Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After an eventful day three Questions from CycleFree

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited August 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After an eventful day three Questions from CycleFree

Answers on one side of the paper only, please, to the UK electorate

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 80,846
    edited August 2019
    Sic semper tyrannis.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 2,316
    edited August 2019
    Number 2, like the current state of British politics.

    Expecting the defections to start happening.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    Next. Boris abolishes Parliament...
  • Today still not as eventful as the cricket the other day....
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265
    Very good questions, CF. Don't expect answers.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,698
    1) They fear they would lose
    2) They don't, and do not expect it to
    3) They couldn't.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,197

    Next. Boris abolishes Parliament...

    He'll settle for replacing it, wholesale.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    Johnson has No Mandate for anything!

    I cannot understand why anyone would wish to destabilise the economy and further erode trust in Democracy other than Putin and his cronies....
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Johnson has No Mandate for anything!

    I cannot understand why anyone would wish to destabilise the economy and further erode trust in Democracy other than Putin and his cronies....

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,698
    edited August 2019
    In short, it is a probably legal move and not necessarily unpopular enough to prevent Boris from winning an election (as it will be popular with the hard core of Tories and BXPers), which seems to have been his aim from the start - to achieve an election by being stymied, rather than seeming to seek it.

    A truly depressing day of politics. Not that any side cares about the high ground, but we are delving into the depths of it now, as party fanatics tell us all how great it is.

    I do repeat my earlier question of why we have not seen more defections among local politicians over the past year - defections are relatively common in local politics anyway, so even though it is perfectly possible for a group to keep their heads down even as the national party, whichever one, transforms into something else, as it is not directly relevant to them, I'd have expected to see some more drama at such a level as it is also easier for such people to make the jump than MPs.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 29,102
    Three good questions. The second is why today is a strategic disaster for Brexit.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,476
    edited August 2019
    Scott_P said:
    As hyperbolic as the Mail crush the saboteurs front page.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Bercow, Grieve, Cooper, Letwin and Benn suddenly become aware that using every spare inch of parliamentary procedure and stretching it to its limits goes both ways.
    The electorate see two camps prepared to shit on any doorstep to get what they want.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,037
    4. Are Parliament willing to vote no confidence in a Prime Minister taking this course?
    5. If not, why not?
    6. If so, what then?
  • The 28th August, 2019 - a date that will live in infamy!
  • Answers to Q1.
    There has already been a referendum.
    I actually support the FTPA and ideally there shouldn't be a GE until May/June 2022.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    An election in October must be likely now.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,910
    edited August 2019
    AndyJS said:

    Scott_P said:
    It isn't a plan anymore. The Queen has already signed the document.
    Indeed.



    Incidentally, one of the last times I remember that three PCs used Orders in Council to such effect was the Falklands, when the three PCs were Thatcher, Nott and Tebbit and the Orders authorised the task-force. Can anybody remember another?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Like being savaged by a bluebell
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 2,411
    Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.

    The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265
    edited August 2019
    I think the Queen has been badly advised in nodding through this prorogation. Maybe ultimately she can't refuse, but she can make her displeasure known.
  • Scott_P said:
    As hyperbolic as the Mail crush the saboteurs front page.
    851,437 signatures :)
  • eekeek Posts: 7,079
    AndyJS said:

    An election in October must be likely now.

    How? the FTPA means it's not an option - it's why Boris is trying to push things as without a VoNC he can't have an election
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 6,935
    Ultimately the Brexiteers know there is no majority for what they want so they’re bringing the whole thing down with them.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,698

    Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.

    The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.

    You'd prefer the Queen actually utilised the power to say no to a PM? Astonishing how many have taken that view.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 3,763
    Question 3 is a common theme in cyclefree's headers, and I think looking to the US would be instructive. Being well behaved, staying well within the spirit of the law, and seeking bipartisan compromise and consensus do exactly zip in compelling your opponents to do the same. If Corbyn really is the unprincipled zealot you believe, he's hardly going to care about whether or not Boris set a precedent for these kinds of tactics, he'll just do it.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 29,102

    Like being savaged by a bluebell
    Don’t underestimate Oliver Letwin. He is mild but very serious. He is a major gain for the constitutionalists. And he is flagging the way forward.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.

