles in a row, Alistair? You're spoiling us.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 4,377
    edited September 6
    Very good and useful summary. November is an even better lay now at 1.8.

    I continue to like 2020.
  • Foxy said:

    When is Boris handing in his homework to Mrs Merkel?

    The dog ate it...

    If BoZo was serious, he would be burning the midnight oil in London and Brussels trying to find a replacement for the backstop, rather than interviewing on Scottish hillsides.
    The EU will never agree to replace the backstop until Parliament is united behind the PM. You don't win a war on two flanks, Boris needs to sort out Parliament, then he can sort out Brussels.
  • DougSeal said:

    Slavery was not something invented by either the Portuguese, Spanish or English. It was something this world had always known. The Bible endorses it, the Romans had it, the Spanish and Portuguese had it. Africans had it without us even getting involved.

    But we stopped it. Yes we got involved first but we stopped it and we were the only ones to do so. It could still exist today like it had for millennia before were it not for us.

    @Philip_Thompson - only ones to do so? We were not even the first. Ahistorical bullshit, What about Toussaint L'Ouverture? Vermont in 1777? Denmark in 1802? We were well behind the curve and slavery does exist today. One of the only things the Tory party has done recently that gives them any credit is the Modern Slavery Act that wouldn’t be necessary if it didn’t exist?

    Still, facts don’t matter to you do they?
    I must have missed Vermont and Denmark abolishing slavery worldwide like we did. Along with the Vermont Empire, I missed that.

    Denmark and Vermont said they weren't going to have slavery. We stopped it. We used our Empire and forced other nations to stop. Did Vermont do that?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    Foxy said:

    When is Boris handing in his homework to Mrs Merkel?

    The dog ate it...

    If BoZo was serious, he would be burning the midnight oil in London and Brussels trying to find a replacement for the backstop, rather than interviewing on Scottish hillsides.
    The EU will never agree to replace the backstop until Parliament is united behind the PM. You don't win a war on two flanks, Boris needs to sort out Parliament, then he can sort out Brussels.
    This is complete nonsense. Just complete and utter nonsense.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 1,952
    Good article. November does seem unlikely. Tho the penultimate paragraph is somewhat opaque?

    The next likely extension - to January 31st - implies that mid Jan would be a good bet? No party would want to face the cliff edge, again, without having faced the voters first.

  • Foxy said:

    When is Boris handing in his homework to Mrs Merkel?

    The dog ate it...

    If BoZo was serious, he would be burning the midnight oil in London and Brussels trying to find a replacement for the backstop, rather than interviewing on Scottish hillsides.
    The EU will never agree to replace the backstop until Parliament is united behind the PM. You don't win a war on two flanks, Boris needs to sort out Parliament, then he can sort out Brussels.
    This is complete nonsense. Just complete and utter nonsense.
    So the EU will agree to replace the backstop with Parliament opposing the PM?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,351

    Foxy said:

    When is Boris handing in his homework to Mrs Merkel?

    The dog ate it...

    If BoZo was serious, he would be burning the midnight oil in London and Brussels trying to find a replacement for the backstop, rather than interviewing on Scottish hillsides.
    The EU will never agree to replace the backstop until Parliament is united behind the PM. You don't win a war on two flanks, Boris needs to sort out Parliament, then he can sort out Brussels.
    That's utter bullshit! Boris has had no intention to negotiate with the EU. The EU are perplexed as to how he is saying "working hard with our partners in Europe" to his domestic audience to get a deal done while not a squeak is heard in Brussels.

    Boris will obviously frame Parliament as the reason for his abject failure which is of course an utter lie - but then again what would you expect from a perennial liar.
  • The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    Foxy said:

    When is Boris handing in his homework to Mrs Merkel?

    The dog ate it...

    If BoZo was serious, he would be burning the midnight oil in London and Brussels trying to find a replacement for the backstop, rather than interviewing on Scottish hillsides.
    The EU will never agree to replace the backstop until Parliament is united behind the PM. You don't win a war on two flanks, Boris needs to sort out Parliament, then he can sort out Brussels.
    This is complete nonsense. Just complete and utter nonsense.
    So the EU will agree to replace the backstop with Parliament opposing the PM?
    If he proposes an adequate solution, of course.

    The fact such a solution does not exist is the whole point.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 500

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    Aren't there other methods to sanction him? Wouldn't it go to the courts?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    You lost all credibility as soon as you said “surrender bill”.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 1,952

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
  • FPT

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    GIN1138 said:

    nichomar said:

    Simple question Johnson resigns Queen invites corbyn to for government as PM no need to have support from anyone else. Goes to Brussels requests extension comes back and seeks 2/3 majority for GE. what is wrong with that

    Everything would work up tp 2/3 majority for a general election.

    Once in power he'd take root there... Certainly through the Winter and possibly beyond.
    VONC is easily done.
    Not sure it would pass .I can see Corbyn doing a deal with the SNP in return for second Indy .Are all the Tory defectors going to vote for an immediate GE that will cost most of them their seats? LDs who knows?
    LDs would VONC Corbyn to keep Tory Remainers voting for them.

