I went to an ex's wedding 2 years ago and didn't find anything remotely difficult about it at all. It was a lovely day. She and another ex of mine are still two of my closest friends.
Days like today bring out my inner republican. Time to find a nuclear shelter to sit out the next few days' fawning.
I like Prince Harry, and today's brought out my inner monarchist.
... an updated avatar in the offing?
Yup, just changed my profile pic to celebrate this momentous day.
Oh you cheeky bugger.
I'm in mourning too, this means Meghan Markle and Patrick J. Adams are leaving Suits.
Good show, for the most part. If they are gone the show will have to as well, the whole premise is based around Mike’s journey and his relationships, even if others have their own stories too.
There's a spin off featuring Jessica in the works.
What's she manufacturing?
The spin off is based around politics in Chicago. Can’t see any story there at all
Were we not supposed to take back control and make Parliament sovereign again ? Or, just not yet!
Just as Labour MPs will be required to take a Momentum Loyalty test, so all MPs will be required to take a Brexit purity test before being allowed to read any documents. Or vote.
Were we not supposed to take back control and make Parliament sovereign again ? Or, just not yet!
Just as Labour MPs will be required to take a Momentum Loyalty test, so all MPs will be required to take a Brexit purity test before being allowed to read any documents. Or vote.
It's a Brave New World.
Anna Soubry: "There’s something about these hard Brexiters: it’s fascinating, actually. Look at the language some of them use. It’s not enough that you accept the result; it’s not enough that you voted to trigger article 50. Now it’s, ‘Yeah, yeah, but do you believe?’ It’s like the counter-revolutionary forces of Chairman Mao or Joe Stalin. It’s not enough that you went against everything you ever believed in; you have to sign up in blood. It’s like Orwell’s thought police and the reign of terror combined.”
Were we not supposed to take back control and make Parliament sovereign again ? Or, just not yet!
Just as Labour MPs will be required to take a Momentum Loyalty test, so all MPs will be required to take a Brexit purity test before being allowed to read any documents. Or vote.
It's a Brave New World.
Well given most Labour voters back Corbyn and Momentum are the Corbyn storm troopers and most Tory voters back Brexit a hunt for Blairite MPs within Labour and diehard Remainer MPs within the Tories may well be on the cards yes. Perhaps they can seek refuge in the LDs?
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
But in the debate in the HoC, that argument was put forward as a reason not to release the reports and despite that, our elected politicians still voted in favour of release. What gives the right to David Davis to over-rule Parliament who made the decision to take that risk?
They are being given the reports just not the most sensitive details for the negotiations
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
But in the debate in the HoC, that argument was put forward as a reason not to release the reports and despite that, our elected politicians still voted in favour of release. What gives the right to David Davis to over-rule Parliament who made the decision to take that risk?
They are being given the reports just not the most sensitive details for the negotiations
How do we know ? So we cannot trust these MPs, but we can trust the moronic Ministers ?
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
But in the debate in the HoC, that argument was put forward as a reason not to release the reports and despite that, our elected politicians still voted in favour of release. What gives the right to David Davis to over-rule Parliament who made the decision to take that risk?
They are being given the reports just not the most sensitive details for the negotiations
Was that ammendment included when the MP's voted to release the reports?
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
But in the debate in the HoC, that argument was put forward as a reason not to release the reports and despite that, our elected politicians still voted in favour of release. What gives the right to David Davis to over-rule Parliament who made the decision to take that risk?
They are being given the reports just not the most sensitive details for the negotiations
How do we know ? So we cannot trust these MPs, but we can trust the moronic Ministers ?
Not given the risks of leaks of the most sensitive material, they will see the rest of the reports
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
That's your belief, and I certainly wouldn't try to change your mind. It's perfectly reasonable for you, believing that, to have hoped that the vote in parliament would not pass.
The issue is that when our beliefs lose out in the democratic process, as yours did here in parliament, that doesn't justify a minister unilaterally overruling that process. Cameron wouldn't have been justified in disregarding the referendum result, or only partially following through with it, no matter how strongly he believed that was in the country's interest. Likewise with Davis here.
