Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

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

1235710

Comments

  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    edited September 2019
    edit
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    algarkirk said:

    Genuine question. Can anyone remind me this - it's all so long ago? Why is the backstop objectionable if it is the case that those who are against it all say it is unnecessary because a solution will be found?

    Because the DUP would revolt and the majority is gone..... oh wait
  • TGOHF said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The people mocking Johnson on twitter all seem to be FBPE - anyone with a "I voted Brexit" picture is backing him... at the moment.

    And that is the big danger. There is plenty of evidence of voter anger over this and this game playing will play out very badly for those engaged in it and, perversely, could give Boris a majority against all the odds and his obvious blustering incompetence

    I suspect that bafflement rather than anger is the most common reaction to recent events.
    Plenty of anger in town this morning.

    I cannot recall a time when you hear politics in the street being talked about and with such dismay and distrust
    You should blame Boris and Farage for rabble-rousing.
    Indeed. It is where it all started. Boris and his silly polemics, and Farage because he was rejected by the Conservative Party for being a fascist
    The peasants getting a bit uppity for you again ?
    Peasants are fine. Quite a few of my family are peasants after a fashion (rural folk). Anyway, when did you first start thinking the Old Etonian Boris Johnson and the Old Dulwich Collegian Nigel Farage (pronounced Farridge) were peasants? I am sure you can get therapy for such delusions.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,697
    timmo said:



    Just got this from Boris...something is going to have to give..

    Something has to give but how do you solve the unsolveable?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited September 2019
    I'm not sure of the etiquette but should you fill your boot before sharing with the rest of us? Shouldn't header writers conform to the FHB rules.....

    Back to the thread....Johnson is such a profuse liar that NOTHING he says can be believed. This is a unique stance for a leading politician in this country. Poor old Profumo...one tiny fib and he was out.

    Anyway it's really ugly . It's trashing the international reputation of the UK and anyone supporting him is a real piece of shit. No ifs no buts....
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,964

    eek said:



    It would be close - but I think Boris gets No confidenced - and the process starts for the election.

    Not quite - there is 14 days in which another Government could be created.
    Which is a risk for BoJo if some clever chaps back his ruse to no-confidence himself.. then switch sides and back a Corbyn/Harman/Clarke/Jo Johnson/Kermit the Frog interim.

    (Though this suggests a level of opposition co-ordination which I'm not convinced is present)
    I read somewhere that apparently the government VoNCing themselves won't work. I cannot remember why.
    They don’t VONC themselves - they have a vote of confidence- so all the opposition have to do is abstain and the government passes its own vote of confidence in itself. Otherwise the government would have to vote that they DIDNT have confidence in themselves- great ammunition for the opposition!
    Why would it be ammunition? The public would know its simply a vote to trigger an election.

    In some continental countries the only way to have an early election is by a VONC so its not unusual for the government to VONC itself in order to trigger that.
    You’re right. Nobody will care if Boris if VONCs himself and nobody will care if JC votes to give confidence in Boris.

    Everyone knows the game going on here.
    But it will be very funny if Boris gets his election even after Corbyn has tried to block it by pretening he has confidence in the PM! Double whammy.....
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    eek said:



    It would be close - but I think Boris gets No confidenced - and the process starts for the election.

    Not quite - there is 14 days in which another Government could be created.
    Which is a risk for BoJo if some clever chaps back his ruse to no-confidence himself.. then switch sides and back a Corbyn/Harman/Clarke/Jo Johnson/Kermit the Frog interim.

    (Though this suggests a level of opposition co-ordination which I'm not convinced is present)
    I read somewhere that apparently the government VoNCing themselves won't work. I cannot remember why.
    They don’t VONC themselves - they have a vote of confidence- so all the opposition have to do is abstain and the government passes its own vote of confidence in itself. Otherwise the government would have to vote that they DIDNT have confidence in themselves- great ammunition for the opposition!
    Why would it be ammunition? The public would know its simply a vote to trigger an election.

    In some continental countries the only way to have an early election is by a VONC so its not unusual for the government to VONC itself in order to trigger that.
    You’re right. Nobody will care if Boris if VONCs himself and nobody will care if JC votes to give confidence in Boris.

    Everyone knows the game going on here.
    But it will be very funny if Boris gets his election even after Corbyn has tried to block it by pretening he has confidence in the PM! Double whammy.....
    That is the danger yeah. SNP mischief perhaps?
  • Ok let me give you a personal anecdote FWIW. Lunch with parents today and was round Wednesday too, politics discussed. Mum a tory voter, much more enthusiastically than she let's on dad doesn't vote often, occasionally Tory, last voted labour under Wilson whom he thinks was the absolute bomb. Both voted to leave.
    Dad - hates Boris, hates the opposition, despises Farage. Will not vote, thinks Boris is a fraud and a chancer. Would now support revoke article 50 to sort out what we do over the next couple of years

    Mum - very protective of poor Boris as she was of poor TM and the nasty Corbyn ruining things, wants to let him get on with it but appears genuinely uncertain she can vote this time, feels all MPs have let us down but she, like me, wants Clive Lewis kicked out of our seat