    Tory rebels are mostly standing down anyway and would VONC Corbyn post extension
    Once again.

    Only the LotO can propose a VONC.
    Not true. Callaghan called some on himself.
    20/07/77
    14/12/78

    Callaghan called confidence votes on these days.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 12,786
    edited September 6
    Betway has free money (unless the bet loses) in its Eton or not market for next Conservative leader.

    Eton 7/4
    Anywhere else 2/5

    https://sports.betway.com/en/sports/evt/4420768

    The most prominent Etonian is Boris himself, though he will not be next leader by definition.

    Then there are, in the order they occur to me because I am too busy to research this properly or even sort them into alphabetical order:

    Jo Johnson, Kwasi Karteng, Jesse Norman and Jacob Rees-Mogg.
    Rory Stewart, Oliver Letwin, Nicholas Soames and Zac Goldsmith.
    Bim Afolami, Philip Dunne, Richard Graham and Hugo Swire.
    Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, David Tredinnick, Nick Hurd and Henry Bellingham.
    AND SOME OTHERS since I vaguely recall there are 20 or so.

    As you can see, they are a most unlikely bunch.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,470
    There’s a big issue with any election in the winter months .

    Namely the weather . There could be problems and this could cause issues with any poll.

    For that reason , I expect an election in early November .
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489
    I wonder if the “rebel alliance” (how can they be both the establishment and the rebel alliance??) have already agreed an alternative government if necessary?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626
    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 2,548
    ..
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 28,335
    edited September 6
    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    Part of Corbyn's allure, for his supporters, is what he might be like it he wins an election and becomes PM. But if Boris has already forced him to be PM when he doesn't really want to be, and he has to sign an extension, it all turns a bit grubby and realistic for Corbyn. It would spoil his election campaign, ruin the idealism.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,335
    AndyJS said:
    Focussing on winning the next election rather than massaging MPs egos.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 879

    DougSeal said:

    Slavery was not something invented by either the Portuguese, Spanish or English. It was something this world had always known. The Bible endorses it, the Romans had it, the Spanish and Portuguese had it. Africans had it without us even getting involved.

    But we stopped it. Yes we got involved first but we stopped it and we were the only ones to do so. It could still exist today like it had for millennia before were it not for us.

    @Philip_Thompson - only ones to do so? We were not even the first. Ahistorical bullshit, What about Toussaint L'Ouverture? Vermont in 1777? Denmark in 1802? We were well behind the curve and slavery does exist today. One of the only things the Tory party has done recently that gives them any credit is the Modern Slavery Act that wouldn’t be necessary if it didn’t exist?

    Still, facts don’t matter to you do they?
    I must have missed Vermont and Denmark abolishing slavery worldwide like we did. Along with the Vermont Empire, I missed that.

    Denmark and Vermont said they weren't going to have slavery. We stopped it. We used our Empire and forced other nations to stop. Did Vermont do that?
    You know nothing. Vermont, an independent state at the time, abolished slavery in all the territory it controlled.

    Conversely, the British Empire abolished slavery in “most” of the territory it controlled. The Slavery Abolition Act 1833 kept slavery intact in territories controlled by a the British East India Company (which it could have done clearly), as well as Ceylon and St Helena. In your beloved Australia, blackbirding and the holding of indigenous workers' pay "in trust" continued, in some instances into the 1970s. So no, we did not completely “stop” slavery and our forcing of other nations to do so was selective at best. And it doesn’t make up for us being one of the original, and definitely the most prolific, slave trading nations on earth in the 200 years previously.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489
    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 10,549

    DougSeal said:

    Slavery was not something invented by either the Portuguese, Spanish or English. It was something this world had always known. The Bible endorses it, the Romans had it, the Spanish and Portuguese had it. Africans had it without us even getting involved.

    But we stopped it. Yes we got involved first but we stopped it and we were the only ones to do so. It could still exist today like it had for millennia before were it not for us.

    @Philip_Thompson - only ones to do so? We were not even the first. Ahistorical bullshit, What about Toussaint L'Ouverture? Vermont in 1777? Denmark in 1802? We were well behind the curve and slavery does exist today. One of the only things the Tory party has done recently that gives them any credit is the Modern Slavery Act that wouldn’t be necessary if it didn’t exist?

    Still, facts don’t matter to you do they?
    I must have missed Vermont and Denmark abolishing slavery worldwide like we did. Along with the Vermont Empire, I missed that.