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
There are procedures that are put in place with other sensitive information - to do with the security services, for instance - before sharing with MPs.
This gives me such confidence in those charged with delivering Brexit
@bbclaurak: 2. Davis letter says tho they had no assurances from Cttee over what they would do with the info so haven’t included anything commercially sensitive or that would damage negotiations
We can't trust the committee not to leak it, so we took everything out
@faisalislam: Understand the Government has indicated to the Committee that there may still be negotiation-sensitive material in these 800-plus pages, and asked it to consult before any decision to publish more widely
Or not...
Just make them Cabinet papers - and release in 30 years....end of issue.
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
I don't think there are any sensitive details. Civil servants are cobbling together these "reports" to order. The temptation must be to add black splodges here and there for artistic effect. The splodges don't have to cover anything.
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
But Leavers made that argument during the HoC debate and despite that they voted to ignore that argument and voted for full release of the reports. So that argument was already lost. Now one man seems to have taken it upon himself to defy the will of Parliament. Surely, you cannot defend that.
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
I don't think there are any sensitive parts. Civil servants are cobbling together these "reports" to order. The temptation must be to add black splodges here and there for artistic effect. They don't have to cover anything.
So let's get this right. Civil Servants [ hundreds of them ] can be trusted. But elected MPs cannot be.
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
There are procedures that are put in place with other sensitive information - to do with the security services, for instance - before sharing with MPs.
Why can't we simply do the same here?
Because they don't want to ? What if it comes out the government is prepared to pay £100bn to get a FTA with the EU ?
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
I don't think there are any sensitive parts. Civil servants are cobbling together these "reports" to order. The temptation must be to add black splodges here and there for artistic effect. They don't have to cover anything.
So let's get this right. Civil Servants [ hundreds of them ] can be trusted. But elected MPs cannot be.
Civil servants can trusted to fabricate reports? Why not? David Davis won't be writing them himself.
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
That's your belief, and I certainly wouldn't try to change your mind. It's perfectly reasonable for you, believing that, to have hoped that the vote in parliament would not pass.
The issue is that when our beliefs lose out in the democratic process, as yours did here in parliament, that doesn't justify a minister unilaterally overruling that process. Cameron wouldn't have been justified in disregarding the referendum result, or only partially following through with it, no matter how strongly he believed that was in the country's interest. Likewise with Davis here.
I voted Remain and lost out in the democratic process when 52% of the electorate voted Leave in a referendum mandated by Parliament. I then accepted that result as did Parliament when it voted to trigger Article 50, attempts to release the most sensitive data from key economic reports is just an attempt by hard-core Remainer MPs to sabotage Brexit
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
There are procedures that are put in place with other sensitive information - to do with the security services, for instance - before sharing with MPs.
Why can't we simply do the same here?
Perhaps we can but they certainly cannot be released straight away including the most sensitive data
You have just been assiduously demonstrating that you have no idea what "parliamentary sovereignty" means (and I can't be arsed to tell you; look it up), so I'd be a bit guarded about calling people morons if I were you. And I think anyone who read your remark about British Asians yesterday will agree that there's worse things than being a moron.
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
But Leavers made that argument during the HoC debate and despite that they voted to ignore that argument and voted for full release of the reports. So that argument was already lost. Now one man seems to have taken it upon himself to defy the will of Parliament. Surely, you cannot defend that.
The government released the documents to the committee as Parliament voted for. However as the committee refused to give any assurances as to how the documents, including the most sensitive data, would be used the most sensitive data was rightly redacted. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42142882
Davis is quite right too, what is to stop diehard Remainer MPs leaking commercially sensitive details to the EU or the press?
That's funny, I wouldn't have had you down in the "political elites should be able to overrule the democratic process to protect people from causing themselves economic harm" camp.
The democratic decision was decided in June 2016 when 52% voted to Leave the EU on a more than 70% turnout despite endless warnings from the Remain campaign about the economic risks
Er... yeah, I agree. And what the fuck has that got to do with what we're talking about?