    The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.

    The Andrew stuff will be far more damaging to the monarchy
  • eekeek Posts: 7,079

    Like being savaged by a bluebell
    It's process and procedure - the question is does Boris have a means within the Lords to stop it...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,698

    4. Are Parliament willing to vote no confidence in a Prime Minister taking this course?
    5. If not, why not?
    6. If so, what then?

    They have to be, surely? Boris has called their bluff and now only the nuclear options will suffice.
  • Rob Gronkowski: Former New England Patriots tight end calls on NFL to legalise use of cannabis oil

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/american-football/49488234

    Everybody seems to be on about CBD oil these days. Is there any hard science behind the claims? I know all the CBD drinks, coffees etc are a bunch of horseshit due to the very low levels, but the pure stuff? Has there been some actual peer reviewed studies or is it anecdotal?
  • isamisam Posts: 30,713
    edited August 2019
    Scott_P said:
    What’s do you call an Englishman who cheers when Germany beat us in the football?


  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 10,714
    Not quite 'To the barricades, comrades!'
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 3,763

    Scott_P said:
    As hyperbolic as the Mail crush the saboteurs front page.
    Strange, The New European is normally so even-handed
  • isamisam Posts: 30,713



  • eekeek Posts: 7,079

    4. Are Parliament willing to vote no confidence in a Prime Minister taking this course?
    5. If not, why not?
    6. If so, what then?

    4) Because there is little point doing that before October...

    Boris is trying to force a decision through - by restricting any final decision to whatever deal he can cobble together against No Deal.
    Everyone else needs to remove No Deal from the table before that final decision is made. Only if the final decision is Deal v No Deal do you want to bin Boris and bring someone else in to extend
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,611
    edited August 2019
    On a slight sidetrack...



    Love it, hope they completely destroy their credibility in the eyes of younger voters.

    Edit: Not sure but this might be the same guy...

    https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1145747419264503808

    I think he really struggles with the job of fact checker, propagandist is a more fitting title.

    More on topic this live feed of parliament square protests is mildly entertaining...

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    eek said:

    AndyJS said:

    An election in October must be likely now.

    How? the FTPA means it's not an option - it's why Boris is trying to push things as without a VoNC he can't have an election
    MPs vote in favour of a VONC, but there's no majority for Corbyn as PM. The only alternative at that point is a GE.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 32,001
    edited August 2019
    ..
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 5,194
    Although perfectly legal, I believe the Queen made a serious mistake this morning.

    She is seen - whether unfairly or not - to be enabling an act of constitutional theft.

    Boris has faced Parliament for just ONE day so far, and he has not yet faced a SINGLE vote. His very Premiership rests on the flimsiest of constitutional conventions, and his majority exists only hypothetically.

    The correct approach by the Queen would have been to delay somehow, perhaps to seek wider advice from her Privy Councillors.

    This is a terrible day for democracy in this country, and indeed for the Union.

    I tend to agree though that this is also terrible optics for Brexit. The whole project is now so toxic it is like a political Chernobyl.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265
    edited August 2019

    Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.

    The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.

    Indeed. The warning lights should have flashed like a Dr Who tardis when Jacob Rees-Mogg showed up at the gates of Balmoral Castle with a baroness no-one's heard of and the chief whip flogging the Queen a prorogation that sellers of dodgy 1990s Fiestas would hesitate to be associated with.
  • kle4 said:

    4. Are Parliament willing to vote no confidence in a Prime Minister taking this course?
    5. If not, why not?
    6. If so, what then?