    Denmark and Vermont said they weren't going to have slavery. We stopped it. We used our Empire and forced other nations to stop. Did Vermont do that?
    Not true. Indeed there was a lot of military tension in the early 1860s between UK and USA, due to the blockade of Confederate exported cotton to Lancashire. We were complicit in slave profits well after 1818.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,335
    What precisely is the problem with a winter election ? The old dears tend to vote postally these days.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,520
    There is a way out for Boris:

    - Go to the European Council meeting on October 17th
    - Say that as Parliament has tied his hands, there's no point extending so he will revoke Article 50
    - Call an election and blame the Remainers for blocking Brexit
    - Win majority on a manifesto of doing Brexit properly
    - Create commission to look at Brexit options and kick the whole thing into the long grass
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 1,510
    edited September 6
    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    This is why the smart move is that Boris calls a confidence motion in himself on Monday (only needs simple majority to pass, which I think he would just squeak). Start the ball rolling on the 14 days, might get Corbs or another caretaker but the extension is then on them, not Boris. Put the impetus back on the opposition who a week or so ago couldn’t agree a suitable alternative PM candidate.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,470
    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    In which case he would have clearly sabotaged the extension and MPs will either end up revoking article 50 or putting forward a VONC. This time though there would be such anger at Johnson’s tactics that Corbyn would be put in to request an extension .
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,139
    FPT

    So the decision to have a long prorogation seems to have achieved the following:

    * engendered widespread allegations about coups, threat to democracy, embarrassing HM etc etc and diminishing even further Johnson's reputation for trustworthiness, having denied it was going to happen only hours before it happened;
    * forced all the opposition parties and rebel Tories to bury their differences and come together behind a coherent and workable strategy to prevent no deal;
    * the expulsion of long-serving Tory MPs, Churchill's grandson included, and the PM's own brother accusing him of abandoning the national interest;
    * an even greater degree of mistrust between the EU and the UK government;
    * the transformation of the opposition parties from a warring rabble of disunited factions into a coherent political force clearly in charge of the parliamentary agenda;
    * the transformation of the Tories from a coherent political force into a warring rabble of disunited factions which has clearly lost control of the parliamentary agenda;
    * closed off any possibility of Johnson being able to deliver on his threats of an early election.

    I wonder how all this fits into the great strategic plan that we have been assured the government is working to?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 15,940

    DougSeal said:

    Slavery was not something invented by either the Portuguese, Spanish or English. It was something this world had always known. The Bible endorses it, the Romans had it, the Spanish and Portuguese had it. Africans had it without us even getting involved.

    But we stopped it. Yes we got involved first but we stopped it and we were the only ones to do so. It could still exist today like it had for millennia before were it not for us.

    @Philip_Thompson - only ones to do so? We were not even the first. Ahistorical bullshit, What about Toussaint L'Ouverture? Vermont in 1777? Denmark in 1802? We were well behind the curve and slavery does exist today. One of the only things the Tory party has done recently that gives them any credit is the Modern Slavery Act that wouldn’t be necessary if it didn’t exist?

    Still, facts don’t matter to you do they?
    I must have missed Vermont and Denmark abolishing slavery worldwide like we did. Along with the Vermont Empire, I missed that.

    Denmark and Vermont said they weren't going to have slavery. We stopped it. We used our Empire and forced other nations to stop. Did Vermont do that?
    Indeed, we spent quite a lot of time and effort to stop the slavery and the trade, but some of our post-slavery practices...... indentured labour for example...... were not a lot better. I think we can take some credit but we've little right to he 'holier than thou' about it.
    We should perhaps be apologetic about the fact that when we paid 'compensation' it wasn't to the slaves, who were left to get on with it, but to the slave owners.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    Boris doesn't need to request an extension. He just needs to tell Parliament that the Prime Minister of Hungary or Malta or Cyprus (or someone he has just promised a cushy investment opportunity to) has said in writing they will veto any further extension. So the whole of the law is a nonsense. There is no law to break.

    Then what, Remainers?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    The letter does not forbid any variance in the conditions of the extension.

  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    This is why the smart move is that Boris calls a confidence motion in himself on Monday (only needs simple majority to pass, which I think he would just squeak). Start the ball rolling on the 14 days, might get Corbs or another caretaker but the extension is then on them, not Boris. Put the impetus back on the opposition who a week or so ago couldn’t agree a suitable alternative PM candidate.
    There is no reason to think a VONC in BoZo will pass.

    If it did, it would mean an election because Parliament is prorogued afterwards and therefore there is no time to form another government.
  • Pulpstar said:

    What precisely is the problem with a winter election ? The old dears tend to vote postally these days.

    A really bad day on Election Day in weather terms could impact turnout and casts questions about the legitimacy of the result.

    Just needs it to be really wet, windy, very cold, or snowy and it’ll be anarchy particularly in rural seats.

    Could impact the ability of people manning the polling stations.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    Boris doesn't need to request an extension. He just needs to tell Parliament that the Prime Minister of Hungary or Malta or Cyprus (or someone he has just promised a cushy investment opportunity to) has said in writing they will veto any further extension. So the whole of the law is a nonsense. There is no law to break.

    Then what, Remainers?
    The EU are united. The likelihood of Hungary or Malta or Cyprus doing this is miniscule.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,004
    edited September 6
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    The letter does not forbid any variance in the conditions of the extension.

    Why does the letter specify 11pm BST, in January?
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 1,510

    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    This is why the smart move is that Boris calls a confidence motion in himself on Monday (only needs simple majority to pass, which I think he would just squeak). Start the ball rolling on the 14 days, might get Corbs or another caretaker but the extension is then on them, not Boris. Put the impetus back on the opposition who a week or so ago couldn’t agree a suitable alternative PM candidate.
    There is no reason to think a VONC in BoZo will pass.