Everything. As diehard Remainer MPs just want to use the most sensitive details to sabotage Brexit
There are procedures that are put in place with other sensitive information - to do with the security services, for instance - before sharing with MPs.
Why can't we simply do the same here?
The "sensitive information" about these reports are that they are bogus. That's the information they can't share.
@richard_conway: BBC sports personality of the year 2018. Shortlist: - Elise Christie - Mo Farah - Chris Froome - Lewis Hamilton - Anthony Joshua - Harry Kane - Johanna Konta - Jonnie Peacock - Adam Peaty - Jonathan Rea - Anya Shrubsole - Bianca Walkden #spoty
@NaomiOhReally: "Ireland has poisoned UK politics and brought down governments for centuries" is the hottest of takes on 800 years of invasion, oppression and attempted extermination
Tory lead on the economy down 5. It's because McDonnell impressed viewers with his memory of key figures, innit?
Yet another demonstration of the fact that any publicity is good publicity.
"failed to boost the Conservatives’ popularity" is technically true, but I think most Conservatives will be happy with "not actually made things worse".
@richard_conway: BBC sports personality of the year 2018. Shortlist: - Elise Christie - Mo Farah - Chris Froome - Lewis Hamilton - Anthony Joshua - Harry Kane - Johanna Konta - Jonnie Peacock - Adam Peaty - Jonathan Rea - Anya Shrubsole - Bianca Walkden #spoty
I've heard of a whole 7 of them, and can talk in a little bit of detail about only 5 of them.
This gives me such confidence in those charged with delivering Brexit
@bbclaurak: 2. Davis letter says tho they had no assurances from Cttee over what they would do with the info so haven’t included anything commercially sensitive or that would damage negotiations
We can't trust the committee not to leak it, so we took everything out
@faisalislam: Understand the Government has indicated to the Committee that there may still be negotiation-sensitive material in these 800-plus pages, and asked it to consult before any decision to publish more widely
Or not...
Just make them Cabinet papers - and release in 30 years....end of issue.
We elect MPs to represent us. They cannot properly do this if they are not given all the necessary information to make a considered judgement.
As with the Miller case I want our MPs to be able to properly govern in our name. That means trusting them until they prove they cannot be trusted. If someone in a Committee leaks sensitive information that puts our country's position in negotiations at risk then they should be prosecuted for it.
What should not happen is we do not give them that information just in case they leak it. That is to undermine the whole system of Governance and put too much power in the hands of the executive.
Moreover if we accept it as a principle it allows the Executive to withhold information that will not necessarily undermine the country in its negotiations but might well undermine one party. That again is not something we should accept as a reason for keeping MPs in the dark.
Tory lead on the economy down 5. It's because McDonnell impressed viewers with his memory of key figures, innit?
Yet another demonstration of the fact that any publicity is good publicity.
"failed to boost the Conservatives’ popularity" is technically true, but I think most Conservatives will be happy with "not actually made things worse".
-3 is "worse", especially as Tories felt the Budget was quite good, and Hammond spent quite a bit of cash that he won't have for the next one.
I'll admit I'm surprised - I thought somethimng like Tories +3 Lab +1 was the most likely on this measure, simply because Hammond did better than expcted.
One of the unnoticed stories of recent polls is UKIP slowly clawing up. I wonder if we'll see them ahead of the Lib Dems in a poll in the next few months.
@NaomiOhReally: "Ireland has poisoned UK politics and brought down governments for centuries" is the hottest of takes on 800 years of invasion, oppression and attempted extermination
This gives me such confidence in those charged with delivering Brexit
@bbclaurak: 2. Davis letter says tho they had no assurances from Cttee over what they would do with the info so haven’t included anything commercially sensitive or that would damage negotiations
We can't trust the committee not to leak it, so we took everything out
@faisalislam: Understand the Government has indicated to the Committee that there may still be negotiation-sensitive material in these 800-plus pages, and asked it to consult before any decision to publish more widely
Or not...