    They have to be, surely? Boris has called their bluff and now only the nuclear options will suffice.
    Unless they vonc Boris next week they are spineless
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,698
    The answer to the three questions;

    Time for the gilet jaunes to mobilise.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Like being savaged by a bluebell
    Don’t underestimate Oliver Letwin. He is mild but very serious. He is a major gain for the constitutionalists. And he is flagging the way forward.
    But he knows full well parliament cannot stop no deal. It's not something you can legislate, it's an outcome that remains possible until a deal is agreed and passed. In fact it's the legal default.
    And given Boris moves today, does anyone really think he will take any notice? Hes clearly prepared to utilise the reserved powers to their fullest extent, which gives him a lot of clout. And thrusts us into very uncertain times.
    They had a deal, they chose to play politics and party advantages, Emporer Boris is their love child.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 6,935
    edited August 2019
    isam said:




    The only people on my facebook who share these kind of memes are racists, to be honest. They also post about gollywogs and the like.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 5,505
    The optics are terrible for Boris - embarrassing HM just massively compounding the blunder. Even Boris’s little soldiers seem half hearted in their defending. I think this will be Boris’s equivalent of Gordon’s election that never was: an example of deeply flawed thinking and dodginess that swept all the magic away,
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,698
    isam said:




    Corbyn's not scruffy anymore.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 1,380
    edited August 2019
    1 Because its policy is to leave with a deal, and no deal has always been the unwelcome backstop position according to Treaty

    2 At the moment this question is about an unknown quantity and cannot be rationally answered either in positive or negative terms by anyone.

    3 Irrelevant. The matter has had intense parliamentary scrutiny and the current position arises precisely out of the results of parliament's decisions thus far. A deal will come back to parliament for it to accept or reject. That is current government policy. Stalinism it ain't.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,910
    AndyJS said:

    eek said:

    AndyJS said:

    An election in October must be likely now.

    How? the FTPA means it's not an option - it's why Boris is trying to push things as without a VoNC he can't have an election
    MPs vote in favour of a VONC, but there's no majority for Corbyn as PM. The only alternative at that point is a GE.
    A VONC with no alternate PM gaining confidence means Bojo stays PM until the election. And Bojo sets the date of the election... :(
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 9,387
    eek said:

    AndyJS said:

    An election in October must be likely now.

    How? the FTPA means it's not an option - it's why Boris is trying to push things as without a VoNC he can't have an election
    If MPs were prepared to vote for it next week we could still have an election on 17th October.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,910

    kle4 said:

    4. Are Parliament willing to vote no confidence in a Prime Minister taking this course?
    5. If not, why not?
    6. If so, what then?

    They have to be, surely? Boris has called their bluff and now only the nuclear options will suffice.
    Unless they vonc Boris next week they are spineless
    Rule 1.1 (as amended)...
  • kle4 said:

    isam said:




    Corbyn's not scruffy anymore.
    Indeed, he took my fashion advice back in 2015.

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/09/11/some-fashion-advice-for-jeremy-corbyn/
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 3,763

    On a slight sidetrack...



    Love it, hope they completely destroy their credibility in the eyes of younger voters.

    Edit: Not sure but this might be the same guy...

    https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1145747419264503808

    I think he really struggles with the job of fact checker, propagandist is a more fitting title.

    More on topic this live feed of parliament square protests is mildly entertaining...

    I'm not sure the lib brains would survive the 1-2 punch of President Trump being followed by President Sanders
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,698

    Scott_P said:
    As hyperbolic as the Mail crush the saboteurs front page.
    He's borrowed Pinochet's uniform. Well chosen
  • eekeek Posts: 7,079

    Although perfectly legal, I believe the Queen made a serious mistake this morning.

    She is seen - whether unfairly or not - to be enabling an act of constitutional theft.

    Boris has faced Parliament for just ONE day so far, and he has not yet faced a SINGLE vote. His very Premiership rests on the flimsiest of constitutional conventions, and his majority exists only hypothetically.

    The correct approach by the Queen would have been to delay somehow, perhaps to seek wider advice from her Privy Councillors.

    This is a terrible day for democracy in this country, and indeed for the Union.

    I tend to agree though that this is also terrible optics for Brexit. The whole project is now so toxic it is like a political Chernobyl.

    I suspect in the medium term, today's decision, though seemingly minor and unavoidable, has destroyed the monarchy.
  • ranierranier Posts: 10
    The government don't care about any of these questions - their time horizon doesn't stretch beyond the end of October.