    Boris is definitely provoking feelings about politics

    They sound like good solid folk. The type that Boris will likely lose IMO.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Ok let me give you a personal anecdote FWIW. Lunch with parents today and was round Wednesday too, politics discussed. Mum a tory voter, much more enthusiastically than she let's on dad doesn't vote often, occasionally Tory, last voted labour under Wilson whom he thinks was the absolute bomb. Both voted to leave.
    Dad - hates Boris, hates the opposition, despises Farage. Will not vote, thinks Boris is a fraud and a chancer. Would now support revoke article 50 to sort out what we do over the next couple of years

    Mum - very protective of poor Boris as she was of poor TM and the nasty Corbyn ruining things, wants to let him get on with it but appears genuinely uncertain she can vote this time, feels all MPs have let us down but she, like me, wants Clive Lewis kicked out of our seat

    Boris is definitely provoking feelings about politics

    So your Tory mum is still a Tory?

    Front page news...
    Ffs I'm just giving you a flavour of my families personal discussions on this for the sake of interest in how people are talking about this week and things in general.
    It's no different to discussions on doorsteps or in peoples offices that get reported here, and im not suggesting anyone place bets based on my Mums rampant Toryism
    If it doesn't interest you then skip over it. Or, ya know, just don't be a dick about it
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    Ok let me give you a personal anecdote FWIW. Lunch with parents today and was round Wednesday too, politics discussed. Mum a tory voter, much more enthusiastically than she let's on dad doesn't vote often, occasionally Tory, last voted labour under Wilson whom he thinks was the absolute bomb. Both voted to leave.
    Dad - hates Boris, hates the opposition, despises Farage. Will not vote, thinks Boris is a fraud and a chancer. Would now support revoke article 50 to sort out what we do over the next couple of years

    Mum - very protective of poor Boris as she was of poor TM and the nasty Corbyn ruining things, wants to let him get on with it but appears genuinely uncertain she can vote this time, feels all MPs have let us down but she, like me, wants Clive Lewis kicked out of our seat

    Boris is definitely provoking feelings about politics

    So your Tory mum is still a Tory?

    Front page news...
    Ffs I'm just giving you a flavour of my families personal discussions on this for the sake of interest in how people are talking about this week and things in general.
    It's no different to discussions on doorsteps or in peoples offices that get reported here, and im not suggesting anyone place bets based on my Mums rampant Toryism
    If it doesn't interest you then skip over it. Or, ya know, just don't be a dick about it
    You are right. I apologise and I have removed my comment.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,351
    kle4 said:

    algarkirk said:

    Genuine question. Can anyone remind me this - it's all so long ago? Why is the backstop objectionable if it is the case that those who are against it all say it is unnecessary because a solution will be found?

    There's a range of opinion on that, especially since some of those who call it the anti-democratic backstop nevertheless considered it acceptable vs no Brexit at all, such as the PM himself. Philip Thompson can more exhaustively summarise the view for whom the mere risk of it is unacceptable on any grounds because they will be subject to laws with on representation or some such, but as to the point about why anyone should care when everyone seems to think a solution will be found, neither side seems to actually believe that it will be found no matter what is said, so the assumption is we will face the backstop (some say the EU will not want us to use it, others believe they will not agree anything else because they want us to use it) at some point.

    But as far as I can see it is not a real issue in any case, on either side, given we end up with the situation the backstop is supposed to prevent by including it/not time limiting it, and given the aforementioned Borisites might not like it but demonstrably are prepared to accept it, making their rhetoric against it false.
    Thanks. Very helpful. Perhaps it's time we revisited TM's deal, though perhaps draw the line at bringing back TM herself. I am sure, say, Mr Clarke could present it beautifully with backing from Mr Kinnock junior.

    (And wouldn't most people agree that annoying the DUP would be in the public interest anyway?)

  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Ok let me give you a personal anecdote FWIW. Lunch with parents today and was round Wednesday too, politics discussed. Mum a tory voter, much more enthusiastically than she let's on dad doesn't vote often, occasionally Tory, last voted labour under Wilson whom he thinks was the absolute bomb. Both voted to leave.
    Dad - hates Boris, hates the opposition, despises Farage. Will not vote, thinks Boris is a fraud and a chancer. Would now support revoke article 50 to sort out what we do over the next couple of years

    Mum - very protective of poor Boris as she was of poor TM and the nasty Corbyn ruining things, wants to let him get on with it but appears genuinely uncertain she can vote this time, feels all MPs have let us down but she, like me, wants Clive Lewis kicked out of our seat

    Boris is definitely provoking feelings about politics

    So your Tory mum is still a Tory?

    Front page news...
    Ffs I'm just giving you a flavour of my families personal discussions on this for the sake of interest in how people are talking about this week and things in general.
    It's no different to discussions on doorsteps or in peoples offices that get reported here, and im not suggesting anyone place bets based on my Mums rampant Toryism
    If it doesn't interest you then skip over it. Or, ya know, just don't be a dick about it
    You are right. I apologise and I have removed my comment.
    Apology accepted. And I apologize if I was a little heated, I'm very protective of my mumma
  • TGOHF said:
    I wonder who Nigel Farage or Arran Banks would support if it were Russia England? I am sure it would be England
  • JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    But it does mean that said Prime Minister doesn’t have to test their support in Parliament, so it might give more scope for Corbyn to nod through someone like Ken Clarke.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    algarkirk said:

    Genuine question. Can anyone remind me this - it's all so long ago? Why is the backstop objectionable if it is the case that those who are against it all say it is unnecessary because a solution will be found?