Just make them Cabinet papers - and release in 30 years....end of issue.
We elect MPs to represent us. They cannot properly do this if they are not given all the necessary information to make a considered judgement.
As with the Miller case I want our MPs to be able to properly govern in our name. That means trusting them until they prove they cannot be trusted. If someone in a Committee leaks sensitive information that puts our country's position in negotiations at risk then they should be prosecuted for it.
What should not happen is we do not give them that information just in case they leak it. That is to undermine the whole system of Governance and put too much power in the hands of the executive.
Moreover if we accept it as a principle it allows the Executive to withhold information that will not necessarily undermine the country in its negotiations but might well undermine one party. That again is not something we should accept as a reason for keeping MPs in the dark.
There is an accepted argument that certain sensitive information discussed by Cabinet is kept secret. I can't see why the terms of the Brexit negotiations shouldn't be classed as such. Probably more so than the great bulk of "secrets" which ARE help back because they have scope to be politically embarrassing.
And democracy hasn't collapsed while this has been utilised - by all parties.
There is an accepted argument that certain sensitive information discussed by Cabinet is kept secret. I can't see why the terms of the Brexit negotiations shouldn't be classed as such.
The real state secrets at this point do not relate to the Brexit negotiations per se, but to the plan B.
Tory lead on the economy down 5. It's because McDonnell impressed viewers with his memory of key figures, innit?
Yet another demonstration of the fact that any publicity is good publicity.
Yet the Tories would still be largest party on those figures on 302 seats to 276 for Labour.
How many times today are you planning to use those spurious figures? This is the second so far. These numbers are merely an extrapolation that does not take into account local factors. Indeed the figure could underestimate or overestimate either party.
“I think it's fair to say Brexit is an enormous challenge and government has been ill equipped in terms of preparations for the negotiations... it's not an ideal state at all.” A savaging by a dead sheep, if ever there was one.
I thought the Guardian used to just give royal news a few lines (unless it's Prince Charles dodging tax!).
Yes, they've gone a bit soft. Report them to Momentum.
On the more serious topic - the combination of the Brexit papers issue and the "we'll ignore Opposition Day votes" policy seems symptomatic of the Government not really understanding how minority governments should work. Basically you sometimes lose votes and have to concede something. Voters will usually understand - you say to them, "We didn't want to do X, but without an overall majority we had to".
Saying you'll ignore or evade Parliamentary decisions is an attempt to shift power from Parliament to the executive, without anything remotely like a mandate to do so.
Tory lead on the economy down 5. It's because McDonnell impressed viewers with his memory of key figures, innit?
Yet another demonstration of the fact that any publicity is good publicity.
Yet the Tories would still be largest party on those figures on 302 seats to 276 for Labour.
How many times today are you planning to use those spurious figures? This is the second so far. These numbers are merely an extrapolation that does not take into account local factors. Indeed the figure could underestimate or overestimate either party.
There will always be local factorS but they could favour MPs from either side, I was simply doing what every national poll does which is project seats won across the UK based on UNS.
We are going to need more than the ginger nut after that showing in the 1st Test. We need to have come up with a way to clone him like Dolly The Sheep and send out 11 out of them.
Also, he won't have played any cricket for months now. How likely is he going to be in touch to face 3 bowlers sending them down at 90 mph.
Yeah yeah, bowling machine, but it is totally different experience...at least thats my excuse when they swapped out the machine for Alex Tudor and he gave me a good working over.
May is actually offering the fairest deal for both sides. Ensuring we Leave the EU and the single market and end free movement to appease Leavers and paying a significant exit bill for a FTA to appease Remainers
I thought the Guardian used to just give royal news a few lines (unless it's Prince Charles dodging tax!).
Yes, they've gone a bit soft. Report them to Momentum.
I realise that's a joke.
But even you must feel a little uncomfortable with the reported stories about Momentum wanting to unleash "hate" against people, including - if the reports are to be believed - the PM's husband.