    If it did, it would mean an election because Parliament is prorogued afterwards and therefore there is no time to form another government.
    I disagree, I think it could.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626
    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    In which case he would have clearly sabotaged the extension and MPs will either end up revoking article 50 or putting forward a VONC. This time though there would be such anger at Johnson’s tactics that Corbyn would be put in to request an extension .
    “Clearly sabotaged” - you mean sticking up for our National interest ?

    That will go down well with the voters.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    The letter does not forbid any variance in the conditions of the extension.

    The letter is the letter. That’s it.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696

    FPT

    So the decision to have a long prorogation seems to have achieved the following:

    * engendered widespread allegations about coups, threat to democracy, embarrassing HM etc etc and diminishing even further Johnson's reputation for trustworthiness, having denied it was going to happen only hours before it happened;
    * forced all the opposition parties and rebel Tories to bury their differences and come together behind a coherent and workable strategy to prevent no deal;
    * the expulsion of long-serving Tory MPs, Churchill's grandson included, and the PM's own brother accusing him of abandoning the national interest;
    * an even greater degree of mistrust between the EU and the UK government;
    * the transformation of the opposition parties from a warring rabble of disunited factions into a coherent political force clearly in charge of the parliamentary agenda;
    * the transformation of the Tories from a coherent political force into a warring rabble of disunited factions which has clearly lost control of the parliamentary agenda;
    * closed off any possibility of Johnson being able to deliver on his threats of an early election.

    I wonder how all this fits into the great strategic plan that we have been assured the government is working to?

    Because Boris can tell the voters he is not the one blocking Brexit. We will have an election at some point soon. And Brexit will still be THE salient issue - who is to blame for this clusterfuck? And Boris can point in lots of directions.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 2,548

    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    Boris doesn't need to request an extension. He just needs to tell Parliament that the Prime Minister of Hungary or Malta or Cyprus (or someone he has just promised a cushy investment opportunity to) has said in writing they will veto any further extension. So the whole of the law is a nonsense. There is no law to break.

    Then what, Remainers?
    Fine at least the election is after the no deal exit an Johnson can reap is rewards good or otherwise. It won’t remain a secret and may actually be regarded as him being a traitor to democracy
  • ab195ab195 Posts: 457
    edited September 6
    Pulpstar said:

    What precisely is the problem with a winter election ? The old dears tend to vote postally these days.

    It’s a long standing convention that we don’t do it during winter. Oh wait....
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489
    edited September 6

    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    This is why the smart move is that Boris calls a confidence motion in himself on Monday (only needs simple majority to pass, which I think he would just squeak). Start the ball rolling on the 14 days, might get Corbs or another caretaker but the extension is then on them, not Boris. Put the impetus back on the opposition who a week or so ago couldn’t agree a suitable alternative PM candidate.
    There is no reason to think a VONC in BoZo will pass.

    If it did, it would mean an election because Parliament is prorogued afterwards and therefore there is no time to form another government.
    I disagree, I think it could.
    Why would any opposition MP vote against it when they’ve agreed no GE before October 31?
  • blueblueblueblue Posts: 497

    Pulpstar said:

    What precisely is the problem with a winter election ? The old dears tend to vote postally these days.

    A really bad day on Election Day in weather terms could impact turnout and casts questions about the legitimacy of the result.

    Just needs it to be really wet, windy, very cold, or snowy and it’ll be anarchy particularly in rural seats.

    Could impact the ability of people manning the polling stations.
    So what? I'll bet on Conservatives and energized Leavers being able to find their way to a polling station in the dark any day...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 11,651

    Pulpstar said:

    What precisely is the problem with a winter election ? The old dears tend to vote postally these days.

    A really bad day on Election Day in weather terms could impact turnout and casts questions about the legitimacy of the result.

    Just needs it to be really wet, windy, very cold, or snowy and it’ll be anarchy particularly in rural seats.

    Could impact the ability of people manning the polling stations.
    Did you miss 23 June 2016?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    The letter does not forbid any variance in the conditions of the extension.

    The letter is the letter. That’s it.
    He can attach an appendix - perhaps call it a “political declaration “.

    Nothing in that letter procludes Boris from for example asking for an extension with zero contributions.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    The letter does not forbid any variance in the conditions of the extension.

    The letter is the letter. That’s it.
    He can attach an appendix - perhaps call it a “political declaration “.

    Nothing in that letter procludes Boris from for example asking for an extension with zero contributions.
    And the appendix would have no legal significance.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,004

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 15,733
    blueblue said:
    If it's going to happen it'll be on Monday?
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 1,510

    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    This is why the smart move is that Boris calls a confidence motion in himself on Monday (only needs simple majority to pass, which I think he would just squeak). Start the ball rolling on the 14 days, might get Corbs or another caretaker but the extension is then on them, not Boris. Put the impetus back on the opposition who a week or so ago couldn’t agree a suitable alternative PM candidate.
    There is no reason to think a VONC in BoZo will pass.