    There's a range of opinion on that, especially since some of those who call it the anti-democratic backstop nevertheless considered it acceptable vs no Brexit at all, such as the PM himself. Philip Thompson can more exhaustively summarise the view for whom the mere risk of it is unacceptable on any grounds because they will be subject to laws with on representation or some such, but as to the point about why anyone should care when everyone seems to think a solution will be found, neither side seems to actually believe that it will be found no matter what is said, so the assumption is we will face the backstop (some say the EU will not want us to use it, others believe they will not agree anything else because they want us to use it) at some point.

    But as far as I can see it is not a real issue in any case, on either side, given we end up with the situation the backstop is supposed to prevent by including it/not time limiting it, and given the aforementioned Borisites might not like it but demonstrably are prepared to accept it, making their rhetoric against it false.
    (And wouldn't most people agree that annoying the DUP would be in the public interest anyway?)

    Yes indeed. Passing a deal they don't like would not in itself be an issue now since Boris wants there to be an election. Problem is he doesn't have the votes even if he wanted to pass the WA, or something similar, and doing so would piss off his own voters never mind the DUP!
  • Ok let me give you a personal anecdote FWIW. Lunch with parents today and was round Wednesday too, politics discussed. Mum a tory voter, much more enthusiastically than she let's on dad doesn't vote often, occasionally Tory, last voted labour under Wilson whom he thinks was the absolute bomb. Both voted to leave.
    Dad - hates Boris, hates the opposition, despises Farage. Will not vote, thinks Boris is a fraud and a chancer. Would now support revoke article 50 to sort out what we do over the next couple of years

    Mum - very protective of poor Boris as she was of poor TM and the nasty Corbyn ruining things, wants to let him get on with it but appears genuinely uncertain she can vote this time, feels all MPs have let us down but she, like me, wants Clive Lewis kicked out of our seat

    Boris is definitely provoking feelings about politics

    So your Tory mum is still a Tory?

    Front page news...
    Ffs I'm just giving you a flavour of my families personal discussions on this for the sake of interest in how people are talking about this week and things in general.
    It's no different to discussions on doorsteps or in peoples offices that get reported here, and im not suggesting anyone place bets based on my Mums rampant Toryism
    If it doesn't interest you then skip over it. Or, ya know, just don't be a dick about it
    You are right. I apologise and I have removed my comment.
    Apology accepted. And I apologize if I was a little heated, I'm very protective of my mumma
    So you should. You only ever have one (for most people)
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited September 2019
    algarkirk said:

    Genuine question. Can anyone remind me this - it's all so long ago? Why is the backstop objectionable if it is the case that those who are against it all say it is unnecessary because a solution will be found?

    When you listen to Leavers like Rees-Mogg they appear to genuinely believe that our membership of the EU is akin to colonial subjugation. If you accept that premise then it follows that the colonial master can not be trusted to act in good faith in the future, and so the backstop will be used to keep us forever bound in servitude, regardless of whatever perfect solutions to the border issue we propose. If you accept the premise then only unconditional independence can be acceptable.

    This is an example of where the "debate" completely misses the point, because the point being debated is not whether the backstop is acceptable or necessary, but whether the EU can reasonably be considered in its actions and motivations as a colonial oppressor.

    I can see how the conclusion follows logically from the starting assumption, but the starting assumption seems quite bonkers - and I'm sure those with the contrary view will be similarly mystified as to why I cannot be cognizant of my oppression. It's also not something that you can reason with. How do you convince a person who is convinced that they are oppressed that they are free, or at least oppressed by a different actor?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,964
    edited September 2019
    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    But the statutory process under the FTPA of getting to a new PM will have been stalled by prorogation.....
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Ok let me give you a personal anecdote FWIW. Lunch with parents today and was round Wednesday too, politics discussed. Mum a tory voter, much more enthusiastically than she let's on dad doesn't vote often, occasionally Tory, last voted labour under Wilson whom he thinks was the absolute bomb. Both voted to leave.
    Dad - hates Boris, hates the opposition, despises Farage. Will not vote, thinks Boris is a fraud and a chancer. Would now support revoke article 50 to sort out what we do over the next couple of years

    Mum - very protective of poor Boris as she was of poor TM and the nasty Corbyn ruining things, wants to let him get on with it but appears genuinely uncertain she can vote this time, feels all MPs have let us down but she, like me, wants Clive Lewis kicked out of our seat

    Boris is definitely provoking feelings about politics

    They sound like good solid folk. The type that Boris will likely lose IMO.
    Both working class stock although mums family were Tories and Dads were hardcore labour (my aunt and cousin's still are on that side)
    Yeah, you may well be right on that. Dad doesn't like pretty boys or clowns so hes been in a dreadful mood since Blair
  • Ok let me give you a personal anecdote FWIW. Lunch with parents today and was round Wednesday too, politics discussed. Mum a tory voter, much more enthusiastically than she let's on dad doesn't vote often, occasionally Tory, last voted labour under Wilson whom he thinks was the absolute bomb. Both voted to leave.
    Dad - hates Boris, hates the opposition, despises Farage. Will not vote, thinks Boris is a fraud and a chancer. Would now support revoke article 50 to sort out what we do over the next couple of years

    Mum - very protective of poor Boris as she was of poor TM and the nasty Corbyn ruining things, wants to let him get on with it but appears genuinely uncertain she can vote this time, feels all MPs have let us down but she, like me, wants Clive Lewis kicked out of our seat

    Boris is definitely provoking feelings about politics

    So your Tory mum is still a Tory?