    Their entire strategy is reliant on one of
    - the EU caving or getting a fudged withdrawal agreement through
    - a VONC and an election before 31 October or an extension by someone other than Boris after an election
    - no dealing on 31 October and it all being fine actually

    The first seems unlikely given the lack of desire of the EU/ERG/labour leavers to compromise and the second relies on the Labour party walking into an obvious bear trap rather than "trying our best but unfortunately not having the numbers in parliament to stop no deal".

    If we no deal on 31 October the government will immediately lose a VONC and holding an election 1-2 months after crashing out of the EU seems a little brave.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,197

    Scott_P said:
    As hyperbolic as the Mail crush the saboteurs front page.
    Crikey, Putin's been busy awarding medals to Boris.....
  • TomsToms Posts: 1,848

    Scott_P said:
    As hyperbolic as the Mail crush the saboteurs front page.
    851,437 signatures :)
    And rising fast.

    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157?fbclid=IwAR0xZDEcMTEMXUJ6Ipm10EOt8SkWZL5IuEK8rceZPhuoRtyqvOCk-C-vbnA

    The petition says that "Parliament will consider this for debate".
    Forgive my ignorance, but if Parliament were prorogued could it actually discuss such a petition?
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 2,924

    4. Are Parliament willing to vote no confidence in a Prime Minister taking this course?
    5. If not, why not?
    6. If so, what then?

    That is what Johnson wants them to do and that is why I hope they don't fall into that trap.

    He wants to be "forced" into an election and play the victim but it is essential for that plan to succeed that it happens before Oct 31st. After that he has to go No Deal or panic and backtrack and either of those courses of action stand to lose him substantial numbers of votes.
  • eekeek Posts: 7,079
    justin124 said:

    eek said:

    AndyJS said:

    An election in October must be likely now.

    How? the FTPA means it's not an option - it's why Boris is trying to push things as without a VoNC he can't have an election
    If MPs were prepared to vote for it next week we could still have an election on 17th October.
    It's only likely if 440MPs vote for it and would mean they could do nothing until after October 31st.

    As I've stated for a while there is no way anyone is going to accept an election now without insisting on an extension - and an extension is toxic for Boris.

    Hence No election is possible.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 27,035
    1. Because while a Deal vs No Deal referendum would be legitimate, Parliament would amend it to be Deal vs Remain. In so doing they would set aside the votes of 17.4 million people and teach them all that voting has no purpose if they disagree with their “betters”

    2. Inertia is the most powerful force in politics. Once it is done it is done and it will go back to being a minority interest

    3. Get a grip. It’s 4 f*****g days. After Bercow and others have abused parliamentary procedure
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979

    Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.

    The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.

    +1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
  • Chris_AChris_A Posts: 1,219
    Cummings - who advises Johnson - has already shown that he holds Parliament in utter contempt. The problem with our constitution is that it works as long as everybody follows the codes, rules, precedences which have gone before. Johnson, under Cummings's bidding no doubt seems content to rip all of this up. This is extremely dangerous especially coupled with Cameron's untested meddling with the FTPA.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,698
    Toms said:

    Scott_P said:
    As hyperbolic as the Mail crush the saboteurs front page.
    851,437 signatures :)
    And rising fast.

    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157?fbclid=IwAR0xZDEcMTEMXUJ6Ipm10EOt8SkWZL5IuEK8rceZPhuoRtyqvOCk-C-vbnA

    The petition says that "Parliament will consider this for debate".
    Forgive my ignorance, but if Parliament were prorogued could it actually discuss such a petition?
    I don't think it has to schedule them for debate in a particularly timely manner.
  • Toms said:

    Scott_P said:
    As hyperbolic as the Mail crush the saboteurs front page.
    851,437 signatures :)
    And rising fast.

    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157?fbclid=IwAR0xZDEcMTEMXUJ6Ipm10EOt8SkWZL5IuEK8rceZPhuoRtyqvOCk-C-vbnA

    The petition says that "Parliament will consider this for debate".
    Forgive my ignorance, but if Parliament were prorogued could it actually discuss such a petition?
    873,326 signatures
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    FF43 said:

    Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.