We had quite enough of that with McBride planting poisonously untrue stories about political spouses. Why should lovely cuddly Jeremy's version of Labour get a free pass on this?
If you've got good arguments, use them to win people to your cause. Unleashing hate - and there have been too many examples of Labour people saying hateful things (cough *anti-semitism* cough) is not something which a party which, in Thornberry's words, is "better than this" should be doing.
Comments
It's a Brave New World.
Parliament was always Sovereign, it just "didn't feel like it"...
Parliament will be Sovereign again, after they shut up and do what they are told
No.. I didn't think so.
There are certain MPs who may leak those if they can to try and sabotage Brexit and the negotiations though I doubt JRM is in their number.
The issue is that when our beliefs lose out in the democratic process, as yours did here in parliament, that doesn't justify a minister unilaterally overruling that process. Cameron wouldn't have been justified in disregarding the referendum result, or only partially following through with it, no matter how strongly he believed that was in the country's interest. Likewise with Davis here.
Why can't we simply do the same here?
Oh, dear! What a moron.
Season 2 is bad. I have no opinion about other seasons as I stopped watching.
I like the story of how the Daily Worker handled George VI's accession to the throne - page 2 item "Cambridge man makes good".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42142882
Yet another demonstration of the fact that any publicity is good publicity.
Shortlist:
- Elise Christie
- Mo Farah
- Chris Froome
- Lewis Hamilton
- Anthony Joshua
- Harry Kane
- Johanna Konta
- Jonnie Peacock
- Adam Peaty
- Jonathan Rea
- Anya Shrubsole
- Bianca Walkden
#spoty
Not bad figures for the Marxists
https://twitter.com/JeremyWarnerUK/status/935185322010402821
https://twitter.com/guardiananushka/status/935237352267579394
As with the Miller case I want our MPs to be able to properly govern in our name. That means trusting them until they prove they cannot be trusted. If someone in a Committee leaks sensitive information that puts our country's position in negotiations at risk then they should be prosecuted for it.
What should not happen is we do not give them that information just in case they leak it. That is to undermine the whole system of Governance and put too much power in the hands of the executive.
Moreover if we accept it as a principle it allows the Executive to withhold information that will not necessarily undermine the country in its negotiations but might well undermine one party. That again is not something we should accept as a reason for keeping MPs in the dark.
I'll admit I'm surprised - I thought somethimng like Tories +3 Lab +1 was the most likely on this measure, simply because Hammond did better than expcted.
Tsk.
I am going to add Suits to the enormous list of TV series I have not watched (yet). Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones etc etc.
And democracy hasn't collapsed while this has been utilised - by all parties.
It is quite good.
https://twitter.com/Phil_Wisden/status/935248070815768576
On the more serious topic - the combination of the Brexit papers issue and the "we'll ignore Opposition Day votes" policy seems symptomatic of the Government not really understanding how minority governments should work. Basically you sometimes lose votes and have to concede something. Voters will usually understand - you say to them, "We didn't want to do X, but without an overall majority we had to".
Saying you'll ignore or evade Parliamentary decisions is an attempt to shift power from Parliament to the executive, without anything remotely like a mandate to do so.
That must be really tough. I mean, how do you get the borrow?
Also England batters,when in make it big.
Also, he won't have played any cricket for months now. How likely is he going to be in touch to face 3 bowlers sending them down at 90 mph.
Yeah yeah, bowling machine, but it is totally different experience...at least thats my excuse when they swapped out the machine for Alex Tudor and he gave me a good working over.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty
NEW THREAD
But even you must feel a little uncomfortable with the reported stories about Momentum wanting to unleash "hate" against people, including - if the reports are to be believed - the PM's husband.
We had quite enough of that with McBride planting poisonously untrue stories about political spouses. Why should lovely cuddly Jeremy's version of Labour get a free pass on this?
If you've got good arguments, use them to win people to your cause. Unleashing hate - and there have been too many examples of Labour people saying hateful things (cough *anti-semitism* cough) is not something which a party which, in Thornberry's words, is "better than this" should be doing.