    Front page news...
    Ffs I'm just giving you a flavour of my families personal discussions on this for the sake of interest in how people are talking about this week and things in general.
    It's no different to discussions on doorsteps or in peoples offices that get reported here, and im not suggesting anyone place bets based on my Mums rampant Toryism
    If it doesn't interest you then skip over it. Or, ya know, just don't be a dick about it
    You are right. I apologise and I have removed my comment.
    I think more of us should consider apologizing when we get it wrong.

    It is a mark of maturity and is refreshing. Good on you
  • JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    Who presumably could then ask for Parliament to be recalled straight away to obtain the necessary vote of confidence.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    But the legislative process of getting to a new PM will have been stalled by proroagation.....
    The legislative aspect only plays into stopping an automatic election.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    TGOHF said:
    I wonder who Nigel Farage or Arran Banks would support if it were Russia England? I am sure it would be England
    Salmond really failed to read the room when he took a job with RT. He's been a pretty sound political operator in his time, but that was so stupid.
    Farage with his appearances on RT too, but he tends to make grave mistakes more often so it's less of a surprise.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    She would need to sack her current one. Unlikely.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    Johnson has started to look like Quasimodo. I'm not suggesting they're the same. Quasimodo had a good side
  • algarkirk said:

    Genuine question. Can anyone remind me this - it's all so long ago? Why is the backstop objectionable if it is the case that those who are against it all say it is unnecessary because a solution will be found?

    When you listen to Leavers like Rees-Mogg they appear to genuinely believe that our membership of the EU is akin to colonial subjugation. If you accept that premise then it follows that the colonial master can not be trusted to act in good faith in the future, and so the backstop will be used to keep us forever bound in servitude, regardless of whatever perfect solutions to the border issue we propose. If you accept the premise then only unconditional independence can be acceptable.

    This is an example of where the "debate" completely misses the point, because the point being debated is not whether the backstop is acceptable or necessary, but whether the EU can reasonably be considered in its actions and motivations as a colonial oppressor.

    I can see how the conclusion follows logically from the starting assumption, but the starting assumption seems quite bonkers - and I'm sure those with the contrary view will be similarly mystified as to why I cannot be cognizant of my oppression. It's also not something that you can reason with. How do you convince a person who is convinced that they are oppressed that they are free, or at least oppressed by a different actor?
    The morons like Rees Mogg who think we are subjugated are insulting those that have genuinely had that experience. Someone I know was a lawyer for the MDC, now that is real subjugation .
  • Well done KFC :) (And getting lots of love underneath!)

    https://twitter.com/KFC_UKI/status/1169970678658998277?s=20
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Ok let me give you a personal anecdote FWIW. Lunch with parents today and was round Wednesday too, politics discussed. Mum a tory voter, much more enthusiastically than she let's on dad doesn't vote often, occasionally Tory, last voted labour under Wilson whom he thinks was the absolute bomb. Both voted to leave.
    Dad - hates Boris, hates the opposition, despises Farage. Will not vote, thinks Boris is a fraud and a chancer. Would now support revoke article 50 to sort out what we do over the next couple of years

    Mum - very protective of poor Boris as she was of poor TM and the nasty Corbyn ruining things, wants to let him get on with it but appears genuinely uncertain she can vote this time, feels all MPs have let us down but she, like me, wants Clive Lewis kicked out of our seat

    Boris is definitely provoking feelings about politics

    So your Tory mum is still a Tory?

    Front page news...
    Ffs I'm just giving you a flavour of my families personal discussions on this for the sake of interest in how people are talking about this week and things in general.
    It's no different to discussions on doorsteps or in peoples offices that get reported here, and im not suggesting anyone place bets based on my Mums rampant Toryism
    If it doesn't interest you then skip over it. Or, ya know, just don't be a dick about it
    You are right. I apologise and I have removed my comment.
    Apology accepted. And I apologize if I was a little heated, I'm very protective of my mumma
    So you should. You only ever have one (for most people)
    Oh there'll only ever be one Mrs Mumwoolie
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    Robert Peston says we're heading for a November election.

    Which means we can definitely rule out a November election.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    TGOHF said:
    That's a game for any number of players
  • Scott_P said:
    I support them totally and those on this forum, who had a go, will recall how much I lauded TM deal and have always, and to this day, said it should have gone through

    If 325 mps can be found to support it, get it done on the 19th October and leave on the 31st
  • JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    But the statutory process under the FTPA of getting to a new PM will have been stalled by prorogation.....
    IIUC you don't need a legislative process to get the new PM, you need one to confirm them once they're there.