    If it did, it would mean an election because Parliament is prorogued afterwards and therefore there is no time to form another government.
    I disagree, I think it could.
    Why would any opposition MP vote against it when they’ve agreed no GE before October 31?
    Because the 2/3rds motion only requires you to abstain to make it fail. To defeat a VONC you actually need to declare you have confidence in HMG.

    Ok, I know the optics work the other way too, but I think there is the risk of some people sitting on their hands in such a situation and therefore letting it squeak though.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 2,548

    There is a way out for Boris:

    - Go to the European Council meeting on October 17th
    - Say that as Parliament has tied his hands, there's no point extending so he will revoke Article 50
    - Call an election and blame the Remainers for blocking Brexit
    - Win majority on a manifesto of doing Brexit properly
    - Create commission to look at Brexit options and kick the whole thing into the long grass


    Nigel Farage
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 145
    What if Boris draws a childish sketch of macron’s genitals over the letter before sending it? I can’t think of many better ideas right now, detoxifying Corbyn by going into an election with him as sitting PM seems almost as bad as the impeachment route.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 28,335

    Pulpstar said:

    What precisely is the problem with a winter election ? The old dears tend to vote postally these days.

    A really bad day on Election Day in weather terms could impact turnout and casts questions about the legitimacy of the result.

    Just needs it to be really wet, windy, very cold, or snowy and it’ll be anarchy particularly in rural seats.

    Could impact the ability of people manning the polling stations.
    You make it sound like we're still living in the middle ages.
  • Foxy said:

    When is Boris handing in his homework to Mrs Merkel?

    The dog ate it...

    If BoZo was serious, he would be burning the midnight oil in London and Brussels trying to find a replacement for the backstop, rather than interviewing on Scottish hillsides.
    The EU will never agree to replace the backstop until Parliament is united behind the PM. You don't win a war on two flanks, Boris needs to sort out Parliament, then he can sort out Brussels.
    This is complete nonsense. Just complete and utter nonsense.
    So the EU will agree to replace the backstop with Parliament opposing the PM?
    If he proposes an adequate solution, of course.

    The fact such a solution does not exist is the whole point.
    Drop the backstop and sort out the border during transition is an adequate solution.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,063
    TGOHF said:

    nico67 said:

    In which case he would have clearly sabotaged the extension and MPs will either end up revoking article 50 or putting forward a VONC. This time though there would be such anger at Johnson’s tactics that Corbyn would be put in to request an extension .

    “Clearly sabotaged” - you mean sticking up for our National interest ?
    That will go down well with the voters.
    But the "National Interest" means staying in the EU, with all its guarantees and protections. National interest is not the same thing as keeping the Conservative Party in office - in fact, quite the contrary.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,074

    Foxy said:

    When is Boris handing in his homework to Mrs Merkel?

    The dog ate it...

    If BoZo was serious, he would be burning the midnight oil in London and Brussels trying to find a replacement for the backstop, rather than interviewing on Scottish hillsides.
    The EU will never agree to replace the backstop until Parliament is united behind the PM. You don't win a war on two flanks, Boris needs to sort out Parliament, then he can sort out Brussels.
    So it'll never happen. Parliament wont unite.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    Foxy said:

    When is Boris handing in his homework to Mrs Merkel?

    The dog ate it...

    If BoZo was serious, he would be burning the midnight oil in London and Brussels trying to find a replacement for the backstop, rather than interviewing on Scottish hillsides.
    The EU will never agree to replace the backstop until Parliament is united behind the PM. You don't win a war on two flanks, Boris needs to sort out Parliament, then he can sort out Brussels.
    This is complete nonsense. Just complete and utter nonsense.
    So the EU will agree to replace the backstop with Parliament opposing the PM?
    If he proposes an adequate solution, of course.

    The fact such a solution does not exist is the whole point.
    Drop the backstop and sort out the border during transition is an adequate solution.
    Well it isn’t. You’re wrong. Clearly.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,791

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
    What's wrong with an additional letter saying the extension will get us nowhere, and we'll be in exactly the same position three months later?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489
    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
    What's wrong with an additional letter saying the extension will get us nowhere, and we'll be in exactly the same position three months later?
    The EU already know that.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,312
    Off-topic:

    A few days ago I mentioned that much of my village lost landline phone and/or Internet for six days after thieves pinched a load of cables. We lost our landline, but fortunately t'Internet remained.

    Guess what? Cables have been stolen again, and much of the village is again without landline or t'Internet. Fortunately for all of you, we currently have both. ;)

    The Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013 really needs to be enforced or tightened up, as the money these little scrotes get from the metal is orders of magnitude less than the disruption caused. Witness also lead from church rooves.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,633

    There is a way out for Boris:

    - Go to the European Council meeting on October 17th
    - Say that as Parliament has tied his hands, there's no point extending so he will revoke Article 50
    - Call an election and blame the Remainers for blocking Brexit
    - Win majority on a manifesto of doing Brexit properly
    - Create commission to look at Brexit options and kick the whole thing into the long grass

    A quaint little scenario with the ever so gargantuan elephant in 10 Downing Street room called Farage.

    Boris's election strategy is to nullify TBP and hoover up leave voters against a split remain vote.