    The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.

    Indeed. The warning lights should have flashed like a Dr Who tardis when Jacob Rees-Mogg showed up at the gates of Balmoral Castle with a baroness no-one's heard of and the chief whip flogging the Queen a prorogation that sellers of dodgy 1990s Fiestas would hesitate to be associated with.
    A Catholic Cabinet Minister bearing unwanted tidings...
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    eek said:

    Although perfectly legal, I believe the Queen made a serious mistake this morning.

    She is seen - whether unfairly or not - to be enabling an act of constitutional theft.

    Boris has faced Parliament for just ONE day so far, and he has not yet faced a SINGLE vote. His very Premiership rests on the flimsiest of constitutional conventions, and his majority exists only hypothetically.

    The correct approach by the Queen would have been to delay somehow, perhaps to seek wider advice from her Privy Councillors.

    This is a terrible day for democracy in this country, and indeed for the Union.

    I tend to agree though that this is also terrible optics for Brexit. The whole project is now so toxic it is like a political Chernobyl.

    I suspect in the medium term, today's decision, though seemingly minor and unavoidable, has destroyed the monarchy.
    Still think the outwash of Andrew's friendship with Epstein and where that whole can of worms leads will be far more damaging. Disgust with the elite is going to rise and rise
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 1,380
    OllyT said:

    4. Are Parliament willing to vote no confidence in a Prime Minister taking this course?
    5. If not, why not?
    6. If so, what then?

    That is what Johnson wants them to do and that is why I hope they don't fall into that trap.

    He wants to be "forced" into an election and play the victim but it is essential for that plan to succeed that it happens before Oct 31st. After that he has to go No Deal or panic and backtrack and either of those courses of action stand to lose him substantial numbers of votes.
    Parliament has power and time to VONC and vote for a new government and named leader (FTPA) if they have a majority to do so. No election required. Let's see if they have the support.

  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 2,228

    Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.

    The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.

    +1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
    She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    eek said:

    Although perfectly legal, I believe the Queen made a serious mistake this morning.

    She is seen - whether unfairly or not - to be enabling an act of constitutional theft.

    Boris has faced Parliament for just ONE day so far, and he has not yet faced a SINGLE vote. His very Premiership rests on the flimsiest of constitutional conventions, and his majority exists only hypothetically.

    The correct approach by the Queen would have been to delay somehow, perhaps to seek wider advice from her Privy Councillors.

    This is a terrible day for democracy in this country, and indeed for the Union.

    I tend to agree though that this is also terrible optics for Brexit. The whole project is now so toxic it is like a political Chernobyl.

    I suspect in the medium term, today's decision, though seemingly minor and unavoidable, has destroyed the monarchy.
    The Tory Party is dead, the monarchy is dead, are you the NE Oscar the cat?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 9,387
    eek said:

    justin124 said:

    eek said:

    AndyJS said:

    An election in October must be likely now.

    How? the FTPA means it's not an option - it's why Boris is trying to push things as without a VoNC he can't have an election
    If MPs were prepared to vote for it next week we could still have an election on 17th October.
    It's only likely if 440MPs vote for it and would mean they could do nothing until after October 31st.

    As I've stated for a while there is no way anyone is going to accept an election now without insisting on an extension - and an extension is toxic for Boris.

    Hence No election is possible.
    A VNOC followed by installing new PM within 14 days - Corbyn or whoever - could still mean election on 24th or 31st October having already requested an extension.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 6,935
    Charles said:

    1. Because while a Deal vs No Deal referendum would be legitimate, Parliament would amend it to be Deal vs Remain. In so doing they would set aside the votes of 17.4 million people and teach them all that voting has no purpose if they disagree with their “betters”

    2. Inertia is the most powerful force in politics. Once it is done it is done and it will go back to being a minority interest

    3. Get a grip. It’s 4 f*****g days. After Bercow and others have abused parliamentary procedure

    Its not 4 days. Its 5 weeks. Stop being misleading. Its like the Leave campaign all over again.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 27,035

    Rob Gronkowski: Former New England Patriots tight end calls on NFL to legalise use of cannabis oil

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/american-football/49488234

    Everybody seems to be on about CBD oil these days. Is there any hard science behind the claims? I know all the CBD drinks, coffees etc are a bunch of horseshit due to the very low levels, but the pure stuff? Has there been some actual peer reviewed studies or is it anecdotal?