    On a very literal reading of the FTPA, the new PM then needs to call an election, since they won't be confirmed. I suppose you could feed that back in the front end and say that since it's impossible for them to subsequently be confirmed because there's no parliament to confirm them, the new PM shouldn't be appointed in the first place...
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,351

    algarkirk said:

    Genuine question. Can anyone remind me this - it's all so long ago? Why is the backstop objectionable if it is the case that those who are against it all say it is unnecessary because a solution will be found?

    When you listen to Leavers like Rees-Mogg they appear to genuinely believe that our membership of the EU is akin to colonial subjugation. If you accept that premise then it follows that the colonial master can not be trusted to act in good faith in the future, and so the backstop will be used to keep us forever bound in servitude, regardless of whatever perfect solutions to the border issue we propose. If you accept the premise then only unconditional independence can be acceptable.

    This is an example of where the "debate" completely misses the point, because the point being debated is not whether the backstop is acceptable or necessary, but whether the EU can reasonably be considered in its actions and motivations as a colonial oppressor.

    I can see how the conclusion follows logically from the starting assumption, but the starting assumption seems quite bonkers - and I'm sure those with the contrary view will be similarly mystified as to why I cannot be cognizant of my oppression. It's also not something that you can reason with. How do you convince a person who is convinced that they are oppressed that they are free, or at least oppressed by a different actor?
    Interesting point. Might explain why the debate was so mystifying. I still think it is worth returning to TMs deal to make progress.

  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Scott_P said:
    They are all misfits within their own parties (or ex parties) an interesting new dynamic
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    TGOHF said:
    I remember when the Conservatives had a little more to offer than this. I mostly didn't agree with it, but they seemed like they had some substance to them. Not any more.

    This is what our actual government has been reduced to. Sigh.
  • Well done KFC :) (And getting lots of love underneath!)

    https://twitter.com/KFC_UKI/status/1169970678658998277?s=20

    The Conservative party seem to be conspiring to lose the next GE.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    She would need to sack her current one. Unlikely.
    If the Conservatives VONC their own Prime Minister I see no reason why Her Majesty shouldn't take them at their word. I believe Her Majesty would not be best pleased with Boris and the Conservatives playing fast and loose with such conventions.

    Exit Boris enter AN OTHER.
  • Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:
    I remember when the Conservatives had a little more to offer than this. I mostly didn't agree with it, but they seemed like they had some substance to them. Not any more.

    This is what our actual government has been reduced to. Sigh.
    I remember when our oppositions would be delighted to get the chance to put their case before the voters. Not anymore.

    This is what our actual opposition has been reduced to. Sigh.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,351
    RobD said:
    Best solution by miles.

  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    But the statutory process under the FTPA of getting to a new PM will have been stalled by prorogation.....
    IIUC you don't need a legislative process to get the new PM, you need one to confirm them once they're there.

    On a very literal reading of the FTPA, the new PM then needs to call an election, since they won't be confirmed. I suppose you could feed that back in the front end and say that since it's impossible for them to subsequently be confirmed because there's no parliament to confirm them, the new PM shouldn't be appointed in the first place...
    Ftpa states parliament must vote an act of confidence in a new proposed PM. They can't if parliament is prorogued. It's not possible and bj wont recall them to do it.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Well done KFC :) (And getting lots of love underneath!)

    https://twitter.com/KFC_UKI/status/1169970678658998277?s=20

    The Conservative party seem to be conspiring to lose the next GE.
    This is great banter and great visibility for both Cons and KFC.

    No doubt some remainer will phone the healthy eating police shortly.
  • Scott_P said:
    No party leaders there. None of the 3 biggest opposition party leaders will let another get a leg up from them.
  • JackW said:

    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    She would need to sack her current one. Unlikely.
    If the Conservatives VONC their own Prime Minister I see no reason why Her Majesty shouldn't take them at their word. I believe Her Majesty would not be best pleased with Boris and the Conservatives playing fast and loose with such conventions.

    Exit Boris enter AN OTHER.
    Convention is VONC leads to a General Election. FTPA just adds a 14 day cooling off period to that.
  • algarkirk said:

    Genuine question. Can anyone remind me this - it's all so long ago? Why is the backstop objectionable if it is the case that those who are against it all say it is unnecessary because a solution will be found?

    When you listen to Leavers like Rees-Mogg they appear to genuinely believe that our membership of the EU is akin to colonial subjugation. If you accept that premise then it follows that the colonial master can not be trusted to act in good faith in the future, and so the backstop will be used to keep us forever bound in servitude, regardless of whatever perfect solutions to the border issue we propose. If you accept the premise then only unconditional independence can be acceptable.

    This is an example of where the "debate" completely misses the point, because the point being debated is not whether the backstop is acceptable or necessary, but whether the EU can reasonably be considered in its actions and motivations as a colonial oppressor.