  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 4,538
    The Lords are now at the Report stage. Lord True's wrecking amendment 2 (which wouldn't have been allowed in the Commons) has just been defeated 283 to 28.

    https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/business-papers/lords/lords-divisions/?dd=2019-09-06&division=2
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626
    PClipp said:

    TGOHF said:

    nico67 said:

    In which case he would have clearly sabotaged the extension and MPs will either end up revoking article 50 or putting forward a VONC. This time though there would be such anger at Johnson’s tactics that Corbyn would be put in to request an extension .

    “Clearly sabotaged” - you mean sticking up for our National interest ?
    That will go down well with the voters.
    But the "National Interest" means staying in the EU, with all its guarantees and protections. National interest is not the same thing as keeping the Conservative Party in office - in fact, quite the contrary.
    It’s your opinion - but not one shared by a majority.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,791

    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
    What's wrong with an additional letter saying the extension will get us nowhere, and we'll be in exactly the same position three months later?
    The EU already know that.
    So what's the point?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 9,171
    To show a suitable level of respect, I assume the UK Government will be sending Prince Andrew to attend Robert Mugabe's funeral.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    The letter does not forbid any variance in the conditions of the extension.

    The letter is the letter. That’s it.
    He can attach an appendix - perhaps call it a “political declaration “.

    Nothing in that letter procludes Boris from for example asking for an extension with zero contributions.
    And the appendix would have no legal significance.
    Just as the appendix to the WA is not significant - hence why voted down 3 times.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
    What's wrong with an additional letter saying the extension will get us nowhere, and we'll be in exactly the same position three months later?
    The EU already know that.
    So what's the point?
    Because they’ll probably give us an extension anyway.

    If they don’t well, that’s another issue isn’t it.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,470
    edited September 6
    I think VONC come under substantive motions and are therefore amendable .

    So if Bozo tried this opposition MPs could amend that .
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 19,795
    moonshine said:

    What if Boris draws a childish sketch of macron’s genitals over the letter before sending it? I can’t think of many better ideas right now, detoxifying Corbyn by going into an election with him as sitting PM seems almost as bad as the impeachment route.

    Good to see that your post after self-imposed exile is raising the intellectual bar.

    ;)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 28,335
    edited September 6

    Off-topic:

    A few days ago I mentioned that much of my village lost landline phone and/or Internet for six days after thieves pinched a load of cables. We lost our landline, but fortunately t'Internet remained.

    Guess what? Cables have been stolen again, and much of the village is again without landline or t'Internet. Fortunately for all of you, we currently have both. ;)

    The Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013 really needs to be enforced or tightened up, as the money these little scrotes get from the metal is orders of magnitude less than the disruption caused. Witness also lead from church rooves.

    We had the same problems about 3 years ago with thieves stealing the copper cables multiples times. Luckily they've replaced them with fibre-optic cables which apparently aren't worth stealing. The internet speed is now about 50 times faster than it was. (75 v 1.5).
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 9,171

    Off-topic:

    A few days ago I mentioned that much of my village lost landline phone and/or Internet for six days after thieves pinched a load of cables. We lost our landline, but fortunately t'Internet remained.

    Guess what? Cables have been stolen again, and much of the village is again without landline or t'Internet. Fortunately for all of you, we currently have both. ;)

    The Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013 really needs to be enforced or tightened up, as the money these little scrotes get from the metal is orders of magnitude less than the disruption caused. Witness also lead from church rooves.

    Roofs.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 19,795
    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    Slavery was not something invented by either the Portuguese, Spanish or English. It was something this world had always known. The Bible endorses it, the Romans had it, the Spanish and Portuguese had it. Africans had it without us even getting involved.

    But we stopped it. Yes we got involved first but we stopped it and we were the only ones to do so. It could still exist today like it had for millennia before were it not for us.

    @Philip_Thompson - only ones to do so? We were not even the first. Ahistorical bullshit, What about Toussaint L'Ouverture? Vermont in 1777? Denmark in 1802? We were well behind the curve and slavery does exist today. One of the only things the Tory party has done recently that gives them any credit is the Modern Slavery Act that wouldn’t be necessary if it didn’t exist?

    Still, facts don’t matter to you do they?
    I must have missed Vermont and Denmark abolishing slavery worldwide like we did. Along with the Vermont Empire, I missed that.

    Denmark and Vermont said they weren't going to have slavery. We stopped it. We used our Empire and forced other nations to stop. Did Vermont do that?
    You know nothing. Vermont, an independent state at the time, abolished slavery in all the territory it controlled.

    Conversely, the British Empire abolished slavery in “most” of the territory it controlled. The Slavery Abolition Act 1833 kept slavery intact in territories controlled by a the British East India Company (which it could have done clearly), as well as Ceylon and St Helena. In your beloved Australia, blackbirding and the holding of indigenous workers' pay "in trust" continued, in some instances into the 1970s. So no, we did not completely “stop” slavery and our forcing of other nations to do so was selective at best. And it doesn’t make up for us being one of the original, and definitely the most prolific, slave trading nations on earth in the 200 years previously.
    Didn't want to say anything to this just thought it should be reposted again.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,791

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
    What's wrong with an additional letter saying the extension will get us nowhere, and we'll be in exactly the same position three months later?
    The EU already know that.
    So what's the point?
    Because they’ll probably give us an extension anyway.