    Oil is rubbished. There are approved CBD and THC based pharmaceuticals (synthetic)
  • eekeek Posts: 7,079
    Charles said:

    1. Because while a Deal vs No Deal referendum would be legitimate, Parliament would amend it to be Deal vs Remain. In so doing they would set aside the votes of 17.4 million people and teach them all that voting has no purpose if they disagree with their “betters”

    2. Inertia is the most powerful force in politics. Once it is done it is done and it will go back to being a minority interest

    3. Get a grip. It’s 4 f*****g days. After Bercow and others have abused parliamentary procedure

    3 - It's not 4 days. It's 4 days + 4 days for the Queen's Speech which cannot be overridden.

    At a minimum it's 8 days and that depends on when the proroguing begins. It's possible that it begins on September 9th which removes another 3 days of debates.

    Between those items it reduces Parliament from 25 days of sitting where things were editable down to 14.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 80,846
    edited August 2019

    Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.

    The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.

    +1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
    She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
    Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 27,035
    edited August 2019
    isam said:




    .
  • Chris_AChris_A Posts: 1,219
    viewcode said:

    AndyJS said:

    Scott_P said:
    It isn't a plan anymore. The Queen has already signed the document.
    Indeed.



    Incidentally, one of the last times I remember that three PCs used Orders in Council to such effect was the Falklands, when the three PCs were Thatcher, Nott and Tebbit and the Orders authorised the task-force. Can anybody remember another?
    The quorum of the Privy Council is HM (or Counsellors of State) +3. Meetings rarely have more than 3, usually the Lord President and the minister whose departmental business is being discuss and one other.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 6,935
    eek said:

    Charles said:

    1. Because while a Deal vs No Deal referendum would be legitimate, Parliament would amend it to be Deal vs Remain. In so doing they would set aside the votes of 17.4 million people and teach them all that voting has no purpose if they disagree with their “betters”

    2. Inertia is the most powerful force in politics. Once it is done it is done and it will go back to being a minority interest

    3. Get a grip. It’s 4 f*****g days. After Bercow and others have abused parliamentary procedure

    3 - It's not 4 days. It's 4 days + 4 days for the Queen's Speech which cannot be overridden.

    At a minimum it's 8 days and that depends on when the proroguing begins. It's possible that it begins on September 9th which removes another 3 days of debates.

    Between those items it reduces Parliament from 25 days of sitting where things were editable down to 14.
    Don’t forget conference season which would have been cancelled but now wont be.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,698
    Conference

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    1. Because while a Deal vs No Deal referendum would be legitimate, Parliament would amend it to be Deal vs Remain. In so doing they would set aside the votes of 17.4 million people and teach them all that voting has no purpose if they disagree with their “betters”

    2. Inertia is the most powerful force in politics. Once it is done it is done and it will go back to being a minority interest

    3. Get a grip. It’s 4 f*****g days. After Bercow and others have abused parliamentary procedure

    3 - It's not 4 days. It's 4 days + 4 days for the Queen's Speech which cannot be overridden.

    At a minimum it's 8 days and that depends on when the proroguing begins. It's possible that it begins on September 9th which removes another 3 days of debates.

    Between those items it reduces Parliament from 25 days of sitting where things were editable down to 14.
    Don’t forget conference season which would have been cancelled but now wont be.
    Conference season could have been cancelled ages ago, they all knew this crisis was coming, I have less sympathy about intending to cancel that but not doing so
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,197

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    1. Because while a Deal vs No Deal referendum would be legitimate, Parliament would amend it to be Deal vs Remain. In so doing they would set aside the votes of 17.4 million people and teach them all that voting has no purpose if they disagree with their “betters”

    2. Inertia is the most powerful force in politics. Once it is done it is done and it will go back to being a minority interest

    3. Get a grip. It’s 4 f*****g days. After Bercow and others have abused parliamentary procedure

    3 - It's not 4 days. It's 4 days + 4 days for the Queen's Speech which cannot be overridden.