    I can see how the conclusion follows logically from the starting assumption, but the starting assumption seems quite bonkers - and I'm sure those with the contrary view will be similarly mystified as to why I cannot be cognizant of my oppression. It's also not something that you can reason with. How do you convince a person who is convinced that they are oppressed that they are free, or at least oppressed by a different actor?
    The morons like Rees Mogg who think we are subjugated are insulting those that have genuinely had that experience. Someone I know was a lawyer for the MDC, now that is real subjugation .
    And this subjugation narrative is a totally counter-productive argument to run with other EU leaders, many of whom, not least a certain A Merkel, grew up in the prison countries of the Soviet empire.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    She would need to sack her current one. Unlikely.
    If the Conservatives VONC their own Prime Minister I see no reason why Her Majesty shouldn't take them at their word. I believe Her Majesty would not be best pleased with Boris and the Conservatives playing fast and loose with such conventions.

    Exit Boris enter AN OTHER.
    Yet more constitutional crisis. Hmq will be very loathe to involve herself in this way and would note an election must now happen and that perhaps let her people decide might be better than get her hands dirty
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:
    I remember when the Conservatives had a little more to offer than this. I mostly didn't agree with it, but they seemed like they had some substance to them. Not any more.

    This is what our actual government has been reduced to. Sigh.
    I remember when our oppositions would be delighted to get the chance to put their case before the voters. Not anymore.

    This is what our actual opposition has been reduced to. Sigh.
    They will very soon. Unfortunately the little business of undoing Cumming's game theory nonsense first.

  • Roger said:

    TGOHF said:
    That's a game for any number of players
    I wonder how long before "The People's Vote" lot put a Boris head on there and ask why he is chicken of a referendum.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    RobD said:
    They were all May deal supporters though except Lamb who was iirc becoming a semi detached lib dem over it all
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    O/T

    "Japan wants to change the way we use Japanese names to keep in line with tradition

    When written in Japan's traditional form, the family name would come first. But when written in English, this word order swaps."

    https://news.sky.com/story/japan-wants-to-change-the-way-we-use-japanese-names-to-keep-in-line-with-tradition-11803579
  • algarkirk said:

    Genuine question. Can anyone remind me this - it's all so long ago? Why is the backstop objectionable if it is the case that those who are against it all say it is unnecessary because a solution will be found?

    When you listen to Leavers like Rees-Mogg they appear to genuinely believe that our membership of the EU is akin to colonial subjugation. If you accept that premise then it follows that the colonial master can not be trusted to act in good faith in the future, and so the backstop will be used to keep us forever bound in servitude, regardless of whatever perfect solutions to the border issue we propose. If you accept the premise then only unconditional independence can be acceptable.

    This is an example of where the "debate" completely misses the point, because the point being debated is not whether the backstop is acceptable or necessary, but whether the EU can reasonably be considered in its actions and motivations as a colonial oppressor.

    I can see how the conclusion follows logically from the starting assumption, but the starting assumption seems quite bonkers - and I'm sure those with the contrary view will be similarly mystified as to why I cannot be cognizant of my oppression. It's also not something that you can reason with. How do you convince a person who is convinced that they are oppressed that they are free, or at least oppressed by a different actor?
    The morons like Rees Mogg who think we are subjugated are insulting those that have genuinely had that experience. Someone I know was a lawyer for the MDC, now that is real subjugation .
    And this subjugation narrative is a totally counter-productive argument to run with other EU leaders, many of whom, not least a certain A Merkel, grew up in the prison countries of the Soviet empire.
    Yes it is just another way they embarrass us as a nation abroad.
  • TGOHF said:
    Bollox. The boldest election advert? Is this guy HYUFD in disguise? How about Labour's not working? Labour's tax Bombshell. The Miliband in the top pocket. All massively better. talking out of his Brexitbottom
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited September 2019
    So this mad week ends with the party of Disraeli, Churchill and Thatcher in a public row with KFC (and coming off worst).

    Hope real Conservative members are taking note. No doubt some will assure us that this was part of a game plan. But really? Come on chaps, wake up!
  • Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:
    I remember when the Conservatives had a little more to offer than this. I mostly didn't agree with it, but they seemed like they had some substance to them. Not any more.

    This is what our actual government has been reduced to. Sigh.
    I remember when our oppositions would be delighted to get the chance to put their case before the voters. Not anymore.

    This is what our actual opposition has been reduced to. Sigh.
    They will very soon. Unfortunately the little business of undoing Cumming's game theory nonsense first.

    You're playing into his game.

    You could have an election now. Or you could have an election after 6 weeks of being too chicken to honour what the country voted for or see the public decide it.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    TGOHF said:
    All we need is a Tory government.

    Oh, wait...
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Jonathan said:

    So this mad week ends with the party of Disraeli, Churchill and Thatcher in a public row with KFC.

    Hope real Conservative members are taking note. No doubt some will assure us that this was part of a game plan. But really? Come on chaps, wake up!

    Jonathan said:

    So this mad week ends with the party of Disraeli, Churchill and Thatcher in a public row with KFC.

    Hope real Conservative members are taking note. No doubt some will assure us that this was part of a game plan. But really? Come on chaps, wake up!

    “Public row”

    It’s a bit of banter from both sides.

    Calm down dear.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    TGOHF said:
    Empirical evidence form the last three years suggests otherwise.
  • Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:
    I remember when the Conservatives had a little more to offer than this. I mostly didn't agree with it, but they seemed like they had some substance to them. Not any more.