    If they don’t well, that’s another issue isn’t it.
    No, what is the point of an extension?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489
    edited September 6
    AndyJS said:

    Off-topic:

    A few days ago I mentioned that much of my village lost landline phone and/or Internet for six days after thieves pinched a load of cables. We lost our landline, but fortunately t'Internet remained.

    Guess what? Cables have been stolen again, and much of the village is again without landline or t'Internet. Fortunately for all of you, we currently have both. ;)

    The Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013 really needs to be enforced or tightened up, as the money these little scrotes get from the metal is orders of magnitude less than the disruption caused. Witness also lead from church rooves.

    We had exactly the same problems about 3 years ago with thieves stealing the copper cables multiples times. Luckily they've replaced them with fibre-optic cables which apparently aren't worth stealing. The internet speed is now 50 times faster than it was. (75 v 1.5).
    Maybe its a ruse to get fibre-optic quicker? Pretty clever really...

    Wor Dom is probably behind the cunning plan.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 24,677
    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    We keep on saying “breaking the law” but presumably this would be a civil offence... ie no role for the police?

    Separately if Boris does resign as PM - but not party leader - what are the next steps?

    Usually it would be a nominated successor from government who would be deemed to have confidence...

    I could see an argument that Boris could recommend someone from the Tory ranks and make the argument they should have first go as they are a member of the party with (I think!!) most seats. So someone goes before Corbyn. (Assuming Boris wants this... may be someone like Fallon who has said he is retiring at the next election...£)

    But how is that Confidence tested...? As I said it would usually be deemed unless proven otherwise in a VoNC. But here it’s not the case necessarily... but there would need to be a rock solid certainty that Corbyn would have Confidence before he could take up the role...



  • AndyJS said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What precisely is the problem with a winter election ? The old dears tend to vote postally these days.

    A really bad day on Election Day in weather terms could impact turnout and casts questions about the legitimacy of the result.

    Just needs it to be really wet, windy, very cold, or snowy and it’ll be anarchy particularly in rural seats.

    Could impact the ability of people manning the polling stations.
    You make it sound like we're still living in the middle ages.
    I've regularly experienced how a little bit of snow grinds the country to a halt, especially the transport system.
  • On topic.

    We haven't always seen eye to eye over the years (to say the least!) but Casino has been pretty incisive and impressive on this election timing business and betting opportunities.

    I think the next question is – are we really going to have an election in December? There are only two viable Thursdays (5 Dec and 12 Dec) and in any case they are in the thick dark of winter.

    2019 might be a lay...?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,791
    nico67 said:

    I think VONC come under substantive motions and are therefore amendable .

    So if Bozo tried this opposition MPs could amend that .

    The wording of the motion is prescribed in the FTPA.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,633
    GIN1138 said:
    Prorogation will not occur during the 14 days as the Queen seeks another Prime Minister.

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 11,651

    AndyJS said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What precisely is the problem with a winter election ? The old dears tend to vote postally these days.

    A really bad day on Election Day in weather terms could impact turnout and casts questions about the legitimacy of the result.

    Just needs it to be really wet, windy, very cold, or snowy and it’ll be anarchy particularly in rural seats.

    Could impact the ability of people manning the polling stations.
    You make it sound like we're still living in the middle ages.
    I've regularly experienced how a little bit of snow grinds the country to a halt, especially the transport system.
    That shouldn't be a problem for voting, but it might prolong the count if it takes time to get the ballot boxes to the counts.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
    What's wrong with an additional letter saying the extension will get us nowhere, and we'll be in exactly the same position three months later?
    The EU already know that.
    So what's the point?
    Because they’ll probably give us an extension anyway.

    If they don’t well, that’s another issue isn’t it.
    No, what is the point of an extension?
    We continue to remain members of the EU.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,335
    Charles said:

    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    We keep on saying “breaking the law” but presumably this would be a civil offence... ie no role for the police?

    Separately if Boris does resign as PM - but not party leader - what are the next steps?

    Usually it would be a nominated successor from government who would be deemed to have confidence...

    I could see an argument that Boris could recommend someone from the Tory ranks and make the argument they should have first go as they are a member of the party with (I think!!) most seats. So someone goes before Corbyn. (Assuming Boris wants this... may be someone like Fallon who has said he is retiring at the next election...£)

    But how is that Confidence tested...? As I said it would usually be deemed unless proven otherwise in a VoNC. But here it’s not the case necessarily... but there would need to be a rock solid certainty that Corbyn would have Confidence before he could take up the role...



    Ken Clarke has floated the idea of backing Corbyn for a day to extend.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,470
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
    What's wrong with an additional letter saying the extension will get us nowhere, and we'll be in exactly the same position three months later?
    The EU already know that.
    So what's the point?
    Because they’ll probably give us an extension anyway.