    At a minimum it's 8 days and that depends on when the proroguing begins. It's possible that it begins on September 9th which removes another 3 days of debates.

    Between those items it reduces Parliament from 25 days of sitting where things were editable down to 14.
    Don’t forget conference season which would have been cancelled but now wont be.
    "would"?
  • isamisam Posts: 30,713

    isam said:




    The only people on my facebook who share these kind of memes are racists, to be honest. They also post about gollywogs and the like.
    Oh my the company you keep!
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 1,380

    Dreadful error by Buckingham Palace staff. Her Majesty has received extremely poor advice.

    The monarch and the monarchy have been popular, but just wait until the No Deal shit hits the fan: she, and her reputation, are going to get absolutely covered in the stinking smatter.

    +1 I agree. Terrible move by HMQ. She will inevitably become a focal point for discontent. A bit like when Diana died. A strange co-incidence it being almost 22 years to the day since events so grippingly moved against the Queen.
    She acted in the proper way constitutionally. Do we want a monarch who overrules the advice of her government? Think about it carefully.
    Yes, just imagine if Boris Johnson or some future PM pursued a really evil policy, if the monarch isn't going to stand up to that then what's the point of the monarchy other than to be the parrot of the PM?
    One could just about imagine this is our parliament, government and courts all failed us. But to talk of HM the Queen being out of order over this matter when both parliament and courts have remedies if they don't like it it hyperbolic nonsense and unfair to the world's most popular lady.

  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 5,505
    It’s amazing that there now seems something of the jackboot about Boris - sweeping away ancient constitutional safeguards with a snigger and a sneer. That carefully crafted jovial-chap-of-the-people persona is in tatters. Cummings couldn’t have thought this through.
  • Post truth and pre Brexit iirc
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,698
    TGOHF said:

    This is the thing - as much as I detest what Boris has done, there is action they can still take and I hope they take it rather than simply getting outraged.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,197
    Why do all these new mothers visit Natal anyway? No good ever seems to come of it.....
  • Chris_AChris_A Posts: 1,219
    kle4 said:

    Conference

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    1. Because while a Deal vs No Deal referendum would be legitimate, Parliament would amend it to be Deal vs Remain. In so doing they would set aside the votes of 17.4 million people and teach them all that voting has no purpose if they disagree with their “betters”

    2. Inertia is the most powerful force in politics. Once it is done it is done and it will go back to being a minority interest

    3. Get a grip. It’s 4 f*****g days. After Bercow and others have abused parliamentary procedure

    3 - It's not 4 days. It's 4 days + 4 days for the Queen's Speech which cannot be overridden.

    At a minimum it's 8 days and that depends on when the proroguing begins. It's possible that it begins on September 9th which removes another 3 days of debates.

    Between those items it reduces Parliament from 25 days of sitting where things were editable down to 14.
    Don’t forget conference season which would have been cancelled but now wont be.
    Conference season could have been cancelled ages ago, they all knew this crisis was coming, I have less sympathy about intending to cancel that but not doing so
    How could it have been cancelled ages ago? The government hadn't laid the necessary order for a recess.
  • glwglw Posts: 6,035
    The one good thing about today is that it should focus the minds of those who wish to stop no deal Brexit. They are going to get one shot at it, and they need to get all their ducks in a row. We will know shortly whether stopping the UK crashing out is possible. If not, everybody has about seven weeks to get ready as it is almost certain to happen now.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 29,102
    Charles said:

    1. Because while a Deal vs No Deal referendum would be legitimate, Parliament would amend it to be Deal vs Remain. In so doing they would set aside the votes of 17.4 million people and teach them all that voting has no purpose if they disagree with their “betters”

    2. Inertia is the most powerful force in politics. Once it is done it is done and it will go back to being a minority interest

    3. Get a grip. It’s 4 f*****g days. After Bercow and others have abused parliamentary procedure

    This four days rubbish has to stop. It's simply untrue.
This discussion has been closed.