    This is what our actual government has been reduced to. Sigh.
    I remember when our oppositions would be delighted to get the chance to put their case before the voters. Not anymore.

    This is what our actual opposition has been reduced to. Sigh.
    They will very soon. Unfortunately the little business of undoing Cumming's game theory nonsense first.

    You're playing into his game.

    You could have an election now. Or you could have an election after 6 weeks of being too chicken to honour what the country voted for or see the public decide it.
    Just a dog whistle. Works for you clearly
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    edited September 2019


    Ftpa states parliament must vote an act of confidence in a new proposed PM. They can't if parliament is prorogued. It's not possible and bj wont recall them to do it.

    I don't think that's right, I think they vote confidence in the newly *appointed* PM (or rather his/her government).

    So:
    1) VONC
    2) Queen's advisors take soundings about who else would be able to get confidence (usually outgoing PM's advice is good but in this case he may be playing silly buggers)
    3) Queen appoints somebody
    4) Parliament votes confidence in them, or doesn't so goto (2)
    ...until time is up and whichever failed PM is sitting in the chair when the music stops schedules an election

    Non-bonkers people of pb, have I got that right???
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,010

    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    But the statutory process under the FTPA of getting to a new PM will have been stalled by prorogation.....
    This question asked in the Lords on 3 September is relevant:

    Lord Cormack

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the powers available to recall Parliament during a prorogation in the event of a national or international crisis.

    Earl Howe (Con)

    My Lords, once Parliament has been prorogued it cannot be recalled. However, the sovereign, acting on the advice of Ministers, may issue a new proclamation setting an earlier date for the beginning of the new Session.
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    Jonathan said:

    So this mad week ends with the party of Disraeli, Churchill and Thatcher in a public row with KFC (and coming off worst).

    Hope real Conservative members are taking note. No doubt some will assure us that this was part of a game plan. But really? Come on chaps, wake up!

    Lol. Whatever.
  • TGOHF said:
    Another load of Remain Tories will see that and be off.

    Boris better be sure he is going to win those northern leave seats.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:
    Empirical evidence form the last three years suggests otherwise.
    Had May got her big majority it’d have been correct. :)
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,010


    Ftpa states parliament must vote an act of confidence in a new proposed PM. They can't if parliament is prorogued. It's not possible and bj wont recall them to do it.

    I don't think that's right, I think they vote confidence in the newly *appointed* PM (or rather his/her government).

    So:
    1) VONC
    2) Queen's advisors take soundings about who else would be able to get confidence (usually outgoing PM's advice is good but in this case he may be playing silly buggers)
    3) Queen appoints somebody
    4) Parliament votes confidence in them, or doesn't so goto (2)
    ...until time is up and whichever failed PM is sitting on the chair when the music stops schedules an election

    Non-bonkers people of pb, have I got that right???
    Right.
  • TGOHF said:

    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..
    And in return received a whole raft of benefits. Stop with this misleading nonsense.
    There's nothing misleading about it. The costs and benifits have been weighed up and found wanting.
  • Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:
    All we need is a Tory government.

    Oh, wait...
    Haha. Indeed. Anyone would think either they hadn't been in power, or all of them have been voting in a disciplined way to get the WA through
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    Scott_P said:
    Another vote winner in the midlands and north.
  • RobD said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:
    Empirical evidence form the last three years suggests otherwise.
    Had May got her big majority it’d have been correct. :)
    It was the will of the people that was to blame then I guess?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    No it's all banter, part of the master game plan. Have faith brother! Dom will see us through.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Chris said:

    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    But the statutory process under the FTPA of getting to a new PM will have been stalled by prorogation.....
    This question asked in the Lords on 3 September is relevant:

    Lord Cormack

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the powers available to recall Parliament during a prorogation in the event of a national or international crisis.

    Earl Howe (Con)

    My Lords, once Parliament has been prorogued it cannot be recalled. However, the sovereign, acting on the advice of Ministers, may issue a new proclamation setting an earlier date for the beginning of the new Session.
    Yeah, she might be advised by her ministers not to recall Parliament, but she’d be within her rights to do so.
  • algarkirk said:

    Genuine question. Can anyone remind me this - it's all so long ago? Why is the backstop objectionable if it is the case that those who are against it all say it is unnecessary because a solution will be found?

    When you listen to Leavers like Rees-Mogg they appear to genuinely believe that our membership of the EU is akin to colonial subjugation. If you accept that premise then it follows that the colonial master can not be trusted to act in good faith in the future, and so the backstop will be used to keep us forever bound in servitude, regardless of whatever perfect solutions to the border issue we propose. If you accept the premise then only unconditional independence can be acceptable.

    This is an example of where the "debate" completely misses the point, because the point being debated is not whether the backstop is acceptable or necessary, but whether the EU can reasonably be considered in its actions and motivations as a colonial oppressor.