    If they don’t well, that’s another issue isn’t it.
    No, what is the point of an extension?
    To facilitate a general election which the EU know is imminent .
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,074
    edited September 6
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
    What's wrong with an additional letter saying the extension will get us nowhere, and we'll be in exactly the same position three months later?
    The EU already know that.
    So what's the point?
    Thry dont want to see us leave . Theyd prefer we had a plan for an extension but are willing to play for time. Either boris wins out and it's not their fault, or a GE or referendum happens.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,139

    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    This is why the smart move is that Boris calls a confidence motion in himself on Monday (only needs simple majority to pass, which I think he would just squeak). Start the ball rolling on the 14 days, might get Corbs or another caretaker but the extension is then on them, not Boris. Put the impetus back on the opposition who a week or so ago couldn’t agree a suitable alternative PM candidate.
    There is no reason to think a VONC in BoZo will pass.

    If it did, it would mean an election because Parliament is prorogued afterwards and therefore there is no time to form another government.
    A VONC only becomes priority business if it is moved by the LOTO. If anyone else moves one the Speaker will not call it forward for debate - he did not call the one the LDs moved a few months ago.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,791

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
    What's wrong with an additional letter saying the extension will get us nowhere, and we'll be in exactly the same position three months later?
    The EU already know that.
    So what's the point?
    Because they’ll probably give us an extension anyway.

    If they don’t well, that’s another issue isn’t it.
    No, what is the point of an extension?
    We continue to remain members of the EU.
    For three more months, then the same thing happens.
  • AndyJS said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What precisely is the problem with a winter election ? The old dears tend to vote postally these days.

    A really bad day on Election Day in weather terms could impact turnout and casts questions about the legitimacy of the result.

    Just needs it to be really wet, windy, very cold, or snowy and it’ll be anarchy particularly in rural seats.

    Could impact the ability of people manning the polling stations.
    You make it sound like we're still living in the middle ages.
    It is perfectly possible that an election day on, say, 12 December is snowbound.

    Only two years ago, much of the country, include parts of the SE, was buried in snow at this time (10 December 2017) which would, as Eagles rightly says, have caused utter havoc and placed the legitimacy of the result in question.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,791

    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    This is why the smart move is that Boris calls a confidence motion in himself on Monday (only needs simple majority to pass, which I think he would just squeak). Start the ball rolling on the 14 days, might get Corbs or another caretaker but the extension is then on them, not Boris. Put the impetus back on the opposition who a week or so ago couldn’t agree a suitable alternative PM candidate.
    There is no reason to think a VONC in BoZo will pass.

    If it did, it would mean an election because Parliament is prorogued afterwards and therefore there is no time to form another government.
    A VONC only becomes priority business if it is moved by the LOTO. If anyone else moves one the Speaker will not call it forward for debate - he did not call the one the LDs moved a few months ago.
    Don't the government control a huge chunk of time in the commons?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    Byronic said:

    The unanswered question by all those who are going to ensure on Monday that Boris doesn't get his General Election remains what if he tells the HoC to feck itself and even with the Surrender Bill he isn't going to seek an extension. On 14th October they would have to move for a VONC and he then gets a fortnight to form his government again and then another VONC and is the HoC really going to put Corbyn in?

    If Boris does not request an extension he will be breaking the new law. I know he’s got cojones but I can’t see him seeking arrest. He therefore has to resign. Which means Corbyn PM, or a different caretaker.
    This is why the smart move is that Boris calls a confidence motion in himself on Monday (only needs simple majority to pass, which I think he would just squeak). Start the ball rolling on the 14 days, might get Corbs or another caretaker but the extension is then on them, not Boris. Put the impetus back on the opposition who a week or so ago couldn’t agree a suitable alternative PM candidate.
    There is no reason to think a VONC in BoZo will pass.

    If it did, it would mean an election because Parliament is prorogued afterwards and therefore there is no time to form another government.
    A VONC only becomes priority business if it is moved by the LOTO. If anyone else moves one the Speaker will not call it forward for debate - he did not call the one the LDs moved a few months ago.
    Doesn’t the government (usually) control the business of the Commons?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/remainers-may-regret-not-backing-an-october-general-election/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    “Ultimately, the Prime Minister has it in his power to make sure that the UK does not get an extension (even while fulfilling his legal duty to request one) by making certain demands that the EU is bound to refuse.“

    The letter is already written in the bill. Any other letter will have no legal significance to the EU and will be thrown in the bin
    Any letter written by the PM has legal significance. The Bill just mandates one particular letter; it says nothing about writing others.
    Asking for an Article 50 extension is a formal process that should be done under the constitutional arrangements of the member state.

    This bill will now become part of those arrangements. The letter is the letter.
    What's wrong with an additional letter saying the extension will get us nowhere, and we'll be in exactly the same position three months later?
    The EU already know that.
    So what's the point?
    Because they’ll probably give us an extension anyway.

    If they don’t well, that’s another issue isn’t it.
    No, what is the point of an extension?
    We continue to remain members of the EU.
    For three more months, then the same thing happens.
    But weve handed over £3Bn..
This discussion has been closed.