    I can see how the conclusion follows logically from the starting assumption, but the starting assumption seems quite bonkers - and I'm sure those with the contrary view will be similarly mystified as to why I cannot be cognizant of my oppression. It's also not something that you can reason with. How do you convince a person who is convinced that they are oppressed that they are free, or at least oppressed by a different actor?
    The morons like Rees Mogg who think we are subjugated are insulting those that have genuinely had that experience. Someone I know was a lawyer for the MDC, now that is real subjugation .
    And this subjugation narrative is a totally counter-productive argument to run with other EU leaders, many of whom, not least a certain A Merkel, grew up in the prison countries of the Soviet empire.
    And they would answer with quotes from Lech Walesa and Mikhail Gorbachev and others comparing it to the Soviet Empire.

    Calling people insulting names because they have different beliefs is just silly and makes things worse. This attitude explains a lot about how our politics (and, increasingly, across the west) have got to the state they are now in.

    I believe I am turning into Rodney King.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited September 2019

    RobD said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:
    Empirical evidence form the last three years suggests otherwise.
    Had May got her big majority it’d have been correct. :)
    It was the will of the people that was to blame then I guess?
    Bloody proles. :D
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Jonathan said:

    No it's all banter, part of the master game plan. Have faith brother! Dom will see us through.
    Jonathan said:

    No it's all banter, part of the master game plan. Have faith brother! Dom will see us through.
    Yes the public discussing chicken/Corbyn is AWFUL for the Conservatives.

  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,010

    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    But the statutory process under the FTPA of getting to a new PM will have been stalled by prorogation.....
    IIUC you don't need a legislative process to get the new PM, you need one to confirm them once they're there.

    On a very literal reading of the FTPA, the new PM then needs to call an election, since they won't be confirmed. I suppose you could feed that back in the front end and say that since it's impossible for them to subsequently be confirmed because there's no parliament to confirm them, the new PM shouldn't be appointed in the first place...
    Ftpa states parliament must vote an act of confidence in a new proposed PM. They can't if parliament is prorogued. It's not possible and bj wont recall them to do it.
    The way it would work is that the Queen would appoint a new PM (not a new "proposed" PM), who would then advise the Queen to issue a proclamation starting the new session immediately, and then there could be a vote of confidence.
  • TGOHF said:
    Another load of Remain Tories will see that and be off.

    Boris better be sure he is going to win those northern leave seats.
    Yep the LDs must be rubbing their hands. In fact I might just keep a copy of that with me in case my resolve weakens when I go into the polling booth
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited September 2019
    In number 10 there is a whiteboard. It has the master strategy grid.

    Thursday: Reenact Police Academy BJ scene with BJ
    Friday: Enter public spat with KFC

    The mind boggles what the weekend holds. I suspect Cummings has a wager with Boris to see how long loyal Conservatives will go along defending this stuff.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,620
    Scott_P said:
    Just spotted that Nadine is picking her nose on this seminal image.
  • RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:
    Empirical evidence form the last three years suggests otherwise.
    Had May got her big majority it’d have been correct. :)
    It was the will of the people that was to blame then I guess?
    Bloody proles. :D
    I think JRM finds them fascinating.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,010
    RobD said:

    Chris said:

    JackW said:

    FTPA geeks - re: my last couple of exchanges with Big G.

    Do you agree Boris has "14 days protection" from the FTPA?

    It looks to me as if that's just the deadline for him or anyone reconstituting an administration before an election's called (ie *anyone* can seek confidence in that period and end the process).

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted

    As dyedwoolie said, prorogation may make the point moot anyway.. but it would be interesting to know how swiftly a subsequent VOC could happen in practice.

    Boris will give notice that Parliament is prorogued at the end of the VONC.
    Prorogation does not prevent the Queen appointing a new Prime Minister.
    But the statutory process under the FTPA of getting to a new PM will have been stalled by prorogation.....
    This question asked in the Lords on 3 September is relevant:

    Lord Cormack

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the powers available to recall Parliament during a prorogation in the event of a national or international crisis.

    Earl Howe (Con)

    My Lords, once Parliament has been prorogued it cannot be recalled. However, the sovereign, acting on the advice of Ministers, may issue a new proclamation setting an earlier date for the beginning of the new Session.
    Yeah, she might be advised by her ministers not to recall Parliament, but she’d be within her rights to do so.
    The answer was that it's not possible to recall parliament once it's been prorogued, but it is possible to start the new session at an earlier date than previously announced.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    edited September 2019
    AndyJS said:

    O/T

    "Japan wants to change the way we use Japanese names to keep in line with tradition

    When written in Japan's traditional form, the family name would come first. But when written in English, this word order swaps.")

    https://news.sky.com/story/japan-wants-to-change-the-way-we-use-japanese-names-to-keep-in-line-with-tradition-11803579

    It's this weird crusade of the foreign minister Taro Kono, he's a massive tit. Everyone will ignore it except the people who make passports, and for the next 10 years half the people will have passports written one way and half the people will have passports written another.

    tl;dr: Nationalism is a disease
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    Jonathan said:

    In number 10 there is a whiteboard. It has the master strategy grid.

    Thursday: Reenact Police Academy BJ scene with BJ
    Friday: Enter public spat with KFC

    The mind boggles what the weekend holds. I suspect Cummings has a wager with Boris to see how long loyal Conservatives will go along defending this stuff.

    "Public spat" with KFC? It's Twitter 'atting' FFS!
This discussion has been closed.